Our globalized world has extended to many factors that imply business sustainability. These factors include success-related conditions between the organization and employees, internal and external activities that foster implementation and market-related conditions (Manninen and Huiskonen, 2022). Increasingly, consumers and businesses are becoming more aware of sustainable business practices (Trivedi et al., 2018; Peterson et al., 2021). They are often willing to face higher costs to be more sustainable (Ullah et al., 2024). Although many organizations and countries have incorporated sustainability regulations and standards, innovative knowledge is now more important than ever in such a competitive market. The interplay between innovation and sustainability is critical for organizations to be able to adopt sustainable strategies while fostering innovation, thus moving towards improved corporate responsibility and environmental management in today’s marketplace (Das, 2024). In this special issue, the aim is to extend the literature by focusing on knowledge management. To this end, the study by He et al. (2024), who identified four dimensions, namely ecological knowledge creation, knowledge acquisition, knowledge application and knowledge storage in a digital environment, was taken as a reference. The papers selected for publication in this special issue address new business sustainability techniques, the interfaces between business and sustainability and the definition and establishment of sustainable regulations in an era characterized by high digitalization and a constantly changing society. The papers were subjected to a rigorous double-blind review process following the journal’s ethics, as well as having potential reviewers in the area mentioned. Finally, it should be noted that the articles selected for this special issue represent a wide range of cutting-edge and academic research, highlighting the relationship between innovation, entrepreneurship and sustainability in a fiercely competitive environment, as well as considering the rapid technological and digital advances that are currently being incorporated into organizations for a wise choice of business strategies.
Contributors
The first paper, “Business incubators as a driver of sustainable entrepreneurship development: evidence from the Italian experience,” by Bonfanti et al. (2025), focuses on Italian non-born-sustainable business incubators (BIs) selected by purposive sampling and analysis of data from the interviews using the Gioia methodology. Traditional forms of businesses focused only on profit-seeking can no longer respond to social expectations and promote affordable long-term corporate strategies. Consequently, in addition to their traditional role as profit-makers, contemporary firms embrace new goals in terms of sustainability that contribute to their overall purpose. In parallel, among researchers and practitioners, the debate about sustainable development and the contribution of corporations to sustainability has dramatically increased, involving different aspects of management. Various contextual factors affect the willingness to develop a sustainable business, but little attention has been given to the capacity of BIs to support and encourage sustainable entrepreneurship. Starting from this gap in the literature, the study focuses on the potential contributions of BIs, particularly of non-born-sustainable BIs, which are BIs whose business model was not sustainability-oriented initially, to promote sustainable entrepreneurship development. Their results show that non-born-sustainable BIs, using various specific tools related to strategy, accountability, intellectual property or technology transfer, facilitate the creation of a sustainability-oriented ecosystem. They nurture virtuous entrepreneurial dynamics regarding competitiveness and sustainability by helping start-ups to develop a purpose, a cultural mindset and business models that enable them to face the challenges of today’s competitive environment. Their findings also make it clear that corporate culture is critical to developing sustainable entrepreneurship and that BIs foster the growth of an ecosystem where start-ups can cultivate their understanding of their development path, skills, and behaviors oriented toward sustainability. The role played by BIs in this ecosystem is also of particular significance when referring to the funding gap often faced by sustainability-oriented start-ups. Finally, their study highlights that the gap between born-sustainable and non-born-sustainable BIs is not clearly defined since the support offered to start-ups by non-born-sustainable BIs often focuses on sustainability as a perspective in the long-term growth of new businesses.
