Unlike previous studies that address innovation, sustainability, or leadership separately, this review simultaneously integrates all three pillars, proposing a systemic and updated perspective to face organizational challenges in times of crisis.

The adoption of emerging technologies, such as artificial intelligence (AI), has enhanced crisis response capabilities by enabling task automation and decision-making based on predictive analysis (Al-Romeedy & Alharethi, 2024). Such capacity is amplified when technologies like IoT, autonomous robotics, and mobile solutions are integrated with ambidextrous organizational structures that balance opportunity exploration and operational efficiency (Aslam et al., 2024). In the Latin American context, for example, the development of digital competencies in SMEs in Lima has improved their competitiveness and sustainability (Espina-Romero et al., 2024).

However, this technological modernization brings new challenges, such as vulnerability to cyberattacks, which demands the implementation of protection mechanisms, encryption, and cybersecurity training (Saeed, Altamimi, Alkayyal, Alshehri and Alabbad, 2023). High-complexity sectors like the Royal Australian Navy require advanced simulation models to anticipate critical scenarios (Jnitova, Joiner, Efatmaneshnik and Chang, 2021), confirming that digital transformation is not merely about adopting technologies, but fundamentally redesigning business models (Carroll, Hassan, Junglas, Hess and Morgan, 2023).

During the pandemic, organizations with existing digital capabilities showed greater responsiveness (Browder, Dwyer and Koch, 2024). Nevertheless, accelerated digitalization without a clear strategy may prove ineffective. Bohorquez-Lopez (2022) identifies five key factors that condition effective digital transformation: prior knowledge, available tools, social dynamics, the effects of the pandemic, and post-pandemic adjustments. Accordingly, Reuschl, Deist and Maalaoui (2022) emphasize the importance of leadership, continuous training, and process review.

In this context, Nkomo and Kalisz (2023) propose a strategy focused on the "3Ps" (people, processes, and plant), recommending horizontal leadership and agile methodologies that prioritize employee well-being as the foundation for generating sustainable value. Similarly, the study by Alqahtani, Badi, and Nasaj (2025) shows that adaptive marketing capabilities-such as environmental scanning and rapid experimentation-are aligned with organizational agility to effectively respond in B2B contexts. This finding reinforces prior claims about the need to combine emerging technologies with agile structures to enhance responsiveness. Supporting this, evidence from Latin American organizations, such as SMEs in Lima (Kanaan, AL-Hawamleh, Aloun, Alorfi and Alrawashdeh, 2025), indicates that digital transformation strengthened operational sustainability-provided it was accompanied by collaborative leadership and iterative methodologies.

Critical discussion: Despite the reported progress in adopting emerging technologies as key tools to enhance organizational response capacity, significant limitations remain in their effective implementation within public institutions. Many of the reviewed studies focus on private or corporate contexts with advanced technological and human resources, which reduces the ability to extrapolate these findings to public organizations with more rigid structures or digital backwardness. Furthermore, there is a theoretical gap regarding how to integrate these technologies in an inclusive and sustainable manner within institutional environments with low levels of digital maturity. On a practical level, the findings suggest that technological adoption must be accompanied by horizontal leadership processes, continuous training, and structural redesign-elements that are rarely addressed in an integrated way. Further research is recommended to explore how these technologies can be gradually appropriated by public institutions, considering their actual capacities and avoiding one-dimensional approaches.

Agricultural producer organizations (APOs) in India exemplify how the combination of efficient resource management and social cohesion, through collaborative leadership, can enhance sustainability (Suresh & SS, 2024). However, lack of training and capital limits their impact. In response to this challenge, Almuqrin Mutambik, Alomran and Zhang (2023) suggest clear guidelines, increased public awareness, and regulatory frameworks that promote social responsibility accounting (SRA), contributing to both profitability and socio-environmental impact.

Khodamipour, Yazdifar, Shahamabad and Khajavi (2024) agree on the importance of standardization and government incentives to strengthen organizational resilience. In Saudi Arabia, Vision 2030 promotes innovative practices aligned with sustainability and competitiveness (Allui & Rawshdeh, 2024), while in Thailand, the sufficiency economy philosophy encourages moderation and efficient use of resources as a pathway to ensuring operational continuity (Rungruang, Tanitteerapan, Jitgarun, Sunthonkanokpong and Leekitchwatana, 2024). Nevertheless, these approaches require robust institutional contexts and significant resources, which raises questions about their applicability in the public sector or countries with budgetary constraints and less developed institutional infrastructure.

Similarly, in the fisheries sector, the adoption of responsible practices-such as adequate resource use and ecological management-helps mitigate risks and enhance corporate reputation (Zhang, Jiang and Chu, 2024). Other studies emphasize the importance of supply chain collaboration as a key mechanism to strengthen sector sustainability (Gouiferda & Iddik, 2024), as well as the implementation of sustainable policies and digital tools that enable adaptation to dynamic regulatory scenarios (Pînzaru, Dobrescu, Vitelar, Moldoveanu and Säniutä, 2023). Kara, Akbaba, Yakut, Çetinel and Pasli (2023) demonstrate that green orientation and the ecological management of human resources simultaneously improve innovation and resilience in the face of environmental challenges.

