Int. Journal of Business Science and Applied Management / Business-and-Management.org
80
information systems literature and then transitioned into the strategic management literature. Following Moker
(2020, p. 4), CDO research can be divided into several literature streams, such as position, person, and
environment. However, the research on the person and the environment is somewhat underrepresented in this
process, compared to the extensive research on the position of the CDO. The literature on the CDO's position
includes work on their anchoring in the company (e.g., Stein & Kollmann, 2021; Stein et al., 2022), their tasks
(e.g., Berman et al., 2020; Horlacher & Hess, 2016), and leadership role types (e.g., Horlacher & Hess, 2016;
Tumbas et al., 2020). In addition, the competencies of a CDO (e.g., Kollmann, 2022c; Singh & Hess, 2017;
Tahvanainen & Luoma, 2018) and their position within organizations have been examined (e.g., Kollmann,
2022c; Singh et al.; 2020). Regarding the CDO as a person, previous research has tended to consider its personal
characteristics as a by-product while analysing its position within the organization (e.g., Berman et al., 2020;
Chhachhi et al., 2016). Finally, there have been studies on the environment, with research focusing on the
interaction between the CDO and the proximate chief information officer (CIO) (e.g., Haffke et al., 2016) and
the impact of the appointment of a CDO on stock market performance (e.g., Drechsler et al., 2019).
Against this backdrop, Sebastian et al. (2017) studied 25 large companies and found two digital thrusts,
which they pursued during the Digital Transformation process: improving customer engagement and
implementing digital solutions. The companies studied aimed to "build customer loyalty and trust by creating
thoughtful, innovative, personalized, and integrated customer experiences" (Sebastian et al., 2017, p. 199).
Additionally, companies intended to improve their operations by digitizing their product and service offerings
(Sebastian et al., 2017, p. 199). The CDOs can support both thrusts, as they are inherently responsible for
developing new digital products, services, and business models and can thus contribute to repositioning the
company's value proposition vis-à-vis the customer. Therefore, it is also suitable for improving the customer
experience on this basis.
Another issue is where and how the CDO is anchored in the company. This organizational design
parameter refers to the structural embedding of CDOs in the company. Research has found that the influence of
the CDO on Digital Transformation depends in particular on the degree of their integration into the organization
(e.g., Horlacher & Hess, 2016; Singh et al., 2020) According to Singh et al. (2020, p. 9) the CDO can be
integrated centrally into or decentralized in the organization. Either the CDO is integrated centrally into the
executive board with all decision-making powers or is decentralized in an individual department, which, in the
latter case, leads to distributed decision-making power between the business units (Horlacher & Hess, 2016, p.
2; Singh et al., 2020, p. 9). According to Horlacher and Hess (2016), decentralized CDOs have a difficult time
mastering Digital Transformation, as they do not have sufficient decision-making authority and may lack
support from the management level. Only by adding a CDO to the executive board (C-level) does the position
have the same significance as other management positions. However, this can also lead to interface conflicts
between the CDO and other leaders. However, is there a correspondingly large number of CDOs at the board
level in large German companies? Stein and Kollmann (2021) and Stein et al. (2022) answered this question
based on their study of the DAX DIGITAL MONITOR and a corresponding analysis of DAX30 (2021) and
DAX40 (2022) companies in Germany (www.dax-digital-monitor.de). At 72% of the companies (Stein et al.,
2022), digitization responsibility and competence are firmly anchored at the board level (in 2021, the figure was
60%). However, an independent CDO, who would explicitly represent digitization responsibility and
competence at the board level as a separate department, could only be observed at five companies in 2022 (3 in
2021).
Sungkono (2021) used the analysis technique of DAX DIGITAL MONITOR and applied it to the
companies in the Dow Jones-Index: “According to the analysis, it has been identified that 19 out of 30
companies are anchoring digital responsibility or have digital competence at the executive board level. This
indicates that 63% of the Dow Jones companies fulfil this criterion. Be that as it may, out of all 19 companies,
there is only one which has the role of Chief Digital Office clearly assigned in the executive board level. Other
companies typically embed digital responsibility into existing positions such as Chief Development Officer,
Chief Innovation Officer, Chief Information Officer, or Chief Technology Officer. Based on this finding, it can
be concluded that the role of Chief Digital Officer is not commonly employed in the Dow Jones companies.”
This is all the more problematic if, in addition to the operational tasks of a CDO already mentioned, their
strategic orientation as a leader is added. It is in the nature of a company's management to be (co-)responsible
for both the initiation of strategies and their operational implementation by creating the appropriate environment
for this (Gibson & Birkinshaw, 2004, p. 223; Raisch & Birkinshaw, 2008, p. 391). The CDO reviews the
existing business models and, if necessary, adapts them to new framework conditions with new digital solutions
and reviews, develops, and implements the new business models associated with digitization (Kollmann, 2022c,
p. 26). However, the examination and development of new digital business models and processes, in particular,
is a strategic component because it affects the future orientation or realignment of the company. Therefore, the
CDO can be defined as follows (Kollmann, 2022c, p. 26):