The second paper, “Females wanna-be entrepreneurs need empathic heroes,” by Bonanni et al. (2025), explores the role of empathy in influencing individuals' “willingness to be mentored” in the context of entrepreneurship, with a focus on gender differences. Despite the well-documented importance of empathy and mentoring in entrepreneurship, there is a need for a deeper understanding of how these factors affect the mentor-mentee relationship, particularly for women who face underrepresentation and social stigma in the field. The authors propose two hypotheses: (1) compared to males, female wanna-be entrepreneurs seek mentors with more affective empathy, and (2) the type of entrepreneurship (social or for-profit) interacts with the type of empathy (affective or cognitive) such that females are more willing to be mentored by social entrepreneurs with affective empathy. To test these hypotheses, the researchers conducted an experimental study with 618 master’s degree students in entrepreneurship from diverse business schools. Participants were randomly assigned to one of four scenarios manipulating the type of empathy and entrepreneurship. Their study introduced a new construct, “willingness to be mentored,” and differentiated it from “attitude toward entrepreneurship.” Their quantitative findings were complemented by an explanatory qualitative study on female start-uppers. Their results support both hypotheses. Female respondents prefer to be mentored by an entrepreneur who exhibits affective empathy rather than only cognitive empathy, with a preference for a social entrepreneur. Their qualitative study confirms these findings, highlighting women’s need for mentors who understand their specific challenges, values and emotional investment in their ventures. Their study contributes to the entrepreneurship literature by introducing the “willingness to be mentored” construct, applying an experimental methodology and revealing gender differences in mentoring preferences. Their findings have practical implications for developing a gender-sensitive entrepreneurship culture and designing mentoring programs that cater to women’s needs. Limitations of the study include the assumption that the relationship between mentoring and entrepreneurial intention (EI) extends to “willingness to be mentored” and “intention to become an entrepreneur,” the use of a student sample rather than nascent entrepreneurs and the focus on gender without considering intersecting factors such as race, sexual orientation and socio-economic class. Overall, this research highlights the importance of empathic mentors in fostering women’s entrepreneurship and calls for a more inclusive approach to mentoring that transcends gender boundaries while acknowledging women’s unique challenges and strengths.
The next contribution, “Impact of founder controls on digital transformation: evidence from listed family firms in China,” by He et al. (2025), examines the impact of founder control on DT within FFs, particularly in the context of Chinese A-share listed companies from 2010 to 2022. Their study aims to understand how founder control influences the propensity for substantive versus symbolic digital transformation and the associated risks and benefits of such transformations. Their results indicate that founder-controlled family firms are significantly more capable of driving substantive digital transformation than their non-founder-controlled counterparts. This is attributed to the unique characteristics of founders, including their substantial ownership stakes, emotional attachment to the firm and a strong inclination towards risk-taking. Founders tend to view their businesses as personal legacies, which motivates them to adopt digital technologies proactively to counteract potential declines in performance. Furthermore, the research highlights that founder control facilitates a higher resource allocation for digital initiatives that align with long-term strategic goals, enhancing the firm’s competitive advantage in the digital economy. Their study further comprehensively examines China’s local context and broadens the boundaries of family founder control, which are related to various internal and external governance elements, including the presence of state capital, intergenerational inheritance, and regional cultural embeddedness, all of which have an impact on firms' DT. Founders prefer DT in family firms devoid of state capital, as state capital enhances risk-taking in family firms and diminishes founders’ control. Founders are better at advocating for DT in family firms devoid of second-generation involvement. The founders concentrate limited innovation resources on low-risk areas to establish the authority of the second generation and facilitate succession in family firms. Founders promote digital transformation more effectively in areas with minimal Confucian influence. Confucian innovation may incentivize founders to engage in digital transformation, while familialism strengthens the founder’s authority. This substitutes founder characteristics. The contributions of their research are multifaceted. Firstly, it enriches the existing literature on digital transformation by explicitly addressing the role of founder control in family firms, a relatively underexplored area. Secondly, it provides empirical evidence supporting the notion that founder-controlled firms are more adept at navigating the complexities of digital transformation, thereby offering insights for practitioners and policymakers on leveraging founder attributes for successful digital initiatives. Lastly, it contributes to the body of knowledge concerning the diverse attributes of DT. The differentiation between substantive and strategic transformation, beginning with motivation, aids in the comprehension of DT as a high-risk strategic choice for businesses. The findings underscore the importance of aligning digital strategies with the unique characteristics of family firms, suggesting that tailored approaches may yield better outcomes in the context of digital transformation. Their study improves understanding of family enterprise digital transformation processes and provides policy insights for their digital evolution.
