Exploring factors influencing blockchain adoption’s effectiveness in organizations for generating business value: a systematic literature review and thematic analysis

ABSTRACT

This paper explores the factors that facilitate and impede blockchain technology adoption (BTA) within business organizations. Analysing 112 scholarly articles via thematic and bibliometric methods reveals a complex adoption landscape, highlighted by the proposition of an innovative conceptual framework that augments the conventional technology-organization-environment (TOE) framework. This augmented framework integrates enabling factors, such as enhanced security mechanisms via smart contracts, and barriers, including scalability challenges and regulatory limitations. The research offers significant insights into cultivating a conducive ecosystem for BTA within organizations and provides practical implications.

KEYWORDS:

• Blockchain
• adoption
• business value
• systematic literature review
• blockchain technology adoption framework

1. Introduction

Blockchain technology (BT), heralded as the next disruptive force following the internet (Chen et al. 2020; Oguntegbe, Paola, and Vona 2022; Zhao, Fan, and Yan 2016), has swiftly transitioned from its origins in cryptocurrency to become a foundation for innovative business models and operational efficiencies across diverse industries (Duy et al. 2018; Saheb and Mamaghani 2021). This shift is supported by BT’s distinct value propositions: decentralisation, transparency, and immutability, which are set to revolutionise data management and transaction processes by eliminating the need for intermediaries, thus introducing a new paradigm of business practices (Du et al. 2019; Park and Sung 2020; Saheb and Mamaghani 2021; Tsang et al. 2024). Despite its growing market, expected to reach USD 469.49 billion by 2030 (Fortune Business Insights 2023), an in-depth analysis of how organizations can leverage BT to create and sustain business value is notably lacking in the academic discourse, highlighting a significant gap in both our theoretical and practical understanding of BT’s full potential.

Existing literature sheds light on various dimensions of BT’s applications across sectors, including enhancing process traceability (Behnke and Janssen 2020; Feng et al. 2020; Hastig and Sodhi 2020; Lu 2022; Tan et al. 2022), improving operational transparency (Centobelli et al. 2022; Srivastava, Zhang, and Eachempati 2023; Tan et al. 2022; Zelbst et al. 2020), fortifying data security (Hsiao and Sung 2021; Lu 2022; Salman et al. 2018), fostering sustainable business models (Happy et al. 2023; Treiblmaier 2019; Yadav and Singh 2020), and innovating in risk management (Choi et al. 2019; Fu and Zhu 2019). However, a comprehensive analysis of the enabling and constraining factors affecting blockchain technology adoption (BTA) within business organizational contexts is still missing. This oversight not only obscures a clear pathway for managers and practitioners aiming to implement BT to meet current and emerging business demands but also underscores the urgency for a systematic literature review (SLR) to consolidate the factors influencing BTA and its role in generating substantial business value.

This study endeavours to fill this research gap by conducting an SLR on the determinants of BTA in business organizations, thereby constructing an integrated framework that clarifies how BTA can be optimised to maximise business value. By integrating our findings within the technology-organization-environment (TOE) framework, we present a comprehensive model that further elucidates the conditions conducive to effective BTA and its contribution to business value enhancement and management. This research marks a pioneering effort in offering a holistic view of BTA factors within organizations, setting the stage for subsequent empirical studies and theoretical advancements in the rapidly evolving domain of blockchain research.

The paper is organised as follows: Section 2 introduces the background and reviews existing studies on BTA to substantiate the necessity of this research. Section 3 describes the research methodology employed. Section 4 details the analysis and findings from the reviewed literature. Section 5 presents the developed conceptual framework for BTA in business contexts. Section 6 discusses the results, implications, limitations of the study, and directions for future research. Section 7 provides the conclusion of the study.

2. Background and related work

2.1. The relevance of BT to business and theoretical advances

BT is a decentralised, immutable, and distributed digital ledger that uses cryptographic methods to securely record transactions and events across a network of distributed nodes, operating on a peer-to-peer basis. This structure eliminates the need for intermediaries. Each block in the chain contains a cryptographic hash of the previous block, ensuring a secure and unalterable record of all network activities (Du et al. 2019). BT is characterised by several key attributes, with some scholars identifying three primary attributes: decentralisation, verification, and immutability (Firsova and Abrhám 2021). However, other researchers suggest a more extensive set of attributes, further enriching our understanding, as outlined in Table 1.

Table 1. Synthesized overview of blockchain attributes (Firsova and Abrhám 2021).

Properties	Description
Open source	The blockchain’s codebase is publicly accessible, enabling participants to develop their applications.
Autonomy	The likelihood of intervention by any single entity is minimal, as the system autonomously updates transactions among participants.
Anonymity	Transactions and participant data can typically remain anonymous, with only the public key being visible to peers.
Decentralization	It operates independently of a central authority, distributing its functions across the network.
Verification/Cryptography	BT employs public/private key cryptography to authenticate transactions and participants.
Immutability	Once confirmed, transactions cannot be altered, ensuring the integrity of data over time.
Transparency	Participants may have access to the transaction ledger, which varies according to the blockchain’s design.

Various types of blockchains can serve business organizations, depending on their needs. Public blockchains are decentralised, permissionless networks open for anyone to join. Participants, or nodes, in public blockchains have equal rights to access, create, and validate blocks of data. These are commonly used in cryptocurrency exchanges and mining, with Bitcoin, Ethereum, and Litecoin being notable examples (Komalavalli, Saxena, and Laroiya 2020; Wegrzyn and Wang 2021). In contrast, private blockchains are overseen by single organizations and restrict access to authorised users only, with Ripple and Hyperledger as examples (Huang et al. 2019; Wegrzyn and Wang 2021). Consortium blockchains, managed by a group of organizations, offer more decentralisation and security than private blockchains, although they may be more complex to establish (Dib et al. 2018; Wegrzyn and Wang 2021). Hybrid blockchains blend centralised control with public transparency, as seen in initiatives like the IBM Food Trust, which seeks to improve the efficiency of food supply chains (Covarrubias and Covarrubias 2021; Wegrzyn and Wang 2021). The provided flowchart (refer to Figure 1) outlines a decision-making process to help organizations select the appropriate BT. It begins with the fundamental question of the need to store transactional data and progresses through considerations such as the number of stakeholders and the potential use of an online trusted third party (TTP). Depending on the level of trust among stakeholders and the necessity for public verifiability, the decision is directed towards the most fitting type of BT – public, private, or hybrid. This flowchart is an instrumental tool for businesses to identify the most suitable blockchain solution according to their specific requirements and transactional dynamics.

Figure 1. Choosing the right BT for your business: a decision-making flowchart (Wüst and Gervais 2018).

Theoretical advances of BT: Different distributed ledger technologies (DLTs) offer unique theoretical advancements. Directed acyclic graphs (DAGs), such as internet of things application’s (IOTA’s) tangle, represent a novel approach to achieving consensus without traditional blockchain structures (Fan et al. 2021). They eliminate the need for mining, reducing energy consumption and transaction times, making them highly efficient and suitable for internet of things (IoT) and other high-transaction environments (Bhushan et al. 2021). DAGs allow for asynchronous transactions, enhancing scalability and reducing transaction times. Exploring the theoretical underpinnings of DAGs and their impact on decentralisation theory reveals their potential applications and advantages over conventional blockchain models. This approach enhances scalability and efficiency, making it ideal for environments requiring high transaction throughput and low latency (Huang et al. 2021).

BT is transforming digital infrastructures by providing innovative solutions to long-standing issues in data security, transaction transparency, and decentralised governance. The theories around incentive mechanisms and game theory are crucial for understanding participant behaviour in these networks (Agrawal et al. 2022). For instance, incentive structures designed using game theory principles ensure cooperation among nodes, prevent malicious behaviour and optimise network performance. Analysing these theoretical frameworks allows for the design of effective incentive mechanisms that promote network security, efficiency, and sustainability. This theoretical foundation supports the robustness and reliability of blockchain systems, which are critical for their adoption in diverse sectors. The potential of BT in improving digital infrastructures is important. It addresses key issues like scalability, security, and sustainability, which are crucial for widespread adoption. This theoretical foundation complements practical and technology-focused discussions, emphasising the transformative impacts and implications of blockchain on digital infrastructures (Liu, Zhang, and Zhen 2023). One real-life example is IBM and Maersk’s TradeLens platform, which uses blockchain to enhance supply chain management (SCM). By employing incentive mechanisms based on game theory, TradeLens ensures cooperation, prevents malicious behaviour, and optimises network performance. This approach supports network security, efficiency, and sustainability, demonstrating blockchain’s potential to address scalability, security, and sustainability issues. The platform exemplifies how BT can transform digital infrastructures by providing robust, transparent, and decentralised solutions for global trade logistics (Chang, Iakovou, and Shi 2020).

Traditionally, BT has relied on proof-of-work (PoW) to achieve consensus. However, PoW faces several constraints, one of the most significant being the immense energy consumption by miners in the blockchain network. Newly developed consensus mechanisms such as proof-of-stake (PoS) and proof-of-authority (PoA) offer considerable theoretical and practical benefits over PoW. On the one hand, PoS reduces energy consumption by allowing participants to validate transactions based on the number of coins they hold and are willing to ‘stake’ as collateral. This mechanism enhances energy efficiency and encourages long-term network participation. On the other hand, PoA relies on a set of trusted authorities to validate transactions, reducing computational resource requirements and improving network performance. Analysing these mechanisms provides insights into their theoretical implications and how they address the limitations of PoW. Additionally, these transformative impacts and implications for digital infrastructures highlight a shift towards more sustainable and efficient BT, paving the way for broader adoption and innovation in various sectors reliant on digital infrastructures (Cao et al. 2020).

Furthermore, comparing consensus approaches such as PoA and PoW provides valuable insights into their implications for network security, scalability, and decentralisation (Pal, Dorri, and Jurdak 2022). PoA, with its reliance on a limited number of validators, offers faster transaction times and lower energy consumption, making it suitable for enterprise and private blockchain applications where trust is established among validators. In contrast, PoW provides robust security through extensive computational requirements, making it ideal for public blockchains where decentralisation and security are paramount (Pal et al. 2021). Understanding the trade-offs and theoretical implications of these approaches guides the selection of appropriate consensus mechanisms for different use cases, ensuring that the chosen method aligns with the specific needs and constraints of the application. Additionally, decentralised autonomous organizations (DAOs) introduce innovative governance models that decentralise decision-making processes. DAOs leverage smart contracts to automate governance, allowing stakeholders to vote on proposals, which promotes transparency and democracy. Examining the theoretical implications of DAOs elucidates how these models enhance organizational transparency, reduce corruption potential, and foster more inclusive decision-making environments (Wang et al. 2019). Decentralised data storage technologies, such as Swarm and Filecoin, challenge traditional centralised data storage models by providing decentralised solutions. These technologies distribute data across a network of nodes, ensuring redundancy and security, while allowing users to retain control over their data (Huang et al. 2020). Assessing the theoretical advancements of these technologies emphasises their role in redefining data ownership, improving data security, and enhancing access control in decentralised networks.

2.2. Related work

In exploring BTA within business organizations, several studies offer comprehensive insights. Singh et al. (2023) conducted an SLR analysing 122 papers spanning from 2012 to 2022, uncovering six themes pivotal to BTA in supply chains: adoption, resilience, cybersecurity, intermediation, challenges, and benefits. This study highlights areas yet to be explored in BTA, particularly its impact on performance, and suggests directions for future research. Complementary to this, Happy et al. (2023) performed an SLR to examine 211 articles from 2014 to 2022, focusing on antecedents such as technological, organizational, social, and environmental factors, alongside consequences that include operational improvements and risk management. Their research offers a detailed framework for subsequent studies, elucidating the intricate dynamics of BT within SCM. Moreover, Wang, Han, and Beynon-Davies (2019) pinpointed trust as a crucial element in BTA in business organizations, based on their SLR of 29 papers from 2008 to 2017. They noted benefits like improved visibility and traceability, digitisation, enhanced data security, and smart contract implementation, while also addressing challenges and knowledge gaps. Furthermore, Vu, Ghadge, and Bourlakis (2021) investigated BTA in food business organizations through an SLR of 69 articles from 2009 to 2020, identifying principal drivers, barriers, and blockchain applications, resulting in a conceptual framework for its implementation.

In the healthcare sector, Bazel, Mohammed, and Ahmad (2023) executed an SLR adhering to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Their investigation, covering the period from 2012 to August 2022, thoroughly evaluated 12 papers from an initial selection of 223. The analysis underscored the predominant use of qualitative research methods, with a primary focus on healthcare providers. Key factors affecting BTA were pinpointed, including privacy, government regulation, trust, and security, revealing considerable gaps in understanding the interplay among these factors and their cumulative effect on adoption. In the realm of agriculture, Akella et al. (2023) explored BTA in smart and sustainable agricultural practices through an SLR following PRISMA guidelines. The review spanned from January 2015 to August 2022 and focused on peer-reviewed journal articles. Out of 2724 articles initially screened, 26 were chosen for in-depth analysis, identifying enablers such as stakeholder collaboration and customer trust, alongside barriers including the absence of global standards and sector-specific practices. The findings emphasise the predominance of adoption barriers within the agri-food sector, suggesting that overcoming these obstacles is crucial for successful blockchain implementation. Parmentola et al. (2021) investigated the environmental sustainability aspect by conducting an SLR in accordance with PRISMA guidelines, assessing blockchain’s contributions towards Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Analysing 195 articles from 2015 to 2020, their study highlights blockchain’s potential to support sustainable business practices and enhance energy efficiency, while also pointing out negative environmental impacts, such as significant energy consumption and CO2 emissions. Lastly, Ansah et al. (2023) undertook an SLR to examine critical factors influencing BTA in land administration, analysing 37 studies from 2008 to 2022. Employing both bibliometric and thematic analysis, they identified 18 institutional factors categorised into regulatory, organizational, and cultural dimensions. The study stresses the need for a balanced integration of these factors to facilitate successful adoption.

In the governance and public sectors, Al-Bazaiah (2023) carried out an SLR to review 61 articles over the past five years up to 2023, with a focus on sectors such as SCM, finance, and education. The research, primarily examining studies from developing Asian countries, pinpointed critical factors influencing BTA, including perceived usefulness and trust. Wibowo and Yazid (2023) undertook an SLR on governmental blockchain applications, analysing 50 articles from 2019 to 2023 and assessing 40 challenges and 28 solutions within the TOE framework. Their findings highlight a growing interest in BTA within governments, indicating a dynamic progression in this domain. Furthermore, Supriyadi, Sensuse, and Sucahyo (2021) conducted an SLR to evaluate 22 empirical studies from 2012 to 2020, aiming to identify key factors for BTA in eGovernment. Their investigation into the challenges and opportunities of blockchain integration in public sectors revealed how certain countries have successfully leveraged its potential to streamline processes and bolster digital trust, whereas others encounter obstacles in its adoption. This study provides an in-depth analysis of the factors influencing blockchain implementation in government services, making a significant contribution to the comprehension and future inquiries in this developing area. Clohessy and Acton (2019) investigated the impact of organizational factors on BTA in Ireland through an extensive literature review and qualitative analysis of 20 Irish companies. The research identified crucial enablers such as top management support and organizational readiness, noting that larger firms are more predisposed to BTA compared to small and medium enterprises (SMEs). While acknowledging its scope limitations and the distinct context of Ireland, the study furnishes essential insights into BTA dynamics in developed countries.

