1. Introduction
Digital innovation (DI) is a vital source of dynamism and innovation for many technologies, products, and services in the global economy. Owing to the connectivity and integration of digital technology [
1], DI accelerates the value interaction across organizational boundaries, which improves the efficiency of firms through joint innovation and fosters an amicable collective exchange relationship [
2,
3]. Precisely because of this, to establish effectiveness, firms and stakeholders are required to disclose parts of their own knowledge and resources to other actors in the DI process [
4,
5]. This underscores the social and public nature of DI and fosters more sustainable, open, but complex relationships between organizations and stakeholders [
6,
7]. Thus, firms in DI process find themselves under continuous pressure to adapt their strategic initiatives in line with the principles of digital coordination and co-creation. In this context, corporate social responsibility (CSR), regarded as a key strategy for maximizing shared value during collaborative processes, is theorized to be the basic task and common goal for organizations initiating a digital movement. This movement aims toward a more sustainable, democratic, and inclusive economy [
8,
9]. Consequently, our research aims to explore the interconnections between DI and CSR.
The mechanisms driving CSR in a digital context are different from those in traditional settings. The pervasive nature of digital technologies in innovation changes the original cooperation and coordination routines between firms by reshaping the original technical infrastructures and associated value chain systems [
10]. In these circumstances, firms can leverage digital technology to open their innovation processes to external stakeholders while designing and producing products. This approach facilitates the formation of complements that can bind multistakeholder technical resources, such as the Android and Apple Store platforms. We theorize that firms, following digital design rules, can aggregate and allocate diversified stakeholders to achieve higher allocation efficiency of shared value. This can be described through the analogy of “baking and slicing the cake.” To establish mutually beneficial exchange relationships with stakeholders, firms may need to promote value exchange or other non-market strategies. Consequently, a growing body of theoretical literature considers that factors related to digitalization as crucial elements may have a significant influence on CSR [
9,
11]. While this understanding is generally well established, existing literature has not fully explored the potential mechanism that underlies the relationship between DI and CSR. A significant research gap exists in explaining why some firms exhibit higher altruistic behavior than others in the process of digitization [
2,
12]. Therefore, our understanding of how DI affects CSR remains rudimentary, and, as of now, there is scarce empirical evidence underpinning these contentions [
9].
To bridge the above gap, we draw on metaorganizations theory to validate the relationship between DI and CSR by explicating the mechanism and boundary conditions from a metaorganizations perspective. Metaorganizations theory posits that DI, which connects multiple organizations, actors, activities, and interfaces, is underpinned by interrelated social value propositions, essentially forming an “organization of organizations” [
13,
14]. Organizations often band together to form a collective or consortium with a specific goal or shared interest in mind. While these constituent organizations may have their unique objectives and strategies, within the metaorganization, they collaborate, pool resources, and work collectively based on a shared value proposition [
15]. In this sense, the prosocial motivation of a firm in the digital environment is significantly influenced by the value proposition shaped by organizational collaboration, coordination, and integration [
16]. Firms involved in the DI process may actively engage in CSR pursuits to foster stable network relationships, which we will detail further in the next section. Additionally, when some firms provide more social benefits through the DI process than others, we must also consider what factors enhance the prosocial motivation of firms in DI. Metaorganization theory underscores that firms must strategize by considering the mutual-way dynamics among organizations and the environment. In this paper, we separately investigate the influence of these three factors (i.e., value exclusivity, partner stability, and environmental uncertainty) as crucial boundary conditions in the relationship between DI and CSR.