The paper “Honest incompetence: exploring the dark side of social entrepreneurship,” by Muldoon et al. (2025), introduces the concept of honest incompetence in social entrepreneurship, where well-meaning but inadequately skilled individuals unintentionally hinder the effectiveness and sustainability of social change efforts. While social entrepreneurship aims to address critical societal issues, this study highlights how a lack of expertise can lead to unintended negative outcomes. Their study uses metatriangulation, a multiparadigm theory-building method, drawing on agency theory and behavioral decision theory. This approach enables the development of a comprehensive framework encompassing the antecedents, processes, outcomes and moderating factors of honest incompetence. Honest incompetence often stems from knowledge gaps, insufficient expertise and a shallow understanding of complex social issues. Misguided interventions, poorly planned initiatives and ineffective resource allocation are typical manifestations. Consequences include group vilification, perpetuation of harmful stereotypes and diminished trust in social entrepreneurship. Factors such as outcome-based compensation and difficulties in evaluating social impact exacerbate the issue. This research highlights how even well-intentioned efforts can inadvertently conflict with their goals. To address honest incompetence, social entrepreneurs must prioritize community engagement, build robust social connections and foster continuous learning. By doing so, they can align their actions more effectively with their objectives, ensuring lasting and meaningful social impact.
The next paper, “Institutions, the entrepreneurial orientation and innovative capabilities of countries: the moderating effect of technological development,” by Ferreira et al. (2025), investigates the impact of institutions on entrepreneurship and innovation and how technological development influences these variables. Their study examines the impact on countries' entrepreneurial orientation and innovative capacity, considering the moderating effect of technological development. The authors combine extensive cross-country survey data on entrepreneurial orientation, innovation capability, institutions and technological development by estimating the direct and indirect effects based on structural equation models. Their study emphasizes the substantial impact of institutional quality on businesses’ entrepreneurial mindset and innovation capabilities. It shows that perceiving institutions as more stable can positively affect both entrepreneurial orientation and innovative capabilities, ultimately improving companies' competitiveness.
The contribution “Antecedents of entrepreneurial intention in an international business environment: a gender comparison,” by González-Ramos et al. (2025), analyzes the influence of contextual factors, including educational, relational and structural support, on the entrepreneurial orientation dimensions of self-confidence and risk-taking propensity. It also examines the impact of these factors on EI. Furthermore, the study employs a multi-group analysis to compare gender differences and explores the moderating effect of family antecedents (i.e. having an entrepreneurial parent) on self-confidence and risk-taking propensity. This paper addresses a gap in the entrepreneurship literature regarding the joint effects of emotional and contextual factors on EI, as well as the behavioral variables that guide students and professionals to become entrepreneurs. By adopting this approach, the study provides a comprehensive overview of EI, extending the current literature on factors influencing self-confidence, risk-taking propensity and attitudes that promote EI. To achieve this, ten hypotheses were developed, and a structural equation model was established and tested using the SmartPLS 4.0 software. Data were collected using a validated questionnaire distributed to 406 professionals from Spain, China and Ibero-American countries who had received entrepreneurial education and completed their studies at least 2 years prior. The findings confirm a significant relationship between educational support and self-confidence in fostering new venture creation for the entire sample. Moreover, their results reveal that educational support significantly affects risk-taking propensity for the female group but not for the male group. This suggests that entrepreneurial education plays a critical role in fostering EI among women, potentially narrowing the gender gap in EI. Additionally, structural support positively impacts self-confidence and risk-taking propensity for the female group, while relational support is positively associated with these traits across the entire sample. Regarding the moderating effect of parental entrepreneurship, the findings indicate a significant influence of having an entrepreneurial father on the relationship between relational support and, respectively, self-confidence and risk-taking propensity, but only for the male group. Conversely, having an entrepreneurial mother does not show a significant moderating effect for any of the traits. Their study also highlights gender-specific indirect effects of educational, relational and structural support on EI through self-confidence and risk-taking propensity. For women, the impact of educational support on these psychological traits is more pronounced compared to men. However, no significant gender differences are observed for structural support, while relational support is found to have a stronger influence on men than on women. From both theoretical and practical perspectives, this study aims to enhance the understanding of the factors that foster EI by examining the joint effects of educational, structural and relational factors on self-confidence and risk-taking propensity. It further explores how these psychological traits influence EI, considering that EI is a precursor to (successful) entrepreneurship. Their findings underscore gender differences in the effects of contextual and family factors on psychological traits, emphasizing the importance of designing policies and educational entrepreneurship programs tailored to different countries. These initiatives should aim to strengthen EI and support the development of successful entrepreneurial projects, ultimately contributing to job creation and economic development.