While the current extensive literature on BT highlights a significant gap in comprehensively understanding the factors affecting BTA in business organizations, sector-specific studies such as those by Ansah et al. (2023) in land administration, Singh et al. (2023) in supply chains, and Bazel, Mohammed, and Ahmad (2023) in healthcare have primarily focused on factors influencing BTA within specific sectors. However, these studies do not fully explore the myriad factors impacting BTA across a wide range of organizational contexts to generate business value. Furthermore, while research by Clohessy and Acton (2019) and Vu, Ghadge, and Bourlakis (2021) has identified key elements influencing BTA, they have not provided a unified framework applicable across the diverse spectrum of business organizations. The literature review summary on BTA in various contexts is presented in Table 2. This SLR seeks to bridge this gap by identifying and synthesizing a broad array of factors affecting BTA in business organizations and the outcomes of such adoption. The goal is to develop a comprehensive framework that integrates both enabling and inhibiting factors, offering a cohesive understanding of the dynamics influencing BTA within these organizations. This research aims to make a significant contribution to the field, providing valuable insights and guidance for organizations contemplating the BTA to maximize business value.

Table 2. Summary of the research on BTA in different contexts.

Author(s)	Methodology	Key findings
Singh et al. (2023)	SLR	Identified six themes central to BTA in supply chains. Highlights unexplored areas, particularly its impact on performance.
Happy et al. (2023)	SLR	Focused on antecedents and consequences, providing a comprehensive framework for BTA in SCM.
Wang, Han, and Beynon-Davies (2019)	SLR	Trust was identified as pivotal, citing benefits and challenges in BTA.
Vu, Ghadge, and Bourlakis (2021)	SLR	Explored drivers, barriers, and applications in food business organizations, offering a conceptual framework for implementation.
Bazel, Mohammed, and Ahmad (2023)	SLR following PRISMA	Highlighted the use of qualitative methods and key factors like privacy and trust in healthcare BTA.
Akella et al. (2023)	SLR using PRISMA	Identified enablers and barriers in agriculture, recommending bridging gaps for successful blockchain implementation.
Parmentola et al. (2021)	SLR using PRISMA	Suggested positive contributions of blockchain to SDGs but cautions about environmental impacts.
Ansah et al. (2023)	SLR	Categorized factors into regulatory, organizational, and cultural dimensions for land administration.
Al-Bazaiah (2023)	SLR	Identified key factors influencing BTA in various sectors within developing Asian countries.
Wibowo and Yazid (2023)	SLR	Revealed an increasing focus on blockchain in government, analysing challenges and solutions.
Supriyadi, Sensuse, and Sucahyo (2021)	SLR	Examined influential factors for BTA in eGovernment, highlighting potential optimizations and hurdles.
Clohessy and Acton (2019)	Literature review	Found top management support and organizational readiness as key enablers in Ireland, focusing on larger companies.
This paper	SLR	To the best of our knowledge, this is the first SLR study to develop a comprehensive framework that includes both enabling and inhibiting factors affecting BTA in business organizations, as well as to explore the outcomes of such adoption.

3. Methodology

SLR stages and paper selection

Initially, following the procedural framework outlined by Kitchenham and Charters (2007), we conducted an SLR. An SLR is characterised as a methodical approach that encompasses the identification, assessment, and synthesis of all relevant studies related to a specific research question or thematic area (Kitchenham and Charters 2007). As illustrated in Figure 2, the SLR methodology unfolds in three primary phases: planning, conducting, and reporting the review. Subsequent sections will provide an in-depth examination of each phase within the SLR process.

Figure 2. Stages of SLR (Kitchenham and Charters 2007).

Planning the review

The objective of planning the review phase is to formulate appropriate research questions and define the review protocol. This phase precisely delineates the scope of the research.

Identification of the need for SLR: As outlined in Subsection 2.2, a notable gap has been identified in the existing literature concerning a comprehensive analysis of BTA within organizations to enhance business value. Given the growing corpus of scholarly articles examining the business implications of BT, a thorough assessment of these contributions becomes imperative. Consequently, this study was conducted to identify the factors affecting BTA in business organizations, with the aim of enhancing the overall effectiveness of BTA.

Specifying the research question: This review aims to identify the factors that influence the effectiveness of BTA in organizations for generating business value. Consequently, the research question posed for this study is: What factors influence the effectiveness of BTA in organizations for generating business value?

Developing the review protocol: Employing a detailed review protocol, this study carries out a systematic examination in accordance with the guidelines and methodologies established in the SLR as prescribed by Kitchenham and Charters (2007) and further elaborated by Upadhyay (2020). This research spans a wide array of literature, incorporating both conceptual and empirical studies that utilise quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-methods research designs. Adhering to the protocol specified by Upadhyay (2020), the review protocol is directed towards two principal dimensions:

• Constructing a conceptual framework that integrates insights on the role of blockchain in enhancing business value.

• Developing a classification for research studies and identifying suitable evaluative metrics.

To ensure the integrity and accuracy of the search results derived from this classification, several rigorous steps were implemented:

1. The SLR was conducted using scientific databases, such as Scopus, Web of Science (WoS), and Association for Information Systems (AIS) eLibrary, recognised for their comprehensive coverage and expected to include a significant portion of research articles pertinent to this review.

2. To maintain relevance and consistency in our data collection, we employed the following search string in the abstracts of the selected databases to retrieve pertinent papers: (blockchain OR ‘distributed ledger*’ OR ‘digital ledger’ OR ‘permissioned ledger’ OR ‘permissionless ledger’ OR ‘smart contracts’) AND (value OR ‘firm performance’ OR ‘organizational performance’ OR ‘strategic imperative’ OR investment OR asset OR impact).

3. Inclusion criteria were as follows:

   • Articles that directly contribute to answering the research question were selected.

   • Inclusion was limited to peer-reviewed journal articles, conference papers, book chapters, and review papers relevant to the study.

   • Only articles published in English were considered.

   • The search covered works published up until October 14, 2022, and was conducted on this date without imposing restrictions on the publication period.

   • A thorough selection process was employed, covering both empirical and conceptual studies, to closely align with the research question and objectives.

   • The selection was based on strict search parameters, focusing on key terms as outlined in the next section under ‘identification of research articles’, and involved screening titles, abstracts, keywords, and full texts. Inclusion was contingent upon the articulation of essential concepts tied to the blockchain business value framework within the articles. This framework includes several sequential steps to generate business value from BT, such as strategic imperative, blockchain investment, blockchain asset, blockchain impact, and organizational performance (Trieu 2017; Marshall, McKay, and Prananto 2005).

4. Exclusion criteria included:

   • Studies irrelevant to the research question were excluded.

   • Grey literature and duplicated studies were also omitted.

5. Each selected paper underwent a detailed examination to ascertain its methodological soundness, relevance, and contribution to the field, ensuring that the findings align with the core principles of the blockchain business value framework, alongside the study’s research question and objectives.

These five meticulous steps facilitated a thorough and replicable literature search across the specified databases, underpinning the study’s findings.

Conducting the review

In conducting the review phase, the primary objective includes developing an extensive search strategy, applying it to gather a comprehensive array of pertinent initial studies, and performing their assessment. Consequently, this stage culminates in the assembly of a collection of relevant articles, extracted from the entire body of existing research, prepared for in-depth evaluation and capable of addressing the research question.

Identification of research articles: Acknowledging that not all academic publications significantly contribute to addressing the research question at hand, it became imperative to assess their relevance. In our pursuit to ensure a thorough review of the existing scholarly literature, we began by developing a search query that combined two key terms: ‘blockchain’ AND ‘business value’. This preliminary search in the Scopus database yielded 47 scholarly articles. Initial examination of these articles indicated the need to incorporate all relevant concepts from the blockchain business value framework into our query to include potentially significant literature. As a result, our search criteria were refined to align with the framework’s concepts for generating business value from BT (Marshall, McKay, and Prananto 2005; Melville, Kraemer, and Gurbaxani 2004; Schryen 2013; Soh and Markus 1995; Trieu 2017). Thus, our final search query included the following terms: (blockchain OR ‘distributed ledger*’ OR ‘digital ledger’ OR ‘permissioned ledger’ OR ‘permissionless ledger’ OR ‘smart contracts’) AND (value OR ‘firm performance’ OR ‘organizational performance’ OR ‘strategic imperative’ OR investment OR asset OR impact). To maintain consistency and focus across different databases, including Scopus, WoS, and AIS eLibrary, we limited our search to article abstracts. Abstracts offer a succinct and detailed overview of the article’s primary aims, methods, findings, and conclusions, which helps to minimise irrelevant results from broad titles and keywords, thereby increasing the relevance and accuracy of our search outcomes (Tullu 2019). The specific search query used for Scopus was: (ABS (blockchain OR ‘distributed ledger*’ OR ‘digital ledger’ OR ‘permissioned ledger’ OR ‘permissionless ledger’ OR ‘smart contracts’) AND ABS (value OR ‘firm performance’ OR ‘organizational performance’ OR ‘strategic imperative’ OR investment OR asset OR impact)) AND PUBYEAR < 2023 AND (LIMIT-TO (DOCTYPE, ‘ar’) OR LIMIT-TO (DOCTYPE, ‘cp’) OR LIMIT-TO (DOCTYPE, ‘ch’) OR LIMIT-TO (DOCTYPE, ‘re’)) AND (LIMIT-TO (LANGUAGE, ‘English’)). The query for WoS was: blockchain OR ‘distributed ledger*’ OR ‘digital ledger’ OR ‘permissioned ledger’ OR ‘permissionless ledger’ OR ‘smart contracts’ (Abstract) AND value OR ‘firm performance’ OR ‘organizational performance’ OR ‘strategic imperative’ OR investment OR asset OR impact (Abstract) and Article or Proceeding Paper or Review Article or Book Chapters (Document Types) and English (Languages). And the query for AIS eLibrary was: abstract: (blockchain OR ‘distributed ledger*’ OR ‘digital ledger’ OR ‘permissioned ledger’ OR ‘permissionless ledger’ OR ‘smart contracts’) AND abstract:(value OR ‘firm performance’ OR ‘organizational performance’ OR ‘strategic imperative’ OR investment OR asset OR impact). On 14 October 2022, we conducted a literature search on the business value of blockchain using these search strings without imposing any time restrictions. However, in the Scopus and WoS databases, we limited our search to journal articles, conference papers, book chapters, and review papers, and restricted the results to English-language publications.

Selecting the appropriate research articles: As presented in Figure 2, the initial search returned a total of 13,379 papers spanning from 2017 (the year the first document was published) to 2022 (the investigation period). Specifically, Scopus accounted for 7,817 papers, WoS for 5,277 papers, and AIS eLibrary for 285 papers. The titles, abstracts, keywords, authors’ names, journal/conference names, publication years, document types, and sources of these papers were exported to an MS Excel spreadsheet for further analysis.

The compilation of scholarly articles was subjected to a stringent four-phase screening process, delineated as follows: (i) initial collection, assembling the primary corpus of texts; (ii) deduplication, identifying and removing any recurring studies; (iii) title, keywords, and abstract evaluation, applying the predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria (detailed in the previous section under ‘developing the review protocol’) to assess the articles; and (iv) final selection, applying the same criteria to the full texts. As shown in Figure 2, the initial comprehensive database search identified 13,379 records. After removing 4,424 duplicates, we conducted a thorough evaluation of titles, keywords, and abstracts, excluding 8,816 papers in the process. The full texts of the remaining 139 papers were carefully reviewed, resulting in the exclusion of 27 papers that did not meet the eligibility criteria. This left a final dataset of 112 papers for this SLR. The final collection of these 112 articles is documented in Table 3.

Table 3. The list of 112 selected research papers for this SLR.

