DIGITAL RISK GOVERNANCE AND SUSTAINABILITY IN SMES: EVIDENCE FROM NORTH MACEDONIA
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.46763/Keywords:
sustainability, SMEs, ESG performance, digital maturity, North MacedoniaAbstract
Small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) represent the backbone of the economy in North Macedonia, yet they increasingly operate in an environment characterized by rapid digitalization and increasing sustainability pressures. This study examines the relationship between digital risk governance maturity and sustainable performance among SMEs in North Macedonia. Specifically, the research investigates how organizational and institutional factors influence the development of digital risk governance and how this capability contributes to environmental, social, and governance (ESG) outcomes.
A quantitative research design was employed based on survey data collected from 150 SMEs in North Macedonia. The data were analyzed using Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM).
The results indicate that digital literacy, formalized digital policies, organizational capacity, export exposure, and institutional pressures significantly influence the maturity of digital risk governance. Furthermore, digital risk governance maturity has a strong positive effect on sustainable performance, confirming its role as a strategic organizational capability. Mediation analysis reveals that digital risk governance partially mediates the relationship between organizational and institutional factors and ESG outcomes.
The study contributes to the literature by integrating digital risk governance with sustainability research in the SME context of a transition economy. Practical implications highlight the importance of strengthening digital competencies, formal governance frameworks, and institutional support mechanisms in order to enhance both digital resilience and sustainable development among SMEs. Furthermore, the study confirms that digital risk governance serves as a critical mediator, effectively translating organizational resources into measurable ESG performance.
References
1. Ahmad, A., Maynard, S. B., & Park, S. (2020). Information security strategies: Towards an organizational multi-strategy perspective. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, 31(2), 361–377. DOI: 10.1007/s10845-018-1451-0
2. Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99–120. DOI: 10.1177/014920639101700108
3. Bharadwaj, A., El Sawy, O., Pavlou, P., & Venkatraman, N. (2013). Digital business strategy: Toward a next generation of insights. MIS Quarterly, 37(2), 471–482. DOI: 10.25300/MISQ/2013/37.2.3
4. Dangelico, R. M., & Pontrandolfo, P. (2010). Mainstreaming green product innovation: Why and how companies integrate environmental sustainability. Journal of Business Ethics, 95(3), 371–386. DOI: 10.1007/s10551-009-0426-4
5. Eccles, R. G., & Klimenko, S. (2019). The investor revolution. Harvard Business Review, 97(3), 106–116.
6. European Commission. (2023). Annual report on European SMEs 2022/2023. Brussels: European Commission.
7. George, G., Merrill, R. K., & Schillebeeckx, S. J. D. (2021). Digital sustainability and entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 45(5), 999–1027. DOI: 10.1177/1042258720945158
8. Ghobakhloo, M. (2018). The future of manufacturing industry: A strategic roadmap toward Industry 4.0. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 29(6), 910–936. DOI: 10.1108/JMTM-02-2018-0057
9. Ghobakhloo, M., & Fathi, M. (2021). Corporate survival in Industry 4.0 era. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 32(1), 1–35. DOI: 10.1108/JMTM-02-2020-0067
10. Kraus, S., Schiavone, F., Pluzhnikova, A., & Invernizzi, A. C. (2021). Digital transformation in healthcare: Analyzing the current state-of-the-art and setting the stage for future research. Journal of Business Research, 123, 557–567. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.10.045
11. Markovic, S., Koporcic, N., & Tumbas, S. (2021). Digital transformation in SMEs: A case study of a family business. Technology in Society, 65, 101553. DOI: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2021.101553
12. NIST. (2023). Cybersecurity Framework (CSF 2.0). National Institute of Standards and Technology.
13. OECD. (2023). SME and Entrepreneurship Outlook 2023. OECD Publishing, Paris.
14. Revell, A., Stokes, D., & Chen, H. (2010). Small businesses and the environment: turning over a new leaf? Business Strategy and the Environment, 19(5), 273–286. DOI: 10.1002/bse.628
15. Sarkis, J. (2021). Supply chain sustainability: learning from the COVID-19 pandemic. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 41(1), 63–73. DOI: 10.1108/IJOPM-12-2019-0899
16. United Nations. (2023). Sustainable Development Goals Report 2023. New York: United Nations.
17. Vial, G. (2019). Understanding digital transformation: A review and a research agenda. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 28(2), 118–144. DOI: 10.1016/j.jsis.2019.01.003
18. World Economic Forum. (2022). Global Cybersecurity Outlook 2022. Geneva: World Economic Forum.
19. Yoo, Y., Henfridsson, O., & Lyytinen, K. (2010). The new organizing logic of digital innovation: an agenda for information systems research. Information Systems Research, 21(4), 724–735. DOI: 10.1287/isre.1100.0322
20. Zhang, Y., Yang, Z., & Bi, G. (2022). Digital transformation and sustainable development: Evidence from Chinese listed companies. Sustainability, 14(8), 4576. DOI: 10.3390/su14084576
