Although transforming economies offer many examples of business model innovation, they have been largely overlooked in academic research, with most studies focusing on what happens in developed countries. However, in their push to become innovation economies, transforming economies have become experimentation arenas for new ways of doing business. This special issue addresses the gap in business model innovation research in several ways. First, we develop a co-evolutionary framework in which we consider what type of business model innovation occurs in transforming economies (adoption, adaptation, or creation) and who the central players are (indigenous firms or MNEs). We show how, through business model innovation, indigenous firms have begun to challenge global industry leaders – despite not having the same resource advantages, proprietary technology, or market power – and we highlight the consequences of this for the domestic and global environment. Second, we discuss how the articles in this special issue advance research by contributing to a co-evolutionary perspective on business model innovation for a global and digital world. Third, to guide future research on business model innovation in the fascinating context of transforming economies we outline various directions that could build on our framework and the articles presented here.

Leveraging the human capital specificity and the Chief Executive Officer (CEO)–top management team (TMT) interface literature, this study explores the impact of generalist versus specialist CEOs on R&D commitments by Indian firms under the boundary conditions of TMTs' functional and educational diversity. Based on a sample of 253 firms over a period of 6 years, in contrast to previous studies, our findings suggest that specialist CEOs are more likely to invest in R&D than generalist CEOs; however, when supported by functionally and educationally diverse TMT, the R&D commitment of generalist CEOs increases as well.

This article examines the industrial relations systems constructed by Ford and United Automobile Workers (UAW) leaders for the Ford Motor Company in the 1940s. Ford’s industrial relations systems extended privileges to men and male-dominated groups to the detriment of their female counterparts and women seeking employment and advancement. Systemic male privilege was integral to Ford’s operations throughout conversion to military production for World War II and reconversion back to civilian production.

Indigenous literature suggests Māori businesses are distinct within Aotearoa New Zealand, due to facing unique challenges and having different operating preferences. It could also be argued that Māori and non-Māori enterprises in the private, public and not-for-profit sectors are identical as a function of operating in similar markets. However, there is a paucity of empirical evidence, and the present article rectifies this with a study of 230 Aotearoa enterprises, including 24 Māori. We test differences and find Māori enterprises report higher cultural capital, which relates to employees' knowledge and skills towards working with and respecting cultural values. However, we find no differences across human capital, relational capital, entrepreneurial culture, and organisational performance. The findings suggest that apart from a culturally specific factor, Māori and non-Māori enterprises appear to be similarly enabled, which provides a useful benchmark for understanding Māori business. We discuss the implications for research.