ID	Title of the paper	References
1	How blockchain technologies impact your business model	Morkunas, Paschen, and Boon (2019)
2	Is Blockchain a Silver Bullet for Supply Chain Management? Technical Challenges and Research Opportunities	Kumar, Liu, and Shan (2020)
3	Industry 4.0 and circular economy practices: A new era business strategies for environmental sustainability	Khan et al. (2021b)
4	Demystifying blockchain: A critical analysis of challenges, applications and opportunities	Upadhyay (2020)
5	Supply chain financing using blockchain: Impacts on supply chains selling fashionable products	Choi (2020)
6	The impact of blockchain technology application on Supply Chain Partnership and Performance	Kim and Shin (2019)
7	Effect of blockchain technology adoption on supply chain adaptability, agility, alignment and performance	Sheel and Nath (2019)
8	The role of block chain technology in circular economy practices to improve organizational performance	Khan et al. (2022)
9	The value of Blockchain technology implementation in international trades under demand volatility risk	Yoon et al. (2020)
10	Green data analytics, blockchain technology for Sustainable Development, and sustainable supply chain practices: Evidence from small and Medium Enterprises	Khan et al. (2021a)
11	Selection of Renewable Energy Alternatives for Green Blockchain Investments: A Hybrid IT2-based Fuzzy Modelling	Liu et al. (2021)
12	The prospective value creation potential of blockchain in business models: A Delphi study	Schlecht, Schneider, and Buchwald (2021)
13	The Transformational Impact of Blockchain Technology on Business Models and Ecosystems: A Symbiosis of Human and Technology Agents	Schneider, Leyer, and Tate (2020)
14	The mitigating role of blockchain-enabled supply chains during the COVID-19 pandemic	Xiong et al. (2021)
15	Evaluation of the impact of blockchain technology on supply chain using cognitive maps	Budak and Çoban (2021)
16	Digital technology and circular economy practices: A strategy to improve organizational performance	Khan et al. (2021c)
17	The adoption of blockchain technology in the financial sector during the era of fourth industrial revolution: a moderated mediated model	Khalil, Khawaja, and Sarfraz (2022)
18	Industry 4.0 technology and circular economy practices: business management strategies for environmental sustainability	Tang et al. (2022)
19	Exploring blockchain value creation: The case of the car ecosystem	Bauer et al. (2019)
20	Blockchain-supported business model design, Supply Chain Resilience, and firm performance	Li et al. (2022)
21	Blockchain-enabled corporate governance and regulation	Daluwathumullagamage and Sims (2020)
22	Exploring the barriers and organizational values of blockchain adoption in the banking industry	Saheb and Mamaghani (2021)
23	Continuance intention in blockchain-enabled supply chain applications: Modelling the moderating effect of Supply Chain Stakeholders Trust	Wamba (2019)
24	Blockchain for business value: A contract and work flow management to reduce disputes pilot project	Downey, Bauchot, and Roling (2018)
25	Adoption of technological innovation and recycling practices in automobile sector: under the COVID-19 pandemic	Yu, Umar, and Rehman (2022)
26	Blockchain speculation or value creation? Evidence from corporate investments	Autore, Clarke, and Jiang (2021)
27	Blockchain marketing through social media surges the economic growth of India	Rathnakar (2019)
28	Blockchain’s impact on platform supply chains: Transaction cost and information transparency perspectives	Wu and Yu (2022)
29	Determining the Idiosyncrasy of Blockchain: An Affordances Perspective	Ostern, Rosemann, and Moormann (2020)
30	Organizations’ approaches to Blockchain: A critical realist perspective	Ostern, Holotiuk, and Moormann (2022)
31	Open logistics: Blockchain-enabled trusted hyperconnected logistics platform	Barenji and Montreuil (2022)
32	Real business applications and investments in Blockchain technology	Lage, Saiz-Santos, and Zarzuelo (2022)
33	Influence of Blockchain Adoption on Technology Transfer, Performance and Supply Chain Integration, Flexibility and Responsiveness. A Case Study from IT&C Medium-Sized Enterprises	Ceptureanu et al. (2021)
34	Research on trust influence of building supply chain members based on Blockchain Technology	Sun and Wang (2020)
35	Organizational Signaling of Blockchain Investments: A Patent Filing Event Study	Bowman and Steelman (2019)
36	Contextualizing the impact of blockchain technology on the performance of new firms: The Role of Corporate Governance as an intermediate outcome	Ronaghi (2022)
37	The value and applications of blockchain technology in business: A systematic review of real use cases	Lage, Saiz-Santos, and Zarzuelo (2021)
38	How blockchain impacts the Supply Chain Finance Platform Business Model Reconfiguration	Ning and Yuan (2021)
39	A business model analysis of blockchain technology-based startup	Park and Sung (2020)
40	Business Value of Smart Contract: Case of Inventory Information Discrepancies	Padalkar, Zadeh, and Song (2020)
41	Blockchain and competitive business performance	Sheel, Singh, and Joshi (2022)
42	Using blockchain and distributed machine learning to evaluate performance management and its effect on the construction industry	Tongkachok et al. (2022)
43	Sustainable organizational performance through Blockchain technology adoption and knowledge management in China	Sun, Shahzad, and Razzaq (2022)
44	Blockchain-Enabled Open Quality System for Smart Manufacturing: Applications and Challenges	Ali, Shin, and Song (2022)
45	Experience on using ArchiMate models for modelling blockchain-enhanced value chains	Jiang and Ræder (2022)
46	Effect of digital marketing capabilities and blockchain technology on organizational performance and psychology	Liu (2022)
47	Blockchain technology for supply chains operating in emerging markets: An empirical examination of technology-organization-environment (TOE) framework	Chittipaka et al. (2022)
48	The business opportunity of blockchain value creation among the internet of value	Sestino et al. (2022)
49	Blockchain-based value creation for supply chain in COVID-19 drug distribution	Chung (2022)
50	Blockchain technology in supply chain management: systematic literature review analysis	Erboz (2022)
51	Blockchain Impacts on Global Supply Chain Operational and Managerial Business Value Processes	Reyes et al. (2022)
52	Adoption of blockchain technology in the Indian Business Market: Obstacles and Opportunities	Litoriya et al. (2022)
53	The study of blockchain technology to enhance the organizational performance: Theoretical perception	Mathur and Vijayvargy (2022)
54	The Impact of Blockchain Technology on International Trade and Financial Business	Valeria et al. (2022)
55	The influence of blockchain technology factors on the four aspects of organizational behaviour	Surjandy et al. (2021)
56	A systematic review on how Blockchain Unlock Business Values	Thiyagarajan and Josephine (2021)
57	Investments in Blockchain Information Management Systems based on Business Angels’ Criteria	Davydovitch et al. (2021)
58	New approach to a disruptive business model with dynamic capability under the blockchain technology	Aydiner (2021)
59	Assessing blockchain investments through the learning option: An application to the automotive and aerospace industry	Pérez et al. (2020)
60	The burn-to-claim cross-blockchain asset transfer protocol	Pillai et al. (2020)
61	Chain of Values: Examining the Economic Impacts of Blockchain on the Value-Added Tax System	Cho et al. (2021)
62	Blockchain’s impact on consumer’s perspective in the luxury fashion industry: A position paper	Noonan and Doran (2021)
63	Utilizing blockchain technology to manage the dark and bright sides of supply network complexity to enhance supply chain sustainability	Yin, Ran, and Chen (2022)
64	Blockchain–industrial applications and potentials	Schmidt et al. (2019)
65	Blockchain brings a new IT capability: A case study of HNA group	Ying and Jia (2018)
66	Strategic Value Creation through Enterprise Blockchain	Yuthas, Sarason, and Aziz (2021)
67	AucSwap: A Vickrey auction modeled decentralized cross-blockchain asset transfer protocol	Liu et al. (2021)
68	Blockchain technology and the impact on business models	Junqueira, Pinochet, and Magalhaes (2021)
69	Value creation from a decentralized car ledger	Bauer et al. (2020)
70	Blockchain in the operations and supply chain management: Benefits, challenges, and future research opportunities	Wamba and Queiroz (2020)
71	An empirical study of blockchain technology, Innovation, service quality and firm performance in the Banking Industry	Rekha and Resmi (2021)
72	Business on chain: A comparative case study of five blockchain-inspired business models	Chong et al. (2019)
73	Blockchain–Just another IT implementation? A comparison of blockchain and interorganizational information systems	Seebacher and Schüritz (2019)
74	The Long-Term Effect of Blockchain Adoption on Firm Value	Lui and Ngai (2019)
75	The generic blockchain ecosystem and its strategic implications	Riasanow et al. (2018)
76	Pervasive decentralization of digital infrastructures: A Framework for blockchain enabled system and use case analysis	Glaser (2017)
77	Perceived Business Objectives for Adopting Blockchain Technology: A Value-Focused-Thinking Approach	Hassna (2020)
78	Do Blockchain and IOT architecture create informedness to support provenance tracking in the product lifecycle?	Mazumdar et al. (2021)
79	Digitalization practices in south-African state-owned enterprises: A framework for rapid adoption of Digital Solutions	Malope, Van Der Poll, and Ncube (2021)
80	Design principles for use cases of blockchain in food supply chains	Sharma et al. (2019)
81	Creating value through blockchain technology: A Delphi study	Schlecht, Schneider, and Buchwald (2020)
82	Contracting in the Age of Blockchain: Case of a Global Value Chain	Zareen (2021)
83	Blockchain technology impacting the role of trust in transactions: Reflections in the case of trading diamonds	Loebbecke, Lueneborg, and Niederle (2018)
84	Blockchain technology for tracking and tracing in supply chains: A critical viewpoint	Straubert, Sucky, and Mattke (2021)
85	Beyond a blockchain paradox: How intermediaries can leverage a disintermediation technology	Abbatemarco et al. (2020)
86	Antecedents and Consequences of Blockchain Innovations	Zhao and Xu (2022)
87	Building a blockchain application that complies with the EU general data protection regulation	Rieger et al. (2019)
88	How tradelens delivers business value with blockchain technology	Jensen, Hedman, and Henningsson (2019)
89	Blockchain won’t kill the banks: Why disintermediation doesn’t work in International Trade Finance	Fridgen et al. (2022)
90	Tutorial: A descriptive introduction to the blockchain	Murray (2019)
91	How do machine learning, Robotic Process Automation, and blockchains affect the human factor in business process management?	Mendling et al. (2018)
92	Trends in Fintech Research and practice: Examining the intersection with the Information Systems Field	Cai, Marrone, and Linnenluecke (2022)
93	Blockchain regulations and Decentralized Applications	Subramanian et al. (2020)
94	A blockchain-based approach towards overcoming financial fraud in public sector services	Hyvärinen, Risius, and Friis (2017)
95	A permissioned blockchain-based implementation of LMSR prediction markets	Carvalho (2020)
96	Understanding decentralization of decision-making power in proof-of-stake blockchains: An agent-based simulation approach	Mueller-Bloch et al. (2022)
97	FinTech as a game changer: Overview of Research Frontiers	Hendershott et al. (2021)
98	Those who control the code control the rules: How different perspectives of privacy are being written into the code of Blockchain Systems	Renwick and Gleasure (2020)
99	Affordances, experimentation and actualization of FinTech: A blockchain implementation study	Du et al. (2019)
100	Stability of transaction fees in Bitcoin: A supply and demand perspective	Ilk et al. (2021)
101	Some simple economics of the blockchain	Catalini and Gans (2020)
102	An organization-friendly blockchain system	Zheng et al. (2020)
103	The impact of blockchain technology on business models – a taxonomy and archetypal patterns	Weking et al. (2019)
104	Blockchain-based traceability system for Supply Chain: Potentials, gaps, applicability and adoption game	Ni et al. (2022)
105	Challenges and common solutions in smart contract development	Kannengieser et al. (2022)
106	Disruptive Technologies for achieving supply chain resilience in COVID-19 ERA: An implementation case study of satellite imagery and blockchain technologies in Fish Supply Chain	Sengupta et al. (2021)
107	Pricing and coordination of vaccine supply chain based on Blockchain technology	Liu, Tan, and Zhao (2021)
108	Knowledge, diffusion and interest in blockchain technology in SMEs	Bracci et al. (2021)
109	Blockchain and multi-agent system for meme discovery and prediction in Social Network	Yang et al. (2021)
110	Blockchain technology in Energy Markets – an interview with the European Energy Exchange	Alt and Wende (2020)
111	Implementing blockchain in information systems: a review	Lu (2022)
112	A novel service level agreement model using blockchain and smart contract for cloud manufacturing in industry 4.0	Tan et al. (2022)

Assessing the quality of research articles: Each research paper included in this study was rigorously evaluated using a scoring framework based on five defined quality criteria (QC), as detailed in Table 4 (Hamdan, Bakar, and Sani 2020; Pawlak and Poniszewska-Marańda 2021). This quality assessment involved three levels of scoring for each criterion: yes = 1, partially = 0.5, and no = 0 (Hamdan, Bakar, and Sani 2020; Pawlak and Poniszewska-Marańda 2021). Employing the specified checklist, the total scores of the quality criteria evaluations for each paper ranged from 0 (denoting very poor quality) to 5 (indicating very good quality). Research articles were subsequently categorised based on their cumulative scores into very poor (≤20%), poor (≤40%), fair (≥50%), good (≥80%), and very good ( = 100%) (Hamdan, Bakar, and Sani 2020). The comprehensive scores assigned to each paper included in this study are recorded in Table A2 (see Appendix A).

Table 4. Quality criteria table.

ID	Quality criteria
QC1	Does the paper contribute to the field of blockchain business value?
QC2	Is the motivation behind the study explicitly articulated?
QC3	Has the methodology of the research been clearly defined?
QC4	Have the researcher(s) presented adequate data to substantiate their findings and conclusions?
QC5	Are the findings of the research thoroughly analysed and discussed?

Data extraction and synthesis: To extract data relevant to the research question articulated in this manuscript, we undertook an exhaustive review of the full texts of 112 papers. These papers were subjected to both deductive and inductive analyses. Deductive analysis began with a comprehensive bibliometric review, detailed in Appendix A, which included publication trends, types of publications and research methodologies, international co-authorship collaborations, keyword co-occurrence, title and abstract-based term co-occurrence maps, principal component analysis (PCA) of terms, dendrogram analysis of blockchain’s influence on business value, and quality evaluations. For this bibliometric analysis, tools such as Microsoft Excel, VOSviewer, and the statistical package for the social sciences (SPSS) were employed. Inductive analysis followed, employing a reflexive thematic analysis strategy that considers researcher subjectivity as a crucial asset while recognising the importance of reflexivity and the contextual dynamics of meaning (Gong, Zhang, and Alharithi 2022; Oguntegbe, Paola, and Vona 2022). This approach allowed for the organization of literature into emergent themes, thus deepening the understanding within this nascent academic field (Gong, Zhang, and Alharithi 2022). The coding process was closely aligned with concepts relevant to the research question, with findings diligently recorded in Excel for integration into the manuscript. The data was then analysed thematically in NVivo 14, following Braun and Clarke’s (2006) six-phase framework. This involved becoming familiar with the data set, generating initial codes, searching for themes, reviewing themes, defining, and naming themes, and finally, reporting the analysis. Notably, coding, theme identification, and review were conducted in iterative cycles until the themes adequately categorised and encapsulated the research findings. This analytical process is illustrated in Figure 3.

Figure 3. Methodological approach (Oguntegbe, Paola, and Vona 2022).

As illustrated in Figure 3, our initial step involves familiarising ourselves with the dataset and noting insights pertinent to the specific research question. We then methodically code the dataset, with particular focus on the facilitating and hindering factors of BTA as well as its business value. To ensure coding reliability, the paper’s first author and a research assistant acted as coders. Both coders read the papers and coded them for factors that facilitate or hinder BTA, as well as for the business values derived from such adoption. For enabling factors, the coders identified elements that facilitate BTA. For example, Chittipaka et al. (2022) highlight that regulatory support by the government is a crucial driver of BTA, which can positively affect business value creation. This was coded as an enabling factor since the researchers found the positive impact of regulatory support on BTA and its value creation. Regarding inhibiting factors, these are elements that hinder BTA. For instance, Schlecht, Schneider, and Buchwald (2021) discuss how integration difficulties and scalability concerns pose significant challenges to BTA. These were coded as inhibiting factors because the researchers highlighted these technical challenges that impede BTA. For business values, the coders focused on the benefits and improvements resulting from BTA. For example, Morkunas, Paschen, and Boon (2019) describe how BT can enhance operational efficiency by reducing costs and settlement times, streamlining operations, and mitigating risks. This was coded under business values as it highlights the positive impact of blockchain on business operations. These distinctions allowed us to categorise and analyse the various factors influencing BTA and its resultant business value effectively. Table 5 summarises the coding rules.

Table 5. Coding agenda for identifying factors affecting BTA in business organizations (adapted from Mayring 2014).

Category	Definition	Anchor samples	Coding rules
Enabling factors	Elements that facilitate BTA	Regulatory support by the government is a crucial driver of BTA, which can positively affect business value creation (Chittipaka et al. 2022).	If the paper identifies factors such as regulatory support that positively influence BTA and its value creation, it is coded as an enabling factor.
Inhibiting factors	Elements that hinder BTA	Integration difficulties and scalability concerns pose significant challenges to BTA (Schlecht, Schneider, and Buchwald 2021).	If the paper highlights challenges such as scalability concerns that impede BTA, it is coded as an inhibiting factor.
Business values	Benefits and improvements resulting from BTA	BT can enhance operational efficiency by reducing costs and settlement times, streamlining operations, and mitigating risks (Morkunas, Paschen, and Boon 2019).	If the paper discusses the positive impacts of BTA on business operations, such as enhanced operational efficiency, it is coded under business values.

Initially, both coders independently reviewed and coded the first 30 papers. They then compared their results and discussed any differences to ensure consistency and reliability in their coding process. The inter-rater reliability, measured using Cohen’s Kappa, ranged from 0.86 to 1.00, with an average of 0.93, indicating almost perfect agreement (Landis and Koch 1977; Tan, Benbasat, and Cenfetelli 2013) (see Table 6). Any discrepancies were resolved through discussion until both coders reached a consensus on the distinctions between enabling and inhibiting factors of BTA and the business values derived from its adoption for each of the first 30 papers. The remaining 82 papers were evenly divided, with each coder independently coding 41 papers. They followed the coding rules outlined in Table 5 and recorded all extracted insights in a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet for presentation in the paper.¹

Table 6. Inter-rater reliability scores (kappa) for coded categories in the 112 reviewed papers.

