Exploring Sustainability-Oriented Innovation in  Thai Technology-Driven Enterprises: A Multiple-Case Study

Nattida Tachaboon

doi:10.55003/ETH.430104

Authors

Nattida Tachaboon Faculty of Engineering, Chiang Mai University, Thailand

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.55003/ETH.430104

Keywords:

Sustainability-Oriented Innovation (SOI), Technology-Driven Enterprises, Multiple-Case Study

Abstract

This study investigates how Thai technology-driven enterprises perceive and implement Sustainability-Oriented Innovation (SOI), with a focus on the economic, social, and environmental dimensions. Addressing the limited empirical evidence on SOI among SMEs in emerging economies, the study examines sectoral variations and contextual influences shaping sustainability adoption. A qualitative multiple-case study was conducted with twelve enterprises across diverse sectors, including healthcare, agriculture, food, digital services, and engineering systems. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews with founders and senior executives and analyzed using thematic coding, supplemented by secondary documentation.

Findings reveal that economic considerations dominate SOI adoption, with firms prioritizing market survival, financial stability, and competitive product or process innovation. Social initiatives are emerging but often instrumental, focusing on community engagement, health, and capacity building. Environmental practices are limited and usually pursued opportunistically or when aligned with product differentiation. Contextual factors, including founder generational experience, shape sustainability orientation and decision-making. Sectoral and stage-specific differences further influence SOI implementation, with agri-food and health enterprises demonstrating higher social and environmental engagement.

The study contributes to theory by highlighting how technology-driven enterprises in emerging economies selectively adopt SOI, emphasizing the interplay of technological capability, sector, development stage, and cultural context. Practical implications suggest the need for targeted policy support, entrepreneurial training, and ecosystem development to enhance comprehensive adoption of sustainability practices. These insights provide guidance for entrepreneurs, policymakers, and investors seeking to foster innovation that integrates economic, social, and environmental value.

References

T. Schiederig, F. Tietze and C. Herstatt, “Green innovation in technology and innovation management–an exploratory literature review,” R&D Management, vol. 42, no. 2, pp. 180–192, 2012, doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9310.2011.00672.x.

R. Adams, S. Jeanrenaud, J. Bessant, D. Denyer and P. Overy, “Sustainability‐oriented Innovation: A Systematic Review,” International Journal of Management Reviews, vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 180–205, 2015, doi: 10.1111/ijmr.12068.

C. Boonmee, J. Mangkalakeeree and Y. Jeong, “Towards sustainable digital transformation: AI adoption barriers and enablers among SMEs in Northern Thailand,” Sustainable Futures, vol. 10, 2025, Art. no. 101169, doi: 10.1016/j.sftr.2025.101169.

K. Jirapong, K. Cagarman and L. von Arnim, “Road to Sustainability: University–Start-Up Collaboration,” Sustainability, vol. 13, no. 11, 2021, Art. no. 6131, doi: 10.3390/su13116131.

J. Elkington and I. H. Rowlands, “Cannibals with forks: the triple bottom line of 21st century business,” Alternatives Journal, vol. 25, no. 4, pp. 42–43, 1999.

E. G. Hansen and F. Große-Dunker, “Sustainability-Oriented Innovation,” in Encyclopedia of Corporate Social Responsibility, S. O. Idowu, N. Capaldi, L. Zu, and A. Das Gupta, Eds., Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, 2013, pp. 2407–2417.

J. Carrillo-Hermosilla, P. Del Río and T. Könnölä, “Diversity of eco-innovations: Reflections from selected case studies,” Journal of Cleaner Production, vol. 18, no. 10–11, pp. 1073–1083, 2010, doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2010.02.014.

M. Halme and M. Korpela, “Responsible Innovation Toward Sustainable Development in Small and Medium‐Sized Enterprises: a Resource Perspective,” Business Strategy and the Environment, vol. 23, no. 8, pp. 547–566, 2014, doi: 10.1002/bse.1801.

