This study examines the link among blockchain technology (BCT), digital accounting practices (DAPs) and sustainable performance (SUP) in the conditions of Vietnam as a developing market. We consider DAPs to be a mediator variable. Furthermore, transformational leadership (TRL) is considered the moderating variable for all nexuses in the research model. Data have been gathered by the survey technique via email with LinkedIn user profiles. 2,000 emails comprising the survey have been dispatched to LinkedIn users of Vietnamese manufacturing firms. The final data set comprised 547 responses. By utilizing partial least squares structural equation modelling, the authors indicate that BCT favourably affects DAPs as well as SUP. Moreover, DAPs favourably mediate the link between BCT and SUP, while TRL demonstrates a significant moderator role in the links among them. As a conclusion, using the perspectives of information processing theory and resource-based view theory, this study adds to the SUP literature by demonstrating the impacts of BCT and DAPs in the context of TRL. Furthermore, this study has been handled as a pioneering investigation that combines DAPs and SUP in the same model in a developing market, specifically Vietnam.
AbbasJ., & KhanS. M. (2022). Green knowledge management and organizational green culture: An interaction for organizational green innovation and green performance. Journal of Knowledge Management, 27, 1852–1870. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-03-2022-0156
2.
Abu AfifaM. M., & NguyenN. M. (2022). Nexus among big data analytics, environmental process integration and environmental performance: Moderating role of digital learning orientation and environmental strategy. VINE Journal of Information and Knowledge Management Systems, in press. https://doi.org/10.1108/VJIKMS-05-2022-0186
3.
Abu AfifaM. M., NguyenT. H., NguyenL. T. L., TranT. H. T., & DaoN. T. (2024). Nexus among blockchain technology adoption and firm performance: Perspective from mediating and moderating effects. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, in press. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOA-11-2023-4076
4.
Abu AfifaM., & NguyenN. M. (2023). Impact of risk-taking tendency and transformational leadership style on the use of management accounting system information: A direct-mediation model. Baltic Journal of Management, 18(3), 366–385.
5.
Abu AfifaM., VanH. V., & Le Hoang VanT. (2022). Factors affecting the intention to use cloud accounting in SMEs: Evidence from Vietnam. In Digital economy, business analytics, and big data analytics applications (pp. 585–599). Springer International Publishing.
6.
AbubakerZ., KhanA. U., AlmogrenA., AbbasS., JavaidA., RadwanA., & JavaidN. (2022). Trustful data trading through monetizing IoT data using BlockChain based review system. Concurrency and Computation: Practice and Experience, 34(5), e6739.
7.
AfifaM. M. A., VanH. V., & VanT. L. H. (2023). Blockchain adoption in accounting by an extended UTAUT model: Empirical evidence from an emerging economy. Journal of Financial Reporting and Accounting, 21(1), 5–44. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFRA-12-2021-0434
8.
AftabJ., AbidN., SarwarH., & VenezianiM. (2022). Environmental ethics, green innovation, and sustainable performance: Exploring the role of environmental leadership and environmental strategy. Journal of Cleaner Production, 378, 134639.
9.
AkbariM., OmraneA., Nikookar-GohariH., & RanjiE. (2022). The impact of transformational leadership on CWBs: The moderating effect of management level in a developing country. Transnational Corporations Review, 15(2), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/19186444.2022.2118492
10.
AlblooshiM., ShamsuzzamanM., & HaridyS. (2021). The relationship between leadership styles and organisational innovation: A systematic literature review and narrative synthesis. European Journal of Innovation Management, 24(2), 338–370.
11.
AldabbasQ., WeshahS., AbdullahN., AlbakheetM., HamoudF. A., & HouraniA. (2023). The effect of digital accounting systems within digital transformation on financial information’s quality. In Artificial intelligence (AI) and finance (pp. 704–711). Springer Nature.
12.
AllioR. J. (2015). Good strategy makes good leaders. Strategy & Leadership, 43(5), 3–9.
13.
Al-OkailyM., AlghazzawiR., AlkhwaldiA. F., & Al-OkailyA. (2022). The effect of digital accounting systems on the decision-making quality in the banking industry sector: A mediated-moderated model. Global Knowledge, Memory and Communication, in press. https://doi.org/10.1108/GKMC-01-2022-0015
14.
