Integration of Traditional Expertise with Digital Tools

Article Sidebar

PDF
Published: 2025-10-27
Keywords:
digital transformation, traditional expertise, technology integration, professional practice, organizational change, digital infrastructure

Main Article Content

Hassan Ahmed
Department of Information Systems, University of Alaska Anchorage, Anchorage, AK 99508, USA
Mei Lin
School of Business Management, Guangxi University for Nationalities, Nanning 530006, China

Abstract

The integration of traditional expertise with digital tools represents a fundamental transformation reshaping professional practices across diverse industries. This paper examines how organizations successfully combine established domain knowledge with contemporary technological capabilities to enhance performance, efficiency, and innovation outcomes. Through systematic analysis of integration approaches spanning professional practice development, software engineering, architectural design, construction management, and manufacturing operations, this research identifies critical success factors and implementation strategies that enable effective synthesis of traditional and digital elements. The study explores theoretical foundations including digital infrastructure development, materiality of technological artifacts, and organizational change mechanisms while examining how practitioners navigate tensions between preserving valuable heritage knowledge and embracing technological advancement. The findings reveal that successful integration requires careful orchestration of technical implementation, human capability development, and organizational culture transformation that respects traditional expertise while leveraging digital capabilities. Organizations achieving effective integration demonstrate adaptive approaches that contextualize digital tools within established practice frameworks rather than pursuing wholesale replacement of traditional methods. This interdisciplinary investigation provides practitioners with comprehensive frameworks for managing digital integration while advancing theoretical understanding of technology-enabled professional practice evolution.

Article Details

Issue

Vol. 1 No. 1 (2025)

Section

Articles

How to Cite

Integration of Traditional Expertise with Digital Tools. (2025). Hua Xia Xin Zhi, 1(1), 8-20. https://journals.hubblepress.com/index.php/hxxz/article/view/2

References

1. D. Tilson, K. Lyytinen, and C. Sørensen, “Research Commentary—Digital Infrastructures: The Missing IS Research Agenda,” Information Systems Research, vol. 21, no. 4, pp. 748–759, 2010, doi: 10.1287/isre.1100.0318.

2. L. Yang, “The Evolution of Ballet Pedagogy: A Study of Traditional and Contemporary Approaches,” Journal of Literature and Arts Research, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 1–10, Apr. 2025, doi: 10.71222/2nw5qw82.

3. P. C. Verhoef, T. Broekhuizen, Y. Bart, A. Bhattacharya, J. Qi Dong, N. Fabian, and M. Haenlein, “Digital transformation: a Multidisciplinary Reflection and Research Agenda,” Journal of Business Research, vol. 122, no. 122, pp. 889–901, 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.09.022.

4. S. Yang, “The Impact of Continuous Integration and Continuous Delivery on Software Development Efficiency,” Journal of Computer, Signal, and System Research, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 59–68, Apr. 2025, doi: 10.71222/pzvfqm21.

5. P. M. Leonardi, “Digital materiality? How artifacts without matter, matter,” First Monday, vol. 15, no. 6, 2010, doi: 10.5210/fm.v15i6.3036.

6. Y. Liu, “Post-pandemic Architectural Design: A Review of Global Adaptations in Public Buildings,” International Journal of Engineering Advances, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 91–100, Apr. 2025, doi: 10.71222/1cj1j328.

7. M. Hanisch, C. M. Goldsby, N. E. Fabian, and J. Oehmichen, “Digital governance: A conceptual framework and research agenda,” Journal of Business Research, vol. 162, p. 113777, 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2023.113777.

8. D. Plekhanov, H. Franke, and T. H. Netland, “Digital transformation: A review and research agenda,” European Management Journal, vol. 41, no. 6, pp. 821–844, 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.emj.2022.09.007.

9. S. Jing, "Practice of digital construction to improve construction project progress management," Academic Journal of Engi-neering and Technology Science, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 36–44, 2025, doi: 10.25236/AJETS.2025.080205.

10. J. Kallinikos, A. Aaltonen, and A. Marton, “The Ambivalent Ontology of Digital Artifacts,” MIS Quarterly, vol. 37, no. 2, pp. 357–370, 2013, doi: 10.25300/misq/2013/37.2.02.

11. M. Alavi and Y. Yoo, “Use Information Technology for Organizational Change,” Handbook of Principles of Organizational Behavior, pp. 595–614, 2012, doi: 10.1002/9781119206422.ch32.

12. Y. Yoo, “Computing in Everyday Life: A Call for Research on Experiential Computing,” MIS Quarterly, vol. 34, no. 2, pp.213-231, 2010, doi: 10.2307/20721425.

13. S. Kraus, S. Durst, J. J. Ferreira, P. Veiga, N. Kailer, and A. Weinmann, “Digital Transformation in Business and Management research: an Overview of the Current Status Quo,” International Journal of Information Management, vol. 63, no. 4, p.102466, 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2021.102466.

14. P. M. Leonardi and S. R. Barley, “Materiality and change: Challenges to building better theory about technology and organ-izing,” Information and Organization, vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 159–176, 2008, doi: 10.1016/j.infoandorg.2008.03.001.

15. A. Majchrzak, P. H. B. More, and S. Faraj, “Transcending Knowledge Differences in Cross-Functional Teams,” Organization Science, vol. 23, no. 4, pp. 951–970, 2012, doi: 10.1287/orsc.1110.0677.

16. G. Wang, “Performance evaluation and optimization of photovoltaic systems in urban environments,” Int. J. New Dev. Eng. Soc., vol. 9, pp. 42–49, 2025, doi: 10.25236/IJNDES.2025.090106.