This study explores gender differences in entrepreneurs’ perceptions of the impact of digitalization on the sustainable development of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in the Visegrád group countries (Czech Republic, Slovak Republic, Poland, and Hungary). Data were collected from 1,398 SME owners or top managers using the computer-assisted web interviewing (CAWI) research method. The results reveal significant differences in how male and female entrepreneurs perceive sustainable business growth from social, economic, and environmental perspectives. Male entrepreneurs consider the social impact of entrepreneurship to be more important compared to female entrepreneurs. A firm's digitalization level is the most important factor in determining the understanding of sustainable business growth for both genders. However, female entrepreneurs do not consider a firm's perception of customers and knowledge from new sources using digitalization to have a significant effect. Customers’ perception of the firm using digitalization is the most crucial indicator for male entrepreneurs regarding sustainable growth as a construct that determines the social system and environmental aspects. Conversely, female entrepreneurs consider knowledge from new sources using digitalization and risk mitigation as the most important indicators. These findings contribute to a comprehensive knowledge of the gendered implications of digital transformation and provide valuable inputs for policies and practitioners aiming to strengthen the inclusive character of the digital economy in SMEs.
The evolution of digital transformation's role among small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in the Visegrád group countries has new challenges and opportunities. The literature elaborates on the implications of digitalization on SMEs’ sustainability. However, a nuanced understanding of how gender differences relate to entrepreneurial perceptions has remained relatively unexplored. Therefore, this study adds to a deep analysis of how male and female entrepreneurs perceive the impact of digitalization on business sustainability. This study employs a novel approach using the computer-assisted web interviewing (CAWI) method applied through a gender-focused lens, thus contributing to the discourse on digital transformation in SMEs across four distinct national contexts. It provides solid evidence not only for which gender should be considered as a key criterion of digitalization's impact but also sets a solid ground for new future orientations of gender-related research and policymaking. Therefore, this study makes a significant contribution to the field by revealing gender-specific findings that question traditional thinking and pave the way for more inclusive and effective strategies for the digitalization of SMEs.
Sustainable development, as a solution to environmental, social, and economic problems, interests professionals and the public. Several academic scientists and academics are dedicated to expanding their understanding of sustainable development (Patyal et al., 2022). Considering that entrepreneurship is a primary driver of economic growth in the V4 countries (Kimmitt et al., 2020), sustainable development is a topic of discussion among SMEs. Owners’ activities and management related to sustainable development are intrinsic to the company's so-called “DNA” (Khanzode et al., 2021). The sustainable development of SMEs is shaped by integrating social, economic, and environmental objectives as well as company operations and relationships with important stakeholders, to secure and satisfy the requirements for future generations. Sustainable development transcends the primary aims of businesses, such as creating profits (Kiefhaber et al., 2020) or immediate economic benefits (Reyes-Rodriguez & Ulhi, 202). According to Mio et al. (2022), SMEs unknowingly implement sustainable practices and requirements. Several authors have identified development-influencing elements within the business sustainability framework, pertaining primarily to the management of business risks (market, financial, personnel, operational, strategic, and social; Fraser et al., 2022); company reputation (Baah et al., 2021); managing economic crises (such as the energy crisis associated with the Russia-Ukraine conflict; Neliger & Utz, 2022); the level of innovation (Ardito et al., 2021); and the technological and digital development of the company (Isensee et al., 2020; Bachmann et al., 2024). Increasing innovation with the aid of technology and digital advancement is a significant challenge for SMEs. This is because of limited financial resources and the benefits of increased competitiveness in the business climate for SMEs (Handiwibowo et al., 2020).
In addition to limited funding sources, the mindful execution of SMEs’ sustainable development and creative operations is hindered by managers’ and owners’ inexperience, ignorance, and lack of time (Silvestre et al., 2022). Managers and owners play the most significant roles in managing SMEs (Malkowska & Uhruska, 2022). Several authors have examined the shared and unique characteristics in the management of SMEs from the perspective of gender differences (Muhammad et al., 2022; Sattar et al., 2022; Chen et al., 2022; Graafland, 2020; Galbreath, 2011: Welsch et al., 2022; Millán et al., 2021).
This study attempts to fill the gaps in gender differences in subjective attitudes and perceptions of digitalization and their relationship with the sustainable growth of the SME segment in individual economies.
The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. Section 1 outlines the significance of SMEs in individual economies. In this context, sustainable development SME segment determinants and the impact of digitalization are presented. Section 2 presents the literature review and delves further into the contextualization of our study within existing research to examine the relationship of digitalization with SME sustainability and gender at the cross-sectional level. Section 3 describes the methodology and demonstrates the study research design, data collection techniques, and analysis methods while highlighting the unprecedented use of the CAWI method. Section 4 discusses the empirical findings concerning gender-specific perceptions. Section 5 reflects on the key insights of this study in relation to a wider theoretical framework, connects them with debates within the discipline as they are currently configured, and identifies possible implications for practice and policy. Finally, Section 6 concludes the paper with an overview of the study's limitations, contributions to the field, and directions for future research, representing a good understanding of the subtle roles that gender plays in the digital transformation of SMEs.
Literature reviewSustainable development of SMEsIn the current era of economic globalization, SMEs are increasingly confronted with sustainable development issues. Several authors have investigated the relationship between social entrepreneurship, social innovation, digital technologies, and sustainable development (Holzmann & Gregori, 2023; Pratono et al., 2021; van Lunenburg et al., 2020). Social enterprises are a subset of businesses aiming to address social problems, instead of maximizing profit and shareholder value (Pratono et al., 2021). Typically, they achieve their objectives through innovative strategies (George et al., 2021). Implementing digitalization technologies (policies and practices) improves business performance (Orrensalo et al., 2022; George et al., 2021; Torres & Augusto, 2020).
If SMEs successfully contribute to developing the sustainability of their business models, any goal in this area must provide them with added value. These activities support their objectives (Del Giudice et al., 2017). In this context, it should be noted that although SMEs are naturally small, they play a crucial role because they dominate the business sectors of the V4 nations (Luthra et al., 2022). The SME segment has a significant cumulative effect (Dvoulety & Orel, 2020).
Innovations aim to improve processes and resource utilization, enhance the development of new sustainable products or services, reorganize the organization's procedures and structures, and implement new forms of management (Ali et al., 2020; Castellano et al., 2022). Developing sustainability strategies for the SME segment in the context of cost-saving factors can facilitate or inhibit the adoption of environmental practices (Purwandani & Michaud, 2021; Wahga et al., 2018).