Category	Kappa score
Enabling factors of BTA	0.86
Inhibiting factors of BTA	0.93
Business values of BTA	1.00
Average	0.93

Figure 4 presents some of the most frequently identified enablers and barriers to BTA derived from the analysed papers. The identified codes are methodically grouped into themes, allowing new themes to emerge. Each theme undergoes a thorough review to ensure it accurately represents the associated codes, remains coherent with the dataset, and is distinct from other themes. The refinement process entails the consolidation and redefinition of themes, clarification of their interrelations, and interpretation of their significance within the context of the dataset.

Figure 4. Word cloud of extracted enabling and inhibiting factors of BTA.

Reporting the review

The findings of this study are presented using both deductive and inductive approaches. Section 4 outlines the results of the SLR conducted on the selected 112 articles. Subsection 4.1 is devoted to the bibliometric analysis of these articles, offering an in-depth examination of their distribution and impact. In contrast, Subsection 4.2 explores the thematic analysis of blockchain research, specifically focusing on the research question. Based on the insights derived from Subsection 4.2, we introduce a theoretical model that encapsulates the key facilitators and barriers impacting BTA within business organizational contexts. This model is designed to enhance our understanding of the subject matter and facilitate the extraction of business value from BT.

4. Analysis and results

This section delineates and examines the findings from the SLR. The analytical process was segmented into two distinct stages. Initially, a bibliometric analysis was conducted on 112 selected articles to outline the current state of BTA in corporate environments. Following this, a thematic analysis relevant to this research was undertaken.

4.1. Bibliometric analysis

Appendix A of this paper presents the results and descriptions of the bibliometric analysis.

4.2. Thematic analysis: understanding the key themes

4.2.1. Factors influencing BTA in business organizations

This SLR has identified both facilitators and barriers affecting BTA within organizations, as detailed in Table 7. A thematic analysis was then utilised to classify and reorganise the reviewed literature (Gong, Zhang, and Alharithi 2022). Through this analysis, various themes and subthemes were discerned, forming the foundation for coding categories. These were further supported by evidence-based quotes and relevant bibliographic references to validate the coding process (Gong, Zhang, and Alharithi 2022). A comprehensive assessment of the selected literature was conducted, from which logical conclusions about the themes were drawn by analysing the content of these documents.

Table 7. Summary of literature review on critical factors influencing BTA in business organizations.

Author(s)	Enabling factors	Inhibiting factors
Morkunas, Paschen, and Boon (2019)	Collaborations between organizations; supportive network of partnerships; development of more efficient blockchain architectures.	Blockchain operations are viewed as slow due to a lack of standardized blockchain architectures; integration challenges; high adoption cost; regulatory constraints; lack of a critical mass of users.
Kumar, Liu, and Shan (2020)	Smart legal templates.	Designing smart contracts is complicated, with high adoption costs; endorsement policies; challenges in linking chains; decisions on on-chain data.
Khan et al. (2021b)	-	Weak information and communication technology (ICT) infrastructure in SMEs; capital shortages; inexperienced human capital.
Upadhyay (2020)	-	Lack of clarity and favorable policies; security and privacy concerns; unavailability of skilled resources; high maintenance costs; lack of industry support.
Sheel and Nath (2019)	Accurate and real-time data collection.	Poor understanding of BT; high costs; massive database requirements; lack of a specific legal framework.
Khan et al. (2021a)	Cost-benefit analysis; availability of finances; staff retraining; ICT education; tax and loans exemptions for ICT.	Unskilled and less educated labor.
Schlecht, Schneider, and Buchwald (2021)	Technical readiness.	Integration difficulties; scalability concerns; regulatory constraints; economic and socio-cultural aspects; developer experience.
Xiong et al. (2021)	Higher research and development (R&D) intensity; higher profitability; lower debt.	Lack of full awareness of blockchain’s business value.
Budak and Çoban (2021)	-	High operational costs; energy consumption.
Tang et al. (2022)	-	Financing constraints; lack of skilled human capital; ICT infrastructure.
Saheb and Mamaghani (2021)	Autonomous transactions; persistency; unique security mechanisms; transparency; decentralized data storage; traceability; consensus protocols; reduced time and costs.	Compliance and regulatory requirements; marketing noise; lack of comprehension by senior managers; environmental cost; security and privacy concerns; scalability limitations; integration challenges with existing legacy systems; lack of readiness; disruptive business models; lack of trust; data integrity challenges; inadequate infrastructure.
Ostern, Rosemann, and Moormann (2020)	-	Technical barriers; insufficiently clear regulations.
Ostern, Holotiuk, and Moormann (2022)	Creating awareness; conducting initial exploration; disruptive effect of novel technology; developing prototypes.	Gradual blockchain diffusion; less enthusiasm to implement blockchain for distributed interaction relationships.
Lage, Saiz-Santos, and Zarzuelo (2022)	-	Issues surrounding data privacy; challenges in data storage and querying; difficulties in scalability; substantial computational demand.
Ceptureanu et al. (2021)	-	Poor understanding of blockchain concepts; no legal framework; no investment in training; high adoption cost; lack of required dedicated skills.
Ronaghi (2022)	Technology advantages; organizational readiness; market and regulatory influences.	Absence of centralized control; outdated systems; inadequate user recognition; contract issues; funding limits; market and regulatory barriers.
Ning and Yuan (2021)	-	Requirement for substantial capital and competent human resources.
Park and Sung (2020)	-	Immature technology; lack of standards.
Sun, Shahzad, and Razzaq (2022)	R&D improvement; knowledge management.	-
Ali, Shin, and Song (2022)	-	Issues with transaction scalability; integration complexities; stakeholder role confusion; novelty of the technology.
Jiang and Ræder (2022)	-	Difficulties convincing suppliers to share information; technical challenges; high adoption costs; infrastructure requirements.
Liu (2022)	-	Lack of digital capabilities; uncertain performance outcomes; need for organizational transformation.
Chittipaka et al. (2022)	Partner pressures; IT capabilities; compatibility; senior support; understanding practical benefits; trust; firm size; financial resources; competitive pressures; regulatory support; government support.	Security concerns.
Chung (2022)	-	Contentious negotiation among actors; restrictive new legislative or regulatory enactments.
Erboz (2022)	Technological and organizational advantages; regulatory environment; trust.	Interoperability issues; privacy concerns; supply chain adoption differences.
Reyes et al. (2022)	Traceability governance; leadership; collaboration; supply chain practices; trust.	Integration challenges; privacy concerns; storage and scalability limitations; regulatory issues; transaction speed concerns; trust and security issues.
Litoriya et al. (2022)	Perceived usefulness; time-saving; ease-of-use.	Security and privacy concerns; latency; computational cost; cultural, regulatory, and awareness issues; lack of experts.
Mathur and Vijayvargy (2022)	-	BT compatibility issues; knowledge gaps; security and privacy concerns; data management challenges; decentralization challenges; trust issues; interoperability; corporate expenses; scalability; legal issues; high energy demands.
Surjandy et al. (2021)	-	High adoption cost; scalability limitation; data integrity problem.
Thiyagarajan and Josephine (2021)	-	Lack of technical expertise; regulatory and scalability issues; network vulnerability.
Yuthas, Sarason, and Aziz (2021)	Distributed ledger potential.	Lack of clear problem-solving; scarce evidence supporting the use of blockchain solutions.
Bauer et al. (2020)	Standardized infrastructure.	Standardization challenges; access friction; cost escalation.
Rekha and Resmi (2021)	Decentralization; transparency; trustlessness; security.	-
Lui and Ngai (2019)	Long-term financial performance of firms.	-
Glaser (2017)	Technological innovation.	Regulatory constraints.
Zareen (2021)	-	Resistance to BTA by stakeholders.
Straubert, Sucky, and Mattke (2021)	-	Slow speed of public blockchain technologies for most applications.
Abbatemarco et al. (2020)	Business operation transformation.	Biometric system limitations; absence of a governance system for legal accountability in a decentralized environment.
Rieger et al. (2019)	Cross-organizational collaboration.	Regulations and legal barriers.
Jensen, Hedman, and Henningsson (2019)	-	Lack of standards; reluctance to change from traditional methods; security concerns.
Fridgen et al. (2022)	-	Limited process flexibility.
Murray (2019)	Decentralization; security.	Scalability concerns.
Mendling et al. (2018)	-	Lack of regulatory support; low acceptance of emerging technologies; complexity and difficulty in understanding technologies.
Cai, Marrone, and Linnenluecke (2022)	Transparency; efficiency.	Scalability issues; regulatory uncertainty; lack of standardization.
Subramanian et al. (2020)	Smart contracts; decentralization; immutability; security; privacy.	Regulatory challenges; privacy concerns; interoperability issues.
Carvalho (2020)	Security.	-
Hendershott et al. (2021)	Smart contracts.	Lack of standards.
Renwick and Gleasure (2020)	Increased transparency; improved efficiency.	Regulatory uncertainty.
Du et al. (2019)	Smart contracts.	Technical complexity.
Ilk et al. (2021)	-	Security concerns.
Catalini and Gans (2020)	Cheaply verify and settle transactions.	Legal and regulatory frictions.
Weking et al. (2019)	Strengthen trust in an ecosystem of actors.	Lack an understanding of how BT can create business value for their respective business model.
Ni et al. (2022)	Easier collaboration among supply chain partners.	High implementation cost; legal and regulatory issues.
Kannengieser et al. (2022)	-	Programming flaws in smart contracts.
Sengupta et al. (2021)	Increased efficiency.	High initial investment; complexity in implementing and integrating disruptive technologies.
Liu, Tan, and Zhao (2021)	Smart contracts; operational efficiency.	Not sharing information among systems.
Bracci et al. (2021)	Perception of usefulness; ease of use; trust.	Limited knowledge of blockchain; resistance to change; high initial investment cost; lack of clear regulation.
Yang et al. (2021)	Smart contracts.	-
Alt and Wende (2020)	Improved efficiency.	Scalability concerns.
Lu (2022)	Eliminate intermediaries.	Legal issues; privacy and security.
Tan et al. (2022)	Smart contracts; efficiency.	-

Initially, we identified six themes from the codings: technological advancements and challenges, organizational capabilities and barriers, environmental influences and constraints, user adoption and acceptance, financial and economic considerations, and governance and policy factors. Upon detailed examination, these codings were categorised into four distinct themes: technological, organizational, environmental, and user factors. These themes comprehensively cover the various aspects of BTA within corporate entities. The delineation of these themes, along with their respective subthemes, is presented in Table 8. An in-depth analysis of these identified themes follows.

Table 8. Integrated themes and underlying codes of the factors affecting BTA in organizations.

Integrated themes	Enabling factors (underlying codes)	Inhibiting factors (underlying codes)	References
Technological factors	Efficiency improvements: Enhanced blockchain protocols for faster, more reliable transactions. Smart contracts: Automation of legal and commercial processes through self-executing contracts. Security enhancements: Leveraging blockchain for secure, tamper-proof transactions. R&D: Continuous innovation in BT to increase its viability. Decentralization benefits: Reduction in central points of failure and increased transparency.	Standardization issues: The absence of universally accepted blockchain standards complicates integration. Integration challenges: Difficulties in merging blockchain with existing IT systems without disruption. Scalability issues: Difficulty in expanding blockchain systems to handle large-scale operations. Security concerns: Addressing vulnerabilities to cyber-attacks, smart contract flaws, and scalability challenges in blockchain systems. Privacy concerns: Ensuring user data privacy while maintaining blockchain’s transparency. Emerging technology risks: Operational and security risks due to the nascent nature of blockchain.	Morkunas, Paschen, and Boon (2019), Kumar et al. (2020), Schlecht, Schneider, and Buchwald (2021), Saheb and Mamaghani (2021), Lu (2022), Xiong et al. (2021), Sun, Shahzad, and Razzaq (2022), Chittipaka et al. (2022), Bauer et al. (2020), Reyes et al. (2022), Surjandy et al. (2021), Thiyagarajan and Josephine (2021), Ali, Shin, and Song (2022), Upadhyay (2020), Litoriya et al. (2022), Lage, Saiz-Santos, and Zarzuelo (2022), Erboz (2022), Mathur and Vijayvargy (2022), Jensen, Hedman, and Henningsson (2019), Fridgen et al. (2022), Murray (2019), Mendling et al. (2018), Cai, Marrone, and Linnenluecke (2022), Subramanian et al. (2020), Carvalho (2020), Hendershott et al. (2021), Renwick and Gleasure (2020), Du et al. (2019), Ilk et al. (2021), Sengupta et al. (2021), Liu, Tan, and Zhao (2021), Yang et al. (2021), Alt and Wende (2020), Tan et al. (2022)
Organizational factors	Collaboration: Partnerships and alliances between organizations to leverage blockchain benefits. Financial support: Access to funding and financial incentives for adopting BT. R&D investment: Dedication to R&D, leading to innovation and competitive advantage. Cost-benefit analysis: Understanding the economic advantages of blockchain over traditional systems. Technology readiness: Organizational infrastructure and culture prepared to adopt blockchain.	Operational costs: High initial and ongoing costs for blockchain implementation and maintenance. Skill shortages: There is a significant gap in blockchain knowledge and expertise among existing staff. Workforce inexperience: There is a need for extensive training and education to develop blockchain competencies. Capital limitations: Constraints on financial resources available for new technological investments. Recruitment challenges: Difficulty in finding and retaining skilled blockchain professionals.	Reyes et al. (2022), Morkunas, Paschen, and Boon (2019), Chittipaka et al. (2022), Lui and Ngai (2019), Xiong et al. (2021), Sun, Shahzad, and Razzaq (2022), Khan et al. (2021a), Schlecht, Schneider, and Buchwald (2021), Ronaghi (2022), Budak and Çoban (2021), Sheel and Nath (2019), Bauer et al. (2020), Upadhyay (2020), Morkunas, Paschen, and Boon (2019), Kumar, Liu and Shan (2020), Ceptureanu et al. (2021), Jiang and Ræder (2022), Surjandy et al. (2021), Tang et al. (2022), Khan et al. (2021b), Ning and Yuan (2021), Rieger et al. (2019), Ni et al. (2022), Ni et al. (2022), Sengupta et al. (2021), Bracci et al. (2021)
Environmental factors	Competitive pressure: The drive to adopt blockchain to stay competitive. Regulatory support: Policies and incentives from governments that encourage BTA. Government support: Financial subsidies, grants, and favorable regulations established by government bodies can expedite the BTA. Favorable market conditions: Favorable market dynamics that support the adoption and growth of blockchain. Industry standards: Establishment of standards that facilitate widespread blockchain integration. Ecosystem support: A supportive network of partnerships that fosters blockchain innovation.	Regulatory constraints: Laws and regulations that limit or complicate the use of blockchain. Compliance challenges: The complexity of adhering to multiple and sometimes conflicting regulations. Cultural barriers: Resistance within organizations and industries towards adopting new technologies. Market entry barriers: High entry costs and regulatory hurdles prevent new entrants from adopting blockchain. Legal uncertainty: Lack of clear legal frameworks for blockchain operations, causing hesitancy.	Chittipaka et al. (2022), Ronaghi (2022), Erboz (2022), Bauer et al. (2020), Morkunas, Paschen, and Boon (2019), Schlecht, Schneider, and Buchwald (2021), Saheb and Mamaghani (2021), Chung (2022), Reyes et al. (2022), Litoriya et al. (2022), Thiyagarajan and Josephine (2021), Glaser (2017), Kumar Liu, and Shan (2020), Ceptureanu et al. (2021), Jiang and Ræder (2022), Erboz (2022), Surjandy et al. (2021), Upadhyay (2020); Sheel and Nath (2019), Rieger et al. (2019), Mendling et al. (2018), Cai, Marrone, and Linnenluecke (2022), Subramanian et al. (2020), Renwick and Gleasure (2020), Catalini and Gans (2020), Ni et al. (2022), Lu (2022)
User factors	Practical benefits recognition: Understanding how blockchain can solve specific problems effectively. User-friendly applications: Development of intuitive blockchain interfaces and applications. Education and training: Providing resources and programs to educate users about blockchain. Perceived usefulness: The belief that BT offers significant advantages. Trust in security: Confidence in blockchain’s ability to provide superior security features.	Understanding complexities: Difficulty in grasping the technical nuances of BT. Trust issues: Skepticism towards the security and reliability of blockchain systems. Expertise gap: There is a shortage of professionals with deep blockchain knowledge and skills. Evidence of effectiveness: Limited demonstrable success stories or case studies showcasing blockchain’s impact. Adoption resistance: Reluctance from established processes to new, blockchain-based systems.	Chittipaka et al. (2022), Litoriya et al. (2022), Khan et al. (2021a), Erboz (2022), Reyes et al. (2022), Ali, Shin, and Song (2022), Saheb and Mamaghani (2021), Mathur and Vijayvargy (2022), Tang et al. (2022), Thiyagarajan and Josephine (2021), Yuthas, Sarason, and Aziz (2021), Zareen (2021), Weking et al. (2019), Bracci et al. (2021)