Alonso-AlmeidaM. d. M., PerramonJ., & Bagur‐FemeniasL. (2017). Leadership styles and corporate social responsibility management: Analysis from a gender perspective. Business Ethics: A European Review, 26(2), 147–161.
15.
AlsharariN. M., & IkemF. (2023). Digital accounting systems and information technology in the public sector: Mutual interaction. Journal of Systems and Information Technology, 25(1), 53–73.
16.
AndreassenR. I. (2020). Digital technology and changing roles: A management accountant’s dream or nightmare?Journal of Management Control, 31(3), 209–238.
17.
AppelbaumD., CohenE., KinoryE., & Stein SmithS. (2022). Impediments to blockchain adoption. Journal of Emerging Technologies in Accounting, 19(2), 199–210.
18.
BalzarovaM., DyerC., & FaltaM. (2022). Perceptions of blockchain readiness for fairtrade programmes. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 185, 122086.
19.
BellucciM., Cesa BianchiD., & ManettiG. (2022). Blockchain in accounting practice and research: Systematic literature review. Meditari Accountancy Research, 30(7), 121–146.
20.
BrislinR. W. (1970). Back-translation for cross-cultural research. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 1(3), 185–216. https://doi.org/10.1177/135910457000100301
21.
BurgelmanR. A., & GroveA. S. (2007). Let chaos reign, then rein in chaos—repeatedly: Managing strategic dynamics for corporate longevity. Strategic Management Journal, 28(10), 965–979.
22.
BurmeisterA., LiY., WangM., ShiJ., & JinY. (2020). Team knowledge exchange: How and when does transformational leadership have an effect?Journal of Organizational Behavior, 41(1), 17–31.
23.
BüyüközkanG., & KarabulutY. (2018). Sustainability performance evaluation: Literature review and future directions. Journal of Environmental Management, 217, 253–267.
24.
Carlsson-WallM., GoretzkiL., HofstedtJ., KrausK., & NilssonC. J. (2022). Exploring the implications of cloud‐based enterprise resource planning systems for public sector management accountants. Financial Accountability & Management, 38(2), 177–201.
25.
CarrascoH., & RomiA. M. (2022). Toward an omniopticon: The potential of blockchain technology toward influencing vulnerable populations in contested markets. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 35(7), 1685–1713.
26.
CentobelliP., CerchioneR., Del VecchioP., OropalloE., & SecundoG. (2022). Blockchain technology design in accounting: Game changer to tackle fraud or technological fairy tale?Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 35(7), 1566–1597.
27.
ChangS. J., van WitteloostuijnA., & EdenL. (2020). Common method variance in international business research. In L. Eden, B. B. Nielsen, & A. Verbeke (Eds.), Research methods in international business (pp. 385–398). Springer International Publishing.
28.
ChenH., ChiangR. H., & StoreyV. C. (2012). Business intelligence and analytics: From big data to big impact. MIS Quarterly, 36(4), 1165–1188.
29.
DaiJ., & VasarhelyiM. A. (2017). Toward blockchain-based accounting and assurance. Journal of Information Systems, 31(3), 5–21.
30.
DandaltE. (2021). The cyber-work performance of managers in education. Journal of Management Development, 40(3), 151–167.
31.
DemirkanS., DemirkanI., & McKeeA. (2020). Blockchain technology in the future of business cyber security and accounting. Journal of Management Analytics, 7(2), 189–208.
32.
Di VaioA., & VarrialeL. (2020). Blockchain technology in supply chain management for sustainable performance: Evidence from the airport industry. International Journal of Information Management, 52, 102014. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2019.09.010
33.
DraschB. J., SchweizerA., & UrbachN. (2018). Integrating the ‘Troublemakers’: A taxonomy for cooperation between banks and fintechs. Journal of Economics and Business, 100, 26–42.
34.
DubeyR., GunasekaranA., & ForoponC. R. (2022). Improving information alignment and coordination in humanitarian supply chain through blockchain technology. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 37(3), 805–827. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEIM-07-2022-0251
35.
DyballM. C., & SeethamrajuR. (2022). Client use of blockchain technology: Exploring its (potential) impact on financial statement audits of Australian accounting firms. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 35(7), 1656–1684.
