The COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated the digital and ecological transition, reshaping both opportunities and challenges for entrepreneurs. This study examines the strategic pivots necessary for effectively navigating this dual transition, analyzing the barriers encountered and the strategies employed to develop more digital and sustainable business models. Based on interviews with 16 French local entrepreneurs, we demonstrate that bricolage practices enable entrepreneurs to engage in the digital and ecological transition.
AlNuaimiBKKumar SinghSRenS, et al. (2022) Mastering digital transformation: The nexus between leadership, agility, and digital strategy. Journal of Business Research145: 636–648.
3.
Amankwah-AmoahJKhanZWoodG, et al. (2021) COVID-19 and digitalization: The great acceleration. Journal of Business Research136: 602–611.
4.
AmeenNPapagiannidisSHosanyARS, et al. (2023) It’s part of the “new normal”: Does a global pandemic change employees’ perception of teleworking?Journal of Business Research164.
5.
AzerJBlasco-ArcasLHarriganP (2021) COVID-19: Forms and drivers of social media users’ engagement behavior toward a global crisis. Journal of Business Research135: 99–111.
6.
BakerTNelsonRE (2005) Creating something from nothing: Resource construction through entrepreneurial bricolage. Administrative Science Quarterly50(3): 329–366.
7.
BatjargalBJackSMickiewiczT, et al. (2023) Crises, COVID-19, and entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice47(3): 651–661.
8.
BattistiEAlfieroSLeonidouE (2022) Remote working and digital transformation during the COVID-19 pandemic: Economic–financial impacts and psychological drivers for employees. Journal of Business Research150: 38–50.
9.
BelitskiMGuentherCKritikosAS, et al. (2022) Economic effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on entrepreneurship and small businesses. Small Business Economics58(2): 593–609.
10.
Berger-DouceS (2020) Transition numérique et engagement RSE en PME : Une lecture par la gestion des paradoxes ?@GRH n°33(4): 91–118.
11.
BerthoudF (2017) Numérique et écologie. Annales des Mines—Responsabilité et Environnement87(3): 72–75.
12.
BiratJP (2020) How to tell the story of change and transition of the energy, ecological and societal systems. Matériaux & Techniques108(5-6): 26 pages.
13.
CastellóIBarberá-TomásDVaaraE (2023) Moving on: Narrative identity reconstruction after entrepreneurial failure. Journal of Business Venturing38(4).
14.
ChirumallaKLeoniLOghaziP (2023) Moving from servitization to digital servitization: Identifying the required dynamic capabilities and related microfoundations to facilitate the transition. Journal of Business Research158.
15.
CorleyKGGioiaDA (2004) Identity ambiguity and change in the wake of a corporate spin-off. Administrative Science Quarterly49(2): 173–208.
16.
Cour des Comptes (2023) La politique de l’État en faveur du commerce de proximité (2017–2022). France: Thematic Public Report.
17.
CrosinaEPrattMG (2019) Toward a model of organizational mourning: The case of former Lehman Brothers bankers. Academy of Management Journal62(1): 66–98.
18.
DemaillyDFrancouRKaplanD, et al. (2017) Faire converger les transitions numérique et écologique. Annales des Mines—Responsabilité et Environnement87(3): 13–16.
19.
DesaGBasuS (2013) Optimization or bricolage? Overcoming resource constraints in global social entrepreneurship. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal7(1): 26–49.
20.
DonbesuurFOwusu-YirenkyiDAmpongGOA, et al. (2023) Enhancing export intensity of entrepreneurial firms through bricolage and international opportunity recognition: The differential roles of explorative and exploitative learning. Journal of Business Research156.
21.
EisenhardtKM (2021) What is the Eisenhardt method, really?Strategic Organization19(1): 147–160.
22.
Feliciano-CesteroMMAmeenNKotabeM, et al. (2023) Is digital transformation threatened? A systematic literature review of the factors influencing firms’ digital transformation and internationalization. Journal of Business Research157.
