Opening the Black Box of the Digital Transformation Process - Evidence from ColombiaABSTRACT
Objective: this article explains how the process of digital transformation (DT) occurs, which constitutes a fundamental change in organizations.
Theoretical approach: to this end, qualitative research was carried out based on in-depth interviews with 10 DT leaders from companies in Colombia and two consultants specialized in the subject.
Method: the methodology proposed by Gioia was used to analyze the results.
Results: the findings show that DT is a continuous, complex, and emerging process that transcends technology, is multidimensional, and involves the entire organization.
Conclusions: this work contributes to unraveling the nature of DT by opening the black box and proposing a dynamic and iterative scheme of three key moments: initiation, implementation, and capitalization, which in turn is permeated by multiple emerging aspects. Additionally, a contribution is made to the dominant literature that presents digital transformation as a technological issue, a matter of process digitization, and as a fixed, homogeneous, and stable phenomenon. It is concluded that digital transformation is a process that corresponds to organizational and strategic change.
Keywords:
Digital transformation; Digitization; Organizational change; Digital technology; Cultural change
RESUMEN
Objetivo: este artículo explica cómo ocurre el proceso de la transformación digital (TD) que se constituye en un cambio fundamental en las organizaciones.
Enfoque teórico: para ello, se realizó una investigación cualitativa a partir de entrevistas a profundidad a 10 líderes de la TD en empresas de Colombia y dos consultores especializados en el tema.
Método: para el análisis de los resultados se utilizó la metodología propuesta por Gioia.
Resultados: los hallazgos muestran que la TD es un proceso continuo, complejo y emergente, que trasciende lo tecnológico, es multidimensional e involucra a toda la organización.
Conclusiones: Este trabajo contribuye a desentrañar la naturaleza de la TD al abrir la caja negra y proponer un esquema dinámico e iterativo de tres momentos clave: iniciación, implementación y capitalización, que a su vez está permeado por múltiples aspectos emergentes. Adicionalmente, se realiza un aporte a la literatura dominante que presenta la TD como un tema tecnológico, de digitalización de procesos y como un fenómeno fijo, homogéneo y estable. Se concluye que la TD es un proceso que corresponde con un cambio organizacional y estratégico.
Palabras-clave:
Transformación digital; Digitalización; Cambio organizacional; Tecnología digital; Cambio cultural
INTRODUCTION
Digital transformation (DT) impacts the reality of organizations at the levels of existence, operation, and value generation (Dąbrowska et al., 2022). The concept emerged in the 2000s with a technological focus (Wessel et al., 2021), and over time, a more organizational, strategic, and managerial perspective has developed (Nadkarni & Prügl, 2020). This enables an understanding of DT as a process with organizational implications (Hanelt et al., 2021; Liborio-Zapata et al., 2022), contrary to the predominant literature that has focused on considering DT as an object centered on the adoption of technologies (Büchner et al., 2022; Zou et al., 2024) or as a set of isolated sub-processes (Jedynak et al., 2021).
This work focuses on answering the question: How does the DT process occur, and what are its implications for organizations? Based on an exploratory qualitative study using interviews from the perspective of DT directors from 10 companies in Colombia and incorporating the insights of two specialized consultants on the subject, a framework was developed that enables an understanding of the DT flow, the dimensions involved, and emerging aspects.
The results show that DT is a phenomenon of a processual nature, with internal and external influences, characterized by being continuous, complex, and emergent. It was identified that the DT process is presented in three key moments: initiation, implementation, and capitalization; these do not represent stagnant and exclusive compartments but rather show themselves as an organizational process, interrelated and in permanent flow, that is permeated by multiple emerging aspects. Findings contribute to broadening the understanding of the DT process by addressing a prevailing limitation in the field, as most research indicates what the process is, but does not delve into the description of how it unfolds (Hanelt et al., 2021).
This work contributes to the positioning of DT as a process of organizational and strategic change, providing an alternative to perspectives that conceive it as purely technological, given that a DT process involves non-linear reconfigurations of decisions, structures, culture, and data, among others, over time. Current scholarly conversations highlight that DT engenders change (Bunduchi et al., 2020), emergence (Baiyere et al., 2020), and complexity (Reis & Melão, 2023) in a holistic manner (Jedynak et al., 2021) - aspects that are not only evidenced in this study but are further explored by opening the black box of DT to reveal its anatomy within the Colombian context.
The article is developed in five sections in addition to this introduction. First, an overview of the study of digital transformation is presented. Second, the research methodology used is described. Third, the results are elaborated upon, highlighting the three key moments: initiation, implementation, and capitalization, as well as the emerging aspects arising from the DT process. Fourth, the discussion of the results is conducted. Finally, the conclusions are presented.
AN OVERVIEW OF DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION
To remain competitive, organizations incorporate the use of digital technologies to seize opportunities and stay relevant in the 21st century (Dworaczek & Martínez, 2024). In general terms, the leveraging and use of digital technologies to create value within an organization is known as digital transformation (Gençer et al., 2025).
According to Gong and Ribiere (2021), the disciplinary multiplicity and diversity of viewpoints regarding DT have hindered the construction of a clear understanding, complicating dialogue across domains and the coherence of research streams. Warner and Wäger (2019) state that they have found such divergent opinions on the concept that it is often used interchangeably with other concepts such as digitalization; the latter is limited to describing how digital technologies can be used to optimize or improve processes (Pagani & Pardo, 2017) or enhance customer experience, yet it remains focused at the operational level (Gong & Ribiere, 2021).