36.
FanH., LiG., SunH., & ChengT. (2017). An information processing perspective on supply chain risk management: Antecedents, mechanism, and consequences. International Journal of Production Economics, 185, 63–75.
37.
FanK., WangS., RenY., LiH., & YangY. (2018). Medblock: Efficient and secure medical data sharing via blockchain. Journal of Medical Systems, 42, 1–11.
38.
GadenneD., MiaL., SandsJ., WinataL., & HooiG. (2012). The influence of sustainability performance management practices on organisational sustainability performance. Journal of Accounting & Organizational Change, 8(2), 210–235.
39.
GarettiM., & TaischM. (2012). Sustainable manufacturing: Trends and research challenges. Production Planning & Control, 23(2–3), 83–104.
40.
GeorgeK., & PatatoukasP. N. (2021). The blockchain evolution and revolution of accounting. In Information for efficient decision making: Big data, blockchain and relevance (pp. 157–172). World Scientific.
41.
GoranJ., LaBergeL., & SrinivasanR. (2017). Culture for a digital age. McKinsey Quarterly, 3(1), 56–67.
42.
HairJ. F., RisherJ. J., SarstedtM., & RingleC. M. (2019). When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM. European Business Review, 31(1), 2–24.
43.
Hidayat-ur-RehmanI., & AlsolamyM. (2023). A SEM-ANN analysis to examine sustainable performance in SMEs: The moderating role of transformational leadership. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 9(4), 100166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joitmc.2023.100166
44.
HoaiT. T., MinhN. N., VanH. V., & NguyenN. P. (2023). Accounting going green: The move toward environmental sustainability in Vietnamese manufacturing firms. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, in press, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2464
45.
HuT., LiuX., ChenT., ZhangX., HuangX., NiuW., LuJ., ZhouK., & LiuY. (2021). Transaction-based classification and detection approach for Ethereum smart contract. Information Processing & Management, 58(2), 102462.
46.
IqbalQ., AhmadN. H., & HalimH. A. (2020). How does sustainable leadership influence sustainable performance? Empirical evidence from selected ASEAN countries. Sage Open, 10(4), 2158244020969394.
47.
KambleS. S., GunasekaranA., & SharmaR. (2020). Modeling the blockchain enabled traceability in agriculture supply chain. International Journal of Information Management, 52, 101967.
48.
KarajovicM., KimH. M., & LaskowskiM. (2019). Thinking outside the block: Projected phases of blockchain integration in the accounting industry. Australian Accounting Review, 29(2), 319–330.
49.
KhanH. U. R., AliM., OlyaH. G., ZulqarnainM., & KhanZ. R. (2018). Transformational leadership, corporate social responsibility, organizational innovation, and organizational performance: Symmetrical and asymmetrical analytical approaches. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 25(6), 1270–1283.
50.
KhanM. M. (2023). Road and destiny are not same: leading to and leading in blockchain driven supply chain. In Blockchain driven supply chain management: A multi-dimensional perspective (pp. 75–86). Springer Nature.
51.
KhanN. U., WuW., SaufiR. B. A., SabriN. A. A., & ShahA. A. (2021). Antecedents of sustainable performance in manufacturing organizations: A structural equation modeling approach. Sustainability, 13(2), 897.
52.
KhawT. Y., TeohA. P., Abdul KhalidS. N., & LetchmunanS. (2022). The impact of digital leadership on sustainable performance: A systematic literature review. Journal of Management Development, 41(9/10), 514–534.
53.
KissiJ., DaintyA., & TuuliM. (2013). Examining the role of transformational leadership of portfolio managers in project performance. International Journal of Project Management, 31(4), 485–497.
54.
KokinaJ., & DavenportT. H. (2017). The emergence of artificial intelligence: How automation is changing auditing. Journal of Emerging Technologies in Accounting, 14(1), 115–122.
55.
LiaoC. H., GuanX. Q., ChengJ. H., & YuanS. M. (2022). Blockchain-based identity management and access control framework for open banking ecosystem. Future Generation Computer Systems, 135, 450–466.
56.