Technological factors

Enabling factors: Technological advancements play a vital role in facilitating BTA within business organizations. Improved blockchain protocols substantially enhance the efficiency and reliability of transactions, laying a solid groundwork for blockchain’s operational excellence (Cai, Marrone, and Linnenluecke 2022; Morkunas, Paschen, and Boon 2019; Saheb and Mamaghani 2021). Smart contracts, by automating legal and commercial processes, streamline operations and diminish the necessity for intermediaries (Hendershott et al. 2021; Kumar, Liu, and Shan 2020; Liu, Tan, and Zhao 2021). Enhancements in security significantly elevate the integrity and trustworthiness of blockchain systems, effectively mitigating concerns over data breaches and tampering. This is vital for safeguarding sensitive information and bolstering user confidence in the technology’s defence against external threats (Lu 2022; Murray 2019; Rekha and Resmi 2021; Saheb and Mamaghani 2021). Ongoing R&D efforts are imperative for ensuring sustained innovation, keeping BT at the leading edge of digital transformation initiatives (Sun, Shahzad, and Razzaq 2022; Xiong et al. 2021). Furthermore, the shift towards decentralisation presents organizations with diminished central points of failure and heightened transparency, foundational for cultivating a robust and open digital ecosystem (Cai, Marrone, and Linnenluecke 2022; Rekha and Resmi 2021; Saheb and Mamaghani 2021).

Inhibiting factors: The lack of universally accepted standards for blockchain complicates its integration, leading to compatibility issues and fragmented systems (Bauer et al. 2020; Jensen, Hedman, and Henningsson 2019; Morkunas, Paschen, and Boon 2019; Park and Sung 2020). Organizations encounter significant hurdles in integrating blockchain with existing IT infrastructures, often necessitating extensive modifications or complete system overhauls (Ali, Shin, and Song 2022; Morkunas, Paschen, and Boon 2019; Reyes et al. 2022; Saheb and Mamaghani 2021; Schlecht, Schneider, and Buchwald 2021; Sengupta et al. 2021). Furthermore, scalability issues present a considerable barrier, as difficulties in expanding blockchain systems to support large-scale operations can restrict its utility (Ali, Shin, and Song 2022; Alt and Wende 2020; Lage, Saiz-Santos, and Zarzuelo 2022; Mathur and Vijayvargy 2022; Reyes et al. 2022; Saheb and Mamaghani 2021; Schlecht, Schneider, and Buchwald 2021; Surjandy et al. 2021; Thiyagarajan and Josephine 2021). Security vulnerabilities, including the risk of cyber-attacks and smart contract flaws, represent significant obstacles to widespread BTA. These challenges highlight the critical need for ongoing improvements in blockchain security to reduce organizational concerns and foster broader acceptance by showcasing strong protections against potential threats (Chittipaka et al. 2022; Jensen, Hedman, and Henningsson 2019; Kannengieser et al. 2022; Litoriya et al. 2022; Mathur and Vijayvargy 2022; Reyes et al. 2022; Saheb and Mamaghani 2021; Upadhyay 2020). Privacy issues, particularly around balancing user data transparency with confidentiality, have not been fully resolved (Erboz 2022; Lage, Saiz-Santos, and Zarzuelo 2022; Litoriya et al. 2022; Mathur and Vijayvargy 2022; Reyes et al. 2022; Saheb and Mamaghani 2021; Subramanian et al. 2020; Upadhyay 2020). Moreover, the emerging nature of BT introduces operational and security risks, requiring continuous vigilance and adaptation (Mathur and Vijayvargy 2022; Mendling et al. 2018; Reyes et al. 2022; Saheb and Mamaghani 2021).

Organizational factors

Enabling factors: Collaboration through partnerships and alliances between organizations is a pivotal driver for BTA, creating a supportive ecosystem for joint blockchain endeavours (Morkunas, Paschen, and Boon 2019; Reyes et al. 2022; Rieger et al. 2019). Access to funding and financial incentives plays a critical role for organizations intending to implement BT, mitigating the financial challenges associated with its deployment (Chittipaka et al. 2022; Khan et al. 2021a). Dedication to R&D is essential for sustaining a competitive advantage and encouraging innovation in the blockchain domain (Sun, Shahzad, and Razzaq 2022; Xiong et al. 2021). Conducting a comprehensive cost-benefit analysis enables organizations to grasp the financial benefits of blockchain compared to conventional systems, supporting informed strategic decisions (Khan et al. 2021a). Moreover, preparing the organizational infrastructure and culture for blockchain integration – technology readiness – is crucial for facilitating a seamless transition and effective assimilation (Ronaghi 2022; Schlecht, Schneider, and Buchwald 2021).

Inhibiting factors: Operational costs related to the implementation and ongoing maintenance of BT remain considerable, presenting a substantial obstacle to its adoption (Bauer et al. 2020; Budak and Çoban 2021; Ceptureanu et al. 2021; Jiang and Ræder 2022; Kumar, Liu, and Shan 2020; Morkunas, Paschen, and Boon 2019; Sengupta et al. 2021; Sheel and Nath 2019; Surjandy et al. 2021). The notable shortage of blockchain knowledge and expertise among the workforce underlines the critical need for specialised training and education initiatives (Ceptureanu et al. 2021; Khan et al. 2021a; Tang et al. 2022; Upadhyay 2020; Weking et al. 2019). This issue is compounded by workforce inexperience, accentuating the discrepancy between existing skills and those necessary for successful blockchain integration (Khan et al. 2021b). Financial constraints further limit organizations’ capacity to invest in emerging technologies, including blockchain (Khan et al. 2021b; Ning and Yuan 2021). Moreover, the challenge of attracting and retaining skilled blockchain professionals represents a significant hurdle that organizations must navigate to effectively utilise BT (Ceptureanu et al. 2021; Litoriya et al. 2022; Tang et al. 2022; Thiyagarajan and Josephine 2021).

Environmental factors

Enabling factors: Competitive pressure often serves as a catalyst for the BTA, compelling organizations to maintain a competitive edge in the market (Chittipaka et al. 2022). Regulatory support, manifested through government policies and incentives, plays a crucial role in facilitating BTA and its subsequent growth (Chittipaka et al. 2022; Erboz 2022; Ronaghi 2022). Furthermore, financial subsidies, grants, and favourable regulations enhance the blockchain ecosystem’s development and integration by bolstering its robustness and accessibility (Chittipaka et al. 2022). Favourable market conditions significantly contribute to the adoption and scalability of blockchain initiatives, underscoring the importance of a conducive economic environment (Ronaghi 2022). The establishment of industry standards is pivotal in enabling widespread blockchain integration, ensuring interoperability and consistency across various applications (Bauer et al. 2020). Additionally, a supportive network, or ecosystem support, encourages innovation and collaborative opportunities within the blockchain domain, facilitating collective progress and success (Morkunas, Paschen, and Boon 2019).

Inhibiting factors: Regulatory constraints present significant challenges, with existing laws and regulations potentially limiting or complicating blockchain usage (Chung 2022; Glaser 2017; Litoriya et al. 2022; Morkunas, Paschen, and Boon 2019; Reyes et al. 2022; Ronaghi 2022; Saheb and Mamaghani 2021; Schlecht, Schneider, and Buchwald 2021; Thiyagarajan and Josephine 2021). Compliance challenges, especially the complexity of adhering to diverse and occasionally conflicting regulations, act as further deterrents to BTA (Saheb and Mamaghani 2021). Additionally, cultural barriers to adopting new technologies like blockchain within organizations and industries can significantly hinder progress and acceptance (Litoriya et al. 2022; Schlecht, Schneider, and Buchwald 2021). High entry costs and regulatory hurdles also prevent new entrants from embracing blockchain, thereby stifling innovation and competition (Budak and Çoban 2021; Ceptureanu et al. 2021; Chung 2022; Jiang and Ræder 2022; Litoriya et al. 2022; Reyes et al. 2022; Ronaghi 2022). Furthermore, legal uncertainty, particularly the absence of clear legal frameworks for blockchain operations, generates hesitancy among organizations considering its adoption (Bracci et al. 2021; Ceptureanu et al. 2021; Mathur and Vijayvargy 2022; Sheel and Nath 2019).

User factors

Enabling factors: At the user and individual level, recognising the practical benefits that BT can offer in addressing specific organizational challenges significantly motivates its adoption (Chittipaka et al. 2022). The development of user-friendly blockchain interfaces and applications enhances the user experience and accessibility, thereby promoting greater acceptance and utilisation (Bracci et al. 2021; Litoriya et al. 2022). Education and training programs are crucial in providing users with the knowledge and skills required to effectively employ BT (Khan et al. 2021a). The perceived usefulness of blockchain, along with its potential to deliver substantial improvements over existing systems, plays a pivotal role in its adoption (Bracci et al. 2021; Litoriya et al. 2022). Trust in BT’s advanced security features significantly influences its acceptance within business organizations, serving as a key facilitator (Bracci et al. 2021; Chittipaka et al. 2022; Erboz 2022; Reyes et al. 2022). In this context, trust is defined as stakeholders’ confidence in the technology’s ability to offer a secure, immutable, and transparent platform for transactions and data management (Reyes et al. 2022). However, this trust is subjective and context-dependent, mirroring stakeholders’ varied expectations and experiences. Stakeholders’ perceptions of security, reliability, and the advantages of blockchain can vary, underscoring the importance of effectively demonstrating and communicating its security features to encourage wider acceptance and integration into organizational processes (Filippi, Mannan, and Reijers 2020).

Inhibiting factors: Challenges such as struggling with the technical complexities of BT can dissuade users and organizations from fully adopting it (Ceptureanu et al. 2021; Du et al. 2019). Trust issues related to BTA extend beyond concerns about security and reliability (Chittipaka et al. 2022; Reyes et al. 2022; Saheb and Mamaghani 2021; Upadhyay 2020) to include regulatory uncertainties (Glaser 2017; Reyes et al. 2022; Thiyagarajan and Josephine 2021), privacy apprehensions (Erboz 2022; Lage, Saiz-Santos, and Zarzuelo 2022; Litoriya et al. 2022; Mathur and Vijayvargy 2022; Reyes et al. 2022; Saheb and Mamaghani 2021; Upadhyay 2020), and difficulties integrating with existing infrastructures (Ali, Shin, and Song 2022; Morkunas, Paschen, and Boon 2019; Reyes et al. 2022; Saheb and Mamaghani 2021; Schlecht, Schneider, and Buchwald 2021). Thoroughly addressing these concerns is crucial for fostering confidence among prospective users. A significant expertise gap, marked by a scarcity of professionals proficient in BT, impedes effective BTA (Ceptureanu et al. 2021; Khan et al. 2021a; Tang et al. 2022; Upadhyay 2020). The lack of tangible demonstrations of blockchain’s efficacy breeds scepticism, highlighting the importance of providing clear evidence of its benefits to surmount these adoption barriers (Yuthas, Sarason, and Aziz 2021). Furthermore, resistance to adoption, arising from an unwillingness to alter established processes in favour of new, blockchain-based alternatives, constitutes a considerable obstacle to broad acceptance (Bracci et al. 2021; Zareen 2021).

Overall, this detailed analysis highlights the complex nature of BTA within business organizations. It sheds light on both the considerable promise and the inherent challenges of embracing BT, offering a nuanced view that is vital for stakeholders seeking to effectively navigate this evolving landscape.

4.2.2. Business values of BTA

BT is positioned at the foThisSLR has identified botrefront of digital innovation, providing transformative solutions that extend beyond mere operational efficiencies. It has the potential to fundamentally reshape business models and competitive landscapes. Table 9 showcases a comprehensive thematic analysis of the business values derived from our review. This section further explores each thematic area, incorporating logical arguments and a rich array of citations to thoroughly analyse the diverse benefits of BTA.

Table 9. Comprehensive thematic analysis of blockchain business values.

Thematic areas	Key benefits	References
Enhancing operational efficiency and reducing costs	Reduction in operational costs and settlement times; streamlining operations and mitigating risks; significant compliance cost savings.	Morkunas, Paschen, and Boon (2019), Khan et al. (2021a), Sheel and Nath (2019), Choi (2020), Upadhyay (2020), Sengupta et al. (2021), Mendling et al. (2018)
Promoting sustainability and environmental stewardship	Promoting sustainability through enhanced traceability; supporting circular economy models; minimizing environmental footprints.	Khan et al. (2021b), Khan et al. (2021a)
Boosting market share and profitability	Attraction of customers and investors through transparency; increase in sales and market share; creation of new revenue streams.	Khan et al. (2021b), Kim and Shin (2019), Morkunas, Paschen, and Boon (2019)
Improving quality and delivery	Real-time tracking capabilities ensuring product authenticity; optimization of supply chain processes; enhanced customer satisfaction and brand reputation.	Sun, Shahzad, and Razzaq (2022), Kim and Shin (2019), Yin, Ran, and Chen (2022), Liu (2022), Mendling et al. (2018)
Transforming SCM	Unprecedented transparency and efficiency; tamper-proof record of transactions; enhanced agility and resilience of supply chains.	Morkunas, Paschen, and Boon (2019), Surjandy et al. (2021), Khalil, Khawaja, and Sarfraz (2022), Sun and Wang (2020), Cai, Marrone, and Linnenluecke (2022)
Enhancing transparency and traceability	Immutable ledger ensuring integrity of transaction records; greater trust and collaboration across the supply chain.	Lage, Saiz-Santos, and Zarzuelo (2022, 2021), Jiang and Ræder (2022), Ni et al. (2022), Thiyagarajan and Josephine (2021), Tan et al. (2022), Jiang and Ræder (2022), Sun and Wang (2020), Zheng et al. (2020)
Fostering innovation and consumer satisfaction	Development of new products, services, and business models; improved service quality and responsiveness; enhanced consumer satisfaction and loyalty.	Liu (2022), Pillai et al. (2020), Sheel, Singh, and Joshi (2022), Budak and Çoban (2021), Bracci et al. (2021)
Ensuring safety and security	Enhancement of data integrity and security; protection of sensitive information; mitigation of risks associated with data tampering and cyber threats.	Xiong et al. (2021), Budak and Çoban (2021), Lage, Saiz-Santos, and Zarzuelo (2022), Ning and Yuan (2021), Murray (2019)

Enhancing operational efficiency and reducing costs

The role of blockchain in enhancing operational efficiency and reducing costs has been extensively documented. Morkunas, Paschen, and Boon (2019) illustrate how BT diminishes operational costs and shortens settlement times. This assertion is reinforced by Khan et al. (2021a) and Sheel and Nath (2019), who argue that the technology’s transparency and immutability play crucial roles in streamlining operations and reducing risks, thereby achieving considerable savings in compliance costs. In a similar vein, Choi (2020) highlights the significant reduction in operational risks and costs, which in turn enhances expected profits within blockchain-supported supply chains. These observations are further validated by Upadhyay (2020), who explores blockchain’s transformative potential in minimising operational inefficiencies across various industries.

