Beyond One-Size-Fits-All Approaches: Digital Maturity Models Across Industries, Countries, and Organizational Systems

A Special Issue of Systems (ISSN 2079-8954) belonging to the section "Systems Practice in Social Science".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: 31 December 2026 | Viewed by 1927

Editors


E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
SBS Swiss Business School, 8302 Kloten-Zurich, Switzerland
Interests: digitalization; SMEs competitiveness; SMEs strategies; international business; business strategies; financial analysis; financial markets
Special Issues, Collections and Topics in MDPI journals

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Department of Management, Ibn Haldun University, 34480 Istanbul, Türkiye
Interests: multivariate data analysis; data analytics; supply chain management; operations management; knowledge management; quality function deployment; decision support systems; machine learning; artificial intelligence; optimization
Special Issues, Collections and Topics in MDPI journals

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Department of Industrial Engineering, Alanya Alaaddin Keykubat Universitesi, Antalya, Turkey
Interests: technology management; technology roadmapping; technology transfer; cybersecurity; blockchain; digital transformation; innovation management; sustainability; Industry 4.0 and 5.0; artificial intelligence

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

Digital maturity models have emerged as critical instruments for guiding organizational transformation, benchmarking progress, and aligning digital strategies with operational and strategic objectives. A rapidly expanding body of research has produced maturity frameworks for diverse sectors, including manufacturing, healthcare, construction, retail, SMEs, public organizations, and cross-national systems. While these models converge on core dimensions—such as strategy, organizational structure, culture, and technology—they differ substantially in emphasis, methodological design, and sectoral relevance.

Despite this progress, much of the existing literature continues to rely on generic, cross-sector architectures and predominantly qualitative or semi-quantitative assessment approaches, limiting their ability to capture industry-specific processes, institutional contexts, and data-driven performance differentials. Growing empirical evidence demonstrates that digital transformation pathways are shaped by sectoral characteristics, firm size, regulatory environments, national ecosystems, and technological intensity, calling into question the suitability of one-size-fits-all maturity trajectories.

This Special Issue aims to showcase research that advances sector-specific and context-adaptive digital maturity models, comparative cross-industry analyses, and country-level frameworks grounded in systems thinking. We particularly encourage the submission of studies that integrate multi-criteria decision-making methods, quantitative scoring techniques, hybrid evaluation models, and longitudinal designs. Conceptual syntheses, methodological comparisons of established maturity frameworks, and empirical investigations linking digital maturity to innovation, resilience, sustainability, and competitive advantage are also welcome.

By adopting a systems perspective, this Special Issue aims to deepen understanding of how heterogeneous organizational, technological, and institutional subsystems jointly shape digital transformation outcomes across industries and economies.

Assoc. Prof. Eyup Kahveci
Prof. Dr. Selim Zaim
Assoc. Prof. Gülin Bolatan
Guest Editors

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 250 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for assessment.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-anonymized peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Systems is an international peer-reviewed open access monthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 2400 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • digital maturity
  • digital transformation
  • Industry 4.0
  • sector-specific models
  • systems perspective
  • organizational systems
  • SMEs
  • manufacturing industries
  • public sector digitalization
  • healthcare digital maturity
  • construction digitalization
  • cross-industry comparison
  • national innovation systems
  • multi-criteria decision making (MCDM), MEREC, and OCRA
  • quantitative maturity assessment
  • strategic alignment
  • organizational readiness
  • innovation performance
  • sustainability and digitalization
  • comparative frameworks
  • context-adaptive models
  • digital competitiveness
  • technology management
  • technology roadmapping
  • technology transfer
  • cybersecurity
  • blockchain adoption
  • digital transformation
  • strategic planning
  • production management
  • quality management
  • innovation management
  • sustainability
  • Industry 5.0
  • artificial intelligence

Benefits of Publishing in a Special Issue

  • Ease of navigation: Grouping papers by topic helps scholars navigate broad scope journals more efficiently.
  • Greater discoverability: Special Issues support the reach and impact of scientific research. Articles in Special Issues are more discoverable and cited more frequently.
  • Expansion of research network: Special Issues facilitate connections among authors, fostering scientific collaborations.
  • External promotion: Articles in Special Issues are often promoted through the journal's social media, increasing their visibility.
  • Reprint: MDPI Books provides the opportunity to republish successful Special Issues in book format, both online and in print.