Russo and Fouts (1997) provide empirical evidence of the correlation between environmental performance and business profitability. Studies conducted in the United States, Thailand, and Europe indicate the significance of small businesses in terms of economic and social issues within the communities in which they operate. They are primarily responsible for job creation, resource consumption, and waste generation (Del Bro & Junquera, 2003). SMEs derive a competitive advantage from their environmental practices (Aftab et al., 2022; Bakos et al., 2020). However, contradictory conclusions, empirical findings, and research gaps in prior studies highlight the need for new models of the relationships among these variables (Cantele et al., 2020).
Concerns caused by global environmental problems and economic crises have increased competitive pressures and created new obstacles for SMEs. According to Linnenluecke and Griffiths (2009), ecological business considerations must be integrated into an overall strategic orientation. These notions are supported by Danso et al. (2019) who state that SMEs must incorporate environmental concerns into their daily strategic orientations. As they can effectively function, environmental issues can affect not only the future performance of an SME but also how customers perceive the products produced by this company.
Digitalization of SMEsThe digitalization of SMEs is a key factor in enhancing their competitiveness and resilience to crises (Kim & Park, 2025; Wang & Esperança, 2023). The gender perspective in implementing digital technologies in SMEs is essential, as differences exist in how men and women approach these technologies, which can influence the success of digital transformation (Martinelli & Tunisini, 2024).
Digitalization reduces transaction costs by improving staff, suppliers, and network access to information and communication. Digital tools facilitate the integration of SMEs into global markets by reducing the costs associated with transport and border operations and significantly expanding the scope of trading services (OECD, 2021). Additionally, digitalization facilitates innovation and provides greater access to innovation. Digitalization improves access to resources, such as finance, training, recruitment channels, and government services, which are increasingly made available online. Akpan et al. (2021) demonstrated that technologies that enable the formation of social enterprises, customer relationship management systems, new communication channels, virtual reality technologies for remote operations, and the Internet of Things are essential for lowering the cost of doing business (Durana et al., 2021). Pfister and Lehmann (2022) emphasized the need to implement digital solutions, provide trustworthy guidance to assist SMEs with their digitalization strategies and determine the measurable value of digital projects. SMEs use digital technologies for various business operations, providing numerous benefits. This is primarily about accelerating product/service development and the internationalization process, and creating new businesses (Proksch et al., 2021). Jafari-Sadeghi et al. (2023) argued that a strategic emphasis on increasing the degree of digitalization can help businesses manage their resources more effectively. According to Orrensalo et al. (2022), digitalization enables the creation of digital information resources that are stored in digital formats and retrieved via distributed networks. Digital technologies provide entrepreneurs with greater access to information than printed information sources, which are restricted by time and space (Nagy & Lazaroiu, 2022; Zhou et al., 2017). The increasing prevalence of digital technologies in business operations has transformed how entrepreneurs approach information. The digital capabilities of entrepreneurs represent an additional area of research on the sustainable growth of the SME segment (Valaskova et al., 2022; Oggero et al., 2009). Baert et al. (2016) believed that digital technologies are essential for entrepreneurs in resource orchestration and reconfiguration. According to Carayannis et al. (2014), the rapid spread of digital technologies (Internet access) has accelerated the emphasis on entrepreneurs’ information behavior in terms of developing search and utilization strategies for information resources. Eller et al. (2020) believed that SMEs need to catch up with larger companies during digitalization, which is detrimental to business performance. Additionally, based on the findings of a survey of 193 SMEs in Austria, he argued that digitalization is significantly related to performance. This mediates the effect of information technology on performance. Raimo et al. (2022) discovered the average level of digitalization in a sample of 101 Italian SMEs and argued that firm size, profitability, and financial leverage are the driving forces that positively impact the digitalization of Italian SMEs. Ardito et al. (2021) examined the direct and indirect effects of digital and environmental orientations on the likelihood of SMEs introducing product and/or process innovations, using a sample of 369 North American SMEs (i.e., product and process innovation performance). Their findings indicate that SMEs’ digital and environmental orientations have a direct positive effect on their performance in product and process innovation (Ionescu et al., 2021). Early indications from global business surveys reveal that up to 70 % of SMEs increased their use of digital technologies in response to COVID-19: i. 75 % of the firms surveyed in the United Kingdom moved to remote working, and approximately a third have invested in new digital capabilities (Riom & Valero, 2020); ii. 55 % of SMEs surveyed in Brazil recognize improvements in customer relationships, process agility, and customer acquisition as key benefits of digitalization during COVID-19 (Zdnet, 2020); iii. 72 % of online small business owners surveyed in Canada believe e-commerce is no exist (Paypal, 2020). Given the investments made and business benefits of the new models, many of these transformations will likely endure. Bai et al. (2021) recommended that SME managers and other stakeholders review their business strategies and incorporate crisis scenarios and business continuity plans for virtual customer support to enhance sustainable development. They also suggested enhancing the digitalization of SMEs following COVID-19.
Several authors, including Chen et al. (2025), Wang and Zhang (2025), and Li et al. (2023), agreed that the success factors of SMEs’ digital transformation include technological readiness, leadership support, organizational culture, and external pressure, emphasized the importance of adapting digital transformation strategies to the individual needs of businesses, which may also involve considering gender aspects.
Mehedintu and Soava (2022) investigated the relationships between digital innovation and digital resilience on a sample of 436 Romanian businesses, of which >70 % were SMEs. The authors confirmed a causal link between digital innovation and resilience. The authors argued that businesses should implement a digital-technology-based organizational culture that enables faster and more effective crisis responses. In this context, IT processes and applications should be integrated to detect and rapidly evaluate the impact of shocks. The authors argued that businesses must implement flexible arrangements for the allocation of financial resources and prioritize digital investments to ensure their stability and growth.
The gender perspectiveMuhammad et al. (2022) found that board gender diversity significantly moderates the relationship between corporate governance mechanisms and firms’ risk-taking. Gender diversity exacerbates the negative effects of board size and independence. Women's presence on corporate boards is crucial for the board's participation in risk-taking. Therefore, investors and other interested parties should view women's presence on corporate boards as a crucial risk-mitigating factor (Kovacova et al., 2019).
Sattar et al. (2022) examined the impact of board gender diversity on the risk of private firms. In a sample of 27,352 private firms in the United Kingdom, they discovered that risk reduction is associated with female directors who may have a stronger incentive for better risk management.
Galbreath (2011) examined whether a correlation exists between women on corporate boards and corporate sustainability. Their findings validated the link between women on boards and economic growth. Owing to their relational abilities, women on boards are more likely to be able to interact with multiple stakeholders and respond to their needs, thereby increasing the likelihood of social responsiveness. They also found no correlation between women in corporate leadership positions and environmental quality.