Promoting sustainability and environmental stewardship

The contribution of BT to sustainability and environmental stewardship is substantial (Khan et al. 2021a; Khan et al. 2021b). Khan et al. (2021b) investigate the ways in which BT fosters sustainability by enhancing traceability and transparency, thus enabling the authentication of eco-friendly practices throughout the supply chain. Furthermore, this technology underpins circular economy models by promoting sustainable practices, including circular procurement and design. This underscores its pivotal role in reducing environmental footprints (Khan et al. 2021b).

Boosting market share and profitability

The strategic connection between BTA, enhanced market share Khan et al. 2021b), and increased profitability (Chittipaka et al. 2022) is clear. Khan et al. (2021b) and Kim and Shin (2019) demonstrate that the transparency and efficiency enabled by blockchain can draw in customers and investors, thereby boosting sales and market share. Furthermore, the capacity of blockchain to generate new revenue streams is underscored by Morkunas, Paschen, and Boon (2019), who examine its influence on business model innovation and competitive advantage.

Improving quality and delivery

Sun, Shahzad, and Razzaq (2022) and Kim and Shin (2019) underscore the enhancements in product quality and delivery facilitated by blockchain, particularly highlighting the technology’s capabilities for real-time tracking. This functionality ensures product authenticity and streamlines supply chain processes, thereby significantly boosting customer satisfaction and brand reputation – a pivotal element for sustained business success (Liu 2022; Yin, Ran, and Chen 2022).

Transforming SCM

The transformative impact of blockchain on SCM is highlighted by its capacity to ensure unparalleled transparency and efficiency (Cai, Marrone, and Linnenluecke 2022; Morkunas, Paschen, and Boon 2019). Surjandy et al. (2021) explore BT’s provision of a tamper-proof record for transactions, which notably enhances the agility and resilience of supply chains. Consequently, this empowers businesses to respond to market fluctuations and customer demands more effectively, thereby securing a competitive edge (Khalil, Khawaja, and Sarfraz 2022; Sun and Wang 2020) in competitive market landscapes.

Enhancing transparency and traceability

The enhancement of transparency (Lage, Saiz-Santos, and Zarzuelo 2022, 2021; Renwick and Gleasure 2020; Tan et al. 2022) and traceability (Jiang and Ræder 2022; Ni et al. 2022) through BTA fosters trust among stakeholders. Thiyagarajan and Josephine (2021) elucidate how the technology’s immutable ledger maintains the integrity of transaction records, thereby facilitating increased trust and collaboration throughout the supply chain. This aspect is especially crucial in industries where the provenance and authenticity of products are of utmost importance, such as in the pharmaceutical and luxury goods sectors (Jiang and Ræder 2022; Lage, Saiz-Santos, and Zarzuelo 2022; Sun and Wang 2020).

Fostering innovation and consumer satisfaction

Blockchain’s function as an innovation catalyst is underlined by Liu (2022) and Pillai et al. (2020), who underscore its significant effect on boosting consumer satisfaction through enhanced service quality and responsiveness. By facilitating more efficient and transparent operations, businesses are better positioned to adapt to changing customer demands, thereby fostering loyalty and propelling growth (Budak and Çoban 2021; Sheel, Singh, and Joshi 2022).

Ensuring safety and security

Blockchain significantly enhances safety (Xiong et al. 2021) and security (Budak and Çoban 2021; Murray 2019), particularly in industries prone to data breaches and fraud. Lage, Saiz-Santos, and Zarzuelo (2022) and Ning and Yuan (2021) highlight blockchain’s critical role in improving data integrity and security, essential for safeguarding sensitive information and establishing consumer trust. BT offers a secure, decentralised platform for transactions, significantly reducing risks related to data tampering and cyber threats, thereby ensuring the safety and confidentiality of business operations.

5. Conceptual framework development

Figure 5 presents a detailed conceptual framework of BTA within business organizations. This framework was developed from the findings of the SLR through thematic analysis, aligned with the extended TOE framework. The model development criteria followed a systematic approach as shown in Figure 3: initially, data collection involved familiarising with the dataset by reading 112 selected papers. The data was then organised to generate initial codes, followed by classifying similar codes into six themes: technological advancements and challenges, organizational capabilities and barriers, environmental influences and constraints, user adoption and acceptance, financial and economic considerations, and governance and policy factors. These themes were reviewed by comparing them with the dataset, and subsequently, the six themes were refined and renamed into four major themes: technological factors, organizational factors, environmental factors, and user factors. This comprehensive approach ensured that both enabling factors, such as technological capabilities and organizational readiness, and inhibiting factors, like technological challenges and regulatory issues, were integrated into the model. The identified themes were mapped onto the TOE framework to ensure theoretical alignment and comprehensiveness. Prior studies have introduced several frameworks for BTA, specifically targeting different domains. For instance, Happy et al. (2023) and Singh et al. (2023) focused on BTA within supply chains, Ansah et al. (2023) on land management, and Bazel, Mohammed, and Ahmad (2023) on healthcare. However, our comprehensive conceptual framework stands out by explicitly incorporating both enabling and inhibiting factors of BTA, offering a wide-ranging perspective on its application within business organizations.

Figure 5. The conceptual framework of BTA in organizations.

6. Discussion

6.1. Research findings

This SLR has diligently outlined the factors enabling and inhibiting BTA in business organizations. Through an in-depth thematic analysis of selected literature, the study reveals the complex interplay of factors that either facilitate or impede the integration of BT in the corporate sector. The analysis, grounded in an exhaustive review of authoritative sources, organises these factors into distinct themes: technological, organizational, environmental, and user factors, with each theme further dissected into subthemes to provide deeper insights into the dynamics involved.

Technological factors emerge as both facilitators and obstacles for BTA, illustrating the dual nature of technological advancement. Innovations such as enhanced blockchain protocols and smart contracts act as key drivers (Hendershott et al. 2021; Liu, Tan, and Zhao 2021), promoting efficiency (Cai, Marrone, and Linnenluecke 2022; Saheb and Mamaghani 2021), security (Lu 2022; Saheb and Mamaghani 2021), and decentralisation (Subramanian et al. 2020). Conversely, challenges like the absence of standardisation (Park and Sung 2020), scalability concerns (Lage, Saiz-Santos, and Zarzuelo 2022), and privacy issues (Reyes et al. 2022) represent significant adoption barriers. These technological dynamics can significantly vary based on organizational focus (Strohmeier, Kabst, and Gueutal 2009) and the country of implementation (Rojas-Mendez, Parasuraman, and Papadopoulos 2017). For instance, tech-centric organizations, particularly those in sectors like fintech and IT, may find advanced blockchain protocols highly beneficial due to their focus on efficiency and security (AlMomani and Alomari 2021). These organizations are likely to leverage blockchain for its potential to streamline operations and enhance security measures (Fernandez-Vazquez et al. 2019). In contrast, firms in more traditional industries, such as manufacturing or healthcare, might struggle with the technical complexity and integration challenges associated with BT, thereby experiencing slower adoption rates (Attaran 2022; Vafadarnikjoo et al. 2023). Country-specific factors also play crucial roles in shaping technological dynamics (Dirir 2023). The state of technological infrastructure, regulatory environment, and the prevalence of digital literacy are critical determinants of BTA success (Chittipaka et al. 2022; Ronaghi 2022). Developed nations with robust IT infrastructure and supportive regulatory frameworks are likely to experience smoother BTA (Chittipaka et al. 2022; Ronaghi 2022). For example, countries like the United States and Germany, with their advanced technological ecosystems and clear regulatory guidelines, provide a fertile ground for blockchain innovation (Frizzo-Barker et al. 2020; Palmié et al. 2020). Conversely, developing countries might face significant hurdles due to inadequate infrastructure and stringent regulations. For instance, countries like Nigeria and Bangladesh, with less developed technological infrastructure and ambiguous regulatory frameworks, may encounter more pronounced challenges in adopting BT (Alam et al. 2022; Jimoh, Abdullahi, and Ibrahim 2019).

Organizational factors explore the internal dynamics that either support or hinder blockchain integration. Collaboration (Reyes et al. 2022) and investment in R&D (Sun, Shahzad, and Razzaq 2022) are beneficial, while operational expenses (Jiang and Ræder 2022) and skill deficits (Khan et al. 2021b) pose challenges. The impact of these factors can be profoundly influenced by the organization’s strategic focus and country-specific contexts (Rojas-Mendez, Parasuraman, and Papadopoulos 2017; Strohmeier, Kabst, and Gueutal 2009). Organizations prioritising innovation and digital transformation are more likely to invest in BT, viewing it as a critical component of their strategic initiatives (Gausdal, Czachorowski, and Solesvik 2018). For instance, companies in the tech industry or those undergoing digital transformation, such as IBM or Walmart, are more inclined to invest heavily in blockchain solutions to enhance their operational efficiency and competitive edge (Zheng and Lu 2021). Conversely, organizations focused on cost-cutting or operating in low-margin industries, such as SMEs, might find the initial investment prohibitive and therefore be less inclined to adopt BT (Kumar et al. 2021; Mahjoub, Hassoun, and Trentesaux 2022). National contexts also matter significantly (Rojas-Mendez, Parasuraman, and Papadopoulos 2017). Countries like Singapore and Malta, which have strong government incentives for digital innovation, can catalyse organizational investment in blockchain (Cheah, Pattalachinti, and Ho 2018; Marian 2019). Singapore, with its favourable regulatory climate and significant investments in blockchain R&D, has become a hotspot for blockchain businesses (Cheah, Pattalachinti, and Ho 2018). Similarly, Malta, often referred to as ‘blockchain island’, has established a comprehensive regulatory framework to support blockchain and digital currencies, fostering a conducive environment for blockchain innovation (Marian 2019; Özgit and Adalıer 2022). Conversely, countries with restrictive financial policies, such as India and Venezuela, might impede such investments (Schuetz and Venkatesh 2020; Torres, Indulska, and Zalan 2020). India’s ambiguous regulatory stance on cryptocurrencies has led to cautious adoption (Schuetz and Venkatesh 2020), while Venezuela’s economic and political instability poses significant barriers to BTA (Rosales 2021; Torres, Indulska, and Zalan 2020).

Environmental factors consider external influences on the BTA landscape, where competitive pressures (Chittipaka et al. 2022) and regulatory support (Ronaghi 2022) stimulate adoption, while regulatory constraints (Reyes et al. 2022) and cultural resistance (Litoriya et al. 2022) act as impediments. These factors vary significantly across countries and industries (Rojas-Mendez, Parasuraman, and Papadopoulos 2017; Strohmeier, Kabst, and Gueutal 2009). In highly competitive industries such as financial services, the drive to maintain a competitive edge can accelerate BTA (Javaid et al. 2022). Companies in these industries, like JPMorgan Chase, are more likely to invest in blockchain to gain a competitive advantage (Case, King, and Case 2020). Similarly, countries with progressive regulatory environments and strong intellectual property protection, like Switzerland and Singapore, are more conducive to blockchain innovation (Cheah, Pattalachinti, and Ho 2018; Scholl, Pomeshchikov, and Rodríguez 2020). Conversely, industries with less competitive pressure or countries with ambiguous or restrictive regulations, such as the energy sector or nations like India, may experience slower adoption rates (Lu et al. 2021; Schuetz and Venkatesh 2020). User factors from the end-user perspective highlight the critical role of tangible benefits and accessible applications in encouraging adoption (Chittipaka et al. 2022) while also acknowledging hindrances such as complexity (Du et al. 2019), trust concerns (Reyes et al. 2022), and a lack of expertise (Tang et al. 2022). Organizations with a strong customer-centric focus, especially those in consumer-facing industries like retail and healthcare, are more likely to adopt blockchain solutions that enhance transparency and trust (Attaran 2022; Mukherjee et al. 2023). For instance, retail giants like Amazon might use blockchain to improve supply chain transparency and customer trust (Kraft and Zheng 2021). However, the complexity of BT can be a significant deterrent in regions with lower levels of digital literacy (Ceptureanu et al. 2021). Moreover, cultural attitudes towards technology and trust in digital solutions vary widely across countries, influencing user acceptance and adoption rates (Schlecht, Schneider, and Buchwald 2021). In cultures with high trust in digital solutions, such as South Korea, BTA might be more readily embraced compared to cultures with lower digital trust levels (Shukla et al. 2023), such as in some developing nations like Nigeria (Jimoh, Abdullahi, and Ibrahim 2019).

Our research culminates in the development of a distinct conceptual framework for BTA, illustrated in Figure 5. This framework advances beyond existing models by offering a comprehensive perspective that includes both enablers and inhibitors of BTA. Unlike the frameworks proposed by Happy et al. (2023), Singh et al. (2023), Ansah et al. (2023), and Bazel, Mohammed, and Ahmad (2023), our model integrates a wider array of factors affecting BTA. Its strength lies in the precise classification of factors into four quadrants: technological, organizational, environmental, and user factors, each further categorised into enablers and inhibitors, thereby providing in-depth insights into the dynamics influencing BTA. For example, while technological advancements like efficiency improvements and smart contracts are identified as enablers, issues with standardization and challenges in integration are acknowledged as significant technological barriers. Similarly, organizational readiness and collaboration are recognized as facilitative elements, whereas skill shortages and workforce inexperience constitute organizational obstacles. By extending the traditional TOE framework with contemporary empirical findings, our framework enhances the theoretical underpinnings of BTA, offering a detailed view of the adoption process. It emerges as an essential academic and practical instrument for addressing the complexities of blockchain integration.