Complementing this perspective, Singh, Martins and Tefera (2025) highlight that sustainable project management-anchored in ethical principles and participatory practices-enables organizations to navigate organizational change more resiliently. Such integrative approach supports strategic alignment and promotes institutional learning as a key mechanism for responding to emerging environments. Likewise, Huzooree and Yadav (2025) propose that strengthening sustainable management competencies not only enhances preparedness for change but also transforms organizational structures into more adaptive and responsible models.

Taken together, the findings support that the strategic implementation of sustainable practices-backed by public policies, collaborative leadership, and ethical management frameworks-is essential to consolidate operational continuity, institutional resilience, and active contribution to the Sustainable Development Goals.

Critical discussion: Although the analyzed studies show significant progress in articulating sustainability and resilience, theoretical gaps remain regarding how these practices are adapted in public contexts with low institutional capacity. Most approaches originate from private sectors or countries with high investment in innovation, limiting their direct applicability to institutions facing budgetary constraints. On a practical level, the findings highlight the need to design policies that integrate sustainability from the strategic planning stage, rather than as a reactive component. Accordingly, further research is needed to understand how regulatory frameworks, organizational culture, and technical capabilities interact to achieve real and sustained operational resilience over time.

In volatile environments, ethical, consistent leadership with clear communication is key to building cohesive teams that are agile in decision-making (Resanovich, Hopthrow and de Moura, 2024). Harison and Lahav (2024) emphasize that decisions grounded in a deep understanding of the operational context improve the management of complex projects and strengthen competitive resilience. At the same time, employee empowerment fosters innovation in uncertain contexts (Wang, Jin, Yoo, 2024), and an organizational culture centered on continuous learning reinforces adaptation in times of crisis (Cai, Zhu and Jin, 2024).

In Vietnam, studies show that a green organizational culture, combined with environmentally oriented transformational leadership, drives both innovation and sustainable performance (Thuy, 2024; Alghfeli, Sohaimi and Chik, 2024). Likewise, green human resource management and ambidextrous leadership-balancing strategic vision with implementation-enhance technology adoption and operational efficiency even in demanding industries like mining (Ngoc Huynh, Thanh Nguyen and Y Vo, 2024; Sampene, Li, Esther Agyeiwaa, 2024; Mokganya, Webber-Youngman, Uys and Olwagen, 2024).

Alshahrani (2023) concludes that transformational leadership fosters a collaborative environment that facilitates innovation and decision-making. This is supported by Mach, Ferreira and Abrantes (2022), who demonstrate that transformational leadership directly impacts team performance through cohesion and collective commitment, especially under pressure. Similarly, Armesto-Céspedes et al. (2024) argue that emotional intelligence significantly influences the effective application of leadership styles, emphasizing that empathetic and emotionally competent leadership is essential for addressing post-crisis scenarios such as those experienced in the Peruvian context. Taken together, these findings suggest that the development of ethical, emotionally intelligent, and strategically ambidextrous leadership is a key component for sustaining organizational performance in uncertain environments. However, theoretical gaps remain regarding how these leadership styles adapt to highly bureaucratic public structures or institutions with low organizational maturity. Such represents a valuable opportunity for future research aimed at designing leadership models applicable to emerging contexts with significant structural limitations.

Critical discussion: From a theoretical perspective, the studies analyzed expand the understanding of leadership by incorporating key dimensions such as emotional intelligence, strategic ambidexterity, and environmentally oriented transformational approaches. These perspectives enrich the field by showing that effective leadership in times of crisis does not rely solely on technical competencies, but also on relational, ethical, and adaptive skills. On a practical level, it is evident that empathetic and cohesive leadership styles increase team engagement and strengthen decision-making. However, gaps remain in the effective application of these approaches within public organizations characterized by rigid hierarchical structures. This opens a line of inquiry into how to adapt resilient leadership models in institutional environments with low response capacity or high resistance to change.

Table 3

Dimension	Objective 1: Emerging Technologies	Objective 2: Sustainable Practices	Objective 3: Leadership Competencies
Main Enablers	AI, IoT, autonomous robotics, digital competencies, ambidextrous organizational structures	Efficient resource management, solid regulatory frameworks, government incentives, intersectoral collaboration	Ethical and transformational leadership, emotional intelligence, clear communication, employee empowerment
Primary Benefits	Automated crisis response, advanced predictive analysis, improved operational efficiency	Sustained operational continuity, strengthened institutional resilience, active contribution to SDGs	Consolidated team cohesion, agile and effective decision-making, facilitation of innovative processes
Critical Challenges	Cybersecurity vulnerabilities, high implementation complexity, significant institutional digital divide	High financial and human resource requirements, dependence on robust institutional capacity	Adaptation to rigid hierarchical structures, organizational resistance to change, low institutional maturity
Contextual Limitations	Reduced applicability in public institutions with technological backwardness and limited resources	Limited transferability to countries with budgetary constraints and low institutional development	Diminished effectiveness in bureaucratic environments with inflexible structures and low response capacity
Practical Implications	Technology adoption must be systemically integrated with structural and leadership changes	Sustainability requires robust institutional contexts, supportive public policies, and collaborative leadership	Effective crisis leadership demands emotional competencies, strategic adaptability, and structural flexibility

Note: Own elaboration

Institutional Context Dependency: All three objectives show reduced effectiveness in public organizations with limited resources.

This study contributes to an integrated understanding of how innovation, sustainability, and leadership work together to strengthen organizational resilience in crisis contexts. It also broadens the theoretical approach by highlighting the interaction between adaptive capacities, ethical frameworks, and transformational leadership in different sectors and industries.