Graafland (2020) examined whether and how gender diversity promotes the sustainable growth of SMEs. According to Graafland's survey of 3663 European SMEs, the presence of more women in management positions improves SMEs’ sustainability by encouraging the use of relational environmental management tools. However, the effect is nonlinear, with sustainability reaching its peak of 54 % for female managers. Thus, a gender-balanced management team can improve SME's long-term viability.
Chen et al. (2022) demonstrated that women's lack of entrepreneurial-relevant knowledge and skills, intrapreneurship experience, and social networks with other entrepreneurs contribute to their lower likelihood of engaging in opportunity-driven entrepreneurship than men (Zhao et al., 2023).
Oggero et al. (2020) found a significant gender gap in the relationship between financial literacy and digital skills. Their findings indicate a positive and statistically significant correlation between financial literacy and the probability of being an entrepreneur, but only for men. Additionally, they asserted that men with digital skills are significantly more likely to be entrepreneurs. These results are consistent with those reported by Verheul et al. (2006).
Suseno and Abbott (2021) interviewed 17 female entrepreneurs in Australia and found that digital technology helps them pursue social innovation in two distinct ways: technology-embodied and technology-enabled social innovation. Their findings demonstrate the social impact of digital social innovation on education, the environment and climate, community development, and other areas.
Lammers et al. (2022) indicate that diversity (in this case, gender diversity) moderates the process and may contribute to more sustainable start-ups. This contributes to current discussions on the need to close the gender gap in (technology) entrepreneurship and highlights female role models.
Alam et al. (2022) examined the determinants of digital transformation perception among regional SMEs in Australia and found significant differences between male- and female-led businesses. The use of social media, innovation processes, workplace culture, and information and communication technologies were identified as key factors influencing the perception of digital transformation. Women-led SMEs have different perceptions of these factors compared with men, indicating the need for tailored approaches to support digital transformation for different genders.
Gergely et al. (2024) investigated the impact of gender on the adoption of information technologies among small business owners. The findings suggest that gender differences exist in technology adoption, with women facing specific challenges such as a lack of technical skills or limited access to networks and resources, which may affect their ability to successfully implement digital solutions.
According to Sagala and Őri (2024), empirical studies suggest that gender differences play a significant role in the digitalization process of SMEs. Furthermore, they highlight the importance and necessity for policymakers and support institutions to consider these differences when designing programs and initiatives to support digital transformation, ensuring equal opportunities for all entrepreneurs, regardless of gender.
Several particularities characterize sustainable development in the context of SMEs. Most of the positions and opinions of experts presented within the empirical research framework demonstrate a significant relationship between digitalization and the sustainability of a company's business environment. Nevertheless, several researchers have confirmed gender differences in the perception of the level of digitalization in SMEs and the comprehension and implementation of a company's strategy for sustainable development. A direct investigation of gender in the context of digitalization's impact on a company's sustainability in the SME segment is not straightforward and has been extensively studied worldwide.
Aim, methodology, and dataThis study aims to identify gender differences in entrepreneurs’ perceptions of the impact of digitalization on the sustainable development of SMEs.
This study's focus is the subjective perception of attitudes. The study was conducted in June 2022 in four Visegrád countries (Czech Republic – CR; Slovak Republic – SR; Poland – PL; and Hungary – H). The first phase involved preliminary research, which comprised: i) a critical review of the literature on the digital transformation of SMEs, with an emphasis on the demographic characteristics of respondents (only the owner or top manager of the SME); ii) the practical experience and knowledge of the researchers involved in scientific projects addressing this issue in the selected research countries; and iii) feedback from >10 companies conducting business activities in the Central European region. The second phase involved conducting actual data collection using the survey agency MNFORCE, which specializes in primary data collection and is an established and reputable organization in the V4 countries. The SMEs that participated in the research were selected from the agency's internal database, based on the criteria set by the research team. The main criteria for data collection were as follows. i) The questionnaire could only be completed by the owner or top manager of the company; ii) the company must operate within the SME segment (fewer than 250 employees) in one or more V4 countries; and iii) the company must have had practical experience with digital transformation during the past five years of business operations; and iv) each respondent group, categorized by gender, must contain at least 45 % of all participating owners/managers in the research. The research team's final request for data collection was formulated for reasons such as enhancing the validity and representativeness of the respondent sample and for comparison with the current ratio of owners/managers operating in the SME sector of the V4 countries. Nationality distribution of V4 respondents (n = 1398; 100 %) is as follows: 322 (23 %) from SR, 347 (24.8 %) from CR, 281 (27.3 %) from PL, and 348 (24.9 %) from H.
The questionnaire comprised 52 questions, eight designed to collect demographic information about the company (see also the structure of respondents). The second part of the questionnaire defines indicators that represent factors, such as digitalization (DG) and sustainable development (SD). DG1: I evaluate our company's digitalization level positively (use of digital technologies). DG2: Digitalization enhances customers’ perceptions of our company. DG3: Digitalization permits us to invent new business models. DG4: Digitalization enables us to acquire knowledge from new sources and mitigate risks. Sustainable development of SME (SD): SD1: I am familiar with sustainable business growth. SD2: Sustainable growth should pursue the economic interests of companies and their positive impacts on social systems and environmental factors. SD3: Understanding the social impact of entrepreneurship is necessary. SD4: Considering the ecological effects of entrepreneurship is essential. SD5: I consider our business sustainable. The respondents were required to answer each statement in the questionnaire (excluding the demographic characteristics of the company and respondent) using one of the following response options based on a 5-point Likert scale: 1 = strongly agree, 2 = agree …, and 5 = strongly disagree. The Likert scale is widely used for evaluating statements in quantitative research, particularly in survey-based studies. While this approach to capturing respondents’ attitudes toward the questionnaire statements is inherently subjective, the use of the CAWI methodology provides respondents with sufficient space and time to objectively evaluate the statements. The average time taken by the respondents to complete the questionnaire was 9.28 mins. Questions on individual factors were randomly generated. The questionnaire was protected against computerized completion. The questionnaire was designed based on the respondents’ native language. Additionally, the questionnaire contained a control question that verified the consistency of respondents’ attitudes.
Within the stated objective, the following research questions (RQs) were developed for male and female entrepreneurs:
RQ1: Compared with female entrepreneurs, do male entrepreneurs’ perceptions of digitalization indicators regarding the sustainable development of businesses differ?
RQ2: Compared with female entrepreneurs, do male entrepreneurs perceive different digitalization indicators to understand the concept of sustainable business growth?