Besides, this SLR cautiously delineates the key thematic advantages of BTA, including operational efficiency, cost savings, sustainability, market share expansion, profitability enhancement, quality and delivery improvements, supply chain overhaul, enhanced transparency and traceability, innovation stimulus, consumer satisfaction, and reinforced safety and security. This comprehensive analysis highlights blockchain’s transformative capacity to remodel business practices, ensuring a competitive advantage and sustainable growth in the digital age. Moreover, a bibliometric analysis of blockchain research from 2017 to 2022 indicates a notable increase in publications, highlighting the surging interest in its business implications across various sectors. Most of this work comprises journal articles and conference papers, reflecting the academic community’s crucial role in proliferating blockchain knowledge. Methodologically, qualitative studies predominate, underscoring an emphasis on exploring the intricate effects of blockchain on organizations. However, quantitative, and mixed methods research also provides important insights. The international nature of blockchain research is underscored by collaborations, particularly among scholars from China, the United States, and the United Kingdom. Through keyword and PCA, central themes such as digital transformation, the impact of the pandemic, and blockchain’s integration into organizational strategies and operations are identified, suggesting a complex appreciation of blockchain’s business value. This overview encapsulates the dynamic, evolving field of blockchain research, accentuating its importance and transformative potential for business practices.

6.2. Contributions to theory and practice

Theoretical implications: The findings from this SLR provide substantial theoretical implications for understanding the dynamics of BTA in business organizations. The delineation of enabling and inhibiting factors within technological, organizational, environmental, and user domains enriches the theoretical landscape by offering a nuanced perspective on the multifaceted nature of BTA. The dual nature of technological advancements, where innovations like enhanced blockchain protocols and smart contracts facilitate BTA while challenges such as standardisation issues, scalability concerns, and privacy problems hinder it, underscores the complex interplay of technological factors (Hendershott et al. 2021; Park and Sung 2020). This dichotomy necessitates a deeper theoretical exploration of how technological advancements can be both enablers and barriers, depending on the context. The model reflects this by categorising efficiency improvements, smart contracts, and security enhancements as enablers, while identifying standardisation issues, integration challenges, and security concerns as inhibitors (Hendershott et al. 2021; Liu, Tan, and Zhao 2021; Park and Sung 2020). The varying impacts of these factors across different organizational types and national contexts highlight the need for a more granular theoretical framework that accounts for industry-specific and region-specific dynamics.

The internal dynamics within organizations, such as collaboration, R&D investment, operational expenses, and skill deficits, offer significant theoretical contributions to understanding organizational readiness and capability for BTA. The model illustrates these by highlighting collaboration, financial support, and technology readiness as enablers, and operational costs, skill shortages, and workforce inexperience as inhibitors (Khan et al. 2021b; Reyes et al. 2022; Sun, Shahzad, and Razzaq 2022). The distinction between organizations that prioritise innovation and those focused on cost-cutting presents an opportunity to refine theories of strategic management and innovation diffusion. The influence of national contexts, with examples from countries like Singapore and Malta (Cheah, Pattalachinti, and Ho 2018; Marian 2019) versus India and Venezuela (Rosales 2021; Schuetz and Venkatesh 2020), further supports the development of a theoretical framework that integrates organizational and environmental contingencies in the adoption of disruptive technologies like blockchain. The role of external pressures, including competitive pressures and regulatory environments, in shaping BTA highlights the importance of institutional theory and competitive dynamics. The model identifies competitive pressure, regulatory support, and government support as enablers (Chittipaka et al. 2022; Ronaghi 2022), while regulatory constraints, compliance challenges, and cultural barriers are noted as inhibitors (Litoriya et al. 2022; Reyes et al. 2022). The impact of progressive versus restrictive regulatory environments on BTA provides a rich avenue for exploring how regulatory support and barriers influence technological adoption. This insight can lead to the development of more robust theoretical models that integrate regulatory and competitive factors into the study of technological adoption and diffusion.

The end-user perspective, emphasising tangible benefits, accessible applications, and the complexity of BT, underscores the importance of user-centric theories in technology adoption. The model reflects this by categorising recognition of practical benefits, user-friendly applications, and perceived usefulness as enablers (Chittipaka et al. 2022), and understanding complexities, trust issues, and expertise gaps as inhibitors (Du et al. 2019; Reyes et al. 2022). The varying levels of digital literacy and cultural attitudes towards technology across different regions necessitate a deeper theoretical understanding of how these factors influence user acceptance and adoption rates. The comparison between regions with high digital trust, such as South Korea (Shukla et al. 2023), and those with lower trust levels, like Nigeria (Jimoh, Abdullahi, and Ibrahim 2019), provides a basis for refining theories related to user adoption and trust in digital technologies.

Overall, our research significantly contributes to the theoretical domain of BTA by revealing a dual-perspective model that comprehensively addresses both enabling and inhibiting factors – a pioneering approach in the realm of blockchain studies. This holistic model transcends the conventional TOE framework by embracing emergent components such as ecosystem support and education and training, reflecting recent advancements in BT and its increasing reach. Incorporating user-centric elements like perceived usefulness and trust in security, our model offers an exhaustive theoretical structure that aptly mirrors the dynamic interaction of users with BT. This enhanced framework promotes a more profound comprehension of BTA, underscoring the intricate web of multi-level influences vital for theoretical progression in this field.

Practical implications: From a practical standpoint, our research provides a comprehensive roadmap for organizations to navigate the complexities of BTA. By identifying critical enabling and inhibiting factors, our study offers strategic insights that facilitate effective blockchain integration and maximise its commercial impact. Technological factors play a crucial role in the BTA. Organizations should prioritise continuous investment in R&D (Sun, Shahzad, and Razzaq 2022) to address challenges such as scalability, standardisation, and security (Lage, Saiz-Santos, and Zarzuelo 2022). For example, financial institutions like JPMorgan Chase invest heavily in blockchain R&D to enhance the security and scalability of their platforms, ensuring they remain at the forefront of technological advancements (Case, King, and Case 2020). Practical steps include establishing in-house R&D labs and partnering with tech startups to co-develop cutting-edge blockchain technologies. Furthermore, the development and implementation of smart contracts can automate legal and commercial processes, streamlining operations and reducing the need for intermediaries (Liu, Tan, and Zhao 2021). Enhancements in blockchain protocols and security measures will also significantly boost the efficiency and reliability of transactions. Addressing the lack of universally accepted standards and integration challenges with existing IT systems is essential to overcoming technological barriers (Saheb and Mamaghani 2021). Practical applications involve developing standardised protocols that ensure seamless interoperability across various blockchain platforms and conducting pilot projects to test integration processes before full-scale deployment.

Organizational factors are critical to the successful BTA. Collaboration through partnerships and alliances between organizations is a pivotal driver for BTA, creating a supportive ecosystem for joint blockchain endeavours (Reyes et al. 2022). For example, the collaboration between IBM and Maersk on the TradeLens platform exemplifies how ecosystem support can drive BTA (Kottler and Graf 2021). Additionally, organizations should implement comprehensive training initiatives focused on BT to ensure their workforce is well-equipped to handle blockchain-related projects (Khan et al. 2021a). Companies like IBM and Walmart have successfully integrated blockchain solutions by continuously upskilling their employees, reducing resistance to adoption and enhancing overall competency (Zheng and Lu 2021). Addressing operational costs (Jiang and Ræder 2022), skill shortages (Tang et al. 2022), and workforce inexperience (Khan et al. 2021b) through targeted investment in education and training programs will further enhance organizational readiness for BTA. Practical applications include developing internal training modules, offering certification programs, and creating mentorship opportunities for employees to gain hands-on experience with BT. Conducting a comprehensive cost-benefit analysis enables organizations to grasp the financial benefits of blockchain compared to conventional systems, supporting informed strategic decisions (Khan et al. 2021a). This involves developing detailed business cases that quantify expected benefits and align blockchain initiatives with organizational goals.

Environmental factors, such as regulatory support and competitive pressure, significantly influence BTA. Proactive regulatory engagement and advocacy are essential to overcome regulatory barriers to BTA (Ronaghi 2022). Companies should participate in industry forums and policy discussions to advocate for clear and supportive regulatory frameworks. In countries like Singapore and Malta, proactive regulatory engagement has led to the development of clear guidelines that facilitate blockchain innovation (Cheah, Pattalachinti, and Ho 2018; Marian 2019). Organizations operating in regions with ambiguous regulations should consider similar advocacy efforts to create a more predictable regulatory environment. Practical applications include forming dedicated regulatory affairs teams to interact with policymakers and contribute to shaping blockchain-friendly legislation. Additionally, building a supportive ecosystem through strategic partnerships and collaborative networks can significantly boost BTA, fostering innovation and collaborative opportunities within the blockchain domain. Companies can participate in consortia, such as the Enterprise Ethereum Alliance, to collaborate on setting industry standards and sharing best practices (Ahmed and MacCarthy 2022).

User factors highlight the importance of addressing user needs and building trust in BT. Developing blockchain solutions that address specific customer needs can drive adoption by enhancing transparency, trust, and user satisfaction (Mukherjee et al. 2023). Identifying pain points in customer interactions that can be alleviated through BT is crucial. Companies like Walmart use blockchain to provide consumers with verifiable information about the origin and journey of products, thereby increasing transparency and trust in SCM (Sunny, Undralla, and Pillai 2020). Organizations should focus on creating user-friendly interfaces and applications to enhance the user experience and promote greater acceptance and utilisation of blockchain. Education and training programs are also critical in providing users with the knowledge and skills required to effectively employ BT. Trust in blockchain’s advanced security features significantly influences its acceptance within business organizations. Ensuring safety and security remains a paramount concern, with practical measures including robust encryption protocols, regular security audits, and continuous monitoring of blockchain networks to detect and address vulnerabilities (Khan et al. 2021a; Litoriya et al. 2022, 2022; Reyes et al. 2022). Practical applications involve developing comprehensive security frameworks, conducting regular risk assessments, and implementing robust incident response plans to address potential security breaches.

Overall, our research provides actionable insights that organizations can leverage to navigate the challenges of BTA. These strategies not only enhance the likelihood of successful BTA but also ensure that companies can fully realise the transformative potential of BT, thereby driving innovation, operational efficiency, and competitive advantage in the digital age. Practical applications highlighted in this research include developing standardised protocols, implementing comprehensive training programs, engaging in proactive regulatory advocacy, and ensuring robust security measures. These actions will enable organizations to effectively integrate BT and achieve sustainable growth and competitive advantage.

6.3. Limitations of this study

This SLR acknowledges certain limitations. The literature search was confined to three principal databases: Scopus, WoS, and the AIS eLibrary. This restriction means that pertinent research published in other scholarly venues, potentially enriching the understanding of the research question, may have been excluded. Future studies could expand their scope by including additional databases, thereby broadening the research landscape. Furthermore, while a systematic approach was employed to select articles, the ultimate inclusion in our review was subject to our interpretive judgement. However, the articles selected for inclusion were rigorously reviewed by the first author and a research assistant, strictly adhering to the specified inclusion and exclusion criteria to ensure objectivity and consistency.

6.4. Future research directions

Despite considerable progress in blockchain research, numerous areas remain underexplored, meriting further investigation. Firstly, there is a pressing need for empirical studies employing quantitative and mixed methods approaches to corroborate the qualitative insights prevalent in the literature, especially concerning blockchain’s impact on business performance metrics. Additionally, the research community has not thoroughly examined the effects of global phenomena, such as pandemics, on BTA and its capacity to enhance organizational resilience.

Moreover, industry-specific investigations are notably lacking; targeted research into BT’s influence on various sectors, particularly regarding operational efficiency and SCM, is crucial. The existing body of literature also falls short in analysing the user adoption process, often neglecting the perspectives of end-users and the usability of blockchain applications. While the SLR emphasises the value of international collaboration in blockchain research, further studies are needed to explore cross-cultural dimensions and understand how different cultural and regulatory contexts affect BTA. Additionally, the conceptual framework proposed for BTA requires empirical validation and refinement to ensure its relevance and applicability across diverse scenarios.

Bridging these research gaps could substantially enhance the corpus of knowledge on blockchain, providing a richer, empirically grounded, and globally contextualised comprehension of blockchain’s capacity to revolutionise business operations. Future research endeavours should therefore strive to address these deficiencies through methodologically varied, culturally aware, industry-focused, and user-centric investigations. Such efforts will contribute to the development of more strategic and effective blockchain integration in business practices.

7. Conclusion

This paper explores the critical factors that impact BTA in business settings, identifying enablers and barriers within technological, organizational, environmental, and individual dimensions. It highlights how technological innovations and organizational strategies, coupled with environmental dynamics and user involvement, play a critical role in facilitating blockchain integration. The study introduces a conceptual framework that serves as an instrument for dissecting these complex influences. The notable increase in blockchain-related research reflects an escalating scholarly and practical interest in leveraging blockchain’s capabilities to transform business operations. The paper not only highlights the transformative potential of blockchain but also suggests avenues for future research to address existing challenges and fully exploit blockchain’s comprehensive business value.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Data availability statement

The data generated and analysed during this study are available online at https://osf.io/ygwu8.

Notes

1. We stored the analysed dataset online, which is accessible at https://osf.io/ygwu8.

Appendix A.

Bibliometric analysis

Trend of publications

The volume of publications exploring the business value of blockchain has shown a significant upward trend from 2017 to 2022. Initially, in 2017, the count stood at two documents, which increased to five by 2018, escalated to seventeen by 2019, and rose to twenty-three in 2020. The growth trajectory continued with thirty publications in 2021, culminating at thirty-five in 2022. This progression underscores a burgeoning interest in the potential of BT across various business areas. Prior to 2017, literature on blockchain’s business value was scant, presumably due to the nascent stage of its development. However, as the practical implementations of the technology expanded, so did the investigation into its commercial advantages.

Types of publications

Between 2017 and 2022, the distribution of publications on the business value of blockchain comprised 76 journal articles, 33 conference papers, and 3 book chapters, as detailed in Figure A1 This distribution suggests a pronounced inclination among researchers and academics towards disseminating their findings in journals and presenting their insights at conferences. Such platforms are preferred for the opportunity they provide to garner specific recommendations, comments, and feedback from peer reviewers and attendees.

Figure A1. Types of publications.

Types of research methods used

Upon analysing 112 papers focused on the business value of BT, the distribution of research methodologies, as depicted in the pie chart (Figure A2), reveals a dominant preference for qualitative research, which constitutes 63% of the studies. This predominance suggests a strong inclination among scholars to explore the nuanced, descriptive dimensions of how BT affects organizations, with a preference for comprehensive narrative and thematic analysis over purely numerical valuations. In contrast, quantitative research accounts for 30% of the studies, underscoring a significant reliance on numerical data and statistical techniques to decipher trends and outcomes related to BTA. Mixed methods research, combining both qualitative and quantitative approaches, is comparatively rare, making up just 7% of the papers. This indicates a potential avenue for future research to bridge the gap by integrating statistical analysis with detailed qualitative observations. The current methodological landscape underscores a trend towards detailed qualitative inquiry in the literature, while quantitative studies play an important, though less predominant, role, and mixed methods approaches remain notably underrepresented.

Figure A2. Types of research methods used.

