Global Journal of Economic and Finance Research

In the context of the transition to a digital economy is an inevitable trend. Because digital transformation will help improve efficiency, reduce operating costs, improve performance, and enhance the quality of business products. However, digital transformation in businesses in general still faces many challenges. Internal challenges of enterprises such as human resource quality, digital technology, and investment costs are factors that affect the speed of digital transformation of enterprises. External factors are those that affect the vision and methods for enterprises to survive and develop, especially institutional quality. Institutional factors interact and affect the digital transformation process in enterprises. Therefore, this study aims to assess the importance and interrelationship between institutional quality factors of digital transformation in foreign-invested enterprises in Ho Chi Minh City using the Dematel method. The study found that regulatory quality and political stability are very strong influences that determine the speed of digital transformation in foreign-invested enterprises, while voice and accountability are less important factors and are influenced by other criteria.

Digital Transformation, Foreign invested enterprise, Institutional quality.

1. Abel-Koch, J., Al Obaidi, L., El Kasmi, S., Acevedo, M. F., Morin, L., & Topczewska, A. (2019). Report the challenges facing European SMEs 2019. European SME survey, 2019. 
2. Barbier, E. B., & Burgess, J. C. (2021). Institutional quality, governance and progress towards the SDGs. Sustainability, 13(21), 11798. 
3. Berggren, N., Bergh, A., & Bjørnskov, C. (2012). The growth effects of institutional instability. Journal of Institutional Economics, 8(2), 187-224. 
4. Clohessy, T., Acton, T., & Morgan, L. (2017). The impact of cloud-based digital transformation on IT service providers: evidence from focus groups. International Journal of Cloud Applications and Computing (IJCAC), 7(4), 1-19. 
5. D’Ingiullo, D., & Evangelista, V. (2020). Institutional quality and innovation performance: evidence from Italy. Regional Studies, 54(12), 1724-1736. 
6. Depietro, R., Wiarda, E., & Fleischer, M. (1990). The context for change: Organization, technology and environment. The processes of technological innovation, 199(0), 151-175. 
7. Fontela, E., & Gabus, A. (1976). The DEMATEL observer. In: Dematel.
8. Henisz, W. J. (2000). The institutional environment for multinational investment. Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, 16(2), 334-364. 
9. Hussen, M. S., & Çokgezen, M. (2021). The impact of regional institutional quality on firm innovation: evidence from Africa. Innovation and Development, 11(1), 69-90. 
10. Jensen, N. (2008). Political risk, democratic institutions, and foreign direct investment. The Journal of Politics, 70(4), 1040-1052. 
11. Jensen, N. M. (2003). Democratic governance and multinational corporations: Political regimes and inflows of foreign direct investment. International Organization, 57(3), 587-587. 
12. Kapuria-Foreman, V. (2007). Economic freedom and foreign direct investment in developing countries. The Journal of Developing Areas, 41(1), 143-154. 
13. Lee, H., Biglaiser, G., & Staats, J. L. (2014). Legal system pathways to foreign direct investment in the developing world. Foreign Policy Analysis, 10(4), 393-411. 
14. Meyer, K. E., & Nguyen, H. V. (2005). Foreign investment strategies and sub‐national institutions in emerging markets: Evidence from Vietnam. Journal of management studies, 42(1), 63-93. 
15. Morakanyane, R., Grace, A. A., & O'reilly, P. (2017). Conceptualizing digital transformation in business organizations: A systematic review of literature. 
16. Nazir, M. U., Yasin, I., & Tat, H. H. (2021). Destination image's mediating role between perceived risks, perceived constraints, and behavioral intention. Heliyon, 7(7). 
17. North, D. C. (1990). Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. Cambridge University. 
18. Saha, S., & Sen, K. (2021). The corruption–growth relationship: does the political regime matter? Journal of Institutional Economics, 17(2), 243-266. 
19. Shieh, J.-I., & Wu, H.-H. (2016). Measures of consistency for DEMATEL method. Communications in Statistics-Simulation and Computation, 45(3), 781-790. 
20. Tran, T. B., Grafton, R. Q., & Kompas, T. (2009). Institutions matter: The case of Vietnam. The Journal of Socio-Economics, 38(1), 1-12. 
21. Trần, T. K. C. D. (2014). Tại sao các quốc gia thất bại. 
22. Ulas, D. (2019). Digital transformation process and SMEs. Procedia computer science, 158, 662-671. 
23. UNCTAD, U. (2019). Digital economy report 2019: Value creation and capture: Implications for developing countries. United Nations conference on trade and development, 
24. ur Rehman, S., & Gill, A. R. (2023). Digital Transformation, Institutional Quality, and Environmental Sustainability: Evidence from SAARC Countries. irasd Journal of Economics, 5(2), 392-407. 
25. Wang, D., & Shao, X. (2024). Research on the impact of digital transformation on the production efficiency of manufacturing enterprises: Institution-based analysis of the threshold effect. International Review of Economics & Finance, 91, 883-897. 
26. Wu, H.-H., & Chang, S.-Y. (2015). A case study of using DEMATEL method to identify critical factors in green supply chain management. Applied Mathematics and Computation, 256, 394-403. 
27. Zastempowski, M. (2022). What shapes innovation capability in micro-enterprises? New-to-the-market product and process perspective. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 8(1), 59.