Our key contributions can be summarized as two primary points. First, to our knowledge, we are the first study to examine the relationship between DI and CSR. Our study investigates how DI should be harnessed as a collective effort to achieve superior social benefits (i.e., CSR). Existing literature in the DI and business ethics domains suggests that the organizational drive toward technology and innovation is a significant catalyst for changes in social norms and practices [
9]. We enrich the research stream of the digital domain and CSR domain by employing metaorganization theory and proposing mechanisms that link the DI to CSR. Second, our paper contributes to the dialogue on the boundary conditions required for promoting social benefits in a digital environment [
13] by analyzing the interactions between DI and metaorganizations [
14,
17]. Conventional theory argues that organizations, stakeholders, and the external environment significantly impact the utilization of digital technology, leading to certain moral and ethical changes [
18,
19]. This assertion has been confirmed in our results; these factors significantly moderate the relationship between DI and CSR. Given the paucity of empirical studies on how boundary conditions facilitate CSR in a digital environment, our research offers valuable insights for firms aiming to assess the role of boundary conditions in influencing social welfare derived from DI.
The remainder of this paper is organized as follows.
Section 2 provides the theoretical background and hypothesis. The methodology is described in
Section 3. In
Section 4, the results are presented. Finally,
Section 5 offers a discussion and our conclusions.
5. Conclusion and Discussion
5.1. Discussion
5.1.1. Research Findings
In this paper, we propose that DI has a positive impact on CSR from a metaorganizational perspective. To some extent, CSR is derived from the social effects of digital innovations and is influenced by the values and norms governing interactions within metaorganizations in a digital context. Recent studies by Chin et al. (2022) and Battisti et al. (2022) have suggested that digitalization has fostered more organic organizational forms, which in turn stimulate the sustainable behavior of firms [
2,
6]. Furthermore, we observe that the effect of DI on CSR is amplified when firms operate with heightened organizational and environmental factors such as values appropriation, partner concentration, and environmental uncertainty. As active participants in digital innovation, firms’ engagement in CSR is facilitated when they possess robust resource allocation capabilities, strong partnerships, or operate within high-risk environments. The propensity of these firms to exhibit more pronounced prosocial preferences can be attributed to the tendency of DI as a metaorganization to pursue a shared and consistent value proposition, and for firms to maintain more stable value relationships to safeguard their own innovation. In summary, we propose hypotheses based on the aforementioned arguments. These hypotheses are elaborated and validated in
Table 6.
5.1.2. Research Context
Our conclusions, although drawn from the institutional setting in China, offer several valuable insights. As a relatively late adopter of digital innovation on a global scale, China’s digital environment diverges markedly from those in developed countries. While the metaorganizational characteristics of DI may be similar, the motivations for prosocial behavior can vary significantly among firms in different institutional environments. In developed countries, research has indicated that as digital value relationships stabilize, firms seek more than just shared niches; they aim to extract as much value as possible from shared revenues [
69,
70]. For example, Amazon, often criticized for infringing on the interests of third-party complementors, currently demonstrates low prosocial motivation in its multilateral relationships. Interestingly, the company exhibited the opposite behavior during its early development years [
71]. In contrast, in the Chinese context, Confucian culture and relationships based on mutual aid may incentivize firms to sustain long-term prosocial motivation in DI. The cost of unethical behavior can be significantly high for firms [
28,
56]. Contrary to the previous literature, which posits that values appropriation, partner concentration, and environmental uncertainty can diminish a firm’s prosocial motives, our China-based study arrives at a different conclusion. The mechanisms that drive CSR in a digital context are different from those in developed country settings. Thus, certain traits of Chinese firms, which might induce negative behavior in developed countries, inspire prosocial tendencies in DI instead. This aligns with our perspective that firms engaged in digital innovation are more inclined to adopt costly CSR measures to maintain stable value relationships, rather than for purely profit-driven reasons.
5.2. Theoretical Implications
Our findings offer two critical theoretical implications. First, we contribute to the burgeoning literature on corporate strategy under digital innovation by systematically investigating how digital innovation influences CSR. While recent literature has explored sustainability issues in the digital era, emphasizing aspects such as organizational performance [
1], innovation output [
72], and business models [
4], there remains a scarcity of research addressing how firms embracing digital innovation engage in CSR activities. Using the metaorganizational theory lens, we argue that CSR is a strategic action that actors in digital innovation deploy to placate salient stakeholders. This study thereby enriches the literature by empirically probing the social value of digital innovations.
