2.1. Servitization and Digitalization
In today’s fiercely competitive domestic and international manufacturing markets, the shift from a “product economy” to a “service economy” has become the primary means of increasing competitiveness [
8], and the manufacturing operation paradigm is undergoing noticeable changes. For example, Xerox offers a pay-per-copy service for its office printers; HP has implemented “information services,” and Michelin has implemented an “after-sales service,” a series of service transformations that have demonstrated remarkable effectiveness. Following GE’s restructuring, service-related revenue accounted for more than 80% of total revenue. Hangyang Group transitioned from selling air separation equipment to becoming a gas service provider, and gas service has since become the enterprise’s primary source of revenue. Manufacturing enterprises are more closely connected to services and digital technologies. On the one hand, green manufacturing, intelligent manufacturing, virtual manufacturing, and other new manufacturing methods have emerged and spread rapidly; on the other hand, the traditional divisions between manufacturing and service industries have accelerated their demise, and the integration of manufacturing and service development has become increasingly prominent [
3]. In this context, manufacturing enterprises are confronted with two disruptive changes. First, there is the need to meet consumer expectations and for businesses to combine high-quality products and services by refocusing their strategies away from providing essential products and toward providing value-added “product+service” solutions, a process known as “servitization” [
9]. Second, there is the increasing availability and connoisseurship of data [
10]. According to Vandermerwe and Rada [
11], servitization can be understood in two ways: as a process of servitization of manufacturing, or servitization of manufacturing organizations. The former reflects the overall manufacturing trend, and the latter emphasizes the strategic initiative of manufacturing organizations. According to Baines et al. [
8], it is a strategy for developing unique and sustainable value-added capabilities compared to competitors. Bandinelli and Gamberi [
12] argue that manufacturing enterprises can leverage servitization to achieve profitability and economic stability, and growth. For digitalization, most early perspectives were technological, viewing digital transformation as the application of digital technology to business processes such as manufacturing operations, and the definition of digital transformation was centered on digital technology [
13]. With the increasing integration of digital technologies into the real economy, scholars have begun to view digitalization through the lens of organizational change, referring to the enhancement of enterprises’ use of market information and the timely application of advanced digital technologies to optimize or change existing production and service processes as a process of digital transformation [
14]. In general, servitization and digitalization are the primary directions of manufacturing enterprise transformation. Regardless of the direction, the primary objective of enterprises is to increase competitiveness, create value, and generate economic benefits.
Given the profound impact that both servitization and digitalization have on business competition, it is necessary to pay closer attention to their interaction. It has been noted that the application of digital technologies can accelerate servitization by enabling the provision of complex and innovative services [
15]. Digital technologies drive and benefit from servitization, and leveraging them allows businesses to mitigate the challenges and risks associated with servitization while successfully reaping the benefits [
16]. This pattern emphasizes value creation through digital technologies, including the Internet of Things, big data, and cloud computing [
17]. The development and provision of services with technical support improve an enterprise’s competitive advantage [
18]; the dematerialization of physical goods with the assistance of ICT capabilities enhance an enterprise’s performance [
19]. While servitization and digital technologies originated in distinct fields of study, scholars have observed a convergence of the two, resulting in the concept of “digital servitization” [
20]. Kohtamäki et al. [
21] define digital servitization as “the transition to intelligent product-service software systems that generate and capture value through monitoring, control, optimization, and self-management.” According to this view, enterprises must use a combination of products, services, and software to derive value from digital services. Dreyer et al. [
22] define digital services as a personalized, dynamic, digital, high-quality service solution provided by an enterprise focusing on perceptibility and connectivity, as a combination of physical products and digital value-added services. These definitions recognize the importance of digital technology in enhancing the strategic and operational effectiveness of servitization. Moreover, the combination of digitalization and servitization results in a synergistic “digital + service” model for manufacturing enterprises, which realizes value-added solutions in all aspects of the manufacturing process.
2.2. The Role of Transformation Concerning Enterprise Innovation
While the transformation of manufacturing enterprises toward servitization and digitization increases their competitiveness, it also raises a critical question: how will it affect manufacturing enterprises’ innovation behavior? In terms of the servitization dimension, scholars have examined the type of product–service systems offered by manufacturing enterprises, the path toward increasing servitization, and the allocation of resources and capabilities necessary to achieve this value-added solution [
23,
24,
25], as well as the relationship between manufacturing enterprise services and the environment. According to Eggert et al. [
26], the impact of services on the performance of engineering firms varies according to the type of service and whether the firm previously possessed product innovation capabilities. Chester Goduscheit and Faullant [
27] investigated how new services can be used to spark three distinct types of innovation: service concept innovation, customer experience innovation, and service process innovation. In terms of servitization, advanced services provided by businesses, such as research and development, are centered on the process of collaborative research with customers, enabling the continuous improvement of products and services through close interaction with customers to meet their needs [
28]. In terms of business models, servitization enlarges the enterprise’s boundaries. Businesses become more sensitive to the external environment due to this process, which enables manufacturers to continuously adapt and design new business models that are more compatible with the dynamic external environment [
29,
30].