The next paper, “Fuelling growth: a qualitative study on the benefits and challenges of growth hacking for micro, small and medium enterprises,” by Macca et al. (2025), employs a multiple-case study approach, conducting semi-structured interviews with founders, managers, consultants and growth experts across various industries, including fitness, gaming, travel and education technology. Their qualitative data were analyzed using the Gioia methodology, which allows for the systematic categorization of first-order concepts into second-order themes and aggregate dimensions. This structured approach ensures a rigorous analysis, enabling the identification of key patterns and insights. Their findings reveal that growth hacking (GH) implementation offers several significant benefits for micro, small and medium-sized enterprises (MSMEs). One of the primary advantages is the scalability of strategies and the development of a data-driven culture, which enhances decision-making processes and organizational adaptability. By leveraging data, organizations can scale successful strategies across different markets, fostering a culture of innovation and continuous improvement. Additionally, GH encourages learning from failures, reframing setbacks as opportunities for growth and iterative learning. This mindset promotes resilience and innovation, enabling organizations to refine their approaches over time. Another key benefit is the improvement in process efficiency and lean operations. GH facilitates the optimization of resource allocation and fosters cross-functional collaboration, leading to more streamlined and effective operational processes. Furthermore, GH enhances organizational adaptability and readiness to respond to change, allowing firms to remain agile in dynamic market conditions. This adaptability is particularly crucial in the face of external disruptions, ensuring long-term competitiveness. However, the study also identifies significant challenges associated with GH implementation. One major obstacle is the presence of entry barriers, as many organizations lack the necessary data infrastructure and expertise to effectively adopt GH. Rigid organizational structures can further impede the experimentation required for successful implementation. Additionally, MSMEs often face resource limitations, including constraints related to time, budget and data availability, which can hinder the execution of GH strategies. Another critical challenge is the propensity for risk aversion, fear of failure and impatience among organizations. A reluctance to embrace risk, coupled with a preference for immediate results, can undermine the iterative and experimental nature of GH, limiting its potential impact. The paper makes several theoretical contributions by advancing GH theory through empirical evidence, particularly in the context of MSMEs. It highlights the importance of data-driven decision-making and continuous experimentation as key drivers of growth, aligning with the resource-based view of competitive advantage.
The last contribution, “Island entrepreneurship and entrepreneurial ecosystems: current debates and future research directions” by Rytkönen et al. (2025), focuses on island entrepreneurship, a relatively new scholarly debate that looks at the unique challenges and opportunities faced by businesses in geographically isolated contexts, e.g. islands across the world. Previous studies have primarily focused on empirical findings within specific island contexts or within specific industries; however, the debate still lacks conceptualization and a theoretical dimension. Their paper was organized as a comprehensive literature review, following results from previous studies in which the research team identified the need for a more solid theoretical foundation and based on the realization that island businesses are dependent on each other, and they often collaborate with each other to overcome challenges faced by their location on islands. The authors examine how island entrepreneurship has been explored; they propose that self-employment and everyday entrepreneurship are separated from entrepreneurship based on disruptive innovation. It also proposes a theoretical framework using entrepreneurial ecosystems theory. Furthermore, their article identifies key gaps in the literature, particularly regarding the key role of collective action, institutional support and resource limitations in shaping island entrepreneurship. The main themes in previous research are (1) a mainstream debate that includes empirical focuses, but also social capital, and the role of islandness and resource limitation; (2) gender issues and women’s businesses; (3) tourism entrepreneurship; (4) culture, ethnicities and local features of islanders; (5) personal features of entrepreneurs including risk propensity and (6) an upcoming debate about entrepreneurial ecosystems. Their paper argues that entrepreneurial ecosystems theory provides a robust framework for understanding value creation and thus island entrepreneurship. Their approach allows for an understanding of the interaction, collaboration and competition dynamics between business communities, policymakers and other stakeholders and how this interaction and collaboration enables or disables value creation and orchestration and mobilization of resources to promote innovative behavior and innovations. It also shows how constraints or opportunities presented by local institutions are used in a constructive way. By viewing island entrepreneurship through the lens of entrepreneurial ecosystems, the study highlights how islands can foster sustainable and innovative business environments despite the liabilities of islands. This perspective offers a more holistic understanding of the factors that influence island entrepreneurship, including social networks, resource availability and institutional support. Understanding these factors will be crucial for shaping policies that promote sustainability and long-term economic growth in island economies. The study advocates for a multidisciplinary approach to study island entrepreneurship.