Second, our findings also contribute to the discourse on how digital innovation transforms organizational logic. It is posited that the digital age has given rise to an organizational logic markedly different from the industrial era it supplanted. In a digitally connected world, actors often become complementors, their digital innovations indirectly enhancing the value of another firm’s offerings [
5]. Consequently, CSR activities, within the metaorganizational context, evolve from a nebulous act of altruism into a strategic investment in collaboration and co-creation [
73]. Value appropriation, for instance, denotes not only higher value capture within the digital value chain [
2] but also a heightened sense of responsibility. Partner concentration, while signifying tight network coupling and increased mutual dependencies [
15], also stimulates the prosocial motivation of participants. Likewise, environmental uncertainty, although signaling business volatility [
74], spurs and amplifies the pursuit of social benefits. While creating and capturing value remain fundamental aspects of organizational logic, one significant shift we observe with digitalization is a changed emphasis on social benefits. Thus, our empirical analysis validates and aligns with Nambisan et al.’s (2017, p. 224) assertion that “the time for new theorising about digital innovation is, therefore, now” [
25].
5.3. Managerial Implications
Based on the comprehensive analysis provided, several key management insights and recommendations arise. These could be pivotal for firms navigating the complexities of DI and its effects on CSR in today’s rapidly evolving digital landscape. Firms must recognize CSR not as a peripheral activity, but as a core strategic action within their digital innovation efforts. Our findings suggest that the adoption of digital innovation significantly enhances a firm’s CSR activities. Therefore, it is critical for managers to align their digital innovation strategies with their CSR objectives, creating a cohesive approach that delivers both business and societal value. This research also underscores the importance of considering organizational and environmental factors in the DI–CSR relationship. Firms operating with higher values appropriation, partner concentration, and environmental uncertainty appear to be more proactive in their CSR efforts in the context of digital innovation. Therefore, firms should not see these factors as challenges but as catalysts that can enhance their social responsibilities. Value creation and capture are no longer the sole pursuits; an increased emphasis on social benefits is also emerging. This insight implies that managers should recalibrate their strategies to accommodate this new focus, potentially leading to more sustainable and socially responsible business models in the digital era.
5.4. Conclusions
This paper concludes with valuable insights into the intricate nexus of digital innovation (DI) and corporate social responsibility (CSR) from a metaorganizational perspective.
First, the research underscores the profound influence DI exerts on CSR initiatives, thereby reshaping conventional business strategies and paradigms. By aligning DI and CSR strategies, firms can create a comprehensive approach that delivers both business and societal value.
Second, the findings shed light on the enhancing role of value appropriation, partner concentration, and environmental uncertainty on firms’ CSR efforts within the DI context. These factors, once perceived as challenges, can act as catalysts, inspiring firms to intensify their commitment to social responsibilities.
Third, related to the point above, the study witnesses a significant shift in organizational logic instigated by digitalization. The focus is no longer restricted to value creation and capture but has expanded to emphasize social benefits. This shift necessitates a strategic recalibration by firms to embed a stronger focus on sustainability and social responsibility within their business models in the digital era.
Fourth, our discussion, although primarily derived from the Chinese institutional context, may provide valuable insights on a global scale. The study suggests that while the metaorganizational characteristics of DI are convergent, the motivations for prosocial behavior can vary significantly across different institutional environments. Hence, managers worldwide should recognize the potential of DI in creating more sustainable and socially responsible businesses.
The limitations of this study also offer new avenues for future research. We will underscore the need for further research in understanding how the balance between DI and CSR can be optimized across different institutional settings and industries. Additionally, the role of stakeholders in shaping firms’ DI and CSR strategies presents a promising avenue for future exploration. As digital technologies continue to evolve, so too must our understanding of their impacts on firms’ social responsibilities. In terms of the research method, while we tried our best to select high-quality literature support to feature terms, the data still inevitably have a certain degree of measurement bias in this approach from a specific theoretical perspective. At the same time, following the established practice found in leading journals [
56,
75], we have adopted proxies to measure core variables, such as digital innovation adopting and values appropriation. Future research should develop better methods to accurately express core variables to correct the bias and further enhance the credibility of the findings.