RQ3: Compared with female entrepreneurs, do male entrepreneurs perceive digitalization indicators differently regarding entrepreneurship's social and environmental impact?
The results of the sample size analysis indicate that the number of SMEs (n = 1398) is twice the minimum number of SMEs (n = 684 respondents from V4 countries). Respondents were randomly selected from the agency's professional database. Men (M) and women (W) were selected from the respondent pool based on the article criteria (W). The definitions of digitalization (DGs) and sustainable SME development (SDs) are listed in Table 1. Table 1 presents the descriptive characteristics calculated separately for men (M, n = 678; 48.5 %) and women (W – women; n = 720; 51.5 %).
The descriptive statistics of DG and SD statements of SMEs.
| DCH/Factors | Items | Mean (M/W) | SD (M/W) | Skewness (M/W) | Kurtosis (M/W) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Digitalization(DGs) | DG1 | 1.801/1.799 | 0.810/0.829 | 1.669/1.092 | 1.064/0.998 |
| DG2 | 1.853/1.829 | 0.815/0.844 | 0.858/1.035 | 0.869/0.998 | |
| DG3 | 1.858/1.858 | 0.858/0.834 | 0.822/0.836 | 0.923/0.884 | |
| DG4 | 1.854/1.854 | 0.873/0.825 | 1.405/0.757 | 1.101/0.863 | |
| DCH/Factors | Items | Mean (M/W) | SD (M/W) | Skewness (M/W) | Kurtosis (M/W) |
| Sustainable development(SDs) | SD1 | 1.739/1.717 | 0.740/0.717 | 1.113/1.709 | 0.897/1.086 |
| SD2 | 1.807/1.757 | 0.741/0.775 | 0.958/2.064 | 0.784/1.119 | |
| SD3* | 1.876/1.798 | 0.800/0.807 | 0.826/1.705 | 0.799/1.092 | |
| SD4 | 1.885/1.822 | 0.814/0.804 | 0.564/1.346 | 0.773/0.984 | |
| SD5 | 1.953/1.885 | 0.830/0.838 | 0.489/1.391 | 0.741/0.991 |
Note: DCH: descriptive characteristics; SD: standard deviation; M: Men; W: women.
The means for men and women across DG statements are relatively close, indicating that perceptions of digitalization are similar across genders. The lowest mean is observed for DG1 (see Table 1; M: Mean = 1.801, W: Mean = 1.799), suggesting that both groups perceive this aspect of digitalization more favorably compared with other statements. DG2 and DG3 have slightly higher means, indicating a less favorable perception. Perceptions of sustainable development are slightly less positive than those of digitalization, with higher means across SD statements. SD5 has the highest mean (M: Mean = 1.953, W: Mean = 1.885), indicating a less favorable perception compared with other SD statements. Statistically significant differences are observed in SD3, indicating men and women perceive this statement differently at the 5 % significance level using the Kruskal-Wallis test. Women generally report higher means in some statements, indicating slightly less positive perceptions compared to men.
In this context, we propose the following hypotheses.
Hij-k: The selected digitalization indicator (DGi; I = 1, …, 4) has a statistically significant impact on men's (k = M) and women's (k = W) perceptions of sustainable development (SDj; j = 1,…, 5).
LRM was used to quantify and validate the causal relationships between sustainable development variables (dependent variables: SD1,..., SD5) and digitalization indicators (independent variables: DG1,...,DG5). Furthermore, LRM was used to validate the statistical significance of DGs (determining their direction and strength) and not to predict future SDs. LRM is an appropriate statistical method because all variables are identically evaluated. In this context, there are other advanced statistical approaches for verifying the relationships between variables, such as structural equation modelling, machine learning, predictive analysis, and Bayesian approaches. However, given the objective of utilizing a statistical approach to identify, quantify, and verify the relationships between variables, the selected approach is considered appropriate.
The statements in the questionnaire were formulated such that a positive perception of the respondents’ DGs would lead to a positive evaluation of the company's SDs. For the variables, the LRM assumptions of linearity and normal distribution (see Table 1; Hair et al., 2010) were accepted. A modified Spearman correlation matrix and t-test were used to assess the interdependencies between the variables (Lancaster & Hamdan, 1964). Regression coefficients (βi) were estimated using the least squares (LSM; Zellner, 1976). The significance level (α) is 5 %. The general linear function of the LRM is as follows:
where: y = 1, 2, 3, 4, 5; k = M, W; SD – statements of sustainable development of SME; DGi, – statement of digitalization; i = 1, …, 4; εt – random error.
The regression characteristics (RCHs) of the LRMs were as follows: Spearman's correlation coefficient (SCC), coefficient of determination (R2), adjusted coefficient of determination (Adj. R2), standard error (SE), and number of respondents (n). Statistical significance of LRMs (ANOVA): sum of squares (SS); mean of squares (MS); degree of freedom (df.); F test (F); and significance (p-value; Zellner, 1976). Statistical significance of the regression coefficients (βi; i = 1, …, 4) was verified: standard error (SE), t-Stat, and p-value. The robustness and stability of the significance of the regression coefficients were verified in the following phases. First phase: Multicollinearity in ordinary least squares regression analysis was verified using the variance influencing factor (VIF). Multicollinearity was verified if the LRM contained a minimum of three statistically significant regression coefficients (critical value – CV: VIF ≤ 5 – multicollinearity is accepted, according to O´Brien, 2007). Second phase: Autocorrelation was not calculated (data are categorial; Stewart, 1987). Third phase: The Shapiro-Wilk Test (SWT) was applied to verify the normal distribution of random errors (James, 1964). Fourth phase: The equality of error variances was verified using Levene's Test (LET). If the p-value of SWT or LET is greater than the level of significance, the assumption is supported (de Waal, 1977). Fifth phase: Stepwise regression analysis was conducted to eliminate statistically insignificant regression coefficients and test LRMs on various respondent groups based on selected demographic categories. The results obtained by verifying the independent variables and their impact on the dependent variables (SDs), as well as the strength and direction of the effect on the dependent variables (SDs), are identical to those presented in the results section. The results were obtained using IBM SPSS Statistics version 28.
Table 2 presents the results of validity and reliability (FL – factor loading: critical value (CV) = 0.7; CR – Composite reliability: CV = 0.7; AVE – Average of variance: CV = 0.5; CA – Cronbach’ s alpha: CV = 0.7; e.g. Arnold, 1980) of the questionnaire.
Results of validity and reliability of questionnaire (M/W).
Source: Authors’ research.