Co-authorship of countries

Figure A3 presents a visual depiction of the co-authorship network among countries engaged in research on the business value of blockchain. In this graphical representation, the size of each node corresponds to the research output of a country, with China, the United States, and the United Kingdom emerging as prominent contributors, as evidenced by their larger node sizes. A notable feature is the thick line connecting China and the United States, indicating a high degree of co-authorship and collaboration between these nations. Additionally, the node for Australia is markedly visible, underscoring Australia’s significant contribution to the global research landscape on blockchain, likely involving partnerships with other countries. This network map serves as a critical analytical instrument, uncovering the depth of international collaboration and highlighting the pivotal roles certain countries play in advancing research on blockchain’s business applications.

Figure A3. Co-authorship network of countries.

Co-occurrence of keywords

Figure A4 illustrates a keyword co-occurrence network derived from a SLR focusing on the business value of blockchain. At the heart of this network lies ‘blockchain’, highlighting its central role in academic discourse. It is intricately linked with essential terms such as ‘smart contract’, ‘SCM’, and ‘IoT’, underscoring their significance within business-related blockchain studies. Additionally, terms like ‘sustainability’, ‘value creation’, and ‘industry 4.0’ are closely clustered, indicating their strong interrelation and pivotal relevance in discussions surrounding blockchain. The thickness of the lines connecting these terms reflects the intensity of their co-occurrence, effectively mapping out key areas of focus in the exploration of blockchain’s implications for business.

Figure A4. Network map of co-occurrence of keywords.

Term co-occurrence map based on titles and abstracts

Figure A5 presents a term co-occurrence map derived from a SLR on the business value of blockchain, constructed using keywords from the titles and abstracts of pertinent publications. This map is characterised by densely interconnected terms such as ‘business value’, ‘BTA’, and ‘firm performance’, which stand at the forefront of discussions in this field. Surrounding these core concepts is a constellation of terms including ‘manager’, ‘organization’, and ‘company’, highlighting their integral relationship to the principal themes. Further enriching the network, secondary terms such as ‘system’, ‘security’, ‘smart contract’, and ‘solution’ branch out from the main nodes, emphasising their relevance to the discourse on blockchain in business contexts. This visual representation effectively delineates the scope of research subjects, with the node sizes and line thicknesses proportionately indicating the frequency of term co-occurrence and the strength of connections between concepts within the literature on the business implications of BT.

Figure A5. Term co-occurrence map.

PCA of the extracted terms

Our research employs PCA with varimax rotation, as detailed in Table A1, to uncover distinct thematic areas within the realm of blockchain business value. The rotated component matrix reveals themes such as ‘pandemic impact’, underscoring COVID-19’s influence on businesses; ‘digital transformation’, indicating the adoption of digital technologies like the Internet and IoT; and ‘adoption and performance’, which examines how emerging technologies affect business outcomes. Additionally, ‘data-driven user engagement’ highlights the significance of data in analysing user behaviour, whereas ‘case study insights’ stress the importance of case studies for understanding operational systems. Other crucial themes identified include ‘organizational performance & strategy’ focusing on business strategies; ‘digital currency analysis’, which explores digital currencies despite a negative association with ‘bitcoin’; ‘supply chain and traceability’ for operational logistics; ‘blockchain integration’ pertaining to its application across sectors; ‘blockchain-enabled financial systems adoption’ related to its financial implications; ‘business value generation’ concerning economic and social value creation; and ‘trust and reliability’, emphasising its significance in technology adoption and business relationships. Furthermore, the scree plot depicted in Figure A6 corroborates the extraction of 12 components (eigenvalue >1) from the dataset, further substantiating our thematic findings.

Table A1. PCA of the extracted terms from keywords and abstracts.

	Components
Terms	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	12
1. Accounting										.910
2. Adoption			.870
3. Asset									−.779
4. Attention		.670
5. Bitcoin							−.841
6. BTA									.447
7. Case Study					.807
8. Company						.845
9. Covid	.900
10.Cryptocurrency							−.831
11. Data				.826
12. Effect	.605					.481
13. Firm	.856
14. Firm Performance						.819
15. Internet		.764
16. IoT		.894
17. Literature									.458
18. Manager					−.424
19. Network				.744
20. Organization		.464							.451
21. Organizational Performance					.488			−.415
22. Pandemic	.916
23. Performance			.857
24. Relationship			.717
25. Risk									−.469
26. Role	.722		.594
27. Security		.820
28. Smart Contract
29. Solution								.629
30. Supply Chain	.714							.462
31. System					.762
32. Traceability								.784
33. Trust												.840
34. Use										.808
35. User				.800
36. Value Creation											−.884

Figure A6. 12 factors generated from 36 extracted terms (eigenvalue> 1).

Dendrogram analysis of blockchain’s impact on business value

The dendrogram displayed in Figure A7 outlines the synergy between technological innovation and organizational strategy in the context of blockchain. It classifies 36 key terms into a structured hierarchy, shedding light on two primary themes: the technological foundations of blockchain, including ‘cryptocurrency’, ‘smart contract’, and ‘security’, as well as the strategic organizational elements, such as ‘BTA’ and ‘organizational performance’. Our analysis reveals that the genuine business value of blockchain not only stems from its technical features but also from the adept integration of these technologies within organizational frameworks and workflows. This dendrogram serves as a crucial tool in navigating the intricate relationship between the technological prospects of blockchain and its implementation in a business setting, underlining the importance of combining technical proficiency with strategic incorporation to unlock blockchain’s full transformative potential.

Figure A7. Hierarchical clustering of BT concepts and their business value implications – Dendrogram.

Quality assessment results

The evaluation criteria detailed in Table 4 served as the foundation for assessing the 112 studies selected for our analysis. The outcomes of this quality assessment are depicted in Table A2, revealing that the average quality score of the studies is 88%. Among these, 15 studies (13.39%) were categorised as fair, 60 studies (53.57%) as good, and 37 studies (33.04%) as very good in quality. Notably, none of the papers were classified as poor quality. Consequently, all selected papers advanced to the subsequent phase for more in-depth analysis.

Table A2. Quality assessment scores of the 112 selected research papers.

ID	Author(s)	QC1	QC2	QC3	QC4	QC5	Total score	Percentage
1	Morkunas, Paschen, and Boon (2019)	1	1	0.5	0.5	1	4	80%
2	Kumar, Liu, and Shan (2020)	1	1	0.5	0.5	1	4	80%
3	Khan et al. (2021b)	1	1	1	1	1	5	100%
4	Upadhyay (2020)	1	1	1	1	1	5	100%
5	Choi (2020)	0.5	1	0	0.5	0.5	2.5	50%
6	Kim and Shin (2019)	0.5	1	1	1	1	4.5	90%
7	Sheel and Nath (2019)	1	1	1	1	1	5	100%
8	Khan et al. (2022)	0.5	1	1	1	1	4.5	90%
9	Yoon et al. (2020)	0.5	1	0.5	1	0.5	3.5	70%
10	Khan et al. (2021a)	1	1	1	1	1	5	100%
11	Liu et al. (2021)	1	1	1	1	1	5	100%
12	Schlecht, Schneider, and Buchwald (2021)	0.5	1	1	1	1	4.5	90%
13	Schneider, Leyer, and Tate (2020)	0.5	1	0.5	1	1	4	80%
14	Xiong et al. (2021)	1	1	1	1	1	5	100%
15	Budak and Çoban (2021)	1	1	1	1	1	5	100%
16	Khan et al. (2021c)	0.5	1	1	1	1	4.5	90%
17	Khalil, Khawaja, and Sarfraz (2022)	1	1	1	1	1	5	100%
18	Tang et al. (2022)	1	1	1	1	1	5	100%
19	Bauer et al. (2019)	0.5	1	1	1	1	4.5	90%
20	Li et al. (2022)	0.5	1	1	1	1	4.5	90%
21	Daluwathumullagamage and Sims (2020)	0.5	1	1	1	1	4.5	90%
22	Saheb and Mamaghani (2021)	1	1	1	1	0.5	4.5	90%
23	Wamba (2019)	0.5	1	1	1	1	4.5	90%
24	Downey, Bauchot, and Roling (2018)	0.5	1	0	0.5	1	3	60%
25	Yu, Umar, and Rehman (2022)	0.5	1	1	1	1	4.5	90%
26	Autore, Clarke, and Jiang (2021)	0.5	1	0.5	1	1	4	80%
27	Rathnakar (2019)	0.5	1	0	0.5	1	3	60%
28	Wu and Yu (2022)	0.5	1	1	1	0.5	4	80%
29	Ostern, Rosemann, and Moormann (2020)	1	1	1	1	1	5	100%
30	Ostern, Holotiuk, and Moormann (2022)	1	1	1	1	1	5	100%
31	Barenji and Montreuil (2022)	0.5	1	1	1	1	4.5	90%
32	Lage, Saiz-Santos, and Zarzuelo (2022)	1	1	1	1	0.5	4.5	90%
33	Ceptureanu et al. (2021)	1	1	1	1	1	5	100%
34	Sun and Wang (2020)	0.5	1	1	1	0.5	4	80%
35	Bowman and Steelman (2019)	0.5	1	1	1	0.5	4	80%
36	Ronaghi (2022)	1	1	1	1	1	5	100%
37	Lage, Saiz-Santos, and Zarzuelo (2021)	0.5	1	1	1	0	3.5	70%
38	Ning and Yuan (2021)	1	1	1	1	1	5	100%
39	Park and Sung (2020)	1	1	1	1	0.5	4.5	90%
40	Padalkar, Zadeh, and Song (2020)	0.5	1	1	1	0.5	4	80%
41	Sheel, Singh, and Joshi (2022)	0.5	1	1	1	0.5	4	80%
42	Tongkachok et al. (2022)	0.5	1	1	1	1	4.5	90%
43	Sun, Shahzad, and Razzaq (2022)	1	1	1	1	1	5	100%
44	Ali, Shin, and Song (2022)	0.5	1	1	1	0.5	4	80%
45	Jiang and Ræder (2022)	0.5	1	1	1	1	4.5	90%
46	Liu (2022)	0.5	1	1	1	1	4.5	90%
47	Chittipaka et al. (2022)	1	1	1	1	1	5	100%
48	Sestino et al. (2022)	1	1	1	1	1	5	100%
49	Chung (2022)	1	1	1	1	1	5	100%
50	Erboz (2022)	1	1	1	1	0.5	4.5	90%
51	Reyes et al. (2022)	1	1	1	1	1	5	100%
52	Litoriya et al. (2022)	1	0.5	1	0.5	1	4	80%
53	Mathur and Vijayvargy (2022)	1	1	1	1	0	4	80%
54	Valeria et al. (2022)	0.5	1	1	1	1	4.5	90%
55	Surjandy et al. (2021)	1	1	1	1	1	5	100%
56	Thiyagarajan and Josephine (2021)	1	1	1	1	1	5	100%
57	Davydovitch et al. (2021)	0.5	1	1	1	0	3.5	70%
58	Aydiner (2021)	0.5	1	1	1	1	4.5	90%
59	Pérez, Fernández, and Rambaud (2020)	1	0.5	1	1	0.5	4	80%
60	Pillai et al. (2020)	1	0.5	0.5	1	1	4	80%
61	Cho et al. (2021)	1	1	1	1	1	5	100%
62	Noonan and Doran (2021)	1	1	1	1	1	5	100%
63	Yin, Ran, and Chen (2022)	1	1	0	1	0.5	3.5	70%
64	Schmidt et al. ()	0.5	1	1	1	1	4.5	90%
65	Ying and Jia (2018)	1	1	1	1	1	5	100%
66	Yuthas, Sarason, and Aziz (2021)	1	0.5	0.5	1	0.5	3.5	70%
67	Liu et al. (2021)	0.5	1	1	1	0.5	4	80%
68	Junqueira, Pinochet, and Magalhaes (2021)	1	1	1	1	1	5	100%
69	Bauer et al. (2020)	1	1	1	1	1	5	100%
70	Wamba and Queiroz (2020)	0.5	1	1	1	1	4.5	90%
71	Rekha and Resmi (2021)	0.5	1	1	1	0.5	4	80%
72	Chong et al. (2019)	1	1	1	1	1	5	100%
73	Seebacher and Schüritz (2019)	1	1	1	1	1	5	100%
74	Lui and Ngai (2019)	1	1	1	1	1	5	100%
75	Riasanow et al. (2018)	0.5	1	1	1	1	4.5	90%
76	Glaser (2017)	1	1	1	1	1	5	100%
77	Hassna (2020)	1	0.5	1	1	0	3.5	70%
78	Mazumdar et al. (2021)	1	1	0	0.5	1	3.5	70%
79	Malope, Van Der Poll, and Ncube (2021)	1	1	1	1	1	5	100%
80	Sharma et al. (2019)	1	1	0.5	1	0.5	4	80%
81	Schlecht, Schneider, and Buchwald (2020)	0.5	1	1	1	1	4.5	90%
82	Zareen (2021)	1	1	1	1	0.5	4.5	90%
83	Loebbecke, Lueneborg, and Niederle (2018)	0.5	0.5	0	0.5	1	2.5	50%
84	Straubert, Sucky, and Mattke (2021)	0.5	1	1	1	1	4.5	90%
85	Abbatemarco et al. (2020)	0.5	1	1	1	0	3.5	70%
86	Zhao and Xu (2022)	0.5	1	1	1	0	3.5	70%
87	Rieger et al. (2019)	1	1	1	1	0.5	4.5	90%
88	Jensen, Hedman, and Henningsson (2019)	0.5	1	1	1	0.5	4	80%
89	Fridgen et al. (2022)	0.5	1	1	1	1	4.5	90%
90	Murray (2019)	1	1	1	1	1	5	100%
91	Mendling et al. (2018)	0.5	1	0.5	1	1	4	80%
92	Cai, Marrone, and Linnenluecke (2022)	1	1	1	1	0.5	4.5	90%
93	Subramanian et al. (2020)	1	0.5	1	1	1	4.5	90%
94	Hyvärinen, Risius, and Friis (2017)	0.5	1	1	1	1	4.5	90%
95	Carvalho (2020)	0.5	1	1	1	0.5	4	80%
96	Mueller-Bloch et al. (2022)	0.5	1	1	1	1	4.5	90%
97	Hendershott et al. (2021)	0.5	1	1	1	1	4.5	90%
98	Renwick and Gleasure (2020)	1	1	1	1	1	5	100%
99	Du et al. (2019)	1	1	1	1	0.5	4.5	90%
100	Ilk et al. (2021)	0.5	1	1	1	1	4.5	90%
101	Catalini and Gans (2020)	1	0.5	1	1	0.5	4	80%
102	Zheng et al. (2020)	0.5	1	1	1	0.5	4	80%
103	Weking et al. (2019)	1	1	1	1	1	5	100%
104	Ni et al. (2022)	1	1	1	1	1	5	100%
105	Kannengieser et al. (2022)	0.5	1	1	1	0.5	4	80%
106	Sengupta et al. (2021)	1	1	1	1	1	5	100%
107	Liu, Tan, and Zhao (2021)	1	1	1	1	0.5	4.5	90%
108	Bracci et al. (2021)	1	1	1	1	1	5	100%
109	Yang et al. (2021)	0.5	1	1	1	1	4.5	90%
110	Alt and Wende (2020)	1	0.5	1	0.5	0.5	3.5	70%
111	Lu (2022)	1	1	1	1	0.5	4.5	90%
112	Tan et al. (2022)	0.5	1	1	1	0.5	4	80%
	Average							88%