23.
France Num (2022) Baromètre France Num : résultats de l’enquête 2022.
24.
France Num (2023) Le numérique dans les TPE et PME de 0 à 249 salariés : évolutions entre 2022 et 2023.
25.
France Relance (2020) Dossier de presse. Jeudi 3, septembre 2020, 48 pages.
26.
FrimousseSPerettiJ-M (2020) Les changements organisationnels induits par la crise de la COVID-19. Question(s) de Management29(3): 105–149.
27.
GeelsFW (2011) The multi-level perspective on sustainability transitions: Responses to seven criticisms. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions1(1): 24–40.
28.
GeoffronP (2017) Comment transition numérique et transition écologique s’interconnectent-elles ?Annales des Mines—Responsabilité et Environnement87(3): 17–19.
29.
GhezziA (2019) Digital startups and the adoption and implementation of Lean Startup Approaches: Effectuation, Bricolage and Opportunity Creation in practice. Technological Forecasting and Social Change146: 945–960.
30.
Gimenez-FernandezEMSandulliFDBogersM (2020) Unpacking liabilities of newness and smallness in innovative start-ups: Investigating the differences in innovation performance between new and older small firms. Research Policy49(10).
31.
GioiaDACorleyKGHamiltonAL (2013) Seeking qualitative rigor in inductive research: Notes on the Gioia methodology. Organizational Research Methods16(1): 15–31.
32.
GlaserBGStraussAL (2017) The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. 1st ed.France: Routledge.
GuerreroMMickiewiczTQinF (2024) Entrepreneurial growth aspirations during the COVID-19 pandemic: The role of ICT infrastructure quality versus policy response. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development36(1–2): 55–75.
35.
INSEE (2021) Pandémie de Covid-19 et pertes d’activité : évaluation de l’impact de la crise sur les trajectoires des entreprises françaises en 2020.
36.
JanssenFFayolleAWuillaumeA (2018) Researching bricolage in social entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development30(3–4): 450–470.
37.
J. MartinG (2023) The ecological transition and the teaching of business law. Concluding remarks. Revue internationale de droit économiqueXXXVII(2): 135–145.
38.
Joensuu-SaloSViljamaaA (2024) The relationship between digital orientation, organizational ambidexterity, and growth strategies of rural SMEs in time of crisis. The International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation25(2): 128–141.
39.
JohannissonBOlaisonL (2007) The moment of truth—Reconstructing entrepreneurship and social capital in the eye of the storm. Review of Social Economy65(1): 55–78.
40.
KickulJGriffithsMBacqS, et al. (2018) Catalyzing social innovation: Is entrepreneurial bricolage always good?Entrepreneurship & Regional Development30(3–4): 407–420.
41.
KumarSGoelUJoshiP, et al. (2024) Factors affecting information & communication technology (ICT) adoption among MSMEs. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity10(1).
42.
KwongCCCheungCWManzoorH, et al. (2019) Entrepreneurship through bricolage: A study of displaced entrepreneurs at times of war and conflict. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development31(5–6): 435–455.
43.
LambinJ-JDe MoerlooseC (2016) Marketing Stratégique et Opérationnel: La Démarche Marketing Dans l’économie Numérique. France: Dunod.
44.
LangevangTNamatovuR (2019) Social bricolage in the aftermath of war. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development31(9–10): 785–805.
45.
LeM (2023) Covid-19 : les chiffres de l’épidémie en France et dans le monde, en cartes et en graphiques.
46.
Lévi-StraussC (1966) The Savage Mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
47.
LiuXZhangL (2024) Entrepreneurial bricolage, business model innovation, and sustainable entrepreneurial performance of digital entrepreneurial ventures: The moderating effect of digital entrepreneurial ecosystem empowerment. Sustainability16(18).
48.
LockeK (2001) Grounded Theory in Management Research. London: Sage.
49.
LongarettiP-YBerthoudF (2021) Le numérique, espoir pour la transition écologique ?L’Économie Politique2(90): 8–22.