Further information on MDPI's Special Issue policies can be found here.

Published Papers (2 papers)

Order results
Result details
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

24 pages, 1240 KB  
Article
Digital Trust Risk in AI-Enabled Platform Government: A Comparative Systems Analysis of Privacy and Cybersecurity Policy Models in South Korea, Estonia, and Taiwan
by Sohyun Park and Seunghwan Myeong
Systems 2026, 14(7), 865; https://doi.org/10.3390/systems14070865 - 20 Jul 2026
Viewed by 598
Abstract
South Korea has achieved internationally recognized digital government capacity and platform-based service integration, yet recent privacy and cybersecurity incidents reveal growing risks to digital trust. This article examines how national governance models shape digital trust risk under conditions of platform dependency, large-scale data [...] Read more.
South Korea has achieved internationally recognized digital government capacity and platform-based service integration, yet recent privacy and cybersecurity incidents reveal growing risks to digital trust. This article examines how national governance models shape digital trust risk under conditions of platform dependency, large-scale data breaches, and artificial intelligence (AI)-enabled cybersecurity threats. Drawing on a comparative socio-technical systems perspective, the study analyzes three digitally advanced but institutionally distinct cases: South Korea, Estonia, and Taiwan. South Korea is examined as a reactive platform-accountability model, Estonia as an architecture-based data-auditability model, and Taiwan as a civic-resilience and joint-defense model. Rather than applying a formal quantum-probability model, the article uses the QP-Gov framework as a bounded analytical lens for interpreting context sensitivity, latent trust, accountability visibility, and abrupt trust-risk shifts. Methodologically, the study adopts a most-different systems design and combines structured profile analysis, case tracing, and an evidence matrix. The comparison focuses on five dimensions: digital density, data concentration, accountability visibility, incident responsiveness, and AI-era readiness. The findings show that digital trust depends not simply on technological sophistication, but on whether citizens can observe how data are accessed, how breaches are handled, how responsibility is allocated, and whether institutions learn from incidents before trust damage becomes systemic. The analysis suggests that Korea’s reactive model demonstrates strong post-incident investigative and regulatory capacity but remains vulnerable when accountability becomes visible only after major breaches. By contrast, Estonia and Taiwan illustrate alternative mechanisms of preventive auditability and resilience-based preparedness. The article concludes by proposing a sequenced policy pathway for South Korea, including citizen-facing data-access logs, systemic platform duties, breach-consequence dashboards, AI-agent audit trails, zero-trust infrastructure, and independent digital trust oversight. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

12 pages, 652 KB  
Article
Perceiving Digital Citizen Participation: A Comparative Socio-Technical Systems Analysis of Government Officials in South Korea and Indonesia
by Seunghwan Myeong
Systems 2026, 14(4), 441; https://doi.org/10.3390/systems14040441 - 17 Apr 2026
Cited by 2 | Viewed by 635
Abstract
Studies of digital participation often draw citizen-level conclusions from surveys completed by public officials. This study addresses that theory–measurement mismatch by treating officials’ perceptions of citizen participation as the substantive outcome of interest and by explaining how digital leadership (DL) and digital technology [...] Read more.
Studies of digital participation often draw citizen-level conclusions from surveys completed by public officials. This study addresses that theory–measurement mismatch by treating officials’ perceptions of citizen participation as the substantive outcome of interest and by explaining how digital leadership (DL) and digital technology use (TU) shape those perceptions across contrasting governance systems. Using survey responses from 377 officials in South Korea and Indonesia, the study develops a comparative socio-technical institutional cueing framework. It employs a sequential hybrid design that combines regression analysis, supplementary quantum probability (QP) modeling of order effects, and contextual digital-trace evidence from national participation platforms. The regression results suggest that DL is more strongly associated with perceived citizen participation in South Korea, whereas TU is more strongly associated with the same perception in Indonesia. Supplementary QP simulations indicate that cue sequencing matters: leadership-first framing produces more stable modeled judgments in Korea, while technology-first framing yields sharper but less durable modeled assessments in Indonesia. The trace series is not treated as direct citizen-level validation; instead, they provide contextual support for interpreting how different socio-technical architectures may shape administrative judgments. The paper contributes by aligning theory with measurement, specifying how institutional context conditions the salience of DL and TU, and demonstrating a bounded, multi-method design for studying context-sensitive administrative perceptions. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Back to TopTop