Unlike IT-enabled organizational transformation, which is typically limited to the optimization of internal processes within organizational boundaries, DT transcends organizational limits, integrating into ecosystems and platforms where external actors such as customers, competitors, and partners participate (Dąbrowska et al., 2022). Moreover, while traditional information systems seek to reinforce existing identity and efficiency, DT can involve the creation of an entirely new organizational identity (Wessel et al., 2021).
Three viewpoints prevail in the literature on DT. First, the entity perspective, which understands DT as an observable, linear object centered on the adoption of new technologies (Reis & Melão, 2023). Second, a process perspective, which prioritizes the activities, events, and trajectories of DT that occur over time (Dąbrowska et al., 2022; Soh et al., 2023). Third, a context perspective, which approaches DT as a response to external competitive, social, or technological pressures (Büchner et al., 2022).
From a process perspective, two viewpoints coexist. A technical approach that sees DT as a functional and linear process with specific impacts (Guo et al., 2023), as if it were a causal model (Plekhanov et al., 2022) or simply digitalization (Verhoef et al., 2021). This restricts the holistic analysis that DT requires (Gong & Ribiere, 2021; Nadkarni & Prügl, 2020). On the other hand, a more organizational approach understands DT as a fundamental organizational change (Verhoef et al., 2021), which is complex, dynamic, continuous, and without a foreseeable end (Bunduchi et al., 2020). From this perspective, DT affects the organization as a whole.
According to the literature, one of the main limitations is the lack of an in-depth analysis of the DT process (Bonanomi et al., 2020; Gregory et al., 2018), favoring breadth or generality over depth (Vial, 2019). Gong and Ribiere (2021) conclude that DT involves a fundamental change in the organization triggered by the use of digital technologies, but strategically leveraged through the use and development of key resources and capabilities.
METHODOLOGY
Following the recommendations of Baiyere et al. (2020) and Bunduchi et al. (2020), an exploratory qualitative study was conducted to answer the question: How does the DT process occur, and what are the implications for organizations? A study was carried out in various companies in Colombia undergoing DT, based on interviews from the perspective of the directors or leaders of the process. For the analysis, an iterative and interpretive coding methodology was adopted, based on the approach proposed by Gioia et al. (2013).
The selection of the companies was carried out under criteria that ensured compliance with the characteristics of digital transformation according to Gong and Ribiere (2021), as shown in Table 1. First, 30 companies were identified with mentions of DT processes highlighted by reliable and recognized media outlets in Colombia through journalistic articles and rankings. Second, a preliminary analysis was conducted between July and September 2022 through telephone calls to the DT leaders of the identified companies to validate the status of the DT process; it was found that only 22 companies were carrying out DT processes, while the remainder had isolated digitalization initiatives. Finally, the companies were invited to participate in the study, and 10 accepted.
Data collection
Following Langley and Tsoukas (2010), data were collected through in-depth interviews to gain a better understanding of the participants’ experiences and viewpoints. The preliminary categories that guided the interviews were based on Gong and Ribiere (2021). See Table 1.
The participating subjects were the individuals leading the DT process in each of the analyzed companies. To maximize heterogeneity and obtain a more exhaustive understanding of DT, representation from different industries and company sizes was sought (Table 2). Additionally, two consultants specialized in DT were included to enrich the perspective and deepen the understanding of the phenomenon. The interviews were conducted between September 2022 and July 2023, with the participation of two researchers; each lasted approximately one hour, and they were recorded, transcribed, and subsequently analyzed.
Data analysis
The data were processed using ATLAS.ti software (version 23.2.3.22778), and the content analysis of the interviews was conducted following the iterative and interpretive coding process proposed by Gioia et al. (2013). In the first-order analysis, the aim was to ensure data affinity by emphasizing observable events and shared experiences to identify concepts using the exact language of the participating subjects. In the second-order analysis, efforts were made to abstract and combine the first-order concepts to identify core categories related to the DT process. Finally, an abstraction of the second-order categories into aggregate dimensions was performed, producing the data structure (Table 3).
RESULTS
“The company has changed so much. Through digital transformation, we have learned many things; also, some initiatives did not turn out in the best way, but now it remains to capitalize on those learnings to keep moving forward and continue providing our services with technology as an ally” (E5, 2022).
In accordance with the research question, the analytical efforts focused on identifying the implications and dimensions impacted during the DT process. Based on the data structure (Table 3), an inductive model was constructed (Figure 1), which captures the patterns that regularly recur through three key moments (initiation, implementation, and capitalization); these are plotted with overlapping, non-contiguous lines, accounting for the interrelationship and influence that exist between them. The findings are presented in a descriptive narrative, including representative quotes from the informants.
Initiation
Initiation represents a strategic inflection point in organizations. It is a moment when various exogenous and endogenous reasons for undertaking DT are reflected upon and analyzed, a situational assessment is conducted, and starting objectives are established. The formal start occurs when organizations declare DT or the use of digital technologies as part of their strategy. This enables top management to commit and include it in their plans, with the allocation of resources, time, and responsible parties. “Technology becomes the engine of the company’s transformation” (E2, 2022).
Exogenous reasons generally force organizations to adopt digital technologies reactively. DT begins to be considered as a response to problems or disadvantages caused by competitors who have started to use technologies to their advantage, or by the emergence of new competitors based on digital business models. “Now companies are facing startups that offer equal or better value, but more efficiently, with fewer people and faster” (Exp. 1, 2022).
Endogenous reasons can also be reactive, triggered by issues of obsolescence or incompetence, but they are primarily proactive. Some organizations identify technological trends, analyzing the technologies and how they can be leveraged. “We had executives who were very inquisitive about technology, who were at the forefront of these issues, and that served to drive DT” (E6, 2023). Additionally, DT can be motivated by previous digitalization processes: “The technology area used software to automate a process and achieved significant time savings. Upon finding out, the executives questioned how technology could be used to solve other organizational problems” (E2, 2022).