LiuL., TsaiW. T., BhuiyanM. Z. A., PengH., & LiuM. (2022). Blockchain-enabled fraud discovery through abnormal smart contract detection on Ethereum. Future Generation Computer Systems, 128, 158–166.
57.
MareiY., Abu AfifaM., AbdallahA., AyoushM., & AmoushA. (2022). Big data and big data analytics in audit brainstorming sessions: A Canadian qualitative research. In Digital economy, business analytics, and big data analytics applications (pp. 657–671). Springer International Publishing.
58.
MelvilleN., & RamirezR. (2008). Information technology innovation diffusion: An information requirements paradigm. Information Systems Journal, 18(3), 247–273.
59.
MoffittK. C., RozarioA. M., & VasarhelyiM. A. (2018). Robotic process automation for auditing. Journal of Emerging Technologies in Accounting, 15(1), 1–10.
60.
MollJ., & YigitbasiogluO. (2019). The role of internet-related technologies in shaping the work of accountants: New directions for accounting research. The British Accounting Review, 51(6), 100833.
61.
MosweuO., & NgoepeM. (2021). Trustworthiness of digital records in government accounting system to support the audit process in Botswana. Records Management Journal, 31(1), 89–108.
62.
NandiM. L., NandiS., MoyaH., & KaynakH. (2020). Blockchain technology-enabled supply chain systems and supply chain performance: A resource-based view. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 25(6), 841–862.
63.
NasutionR. A., ArnitaD., RusnandiL. S. L., QodariahE., RuditoP., & SinagaM. F. N. (2020). Digital mastery in Indonesia: The organization and individual contrast. Journal of Management Development, 39(4), 359–390.
64.
NguyenN. M., Abu AfifaM., & Van BuiD. (2023). Blockchain technology and sustainable performance: Moderated-mediating model with management accounting system and digital transformation. Environment, Development and Sustainability, in press, 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-023-04189-7
65.
NishitaniK., NguyenT. B. H., TrinhT. Q., WuQ., & KokubuK. (2021). Are corporate environmental activities to meet sustainable development goals (SDGs) simply greenwashing? An empirical study of environmental management control systems in Vietnamese companies from the stakeholder management perspective. Journal of Environmental Management, 296, 113364.
66.
OatleyG. C. (2022). Themes in data mining, big data, and crime analytics. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery, 12(2), e1432.
67.
PanG., & SeowP. S. (2016). Preparing accounting graduates for digital revolution: A critical review of information technology competencies and skills development. Journal of Education for Business, 91(3), 166–175.
68.
PaulT., MondalS., IslamN., & RakshitS. (2021). The impact of blockchain technology on the tea supply chain and its sustainable performance. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 173, 121163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.121163
69.
PengT., KellensK., TangR., ChenC., & ChenG. (2018). Sustainability of additive manufacturing: An overview on its energy demand and environmental impact. Additive Manufacturing, 21, 694–704.
70.
PhilipJ. (2021). Viewing digital transformation through the lens of transformational leadership. Journal of Organizational Computing and Electronic Commerce, 31(2), 114–129.
71.
Piwowar-SulejK., & IqbalQ. (2023). Leadership styles and sustainable performance: A systematic literature review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 382(1), 134600.
PremkumarG., RamamurthyK., & SaundersC. S. (2005). Information processing view of organizations: An exploratory examination of fit in the context of interorganizational relationships. Journal of Management Information Systems, 22(1), 257–294.
74.
PuniA., HiltonS. K., MohammedI., & KorankyeE. S. (2022). The mediating role of innovative climate on the relationship between transformational leadership and firm performance in developing countries: The case of Ghana. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 43(3), 404–421.
75.
QatawnehA. M., & MakhloufM. H. (2023). Influence of smart mobile banking services on senior banks’ clients intention to use: Moderating role of digital accounting. Global Knowledge, Memory and Communication, in press. https://doi.org/10.1108/GKMC-01-2023-0018
76.
RanasingheG. M., BadirY. F., & FrankB. (2022). Organisational resources as facilitators and inhibitors of green performance: Non-linearities, interactions and international differences. European Journal of International Management, 18(1), 154–184.
77.
RaoY., GuoK. H., & ChenY. (2015). Information systems maturity, knowledge sharing, and firm performance. International Journal of Accounting & Information Management, 23(2), 106–127.
