Page 331 - ISC PROCEEDINGS 21.4

Figure 4 provides one of the most important findings of the study. SMEs rate
their adaptability and innovation capacity at only a moderate to fairly positive level,
with mean scores ranging from 2.96 to 3.33. Compared with the relatively strong
scores on leadership awareness and perceived benefits of digital transformation, this
dimension is noticeably weaker. This indicates that the central challenge for
Vietnamese SMEs does not lie primarily in recognizing the importance of digital
transformation, but in developing the organizational capabilities needed to turn
digitalization into sustained and strategic change.
The highest-rated criterion in this group is the ability to adjust work processes when
adopting new technologies, with a score of 3.33. This suggests that many firms are
capable of making practical adjustments during implementation. However, the score is
only moderate, indicating that such adjustments are still limited in depth and may remain
uneven across enterprises. The capacity to proactively learn and update new technologies
is rated at 3.20, while coordination among departments when technological changes
occur receives 3.17. Together, these results suggest that learning and coordination are
present, but not yet strong enough to support deeper transformation across the
organization.
The criterion related to encouraging experimentation with new management or
operational initiatives scores 3.11. This reflects a cautious approach to innovation. Many
SMEs appear aware that digital transformation requires experimentation and
organizational learning, but resource constraints and risk concerns limit their willingness
to test new models or routines. This is consistent with the structural characteristics of
SMEs, where failed experiments may impose relatively high costs and uncertainty.
The lowest score is observed for strategically linking digital transformation with
sustainable development goals, at 2.96. This is a particularly significant result because it
reveals the clearest gap between digital activity and long-term strategic orientation.
Many firms are implementing digital tools, but they are not yet systematically integrating
those efforts into a broader sustainability agenda. Digital transformation, in other words,
often remains operational and short-term rather than strategic and sustainability-
oriented.
Dynamic capability theory provides the clearest explanation for this pattern.
Adaptability and innovation are the mechanisms that allow firms to move from isolated
digital adoption to deeper organizational renewal. Enterprises that can sense changes,
seize opportunities and reconfigure their internal resources are more likely to convert
digital transformation into lasting value across economic, social and environmental
dimensions. Where these capabilities remain weak, digital transformation tends to
produce narrower gains concentrated in efficiency or market responsiveness rather than
broader sustainable development outcomes.
This helps explain the overall empirical logic of the study. SMEs report relatively
strong leadership awareness and recognize clear economic benefits from digital
transformation. They also face considerable pressure from competition and customer
demand. Yet the moderate scores on adaptability and innovation indicate that many firms
still lack the organizational bridge needed to transform these pressures and intentions
into more comprehensive and sustained outcomes. Therefore, digital transformation
alone is not the decisive factor. What matters is whether the enterprise possesses the
dynamic capability to align digitalization with strategic learning, resource reconfiguration
and sustainability goals.

330