When the organization understands the strategic need for DT, a cascade of questions and initial reflections of organizational significance is triggered: What is digital transformation? Why do it? Is the organization prepared? How should it be carried out? Thus, a first action emerges: conducting a situational assessment to attempt to provide some answers to these questions: “A diagnosis became necessary to evaluate current resources and capabilities and those needed for DT” (E3, 2023). This initial assessment, in turn, serves as a fundamental input for establishing the purpose and objectives that will set the course for DT. This is when DT is declared part of the strategy.
With the strategic commitment to DT, the starting objectives are established. It is noteworthy that the initial objectives of DT are generally set in relation to the area representing the business core. Thus, in industrial sector companies, objectives focus on production areas to automate or optimize production processes. In commercial sector companies, the focus is generally on marketing or sales areas to improve relationships with customers and other stakeholders. In service sector companies, the focus is on customer service areas to transform the value proposition based on a personalized and digital experience.
Implementation
Strategy-driven implementation represents the most intensive moment of the process. The operationalization of DT impacts the mobilization and readiness of organizational resources and capabilities, involving multiple key organizational dimensions beyond strategy: technology, structure, processes, data, people, culture, products and services, and customers. The process is not linear but systemic; the organizational dimensions are interrelated, denoting the complexity of DT. Dimensions that were in relative stability are now in a dynamic state of exploration and adaptation during the digital transition. It is a transformative journey that unfolds among facilitators, obstacles, and emerging factors.
The process begins with the readiness of the organization’s resources and capabilities. Resources are generally technological, human, and financial. Technological resources involve acquiring, updating, or modifying digital technologies such as artificial intelligence, virtual reality, the internet of things, robotics, cloud computing, systems, and software, among others. Regarding human resources, external consultants hired to sensitize and accompany the DT process stand out, along with technical experts - either external or internal - who are responsible for the application, execution, and training in the use of these technologies. “We began to identify employees with technical knowledge in the technologies we had, so we brought them into our area to support us in DT” (E9, 2023). Finally, there are the financial resources necessary for investment in new technologies and digital infrastructure, as well as in staff training and development: “The company had to allocate a budget; if it didn’t, we couldn’t implement everything we had planned” (E4, 2022).
Regarding organizational capabilities, some become essential for the new dynamics of DT: ambidexterity, digital competencies, and openness to the environment. Ambidexterity involves two sometimes conflicting drives: exploitation and exploration. Exploitation for process optimization, profit maximization, and consolidation of the competitive position; and exploration for leveraging opportunities and adopting emerging technologies. “Organizational ambidexterity is a key capability in organizations to optimize the present and available technological resources, while simultaneously exploring the future and capitalizing on latent opportunities of technologies” (Exp. 2, 2022).
Digital competencies are vital for the digital transition, which demands new forms of work, collaboration, communication, and knowledge for the use of technologies. “In our company, we had to invest in training plans so that our staff could learn how to use the technologies” (E4, 2022). Finally, openness to the environment stems from a condition almost intrinsic to DT. The journey toward digital often transcends the organization itself, requiring the mobilization of stakeholders and their involvement in the value chain. “Our success in leveraging technologies has been open innovation; thanks to this, we have established and maintained collaborative relationships and value co-creation with our stakeholders” (E6, 2023).
Regarding the technology dimension, in the Colombian context, technological investment is primarily based on sustainability, operational efficiency, and environmental adaptation. According to the findings, the initial focus usually prioritizes profitability: “Investment centered on automating and improving processes to achieve greater efficiencies, reduce costs, and be more profitable” (E8, 2023). However, it is recognized that the rise of the topic as a global trend influenced the beginning of DT: “We started because everyone is talking about AI; we could not ignore this trend” (E3, 2022).
However, this investment in technology can result in a waste of resources and time if there is no clear strategy, a supportive organizational culture, or when projects are executed in isolation: “Unfortunately, in 2018, not many results were achieved; we got stuck in too many pilots that, when it came time to monetize, did not have positive impacts” (E3, 2022). This gap between technical expectation and operational viability is underscored by E7 (2023), who highlights projects that, despite their theoretical value, fail due to their complexity: “We had a very interesting project aimed at having real-time inventory of all points of sale, but it was costly and difficult to control... it was a high-potential idea, but too complex to bring to reality.”
Likewise, a duality was identified: while some companies invest in technology driven by global trends (technology-first), as stated by E4 (2022), “Typically in our company technology is monitored and then we look for where to fit it”; others do so with the aim of solving specific problems (problem-first): “The adoption of robots was not capricious, but rather a solution to the human inability to handle the volume of requests during the pandemic” (E1, 2022). Over time, most seem to have migrated toward a model where the ‘why’ (the problem) must precede the technology: “Technology must be an enabler of an already defined strategy” (Exp. 1, 2022).
Digital technologies constitute the great enabler and the transversal axis of change because they directly impact processes and people. In this way, an analog-to-digital transition begins. Processes experience an instantaneous change and are generally optimized and become smarter: “Without a doubt, processes were transformed; we achieved automation, standardization, and scalability” (E9, 2023). This evidences the transition of production, commercial, and administrative processes toward digital or hybrid models.