The results (Table 2) confirm the questionnaire's assumptions (reliability and validity). The high CR values (DG: M/W: CR = 0.928/0.910; SD: M/W: CR = 0.923/0.913) suggest that the items in both constructs (DG and SD) exhibit a strong degree of internal reliability, meaning that the questionnaire effectively captures the intended concepts for both genders. The AVE values (DG: M/W: AVE = 0.765/0.717; SD: M/W: AVE = 0.707/0.677) confirm that a substantial proportion of the variance in the observed variables is captured by the latent constructs, thus validating the theoretical framework of the questionnaire. The CA values (DG: M/W: CA = 0.897/0.868; SD: M/W: CA = 0.896/0.879) suggest that the questionnaire items are highly consistent within each construct, further reinforcing the reliability of the measurement tool.
The composition of respondents and SMEs was as follows: 756 owners and 642 managers (45.9 %); 678 (48.5 %) microbusinesses, 397 (28.4 %) small businesses, and 323 (23.1 %) medium-sized businesses. The legal forms of business were as follows: 491 (35.1 %) sole proprietorships, 691 (49.4 %) limited liability companies, 174 (12.5 %) joint stock companies, and 42 (3.1 %) other forms of business. The industries with the largest number of businesses were services (368, 26.3 %) and trade (264, 18 %). The other business sectors comprised: 226 (16.2 %) production, 226 (16.2 %) tourism, 112 (8 %) construction industry, 54 (3.8 %) transport, 46 (3.3 %) agriculture, and 102 (7.3 %) respondents stated other business sector. Furthermore, 370 (26.5 %) respondents had been in business for less than three years, 550 (39.3 %) for <10 years, and 478 (34.2 %) for >10 years. The capital city as a place of business was selected by 410 respondents (29.3 %), whereas 988 respondents (70.7 %) selected another region. Moreover, 48.5 % of respondents were male and 51.5 % were female. The highest level of education: 107 respondents (7.6 %) had a high school diploma, 619 (44.3 %) had a high school diploma, 238 (17 %) had a bachelor's degree, 405 (29 %) had an engineering degree or master's, and 29 (2.1 %) had a doctorate. Age of respondents: 494 (35.3 %) were 35 years old, 480 (34.3 %) were 36–45 years old, 296 (21.2 %) were 46–55 years old, and 128 (9.5 %) were 55 years old.
Empirical resultsThe modified Spearman correlation matrix of dependencies between the independent variables (DGs) and dependent variables (SDs) is presented in Table 3.
The coefficients and verification of dependences between variables (M/W).
Note: *Statistically significant correlation at α = 0.1 %.
Source: Authors’ research.
All digitalization items (see Table 3; DG1–DG4) show moderate to strong positive correlations with the sustainable development variables (SD1–SD5), suggesting a meaningful relationship between the adoption of digitalization and sustainability initiatives in SMEs. The highest correlations are observed between DG4 and SD5 (M: 0.571, W: 0.474), indicating that businesses with higher digitalization efforts (DG4) tend to have better sustainable development performance related to SD5. Across all SD factors, women (W) show slightly lower correlation values compared to men (M), suggesting a potential gender-based perception difference in the relationship between digitalization and sustainability. Men tend to report stronger correlations between digitalization and sustainable development compared to women. For instance, the correlation between DG1 and SD1 is stronger for women (0.511) than for men (0.463), whereas for DG3 and SD5, men report a stronger correlation (0.509) than women (0.474). These differences might suggest that men perceive digitalization as having a greater impact on sustainable development efforts compared to women.
Effect of digitalization on the understanding the concept of sustainable business growthVerification LRMs (LRM1/M, LRM1/W) of the effect of digitalization indicators (DGs) on the understanding of the concept of sustainable business growth (SD1; M/W): RCHs: SCC = 0.504/0.552; R2 = 0.254/0.305; Adj. R2 = 0.250/0.301; SE = 0.641/0.642; n = 678/720. The results of the ANOVA (LRM1/M/ LRM1/W) are as follows: Regression: df. = 4/4; SS = 94.260/128.831; MS = 23.565/32.208; F = 57.279/78.267; p-value = 1.34E-41/4.54E-55; Residual: df. = 673/715; SS = 276.464/294.230; MS = 0.411/0.412; Total: df. = 677/719; SS = 370.724/423.061. These results confirm the statistical significance of LRM1/M and LRM1/W. The results of the calculation and verification of βi are listed in Table 4.
The verification of the effect of DGs on SD1 (M/W).
Note: Eval. – Evaluation; S – Support R – Reject; Statistically significant LRM for the α = 5 %*; α = 1 %⁎⁎ α = 0.1 %⁎⁎⁎.
Source: Authors’ research.
LRM1/M shows that all defined indicators of digitalization (see Table 4) are statistically significant, with an effect on SD1 (DG1, DG2, DG4 – positive effect; DG3 – negative effect). LRM1/W shows the indicators of digitalization, DG1 and DG3 (see Table 4), were statistically significant (DG1, DG3 – positive effects). However, DG2 and DG4 were not statistically significant. The linear functions of LRM1/M and LRM1/W are as follows.
where: SD1– understand the concept of sustainable business growth; DGi – digitalization indicator; i = 1, …, 4.
Multicollinearity was rejected for LRM1/M (DG1, VIF = 2.029; DG2, VIF = 2.622; DG3, VIF = 3.230; and DG4, VIF = 2.803). Homoscedasticity was accepted (LET: LRM1/M, p = 0.098; LRM1/W, p = 0.104). Normal distribution of random errors was supported for both LRMs (SWT: LRM1/M, p = 0.181; LRM1/W, p = 0.122). The above-mentioned results confirm the robustness and stability of the estimated regression coefficients (βi) in LRM1 for both groups of respondents based on gender (M/W).
Effect of digitalization on sustainable growth as a construct determining the social system and the environmental aspectsVerification LRMs (LRM2/M, LRM2/W) of the effect of digitalization indicators (DGs) on sustainable growth as a construct determining the social system and environmental aspects (SD2; M/W): RCHs: SCC = 0.545/0.538; R2 = 0.297/0.289; Adj. R2 = 0.292/0.285; SE = 0.624/0.648; n = 678/720. The results of the ANOVA (LRM2/M/ LRM2/W) are as follows: Regression: df. = 4/4; SS = 110.248/122.165; MS = 27.562/30.541; F = 70.855/72.717; p-value = 4.51E-50/1.06E-51; Residual: df. = 673/715; SS = 261.403/300.300; MS = 0.389/0.420; Total: df. = 677/719; SS = 371.651/422.465. These results confirm the statistical significance of LRM2/M and LRM2/W. The results of the calculation and verification of βi are listed in Table 5.
