VOlUME 05 ISSUE 05 May 2026
An Nguyen Thanh
Thu Dau Mot University, Ho Chi Minh City, Viet Nam
DOI : https://doi.org/10.58806/ijsshmr.2026.v5i5n11Google Scholar Download Pdf
ABSTRACT
Responsible innovation and responsible digital transformation are increasingly important for firms seeking to create innovation value while responding to ethical, social, and stakeholder expectations. However, empirical evidence on how barriers to responsible innovation influence responsible innovation implementation, responsible digital transformation, and innovation performance remains limited, particularly in emerging economies. Drawing on Responsible Innovation Theory, Stakeholder Theory, and Dynamic Capabilities Theory, this study examines the relationships among barriers to responsible innovation, responsible innovation implementation, responsible digital transformation, innovation performance, and ethical pressure. Data were collected from 240 senior managers and decision-makers in medium and large enterprises in Vietnam and analyzed using Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling with SmartPLS 4. The findings show that barriers to responsible innovation significantly reduce responsible innovation implementation. In turn, responsible innovation implementation positively affects both responsible digital transformation and innovation performance. Responsible digital transformation also has a strong positive effect on innovation performance and is the most influential predictor of innovation outcomes in the model. In addition, ethical pressure positively moderates the relationship between responsible innovation implementation and responsible digital transformation, suggesting that stakeholder and regulatory expectations strengthen the translation of responsible innovation practices into responsible digital transformation. The results further indicate that responsible innovation implementation partially mediates the relationship between barriers to responsible innovation and responsible digital transformation. This study contributes to the literature by positioning responsible innovation implementation as a dynamic organizational capability linking internal barriers, external ethical pressure, responsible digital transformation, and innovation performance. The findings offer practical implications for managers and policymakers seeking to promote ethical, transparent, and performance-enhancing digital transformation in emerging economies.
KEYWORDS:Barriers to responsible innovation; Responsible innovation implementation; Responsible digital transformation; Innovation performance; Ethical pressure; PLS SEM; Vietnam
REFERENCES
1) Baruch, Y., & Holtom, B. C. (2008). Survey response rate levels and trends in organizational research. Human Relations, 61(8), 1139–1160. DOI: 10.1177/0018726708094863
2) Blok, V., & Lemmens, P. (2015). The emerging concept of responsible innovation. Three reasons why it is questionable and calls for a radical transformation of the concept of innovation. In Responsible innovation 2: Concepts, approaches, and applications (pp. 19-35). Cham: Springer International Publishing. DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-17308-5_2
3) Blok, V., Lubberink, R., Van Ophem, J., & Omta, O. (2017). Lessons for responsible innovation in the business context: A systematic review of responsible-, social-, and sustainable innovation practices. Sustainability, 5(9), 721. DOI: 10.3390/su9050721
4) Blok, V., Scholten, V., & Long, T. B. (2018). Responsible innovation in industry and the importance of customer orientation: Introduction to the special issue. International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, 21(4), 455–462. https://doi.org/10.22434/IFAMR2018.x001
5) Brown, M. E., & Treviño, L. K. (2006). Ethical leadership: A review and future directions. The Leadership Quarterly, 17(6), 595–616. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2006.10.004
6) Ceicytė, J., & Petraite, M. (2018). Networked responsibility approach for responsible innovation: Perspective of the firm. Sustainability, 10(6), 1720. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10061720
7) Del Río, P., Peñasco, C., & Romero-Jordán, D. (2023). Innovation performance in firms: A review of measurement approaches. Technovation, 122, Article 102693. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2022.102693
8) Di Vaio, A., Palladino, R., Hassan, R., & Escobar, O. (2020). Artificial intelligence and business models in the sustainable development goals perspective: A systematic literature review. Journal of Business Research, 121, 283–314. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.08.019
9) Floridi, L. (2018). Soft ethics and the governance of the digital. Philosophy & Technology, 31(1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-018-0303-9
10) Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Pitman.
11) Garriga, E. (2021). A framework for stakeholder engagement in responsible innovation. Journal of Business Ethics, 170, 121–138. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-020-04637-y
12) Gonzales-Gemio, C., Cruz-Cázares, C., & Parmentier, M. J. (2020). Responsible innovation in smes: A systematic literature review for a conceptual model. Sustainability, 12(24), 10232. https://doi.org/10.3390/su122410232
13) Gurzawska, A., Mäkinen, M., & Brey, P. (2017). Implementation of responsible research and innovation (RRI) practices in industry. Sustainability, 9(10), 1759. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9101759
14) Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2017). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) (2nd ed.). Sage.
15) Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(1), 115–135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8
16) Hinings, B., Gegenhuber, T., & Greenwood, R. (2018). Digital innovation and transformation: An institutional perspective. Information and Organization, 28(1), 52–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infoandorg.2018.02.004
17) Jobin, A., Ienca, M., & Vayena, E. (2019). The global landscape of AI ethics guidelines. Nature Machine Intelligence, 1(9), 389–399. https://doi.org/10.1038/s42256-019-0088-2
18) Khan, A. A., Badshah, S., Liang, P., Waseem, M., Khan, B., Ahmad, A., ... & Akbar, M. A. (2022, June). Ethics of AI: A systematic literature review of principles and challenges. In Proceedings of the 26th international conference on evaluation and assessment in software engineering (pp. 383-392).
19) Kraus, S., et al. (2022). Digital transformation in business and management research: An overview. International Journal of Information Management, 63, Article 102466. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2021.102466
20) Lara Lobschat, B., Mueller, F., Eggers, F., Brandimarte, L., Diefenbach, S., Kroschke, M., & Wirtz, J. (2021). Corporate digital responsibility. Journal of Business Research, 122, 875–888. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.10.006
21) Lubberink, R., Blok, V., Van Ophem, J., & Omta, O. (2017). Lessons for responsible innovation in the business context: A systematic literature review of responsible, social and sustainable innovation practices. Sustainability, 9(5), 721.
22) Martinuzzi, A., Schönherr, N., Jarmai, K., & Klopf, J. (2018). Responsible research and innovation in industry - Challenges, insights and perspectives. Sustainability, 10(3), 702. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2019.1625871
23) Mitchell, R. K., Agle, B. R., & Wood, D. J. (1997). Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience. Academy of Management Review, 22(4), 853–886. https://doi.org/10.2307/259247
24) Nadkarni, S., & Prügl, R. (2021). Digital transformation: A review, synthesis and opportunities. Management Review Quarterly, 71, 233–341. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11301-020-00185-7
25) Owen, R., Bessant, J., & Heintz, M. (2013). Responsible innovation: Managing the responsible emergence of science and innovation in society. Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118551424
26) Pappas, I. O., Mikalef, P., Dwivedi, Y. K., Jaccheri, L., & Krogstie, J. (2023). Responsible digital transformation for a sustainable society. Information Systems Frontiers, 25(3), 945-953. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-023-10406-5
27) Pidgeon, N., Harthorn, B., & Satterfield, T. (2011). Nanotechnology risk perceptions and communication: emerging technologies, emerging challenges. Risk Analysis: An International Journal, 31(11), 1694-1700. DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2011.01738.x
28) Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2017). Strategy & Society. Harvard business review, 84.
29) Singh, S. K., et al. (2022). Stakeholder pressure, green innovation, and performance. Business Strategy and the Environment, 31(1), 500–514. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2906
30) Song, M., Yang, M. X., Zeng, K. J., & Feng, W. (2020). Green knowledge sharing, stakeholder pressure, absorptive capacity, and green innovation: Evidence from Chinese manufacturing firms. Business Strategy and the Environment, 29(3), 1517-1531. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2450
31) Stilgoe, J., Owen, R., & Macnaghten, P. (2013). Developing a framework for responsible innovation. Research Policy, 42(9), 1568–1580. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2013.05.008
32) Teece, D. J. (2007). Explicating dynamic capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 28(13), 1319–1350. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.640
33) Trier, M., Kundisch, D., Beverungen, D., Müller, O., Schryen, G., Mirbabaie, M., & Trang, S. (2023). Digital responsibility: A multilevel framework for responsible digitalization. Business & Information Systems Engineering, 65(4), 463–474. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-023-00822-x
34) Van de Poel, I. (2020). Embedding values in artificial intelligence (AI) systems. Minds and machines, 30(3), 385-409. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11023-020-09537-4
35) Verhoef, P. C., Broekhuizen, T., Bart, Y., Bhattacharya, A., Dong, J. Q., Fabian, N., & Haenlein, M. (2021). Digital transformation: A multidisciplinary reflection and research agenda. Journal of Business Research, 122, 889–901. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.09.022
36) Vial, G. (2019). Understanding digital transformation. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 28(2), 118–144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsis.2019.01.003
37) Wiarda, M., van de Kaa, G., Yaghmaei, E., & Doorn, N. (2021). A comprehensive appraisal of responsible research and innovation: From roots to leaves. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 172, 121053. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.121053
38) Zimmer, M. P., Järveläinen, J., Stahl, B. C., & Mueller, B. (2023). Responsibility of/in digital transformation. Journal of Responsible Technology, 16, Article 100068. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrt.2023.100068
Cite this Article:Thanh, A. N. (2026). Responsible Innovation and Responsible Digital Transformation in Emerging Economies (Vietnam): the Roles of Innovation Barriers and Ethical Pressure. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SOCIAL SCIENCE HUMANITY & MANAGEMENT RESEARCHS, 5(5), 1001-1017. https://doi.org/10.58806/ijsshmr.2026.v5i5n11