Digitalized processes affect structure, people, and culture. The organizational structure must be adjusted to enable new workflows, communication, and interaction, which involves the creation and redefinition of roles, functions, departments, and/or committees. “In the company, we created the position of DT leader and a cross-departmental committee that meets monthly with top management to monitor digital initiatives” (E3, 2022). It is worth noting that bureaucratic structures, with excessive levels and centralization, require special attention because they hinder the dynamism inherent to DT.
In this adjustment, people are necessarily mobilized through the development of new digital competencies, practices, and ways of working. “Technology does absolutely nothing if people do not incorporate it into their DNA or implement it; people are either enablers or inhibitors of DT” (E6, 2023). DT often embodies contradictions, tensions, and resistance to change, requiring a social process to engage people through frank and open communication while making them part of the change.
Along with people, culture plays a key role in the [re]configuration required by DT. It acts both as the main enabler (when there is openness) and as the greatest obstacle (when there is resistance). For instance, the pre-existing culture determines the speed and success of DT. The fear of being replaced by technology is a common hindrance: “People think that bringing in new technology means reducing staff in the company” (E8, 2023). Executive leadership can also affect DT: “If leaders are not involved, people simply do not mobilize” (E9, 2023).
Likewise, culture is affected by digital transformation; it changes, becoming more agile, horizontal, and open to constant learning: “With DT, we have had to work on people’s mindset to open minds, experiment, and make mistakes” (E4, 2022). E9 (2023) mentions that a mindset shift “is much more complex than implementing technologies.” E2 (2022) highlights how there is a breaking of silos and greater horizontality: “We have learned to work without process labels and without walls between us… technology forces us to work in multidisciplinary teams.” Thus, culture both affects and is affected by DT, but it presents a major obstacle when characterized by rigidity, attachment to the conventional, and fear of failure.
Finally, the entire journey toward digital elevates a new key dimension: data, which has evolved from simple operational records into strategic assets. The most relevant findings are the centralization of information, the democratization of analytics, and data-driven decision-making. Several companies agree that the critical first step is ‘putting the house in order’ by centralizing dispersed information in one place: “Having a data lake that allowed us to centralize information in a single place was strategic” (E8, 2023). A recurring finding is that the capability to analyze data should not be exclusive to the IT department but should permeate employees across all areas. E3 (2022) notes that they “implemented a program to train employees in data analysis,” and E10 (2023) states that they “enabled people at operational levels to create analytical models.”
There is also evidence of an evolution in data analytics, moving from describing the past to predicting the future and automating decisions: “We reached a point where we enhanced the data infrastructure toward something more predictive” (E2, 2022). A concrete example is provided by E4 (2022): “Key processes such as pricing are now handled with predictive analytics models that cross-reference multiple variables.” Automation and digitalization, as well as the openness and involvement of stakeholders, energize the use and creation of data. Following DT, processes and people are driven by data, which connects the implementation phase with capitalization, as data serves as both input and output.
Capitalization
Capitalization is an instance that allows for the realization of the unfinished nature of DT. The preceding moments culminate in results - both expected and emerging - that become a new starting point, elevating the organization’s level of digital maturity. “The organization will now seek to capitalize on the learnings obtained” (E5, 2022). The evaluation, reflection, and learning from the results achieved lead to the setting of new objectives and the iteration of the process, which denotes an important proposition: digital transformation never ends.
At this stage, two organizational dimensions gain importance: products and services, and customers. The former, through digital technologies, enables the generation of new value offerings by digitalizing existing ones or creating new digital products and services. This impacts data capture and generation, which, in turn, allows for a more dynamic connection with customers. They now become key actors who provide timely and automated market information, facilitating co-creation and the development of new value propositions.
This dynamic represents an opportunity for Colombian companies to venture into new business models. For example, companies in traditional sectors created new revenue streams based on intangible assets: “We do not sell information; we are a food sales company, but today we have a way to sell it. This is a new business” (E4, 2022). Another example involves technical capabilities originally developed for internal use that are transformed into market products: “... it has become possible to transcend internal service to sell our software developments to other companies” (E5, 2022).
DT also facilitates the transition from linear distribution models to platform or intermediary models: “Today we are distributors, but with our marketplace, we aim to be the Amazon of liquors” (E8, 2023). This is also observed in niche sectors, such as sustainable mobility: “... there is a whole world of e-commerce to exploit in spare parts” (E7, 2023). Even in structures that maintain their traditional business core, DT enhances digital sales channels, achieving revenue growth that would not be possible through analog methods: “We are doing very well in terms of digital sales; in these years, sales have doubled” (E1, 2022). Undoubtedly, DT transcends organizational boundaries and expands the value chain. Digitalization blurs the space-time barriers that previously characterized analog relationships and energizes engagement with stakeholders.
Finally, capitalizing means reaching a new level of digital maturity or a new starting point. “After having started this DT journey, we had to make a break and reflect on what we had achieved, how we had achieved it, where there were opportunities for improvement, and how we could continue to improve” (E7, 2023). In this way, DT represents a constant cycle of action-learning-adjustment.
Emerging aspects of DT
DT as an organizing process represents a continuous state within a spiral of digital maturity. The involvement of multiple organizational dimensions, which interact and interrelate, demonstrates the complexity of the process and makes the rise of emergent aspects inevitable. DT does not manifest as a linear deployment, but rather as a ‘bubbling’ and experimental process: “Experimenting was the only way to discover the potential results of applying technologies; nothing was guaranteed” (E4, 2022). This non-predictive nature generates a series of emergent dynamics in DT: “Many things appear that we had not planned” (E7, 2023). Within this framework, emergent findings are categorized into technological, structural, and sociocultural aspects.