The verification of the effect of DGs on SD2 (M/W).
Note: Eval. – Evaluation; S – Support R – Reject; *Statistically significant LRM at the α = 5 %*; α = 1 %⁎⁎ α = 0.1 %⁎⁎⁎.
Source: Authors’ research.
LRM2/M shows that all defined indicators of digitalization (see Table 5) are statistically significant with a positive effect on SD2 (DG1, DG2, DG4), without DG3 (indicator is not statistically significant). LRM2/W shows that all defined indicators of digitalization (see Table 5) are statistically significant with a positive effect on SD2 (DG2, DG3, DG4), without DG1 (indicator is not statistically significant). The linear functions of LRM2/M and LRM2/W are as follows:
where: SD2– sustainable growth as a construct determining the social system and the environment aspects; DGi – digitalization indicator; i = 1, …, 4.
Multicollinearity was rejected in LRM2/M (DG1: VIF = 1.918; DG2: VIF = 2.479; DG4: VIF = 2.650) and LRM2/W (DG2: VIF = 2.197; DG3: VIF = 2.699; and DG4: VIF = 2.159). Homoscedasticity was accepted (LET: LRM2/M, p = 0.107; LRM2/W, p = 0.110). Normal distribution of random errors was supported for both LRMs (SWT: LRM2/M, p = 0.121; LRM2/W, p = 0.117). The above-mentioned results confirm the robustness and stability of the estimated regression coefficients (βi) in LRM2 for both groups of respondents based on gender (M/W).
Effect of digitalization on the perception of social impacts of entrepreneurshipVerification LRMs (LRM3/M, LRM3/W) of the effect of digitalization indicators (DGs) on the perceived social impact of entrepreneurship (SD3; M/W): RCHs: SCC = 0.566/0.524; R2 = 0.321/0.274; Adj. R2 = 0.317/0.270; SE = 0.662/0.700; n = 678/720. The results of the ANOVA (LRM3/M/ LRM3/W) are as follows: Regression: df. = 4/4; SS = 139.080/132.379; MS = 34.770/33.095; F = 79.454/67.501; p-value = 3.25E-55/1.8E-48; Residual: df. = 673/715; SS = 294.512/350.553; MS = 0.438/0.490; Total: df. = 677/719; SS = 433.593/482.932. These results confirm the statistical significance of LRM3/M and LRM3/W. The results of the calculation and verification of βi are listed in Table 6.
The verification of the effect of DGs on SD3 (M/W).
Note: Eval. – Evaluation; S – Support R – Reject; *Statistically significant LRM at the α = 5 %*; α = 1 %⁎⁎ α = 0.1 %⁎⁎⁎.
Source: Authors’ research.
LRM3/M shows that all defined indicators of digitalization (see Table 6) are statistically significant with a positive effect on SD3 (DG2, DG3, DG4), without DG1 (indicator is not statistically significant). LRM3/W shows the indicators of digitalization, DG3 and DG4 (see Table 6), were statistically significant (DG3, DG4 – positive effects). However, DG1 and DG2 were not statistically significant. The linear functions of LRM3/M and LRM3/W are as follows:
where: SD3– perceive of social impacts of entrepreneurship; DGi – digitalization indicator; i = 1, …, 4.
Multicollinearity was rejected in LRM3/M (DG2, VIF = 2.789; DG3, VIF = 2.436; DG4, VIF = 2.982). Homoscedasticity was accepted (LET: LRM3/M, p = 0.089; LRM3/W, p = 0.096). Normal distribution of random errors was supported for both LRMs (SWT: LRM3/M, p = 0.112 and LRM3/W, p = 0.108). The above-mentioned results confirm the robustness and stability of the estimated regression coefficients (βi) in LRM3 for both groups of respondents based on gender (M/W).
Effect of digitalization on the perceive the environmental impacts of entrepreneurshipVerification LRMs (LRM4/M, LRM4/W) of the effect of digitalization indicators (DGs) on the perception of the environmental impacts of entrepreneurship (SD4; M/W): RCHs: SCC = 0.550/0.524; R2 = 0.302/0.274; Adj. R2 = 0.298/0.270; SE = 0.682/0.689; n = 678/720. The results of the ANOVA (LRM4/M/ LRM4/W) are as follows: Regression: df. = 4/4; SS = 135.824/128.167; MS = 33.956/32.042; F = 72.964/67.554; p-value = 2.3E-51/1.67E-48; Residual: df. = 673/715; SS = 313.202/339.132; MS = 0.465/0.474; Total: df. = 677/719; SS = 449.027/467.299. These results confirm the statistical significance of LRM4/M and LRM4/W. The results of the calculation and verification of βi are listed in Table 7.
The verification of the effect of DGs on SD4 (M/W).
Note: Eval. – Evaluation; S – Support R – Reject; *Statistically significant LRM at the α = 5 %*; α = 1 %⁎⁎ α = 0.1 %⁎⁎⁎.
Source: Authors’ research.
LRM4/M shows that the indicators of digitalization, such as DG2 and DG4 (see Table 7) were statistically significant (DG2, DG4 – positive effects). However, DG1 and DG3 were not statistically significant. LRM4/W shows that all defined indicators of digitalization (see Table 7) are statistically significant with a positive effect on SD4 (DG2, DG3, DG4), without DG1 (indicator is not statistically significant). The linear functions of LRM4/M and LRM4/W have the following formulation:
where: SD4– perceive the environmental impacts of entrepreneurship; DGi – digitalization indicator; i = 1, …, 4.
Multicollinearity was rejected in LRM4/W (DG2, VIF = 2.481; DG3, VIF = 2.948; DG4, VIF = 2.438). Homoscedasticity was accepted (LET: LRM4/M, p = 0.093; LRM4/W, p = 0.088). Normal distribution of random errors was supported for both LRMs (SWT: LRM4/M, p = 0.120; LRM4/W, p = 0.122). The above-mentioned results confirm the robustness and stability of the estimated regression coefficients (βi) in LRM4 for both groups of respondents based on gender (M/W).
Effect of digitalization on the perception of a firm as sustainableVerification of LRMs (LRM5/M, LRM5/W) on the effect of digitalization indicators (DGs) on the perception of a firm as sustainable (SD5; M/W): RCHs: SCC = 0.606/0.566; R2 = 0.367/0.321; Adj. R2 = 0.363/0.317; SE = 0.662/0.690; n = 678/720. The results of the ANOVA (LRM5/M/ LRM5/W) are as follows: Regression: df. = 4/4; SS = 171.302/160.617; MS = 42.825/40.154; F = 97.638/84.355; p-value = 1.65E-65/1.1E-58; Residual: df. = 673/715; SS = 295.188/340.349; MS = 0.439/0.476; Total: df. = 677/719; SS = 466.490/500.965. These results confirm the statistical significance of LRM5/M and LRM5/W. The results of the calculation and verification of βi are listed in Table 8.