N. M. P Bocken, S. W. Short, P. Rana and S. Evans, “A literature and practice review to develop sustainable business model archetypes,” Journal of Cleaner Production, vol. 65, pp. 42–56, 2014, doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.11.039.

H. E. J. Bos‐Brouwers, “Corporate sustainability and innovation in SMEs: Evidence of themes and activities in practice,” Business Strategy and the Environment, vol. 19, no. 7, pp. 417–435, 2010, doi: 10.1002/bse.652.

R. Lozano, “A Holistic Perspective on Corporate Sustainability Drivers,” Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 32-44, 2015, doi: 10.1002/csr.1325.

B. Harsanto, A. Mulyana, Y. A. Faisal, V. M. Shandy and M. Alam, “Sustainability Innovation in Small Medium Enterprises (SMEs): A Qualitative Analysis,” The Qualitative Report, vol. 28, no. 11, pp. 3257–3271, 2023, doi: 10.46743/2160-3715/2023.6193.

G. G. Singgih and M. Famiola, “Core Values of Sustainable Innovation in Indonesian SMEs,” in Core Values and Decision-Making for Sustainable Business: An International Perspective, Cham, Switzerland: Springer Nature, 2025, ch. 3 pp. 39–74.

A. R. A. Arokiasamy, P. Doraisingam, H. N. Krishnasamy, W. Wider, S. F. A. Hossain and D. R. Sawitri, “Greening the dragon: how Malaysian SMEs can achieve SDGs through engaged employees,” Discover Sustainability, vol. 5, no. 1, 2024, Art. no. 415, doi: 10.1007/s43621-024-00642-3.

N. N. T. Vy, T.-Q. Luu and W.-K. Wong, “Impact of Globalisation on Innovation of Small and Medium Enterprises in Vietnam,” Asian Academy of Management Journal, vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 81–112, 2023, doi: 10.21315/aamj2023.28.1.4.

S. Kantabutra, “Measuring corporate sustainability: a Thai approach,” Measuring Business Excellence, vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 73–88, 2014, doi: 10.1108/MBE-02-2013-0015.

S. Suriyankietkaew and G. Avery, “Sustainable leadership practices driving financial performance: Empirical evidence from Thai SMEs,” sustainability, vol. 8, no. 4, 2016, Art. no. 327, doi: 10.3390/su8040327.

W. Winit and S. Kantabutra, “Sustaining Thai SMEs through perceived benefits and happiness,” Management Research Review, vol. 40, no. 5, pp. 556–577, 2017, doi: 10.1108/MRR-04-2016-0083.

R. K. Yin, “Getting Started How to Know Whether and When to Use the Case Study as a Research Method,” in Case study research and applications: Design and methods, 6th ed. Thousand Oaks, CA, USA: SAGE Publications, Inc., 2017, ch. 1, pp. 32–61.

K. M. Eisenhardt, “Building theories from case study research,” Academy of Management Review, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 532–550, 1989, doi: 10.2307/258557.

F. Halila and J. Rundquist, “The development and market success of eco‐innovations: A comparative study of eco‐innovations and “other” innovations in Sweden,” European Journal of Innovation Management, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 278–302, 2011, doi: 10.1108/14601061111148807.

P. Dobers and M. Halme, “Corporate social responsibility and developing countries,” Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, vol. 16, no. 5, pp. 237–249, 2009, doi: 10.1002/csr.212.

D. J. Teece, G. Pisano and A. Shuen, “Dynamic capabilities and strategic management,” Strategic Management Journal, vol. 18, no. 7, pp. 509–533, 1997, doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199708)18:7<509::AID-SMJ882>3.0.CO;2-Z.

T. Piyatamrong and D. Guile, “Cultivating Workplace Innovation: Establishing a Common Technical Language for Knowledge Management in a Digital Transformation Perspective-A UK-Based Global Consulting Firm Case Study,” in 2024 IEEE International Conference on Technology Management, Operations and Decisions (ICTMOD), Sharjah, United Arab Emirates, Nov. 4–6, 2024, pp. 1–7, doi: 10.1109/ICTMOD63116.2024.10878215.