Regarding technological emergent aspects, the development of digital competencies fueled the shadow IT phenomenon, where employees implement solutions outside company protocols: “Some people started using digital tools on their own, and only when these solutions hit a point of difficulty did the company find out” (E2, 2022). However, this autonomy has also forced the in-house development of software due to market limitations: “We decided to do our own developments because market solutions were delayed and expensive” (E8, 2023). Furthermore, digital maturity has enabled the identification of unplanned applications of technology. An example is the use of technology for financial risk management: “We incorporated GPS into our products and discovered an emergent use for credit risk management… if the customer doesn’t pay, the product is turned off and I recover it” (E7, 2023).
Regarding structural emergent aspects, DT has forced a reconfiguration of governance, shifting leadership from technical areas (IT) toward transversal departments such as Human Resources or Strategic Management to “avoid strategic short circuits” (E3, 2022). This transition responds to the need to overcome operational bottlenecks and has institutionalized new ways of working, such as the “creation of agile cells” (E10, 2023) as a new agile, flexible, and interdisciplinary work method; the “creation of cross-departmental committees” (E5, 2022), which fosters a systemic and holistic view of DT; or “learning communities” (E6, 2023), as spontaneous groups formed to tackle unfamiliar processes and technologies. Added to this are structural connectivity limitations that hinder digital plans in rural regions: “Connectivity is a terrible obstacle in Colombia; without internet, we could not reach our customers” (E9, 2023).
Regarding sociocultural emergent aspects, digital literacy gaps have become evident, not only internally but across the value chain: “We acquired an e-commerce platform and trained our staff, but our business partners did not know how to use it” (E8, 2023). Added to this are unforeseen external challenges, particularly global competition for human capital: “Unexpected pressure on salaries arose; companies from other countries looking for tech talent paid in dollars or euros, and we had no way to outperform those offers” (E8, 2023). Simultaneously, informal leadership emerges: “We identified the technology ‘experts’ in each area and relied on them as ambassadors for digital transformation” (E3, 2022).
On the other hand, different resistance mechanisms to DT emerge. For example, “employees often associate automation and technology with replacement and job loss” (E8, 2023). Employee longevity and the past success of analog methods also generate resistance: “The attachment to tradition because things have always been done this way” (E3, 2022). There are clashes of egos between departments (such as IT and Human Talent) regarding project control (E5, 2022). Passive resistance was evidenced under the “seeing is believing” philosophy, where departments wait for results before committing (E9, 2023). In companies that depend on intermediaries, resistance shifts to the sales or distribution network: “Digital adoption is difficult because the business partner sometimes has a basic profile” (E7, 2023).
Colombian companies address resistance through a combination of committed leadership, transparent communication, education, and employee involvement in the process. For the transformation to be accepted, self-conviction must begin with top management. “If leaders do not believe in the process, teams will hardly mobilize” (E1, 2022). Resistance can also be managed through communication that frames technology as an assistant, not a substitute: “There must be clear communication regarding the purpose of DT, highlighting that technology facilitates work and frees up time for people to focus on other activities that generate greater value” (E10, 2023). Furthermore, education becomes both a requirement and an enabler for people to overcome their fear of the unknown (E5, 2022). In this way, DT establishes itself as an emergent process “that takes shape as it goes” (E7, 2023), assuming that “it is impossible to predict the impact of every technological move” (E1, 2022).
DISCUSSION
In line with the call made by Hanelt et al. (2021), and in response to the research question, this work opens the black box of DT and provides an explanation of how the process occurs and what its implications are for organizations. The developed framework details the key dimensions at each stage and seeks to graphically represent a process that involves the entire organization, with multiple and cross-cutting impacts among different organizational dimensions. Jedynak et al. (2021) point out that, although the literature on DT is abundant, it suffers from critical ‘blind spots’ in understanding the DT process, as research often treats DT instrumentally without delving into the organizational implications. This work sought to contribute to addressing these blind spots.
Likewise, the characteristics of DT proposed by Gong and Ribiere (2021) are evident in the study: nature, scope, entity, means, results, and impact. In terms of nature, DT is seen as a fundamental change: “Our company achieved a significant change in the current business model” (E3, 2022). Regarding scope, the process transcends the technical to impact culture and organizational strategy transversally: “DT accelerated the company’s strategy, and technology empowered all people” (E1, 2022). Concerning entity, “DT impacted everything from the organizational structure to the network of business partners” (E7, 2023). Regarding means, evidence showed “the acquisition of new digital technologies in companies and the development of new digital skills” (E4, 2022). In terms of results, improvements in operational efficiency and higher revenues were observed, as noted by E9 (2023). Regarding impact, several companies redefined their value proposition: “DT, for us, is the key process for generating value and thus achieving sustainability and providing a competitive advantage to the business” (E2, 2022).
While the characteristics of DT are evident and align with the literature, context is a determining factor that shapes the trajectory of DT (Soh et al., 2023) and depends on how the company interprets external pressures, its own internal maturity, and the particularities of its industry (Oludapo et al., 2024). The interviewees agree that there is no “one-size-fits-all recipe” (E6, 2023) and that technology must adapt to business reality and not the other way around (E1, 2022). In the Colombian case, it was evidenced that, although the characteristics of DT are similar, the process varies among companies.
For example, one difference is the direct or intermediate relationship between companies and their customers. Companies that do not reach the consumer directly face the challenge of also transforming their intermediaries: “DT was limited by the low digital maturity of our business partners, who are the visible face for the customers” (E7, 2023). On the other hand, E1 (2022) indicates that, in a direct relationship, the focus is on frictionless omnichannel: “A customer is constantly moving between the physical and the digital and should feel they are having the same experience.”