The verification of the effect of DGs on SD5 (M/W).
Note: Eval. – Evaluation; S – Support R – Reject; *Statistically significant LRM at the α = 5 %*; α = 1 %⁎⁎ α = 0.1 %⁎⁎⁎.
Source: Authors’ research.
The LRM5/M model shows that all the defined indicators of digitalization (see Table 8) were statistically significant (DG1, DG2, DG4 – positive effects), without DG3 (indicator is not significant). The LRM5/W model showed that DG1, DG3, and DG4 (see Table 8) were statistically significant and positively affected SD5. However, the effects of DG2 were not confirmed (Table 8). The linear functions of LRM5/M and LRM5/W are as follows:
where SD2 is the perception of the firm as sustainable and DGi is the digitalization indicator, i = 1, …, 4.
Multicollinearity was rejected in LRM5/M (DG1: VIF = 2.163; DG2: VIF = 2.795; DG4: VIF = 2.988), and LRM5/W (DG1: VIF = 2.049; DG3: VIF = 2.793; and DG4: VIF = 2.447). Homoscedasticity was accepted (LET: LRM5/M, p = 0.103; LRM5/W, p = 0.108). Normal distribution of random errors was supported for both LRMs (SWT: LRM5/M, p = 0.102; LRM5/W, p = 0.100). The above-mentioned results confirm the robustness and stability of the estimated regression coefficients (βi) in LRM5 for both groups of respondents based on gender (M/W).
The estimated values of the regression coefficients, calculated using LSM, were verified with insignificant deviations using the maximum likelihood method. Additionally, the robustness of the LRM and the application of step-by-step regression analysis yielded results that contradicted the aforementioned evaluations of the statistical hypotheses.
DiscussionComparing the results of the two respondent groups from the V4 countries (i.e., male and female entrepreneurs) resulted in equal but different evaluations of the digitalization effect on sustainable development.
Male entrepreneurs perceive the social impact of entrepreneurship as more essential than female entrepreneurs (M: Mean = 1.876; W: Mean = 1.798). Male and female entrepreneurs similarly evaluate other factors of sustainable development: understanding the concept of sustainable business growth (SD1); sustainable growth as a construct determining the social system and environmental aspects (SD2); perceiving the environmental impacts of entrepreneurship (SD4); and the perception of the firm as sustainable. Our findings indicate differences between men and women in the perceptions of sustainable business development regarding social, economic, and ecological aspects. These findings are partially supported by those of Muhammad et al. (2022) and Graafland (2020).
Significant differences exist in the perception of the effect of digitalization on the understanding of the concept of sustainable business growth (SD1) between men and women. Male entrepreneurs confirmed that all aspects of digitalization were significant, and stated that the innovation of business models using digitalization has a weakly negative effect on understanding the concept of sustainable business growth (β3 = − 0.125). Female entrepreneurs stated that the firm's perception of customers using digitalization (p-value = 0.724) and knowledge from new sources using digitalization, thus mitigating the risks (p-value = 0.077), have no significant effect on SD1. A firm's digitalization level (use of digital technologies) is the most important factor determining the understanding of sustainable business growth, according to both genders (M: β1 = 0.282; W: β1 = 0.311; very strong and positive effect). Studies such as Jafari-Sadeghi et al. (2023) and Orrensalo et al. (2022) support the importance of digitalization in understanding sustainable growth. George et al. (2021) stated that several idiosyncratic perspectives exist for tackling climate change, sustainable development, and creating socio-ecological value. The authors formulated the sustainability of enterprise pathways based on the innovative and creative deployment of digital technologies.
Significant differences exist between men and women in their perceptions of the effect of digitalization on sustainable growth as a construct that determines the social system and environmental aspects (SD2). Male entrepreneurs confirmed that innovation in business models using digitalization did not have a statistically significant effect on SD2 (p = 0.225), and stated that the customers’ perception of the firm using digitalization is the most critical indicator, with a medium-strong and positive effect on SD2 (β2 = 0.194). Female entrepreneurs opined that a firm's digitalization level (use of digital technologies) is not a significant indicator of SD2 (p-value = 0.140). According to them, the most important indicator of DG is knowledge from new sources using digitalization, thus mitigating the risks that determine SD2 (β4 = 0.232; strong and positive effect).
Significant differences exist between men and women in their perception of the effect of digitalization on the perceived social impact of entrepreneurship (SD3). According to male entrepreneurs, the knowledge from new sources using digitalization, thus mitigating the risks (β4 = 0.222; solid and positive effect) is a more significant indicator (on the SD3) than the perception of the firm of customers using digitalization (β2 = 0.161; medium solid and positive effect). According to female entrepreneurs, the innovation of business models using digitalization (β3 = 0.291; solid and positive effect) is a more significant indicator (on the SD3) than the knowledge from new sources using digitalization (β4 = 0.212; medium strong and positive effect). A firm's digitalization level (use of digital technologies) is not a significant indicator that determines the perceived social impacts of entrepreneurship according to male (p-value = 0.296) and female (p-value = 0.168) entrepreneurs. These findings are consistent with those of Crittenden et al. (2019) and Pergelova et al. (2019). Suseno and Abbott (2021) demonstrated how technology can create opportunities and address the challenges imposed by social factors. This indicates that, although the glass ceiling has not been shattered, the gender gap in traditionally male-dominated fields can be addressed using technology.
Significant differences exist between men and women in their perception of the effect of digitalization on the perceived environmental impacts of entrepreneurship (SD4). The innovation of business models using digitalization has no effect on the SD4 according to male entrepreneurs (p-value = 0.206), but according to female entrepreneurs, it has a significant impact on the SD4 (p-value = 0.017; β3 = 0.119; weakly and positive effect). Knowledge from new sources using digitalization is the most significant indicator that determines SD4 according to male (β4 = 0.230; strong and positive effect) and female (β4 = 0.309; very strong and positive impact) entrepreneurs. A firm's digitalization level (use of digital technologies) is not a significant indicator that determines the perceived environmental impacts of entrepreneurship according to male (p-value = 0.065) and female (p-value = 0.150) entrepreneurs. Our findings on gender practices in the context of the impact of technology on business sustainability correlate with the conclusions of Galbreath (2011), Manocha et al. (2021), and Lammers et al. (2022).