50.
MagobeMJMalfense-FierroACLiM, et al. (2024) The antecedents of bricolage in innovative firms: An empirical study in Tanzania. The International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation.
51.
MairJMartíI (2006) Social entrepreneurship research: A source of explanation, prediction, and delight. Journal of World Business41(1): 36–44.
52.
MichelLMeheutG (2017) Numérique et transition énergétique. Annales des Mines - Responsabilité & environnement87(3): 31–34.
53.
MilesMBHubermanAM (2003) Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook. France: Sage Publications.
54.
MindelVOverstreetRESternbergH, et al. (2024) Digital activism to achieve meaningful institutional change: A bricolage of crowdsourcing, social media, and data analytics. Research Policy53(3).
55.
NambisanS (2017) Digital entrepreneurship: Toward a digital technology perspective of entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice41(6): 1029–1055.
56.
OECD (2018) La prochaine révolution de la production : Conséquences pour les pouvoirs publics et les entreprises. Paris: Editions OECD.
57.
OludapoSCarrollNHelfertM (2024) Why do so many digital transformations fail? A bibliometric analysis and future research agenda. Journal of Business Research174.
58.
PaulJAlhassanIBinsaifN, et al. (2023) Digital entrepreneurship research: A systematic review. Journal of Business Research156.
59.
PeruchiDFDeJPachecoDA, et al. (2022) Moving towards digital platforms revolution? Antecedents, determinants and conceptual framework for offline B2B networks. Journal of Business Research142: 344–363.
60.
PoissonY (2009) L’approche qualitative et l’approche quantitative dans les recherches en éducation. Revue des Sciences de L’éducation9(3): 369–378.
61.
RattenV (2021) COVID-19 and entrepreneurship: Future research directions. Strategic Change30(2): 91–98.
62.
ReuschlAJDeistMKMaalaouiA (2022) Digital transformation during a pandemic: Stretching the organizational elasticity. Journal of Business Research144: 1320–1332.
63.
SarasvathySD (2001) Causation and effectuation: Toward a theoretical shift from economic inevitability to entrepreneurial contingency. The Academy of Management Review26(2): 243–263.
64.
SarkarSMateusS (2024a) Distributed bricolage—The affordances of digital technologies towards a collaborative entrepreneurial agency response to COVID-19. The International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation.
65.
SarkarSMateusS (2024b) Resource-constrained product innovation—An evidence-based review and research agenda. International Journal of Innovation Management.
66.
ScazziotaVSerraFSarkarS, et al. (2023) The antecedents of entrepreneurial action: A meta-synthesis on effectuation and bricolage. Journal of Business Research155.
67.
ServantieVHlady-RispalM (2019) Bricolage, effectuation et planification : Le cas de la démarche entrepreneuriale d’une EIRP. Revue Internationale P.M.E32(3–4): 261–290.
68.
SharmaGDKrausSLiguoriE, et al. (2022) Entrepreneurial challenges of COVID-19: Re-thinking entrepreneurship after the crisis. Journal of Small Business Management62(2): 824–846.
69.
SklenarzFAEdelingAHimmeA, et al. (2024) Does bigger still mean better? How digital transformation affects the market share–profitability relationship. International Journal of Research in Marketing.
70.
Statista (2023) Nombre de personnes décédées à cause du coronavirus (COVID-19) dans le monde au 18 août 2023, par pays.
71.
VialG (2019) Understanding digital transformation: A review and a research agenda. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems28(2): 118–144.
72.
VuchkovskiDZalaznikMMitręgaM, et al. (2023) A look at the future of work: The digital transformation of teams from conventional to virtual. Journal of Business Research163.
73.
WilliamsTAGruberDASutcliffeKM, et al. (2017) Organizational response to adversity: Fusing crisis management and resilience research streams. Academy of Management Annals11(2): 733–769.
74.
YinR (2014) Case Study Research: Design and Methods. 5th ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