Another difference lies in the age and trajectory of the company, which dictate the speed of adoption and the intensity of resistance. E3 (2022) noted that in their company, with decades in the market, the challenge was to break deeply ingrained analog processes: “There are people who have been doing things the same way for 30-35 years.” E6 (2023) agrees that “changing the mindset of people over 50 who have been with the company for a long time is very complex.” However, E5 (2022) points out that, “being a company founded in 2017, its culture is more malleable.” A final example is the difference between centralization and autonomy in decision-making. Some companies define DT on their own terms and conditions: “Our company operates autonomously with strategic coherence” (E4, 2022), while the DT of other companies is guided by a headquarters: “We belong to a multinational, and they set the path that we must adapt to Colombia” (E6, 2022).
On the other hand, this study shows that DT is a process with three central characteristics: continuity, complexity, and emergence. Continuity allows for questioning the existence of a single timeline with a beginning and an end. The transition from analog to digital implies a continuous course within a spiral of digital maturity, turning DT into a state without a temporal horizon. “It is a continuous transition from present states to future states between the physical/analog and the digital” (E2, 2022). DT constitutes a process of change that leads to permanent organizational reconfiguration. In this sense, the work agrees with Rahrovani (2020), who views DT as a sequence of events, actions, and goals that progress and update according to environmental dynamics and the strategic needs of the organization, in a sequence that is not linear but dynamic and adaptive.
Complexity is clear evidence of the multidimensionality of the process. Although DT is grounded in digital technologies, these remain a dimension that enables but does not conclude the process. This work contributes to the framework of Ifenthaler and Egloffstein (2020), who highlight multiple organizational dimensions involved in a DT process but do not explain the role or implications they have during that process. Furthermore, it corroborates and demonstrates that the process is multidimensional, interdependent, and interconnected (Bonanomi, 2019; Liborio-Zapata et al., 2022), featuring a holistic co-evolution where all spheres of an organization can be affected (Hanelt et al., 2021).
The emergent aspects express the contingent idiosyncrasy of DT, which is, in turn, fueled by the two previous characteristics. Its continuous and complex nature, along with the fundamental change process it generates, gives rise to various aspects that cannot be foreseen in advance. Revealing the emergent aspects of DT constitutes a theoretical contribution by questioning classical theories used to explain a phenomenon that challenges traditional models (Dąbrowska et al., 2022) and by shifting the focus from static results toward procedural mechanisms, dynamic tensions, and action flows that define contemporary reality (Weber & Maciel, 2024).
Making the emergent aspects of DT visible through the experience of Colombian companies also offers a practical contribution, as it calls on organizations to move from rigid planning to adaptive management. According to E5 (2022), “Paying attention to emergent results allows companies to be prepared for contingencies, something that traditional planning sometimes ignores.” E10 (2023) notes: “Instead of viewing unintended consequences as errors, they should be seen as sources of learning, warnings, and opportunities.”
Another result to highlight is the role of data as a key and transversal dimension of DT. Data has been considered a digital resource within the field of information systems (Verhoef et al., 2021) and a productive resource from the perspective of traditional management (Dąbrowska et al., 2022); however, from a more organizational standpoint and in association with digital technologies, it becomes a key seed of the digital organization. Consequently, another point of discussion arises: DT blurs organizational boundaries and transversally expands the value chain. Through digital technologies and based on data, customers and other business partners become an active part of the organizational process. In line with the arguments made by Hanelt et al. (2021), digital technologies enable an instantaneous release, making it increasingly difficult to differentiate whether the origin of change was generated within or outside the boundaries of an organization.
Finally, this work invites the consideration of DT as an organizational transformation in all its complexity and the adoption of a strong process view, which allows for seeing change in the way reality becomes reality at every moment (Langley & Tsoukas, 2016), or as a hive of continuous activity that is renewed every day (De Villa & Langley, 2024). In this way, the characteristics of continuity, complexity, and emergence intended in this work can be highlighted rather than reduced.
CONCLUSIONS
This article presents an explanation of how DT occurs and the dimensions involved, as well as the emergent aspects that arise during the process. The results enabled the conceptualization and distinction of DT as a process that moves through three key moments: initiation, implementation, and capitalization, all of which are permeated by multiple emergent aspects. The evidenced processual nature represents a dynamic spiral of digital maturity, which allows for viewing DT from an organizational and strategic change perspective.
As a contribution to both theory and practice, a framework was developed that seeks to graphically demonstrate how the DT process occurs. Initiation shows how different internal and external drivers motivate the organization’s strategic commitment and foster the establishment of initial objectives. Implementation highlights the required resources and capabilities, as well as key dimensions such as processes, people, culture, and structure - with technology acting as the great enabler and mediator for data generation. Capitalization, as an apparent endpoint, evidences results that materialize in products, services, and new ways of relating to customers and business partners. This stage leads to reflection, evaluation, and learning, representing a new starting point or adjustment for DT.
Likewise, these three stages do not constitute a siloed and linear process; rather, they are transversally permeated by countless emergent aspects. The DT process involves a set of non-linear reconfigurations of decisions or, as previously stated, a ‘bubbling’ and experimental process involving multiple actors and organizational dimensions.
This work makes a fundamental contribution to the field of DT by presenting how the process occurs and highlighting its processual nature. Weber and Maciel (2024)argue that investigating a constantly evolving organizational phenomenon fosters a better understanding of its complexity and allows for the recognition of the heterogeneous nature of reality.
Regarding the limitations of this work, two main points should be highlighted. The first is related to the participating subjects, who were predominantly leaders and consultants. It is possible that including members from various organizational levels could provide important elements to further enrich the findings. Second, although the characteristics of continuity, complexity, and emergence of DT have been identified, it is necessary to deepen research on DT from other perspectives, such as process or practice theories.