Scholars have increasingly focused on the relationship between digital transformation and innovation management [
31], arguing that digital technologies have had a significant impact on today’s competitive business environment [
32], most notably by altering the way firms and consumers interact and exchange value [
33], as well as by changing the innovation capabilities and the nature of innovation activities [
34]. Because the widespread adoption of digital technologies can significantly improve product and service performance in a variety of ways, digital transformation has the potential to influence various stages of the innovation process in complex and causally ambiguous ways [
35,
36]. According to Ardito et al. [
37], digitalization directly affects product and process innovation performance; Lee [
38] argues that firms benefit from the use of ERP, product management, and other systems. Ferreira et al. [
30] demonstrate a strong correlation between process digitization and firm innovation using a sample of 938 firms. The more businesses that adapt to ongoing digital transformation, the more they can innovate and establish sustainable competitive advantages. Appio et al. [
39] demonstrate the myriad ways in which digital transformation and innovation are interconnected at the micro, meso, and macro levels. The rapid advancement of digital technology continues to create new opportunities and challenges for innovators.
Some scholars have focused on the interaction effect of servitization and digitalization. The “digital” aspect of servitization is becoming increasingly apparent, and digital technology has the potential to boost product and service innovation significantly. In digital servitization, enterprises place a premium on the integration and coordination of the front and back ends; they conduct data analyses via platforms to align the front end (sales) with the back end (manufacturing), increase organizational efficiency through the adjustment of organizational structures and processes (Kohtamäki et al.) [
40], stimulate organizational dynamics, and maintain a positive work environment [
5]. As a result, the following hypotheses are proposed:
Hypothesis 1 (H1). The transformation of enterprise servitization has a positive impact on the innovation performance of enterprises.
Hypothesis 2 (H2). Digitalization can enhance enterprise innovation performance by mediating the effect of servitization on innovation performance.
Despite the lack of a clear understanding of which corporate initiatives are more effective at integrating new digital service capabilities into traditional manufacturing firms, the mechanisms by which servitization and digital transformation affect a firm’s innovation performance are complex, especially when other factors influencing a firm’s innovation performance are taken into account. According to some scholars, this process requires effective resource mobilization within the firm or collaboration with other organizations in the system [
27]. Scholars (e.g., Theoharakis et al. [
41]) discovered the beneficial effect of a firm’s operational capabilities on servitization and performance, where operational capabilities primarily include internal management and external relationship capabilities; Kohtamäki et al. [
42] emphasized the beneficial moderating role of network capabilities (network management capabilities, network integration capabilities, and network learning capabilities). Increasingly, scholars believe that the inconsistent effect of servitization and digitization on the enterprise’s role is because the transformation process of digital servitization is influenced by a variety of factors, including organizational and resource capabilities and the external environment [
43]. While the foci of most scholars’ perspectives are on one aspect of the firm’s capabilities, such capabilities are frequently not static, necessitating the development of specific capabilities that constantly adjust their strategies in light of the firm’s environment, e.g., the dynamic capabilities vision.
A company is a collection of assets and capabilities, some of which are unique and difficult to replicate. According to Teece et al. [
44], dynamic capabilities can be analyzed and decomposed into three dynamic capability dimensions: coordination and integration capabilities, learning abilities, and organizational reconfiguration capabilities. In the coordination and integration capability dimension, examined from the perspective of resource elements, the focus is on maximizing the value of irreplaceable, scarce, and difficult-to-replicate resources and using them to improve the current manufacturing processes and procedures. Tian et al. [
45] highlighted the importance of coordination and value cocreation across multiple participants, whereas, Lockett and Wright [
46] claimed that managers should focus on training and hiring employees with a broad base of business skills, as demonstrated by Groysberg and Lee [
47].
On the one hand, learning capabilities enable managers to respond rapidly to environmental and technological changes [
48]. A robust learning capability enables firms to acquire new skills and resources, integrate them into their internal capabilities, produce innovative products, develop new product markets, reduce R&D costs, and improve innovation performance [
49]. On the other hand, organizations with a strong capacity for learning place a premium on cultivating the innovation capacity of radical employees to build the necessary strength for innovative development. If an organization has a strong organizational restructuring capability, it can adapt its organizational strategy and development model to the external market and policy environment. Additionally, it is more receptive to organizational and technological innovation. While it is clear that dynamic capabilities and enterprise innovation are related, the extent to which dynamic capabilities affect enterprise innovation remains unknown. It is unclear what role dynamic capabilities play in manufacturing enterprises in the processes of servitization and digital transformation and the effect they have on innovation performance. As a result, this paper proposes the following hypotheses:
Hypothesis 3a (H3a). Enterprise coordination and integration capabilities play a moderating role in the relationship between servitization, digitalization, and enterprise innovation performance, and the moderating effect is positive.
Hypothesis 3b (H3b). Learning capability plays a moderating role in the relationship between servitization, digitization, and enterprise innovation performance, and the moderating effect is positive.
Hypothesis 3c (H3c). Organizational restructuring capability plays a moderating role in the relationship between servitization, digitization, and enterprise innovation performance, and the moderating role is positive.
In conclusion, the research model constructed in this paper is shown in
Figure 1.