78.
Rehman KhanS. A., YuZ., SarwatS., GodilD. I., AminS., & ShujaatS. (2022). The role of block chain technology in circular economy practices to improve organisational performance. International Journal of Logistics Research and Applications, 25(4–5), 605–622.
79.
SalehI., MareiY., AyoushM., & AfifaM. M. A. (2023). Big Data analytics and financial reporting quality: Qualitative evidence from Canada. Journal of Financial Reporting and Accounting, 21(1), 83–104. https://doi.org/10.1108/JFRA-12-2021-0489
80.
SamadhiyaA., AgrawalR., KumarA., & Garza-ReyesJ. A. (2023). Blockchain technology and circular economy in the environment of total productive maintenance: A natural resource-based view perspective. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 34(2), 293–314.
81.
ShabanO. S. (2020). Digital currencies: Its features and macroeconomic implications. In Advances in cross-section data methods in applied economic research: 2019 International Conference on Applied Economics (ICOAE 2019) (pp. 477–489). Springer International Publishing.
82.
ShafiM., LeiZ., SongX., & SarkerM. N. I. (2020). The effects of transformational leadership on employee creativity: Moderating role of intrinsic motivation. Asia Pacific Management Review, 25(3), 166–176.
83.
SislianL., & JaeglerA. (2022). Linkage of blockchain to enterprise resource planning systems for improving sustainable performance. Business Strategy and the Environment, 31(3), 737–750.
84.
SowM., & AborbieS. (2018). Impact of leadership on digital transformation. Business and Economic Research, 8(3), 139–148.
85.
SroujiA. F., HamdallahM. E., Al‐HamadeenR., Al‐OkailyM., & ElamerA. A. (2023). The impact of green innovation on sustainability and financial performance: Evidence from the Jordanian financial sector. Business Strategy & Development, 6(4), 1037–1052.
86.
SunY., ShahzadM., & RazzaqA. (2022). Sustainable organizational performance through blockchain technology adoption and knowledge management in China. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, 7(4), 100247.
87.
SutaA., & TóthÁ. (2023). Systematic review on blockchain research for sustainability accounting applying methodology coding and text mining. Cleaner Engineering and Technology, 14, 100648. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clet.2023.100648
88.
TangY. M., ChauK. Y., FatimaA., & WaqasM. (2022). Industry 4.0 technology and circular economy practices: Business management strategies for environmental sustainability. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 29(33), 49752–49769.
89.
ThaherY. A. Y., & JaaronA. A. M. (2022). The impact of sustainability strategic planning and management on the organizational sustainable performance: A developing-country perspective. Journal of Environmental Management, 305, 114381.
90.
Tingey-HolyoakJ., PisanielloJ., BussP., & MayerW. (2021). The importance of accounting-integrated information systems for realising productivity and sustainability in the agricultural sector. International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, 41, 100512.
VachonS., & KlassenR. D. (2008). Environmental management and manufacturing performance: The role of collaboration in the supply chain. International journal of production economics, 111(2), 299–315.
93.
van DunD. H., & KumarM. (2023). Social enablers of Industry 4.0 technology adoption: Transformational leadership and emotional intelligence. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 43(13), 152–182.
94.
WuJ., & BoatengA. (2010). Factors influencing changes in Chinese management accounting practices. Journal of Change Management, 10(3), 315–329.
95.
XieS., GongY., KuncM., WenZ., & BrownS. (2022). The application of blockchain technology in the recycling chain: A state-of-the-art literature review and conceptual framework. International Journal of Production Research, in press, 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2022.2152506
96.
YousefiS., & TosarkaniB. M. (2022). An analytical approach for evaluating the impact of blockchain technology on sustainable supply chain performance. International Journal of Production Economics, 246, 108429.
97.
ZhouZ., & LiZ. (2023). Corporate digital transformation and trade credit financing. Journal of Business Research, 160, 113793.
98.
ZkikK., BelhadiA., Rehman KhanS. A., KambleS. S., OudaniM., & TourikiF. E. (2023). Exploration of barriers and enablers of blockchain adoption for sustainable performance: Implications for e-enabled agriculture supply chains. International Journal of Logistics Research and Applications, 26(11), 1498–1535.