Finally, the work identified several future lines of research. The first involves incorporating a process perspective to investigate DT in accordance with its processual nature. Research from this perspective could broaden the understanding of DT through the lenses of complexity and emergence. The second derives from the need to investigate the interrelationship between organizational dimensions over time. Although this work sought to highlight the flow of dimensions, studying DT through the lens of practice theory would allow for unveiling with greater precision and detail the interrelations between the social and the technological. The third stems from the need to further delve into the emergent aspects derived from DT and the impacts they generate within the organization. The fourth suggests the importance of understanding and addressing data as a key organizational dimension for the functioning of the digitally transformed organization.
REFERENCES
-
Baiyere, A., Salmela, H., & Tapanainen, T. (2020). Digital transformation and the new logics of business process management. European Journal of Information Systems, 29(3), 238-259. https://doi.org/10.1080/0960085X.2020.1718007
» https://doi.org/10.1080/0960085X.2020.1718007 -
Bonanomi, M. M. (2019). Digital Transformation Strategies of Multidisciplinary Design Firms: Key-takeaways from Experts’ Interviews. In SpringerBriefs in Applied Sciences and Technology https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-19701-8_2
» https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-19701-8_2 -
Bonanomi, M. M., Hall, D. M., Staub-French, S., Tucker, A., & Talamo, C. M. L. (2020). The impact of digital transformation on formal and informal organizational structures of large architecture and engineering firms. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 27(4), 872-892. https://doi.org/10.1108/ECAM-03-2019-0119
» https://doi.org/10.1108/ECAM-03-2019-0119 -
Büchner, S., Hergesell, J., & Kallinikos, J. (2022). Digital transformation(s): On the entanglement of long-term processes and digital social change. An introduction. Historical Social Research, 47(3), 7-39. https://doi.org/10.12759/hsr.47.2022.25
» https://doi.org/10.12759/hsr.47.2022.25 -
Bunduchi, R., Tursunbayeva, A., & Pagliari, C. (2020). Coping with institutional complexity: Intersecting logics and dissonant visions in a nation-wide healthcare IT implementation project. Information Technology and People, 33(1), 311-339. https://doi.org/10.1108/ITP-08-2018-0373
» https://doi.org/10.1108/ITP-08-2018-0373 -
Dąbrowska, J., Almpanopoulou, A., Brem, A., Chesbrough, H., Cucino, V., Di Minin, A., Giones, F., Hakala, H., Marullo, C., Mention, A. L., Mortara, L., Nørskov, S., Nylund, P. A., Oddo, C. M., Radziwon, A., & Ritala, P. (2022). Digital transformation, for better or worse: A critical multi-level research agenda. R&D Management, 52(5), 930-954. https://doi.org/10.1111/RADM.12531
» https://doi.org/10.1111/RADM.12531 -
De Villa, M. A., & Langley, A. (2024). Doing process research in international business. International Business Review, 33(5). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibusrev.2024.102316
» https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibusrev.2024.102316 -
Dworaczek, H., & Martínez, C. (2024). Maestría en Administración y su vinculación con la Inteligencia Artificial para líderes del futuro. Revista de Ciencias Sociales, 30(3), 173-186. https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=9800765
» https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=9800765 -
Gençer, M., Izcan, E., Göçer, A., & Özpeynirci, Ö. (2025). A digital transformation index for business organisations: reckoning the extraverted change in pillars. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management, 38(2). https://doi.org/10.1080/09537325.2025.2472235
» https://doi.org/10.1080/09537325.2025.2472235 -
Gioia, D., Corley, K., & Hamilton, A. (2013). Seeking qualitative rigor in inductive research: Notes on the Gioia Methodology. Organizational Research Methods, 16(1), 15-31. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428112452151
» https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428112452151 -
Gong, C., & Ribiere, V. (2021). Developing a unified definition of digital transformation. Technovation, 102(July), 102217. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2020.102217
» https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2020.102217 -
Gregory, R. W., Kaganer, E., Henfridsson, O., & Ruch, T. J. (2018). It consumerization and the transformation of it governance. MIS Quarterly: Management Information Systems, 42(4), 1225-1253. https://doi.org/10.25300/MISQ/2018/13703
» https://doi.org/10.25300/MISQ/2018/13703 -
Guo, X., Li, M., Wang, Y., & Mardani, A. (2023). Does digital transformation improve the firm’s performance? From the perspective of digitalization paradox and managerial myopia. Journal of Business Research, 163(November 2022), 113868. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2023.113868
» https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2023.113868 -
Hanelt, A., Bohnsack, R., Marz, D., & Antunes Marante, C. (2021). A Systematic Review of the Literature on Digital Transformation: Insights and Implications for Strategy and Organizational Change. Journal of Management Studies, 58(5), 1159-1197. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12639
» https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12639 -
Ifenthaler, D., & Egloffstein, M. (2020). Development and Implementation of a Maturity Model of Digital Transformation. TechTrends, 64, 302-309. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-019-00457-4
» https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-019-00457-4 -
Jedynak, M., Czakon, W., Kuźniarska, A., & Mania, K. (2021). Digital transformation of organizations: What do we know and where to go next? Journal of Organizational Change Management, 34(3), 629-652. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOCM-10-2020-0336
» https://doi.org/10.1108/JOCM-10-2020-0336 -
Langley, A., & Tsoukas, H. (2010). Introducing “Perspectives on Process Organization Studies.” In T. Hernes & S. Maitlis (Eds.), Process, Sensemaking, and Organizing (Oxford Uni, pp. 1-26). https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199594566.003.0001
» https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199594566.003.0001 -
Langley, A., & Tsoukas, H. (2016). Introduction: Process Thinking, Process Theorizing and Process Researching. The SAGE Handbook of Process Organization Studies, 1-25. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781473957954.n1
» https://doi.org/10.4135/9781473957954.n1 - Liborio-Zapata, M., Berrah, L., & Tabourot, L. (2022). Identifying the scope of the implications of a digital transformation: A formal approach to define the business dimensions involved (pp. 59-65). In 2022 The 3rd International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Industrial Management, Spain.