Manocha et al. (2021) suggest that increased internet access is, in the aggregate, associated with heightened entrepreneurial activity. However, the favorable effect for male entrepreneurs is markedly more significant than that for female entrepreneurs. The findings reveal that gender-based disaggregation is critical in assessing the influence of macro-environmental forces on the entrepreneurial activity rate, extent, and substance.
Alternatively, Lammers et al. (2022), analyzed 320 start-ups from a survey of entrepreneurial activities in the Berlin region and suggested that digital technology start-ups prioritize economic goals, while social and environmental goals are less critical or ignored.
Significant differences exist between men and women in the perception of the effect of digitalization on a firm's perception of sustainability (SD5). According to female entrepreneurs, the firm's digitalization level (use of digital technologies) is the most important indicator that determines the perception of the firm as sustainable (β1 = 0.234), while the perception of the firm of customers using digitalization did not affect the firm's perception of sustainability (p-value = 0.726). According to male entrepreneurs, knowledge from new sources using digitalization is the most significant indicator that determines SD5 (β4 = 0.350; very strong and positive effect), while the innovation of business models using digitalization did not impact SD5 (p-value = 0.726).
In this context, the OECD (2021) states that easing SME access to strategic resources plays a key role: i) leveraging fintech and alternative sources of finance for SMEs; ii) encouraging business innovation and the supply of new digital solutions; iii) connecting SMEs with knowledge networks; and iv) providing SMEs with access to data and technology. According to Giotopoulos et al. (2022) and Mishrif and Khan (2022), the COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated the adoption of digital technologies in the SME sector. It is widely believed that the ongoing Russian-Ukrainian conflict will exacerbate this situation.
ConclusionThis study is among the few to highlight the gendered nuances of entrepreneurs’ perceptions of the impact of digitalization on sustainability in general and within the countries of the Visegrád Group. Accordingly, methodologically innovative empirical research based on the CAWI technique reveals that significant gender differences in perceptions exist systematically and are challenging. Consequently, some common assumptions contribute to a comprehensive knowledge of the gendered implications of digital transformation. The results provide an essential addition to the academic debate on SME sustainability and valuable input for policies and practitioners who aim to strengthen the inclusive character of the digital economy. This emerging new line of investigation has a critical role played by gender issues in defining the perceptions of entrepreneurs and, concurrently, underlines the importance of the gender perspective in devising strategies that are simultaneously equal and sustainable for the promotion of digitalization in the SME sector.
This study explored gender differences in the perception of digitalization for entrepreneurs toward the sustainable development of SMEs. This study identified several characteristics that affect the evaluation of entrepreneurs based on their gender, including the positive influence of digital technologies on the management's ability to conceive sustainable business growth. Learning from new sources and using digitalization in risk mitigation have a stronger impact on male entrepreneurs in terms of their perceptions of environmental effects. Furthermore, this study revealed that male entrepreneurs perceive business model innovation through digitalization to have a substantial positive influence on social impact, whereas female entrepreneurs have a weaker perception of this impact. Finally, this study aimed to assist academic and scientific personnel in analyzing gender differences related to assessing the interconnection between the digitalization level and sustainable development of SMEs.
The practical implication of this study is that no significant difference exists in the understanding of gender differences among SME investors, owners, common stockholders, and managers. This means that no variation exists in their perception of gender when making decisions about employee choice and a company's level of digitalization. The universality of the proposed causal relationship models between sustainability and the level of digitalization in enterprises offers extensive opportunities for their applicability and verification across various business environments and economies worldwide. In the context of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG4 – Quality Education; and SDG5 – Gender Equality), these empirical findings are crucial for gaining deeper insights and expanding knowledge regarding the common characteristics and differences concerning the gender of owners and managers in the SME sector. Their contribution lies in enriching the database of theoretical models at the academic level and more importantly, in raising practical awareness among SME owners and managers about the need to engage with digital technologies to ensure the sustainable development of their business activities. The findings of this study are significant for organizations supporting entrepreneurship in the SME sector; non-profit sector with a focus on enhancing the quality of the business environment; educational institutions as a basis for developing materials, seminars, and workshops in the field of SME sustainability; and governmental organizations to advocate the need to allocate financial resources to challenges related to digitalization and artificial intelligence.
However, this study has some limitations, such as subjective estimation by the SME owner or manager of the company's digitalization and sustainability, research limited to small businesses in V4 countries, and data constrained to businesses with Internet connections. Data collection was conducted during the first four months of the Russian-Ukrainian conflict, which had negative consequences on the business environment in Middle European countries and could have resulted in statistical bias. The causal relationships between variables were assumed to be unidirectional. Another limitation of this empirical research is the use of the CAWI method for primary data collection. Given the requirement for respondents to have Internet access and their willingness to participate in the survey, this approach may have led to a sampling bias. Additionally, a potential risk lies in the possibility of respondents completing the questionnaire in a private setting without direct interaction with the researcher, which may result in respondent bias when evaluating the selected questions. The research data were evaluated using a single statistical approach—linear regression modelling. Currently, other approaches exist for assessing relationships and predicting future data, such as structural equation modelling or artificial neural networks.
We hope to expand scientific knowledge in the future and use our research as a reference for gender considerations in other factors, such as human resource management, financial performance, crisis phenomena, and environmental aspects of businesses. Other demographic characteristics of SME owners and top executives must be considered. Additionally, we examine future research activities relating to digital skills and competencies. This includes exploring the influence of gender disparities in digital literacy, skills, and competencies on the adoption of digital transformation practices in SMEs, specifically: i) gender gaps in digital upskilling and training opportunities; ii) perceptions of AI and automation across genders; and iii) strategies to enhance the digital competencies of female entrepreneurs and managers. In this context, the sociocultural influence on gender disparities is also significant. It also includes investigating how cultural attitudes and social norms influence gender roles in the context of digitalization and sustainability efforts in SMEs, specifically: i) gender stereotypes affecting digital adoption; ii) work-life balance challenges related to digital transformation; and iii) cultural differences within the V4 region affecting female participation in leadership.
CRediT authorship contribution statementJaroslav Belas: Methodology, Investigation, Funding acquisition, Formal analysis, Data curation, Conceptualization. Tomas Kliestik: Writing – review & editing, Validation, Software, Project administration, Methodology, Formal analysis. Jan Dvorsky: Visualization, Validation, Supervision, Software, Resources, Formal analysis. Dalia Streimikiene: Writing – review & editing, Investigation, Formal analysis, Conceptualization.