-
Nadkarni, S., & Prügl, R. (2020). Digital transformation: A review, synthesis and opportunities for future research. Management Review Quarterly., 71, 233-341. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11301-020-00185-7
» https://doi.org/10.1007/s11301-020-00185-7 -
Oludapo, S., Carroll, N., & Helfert, M. (2024). Why do so many digital transformations fail? A bibliometric analysis and future research agenda. Journal of Business Research, 174 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2024.114528
» https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2024.114528 -
Pagani, M., & Pardo, C. (2017). The impact of digital technology on relationships in a business network. Industrial Marketing Management, 67, 185-192. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2017.08.009
» https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2017.08.009 -
Plekhanov, D., Franke, H., & Netland, T. H. (2022). Digital transformation: A review and research agenda. European Management Journal, 41(6), September. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2022.09.007
» https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2022.09.007 -
Rahrovani, Y. (2020). Platform drifting: When work digitalization hijacks its spirit. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 29(2), 101615. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsis.2020.101615
» https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsis.2020.101615 -
Reis, J., & Melão, N. (2023). Digital transformation: A meta-review and guidelines for future research. Heliyon, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e12834
» https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e12834 -
Soh, C., Yeow, A., & Goh, Q. W. (2023). Shaping digital transformation pathways: Dynamics of paradoxical tensions and responses. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 24(6), 1594-1617. https://doi.org/10.17705/1jais.00852
» https://doi.org/10.17705/1jais.00852 -
Verhoef, P. C., Broekhuizen, T., Bart, Y., Bhattacharya, A., Qi Dong, J., Fabian, N., & Haenlein, M. (2021). Digital transformation: A multidisciplinary reflection and research agenda. Journal of Business Research 122 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.09.022
» https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.09.022 -
Vial, G. (2019). Understanding digital transformation: A review and a research agenda. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 28(2), 118-144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsis.2019.01.003
» https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsis.2019.01.003 -
Warner, K. S. R., & Wäger, M. (2019). Building dynamic capabilities for digital transformation: An ongoing process of strategic renewal. Long Range Planning, 52(3), 326-349. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2018.12.001
» https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2018.12.001 -
Weber, T. B. B., & Maciel, C. O. (2024). The categorization process from the becoming perspective. Organizações & Sociedade, 31(109). https://doi.org/10.1590/1984-92302024v31n0007en
» https://doi.org/10.1590/1984-92302024v31n0007en -
Wessel, L., Baiyere, A., Ologeanu-Taddei, R., Cha, J., & Jensen, T. B. (2021). Unpacking the difference between digital transformation and it-enabled organizational transformation. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 22(1), 102-129. https://doi.org/10.17705/1jais.00655
» https://doi.org/10.17705/1jais.00655 -
Zou, L., Li, W., Wu, H., Liu, J., & Gao, P. (2024). Measuring corporate digital transformation: Methodology, indicators and applications. Sustainability (Switzerland), 16(10), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16104087
» https://doi.org/10.3390/su16104087
-
Funding
The authors stated that there was no funding for the research in this article.
-
Plagiarism Check
RAC maintains the practice of submitting all documents approved for publication to the plagiarism check, using specific tools, e.g.: iThenticate.
-
Peer Review Method
This content was evaluated using the double-blind peer review process. The disclosure of the reviewers’ information on the first page, as well as the Peer Review Report, is made only after concluding the evaluation process, and with the voluntary consent of the respective reviewers and authors.
-
Data Availability
This information cannot be shared because the data are not public; they come from in-depth interviews with leaders from different companies and contain sensitive and anonymous information.RAC encourages data sharing but, in compliance with ethical principles, it does not demand the disclosure of any means of identifying research subjects, preserving the privacy of research subjects. The practice of open data is to enable the reproducibility of results, and to ensure the unrestricted transparency of the results of the published research, without requiring the identity of research subjects.
-
Cite as:
Galindo-Rodriguez, O. A., & Gentilin, M. (2026). Opening the Black Box of the Digital Transformation Process - Evidence from Colombia. Revista de Administração Contemporânea, 30(3), e250332. https://doi.org/10.1590/1982-7849rac2026250332.en
-
JEL Code:
M10, O33.
-
Peer Review Report:
The disclosure of the Peer Review Report was not authorized by its reviewer.
Edited by
-
Editor-in-chief:
Paula Chimenti (Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, COPPEAD, Brazil) https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6492-4072
-
Associate Editor:
Elaine Tavares (Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, COPPEAD, Brazil https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1107-2101
This information cannot be shared because the data are not public; they come from in-depth interviews with leaders from different companies and contain sensitive and anonymous information.
RAC encourages data sharing but, in compliance with ethical principles, it does not demand the disclosure of any means of identifying research subjects, preserving the privacy of research subjects. The practice of open data is to enable the reproducibility of results, and to ensure the unrestricted transparency of the results of the published research, without requiring the identity of research subjects.
Source: Elaborated by the authors.
