Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Innovation (2025)

Volume 21 Issue 2: 15-32

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7341/20252122

JEL Codes: Q01, A20, I20, Q56

May Portuguez-Castro, Ph.D. Educational Innovation, Professor, Researcher of CENTRUM Católica Graduate Business School, Departamento Académico de Posgrado en Negocios,Lima 15023, Peru and Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú, Departamento Académico de Posgrado en Negocios, Lima 15088, Peru, e-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Isolda Margarita Castillo- Martínez, Ph.D. Educational Innovation, Professor Researcher of Tecnologico de Monterrey and Benemérita Escuela Normal de Coahuila, México, e-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Abstract

PURPOSE: This study explores the critical leadership competencies necessary for fostering innovability— the integration of innovation and sustainability—within organizations, particularly inr education institutions (HEIs) and the business sector. The research seeks to address the gap in understanding how these competencies are developed in HEIs and whether they effectively prepare graduates with the skills needed for the current business context. Additionally, the study emphasizes the need to identify robust instruments for measuring these competencies to ensure their practical application in organizational settings. METHODOLOGY: A systematic literature review (SLR) was conducted using Scopus and Web of Science databases. The study employed a rigorous selection process to identify relevant empirical studies published between 2015 and 2024. A total of 53 articles were analyzed to address three key research questions related to the characteristics of innovability leadership, recommendations for developing immovability in organizations, and the methodologies or instruments used to identify these competencies. The analysis involved thematic synthesis and content analysis to extract insights and identify gaps in the existing literature. FINDINGS: The study identifies five key categories of leadership competencies essential for innovability, including strategic leadership, fostering a culture of collaboration, commitment to sustainability, continuous education, and sensitivity to global megatrends. Despite the recognition of these competencies, the study reveals a significant lack of empirical research on their practical implementation and measurement. The findings also highlight the need for robust tools to assess these competencies effectively. Additionally, the study provides several recommendations for developing innovability for their integration into the business sector, emphasizing the importance of leadership development programs, the integration of sustainability into corporate strategy, and the promotion of a collaborative organizational culture. IMPLICATIONS: Theoretically, the study contributes to the conceptual framework of innovability leadership by identifying critical competencies and suggesting a more integrated approach to leadership development in business education. Practically, the research underscores the importance of developing targeted training programs and assessment tools to cultivate these competencies in future leaders. This is particularly relevant for business schools, which play a crucial role in preparing students to address complex global challenges. ORIGINALITY AND VALUE: This study fills a gap in the literature by providing a detailed examination of the competencies required for innovability leadership and proposing directions for future research and practice. It offers a unique contribution by bridging the theoretical and practical aspects of innovability in leadership, particularly within the context of higher education.

Keywords: innovability, leadership competencies, sustainability, business education, systematic literature review, Sustainable Development Goals, SDGs, leadership development, educational innovation, higher education

INTRODUCTION

The contemporary world is becoming increasingly complex, and within this context, business sustainability has emerged as a critical element for addressing new challenges. Organizational leaders are progressively recognizing the need to adopt sustainable measures in hopes of generating a positive impact on society (Makower, 2021). This reality underscores the growing importance of integrating sustainability and innovation into the curricula of business schools within higher education institutions (Fang & O’Toole, 2023). Given the crucial role these schools play in training the future leaders of industry, it is essential that they impart the necessary knowledge and skills to their students to address complex societal issues and apply them within their organizations (Terán-Yépez et al., 2023). These educational programs must prepare the next generation of leaders to face uncertain challenges with knowledge, skills, attitudes, and values aligned with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and innovability (Portuguez-Castro & Castillo-Martínez, 2024). Despite the growing recognition of the importance of these approaches, significant gaps remain in how to develop and assess this competence.

In the current business and educational landscape, innovability positions itself as a fundamental concept for achieving sustainable and competitive development. This term, which merges "innovability” and "sustainability,” not only refers to the creation of novel products or services but also involves a deep integration of sustainability across all aspects of the innovation process (De la Vega & Barcellos de Paula, 2021). Innovability extends beyond traditional approaches to innovation, as it requires a reconfiguration of business models and organizational strategies to make sustainability a central axis (Zucchella et al., 2024). This ensures that new ideas and solutions not only generate economic benefits but also have a lasting positive impact on the environment and society (De Tommaso & Pinsky, 2022). Despite advances in its adoption as a strategy, the understanding of innovability as a competence remains limited, highlighting the need for further theoretical and methodological development to clearly delineate it.

Understanding innovability as a competence is crucial for driving sustainable competitiveness in a constantly changing world. However, as a relatively new concept, it is often confused with terms like skill, capability, and creativity (Chang, 2024). Therefore, more theoretical development is needed to clearly delineate innovability as a competence and differentiate it from other similar concepts. For innovability to become a central competence, it must permeate all levels of the organization, from senior management to front-line employees. This involves a profound cultural shift where sustainable innovation becomes a fundamental value, and where collaboration, experimentation, and risk-taking are encouraged (Zucchella et al., 2024). Although innovability presents itself as a promising strategy for achieving business success and contributing to sustainable development (De la Vega & Barcellos de Paula, 2021), more empirical evidence is needed to support this claim. A better understanding of this concept and how it is developed at the individual and organizational level would provide business leaders and educational institutions with the tools and knowledge needed to drive sustainable innovation more effectively.

This study aims to identify how universities cultivate innovability competencies and provide evidence-based recommendations for their effective application in the business sector. Despite the growing recognition of innovability’s importance, there is a significant gap in the literature regarding how these competencies can be systematically developed and measured within organizations, in higher education and the business sector. This study seeks to address this gap by exploring the following research questions (RQs):

Q1: What characteristics should a leader in innovability possess?

Q2: What specific recommendations can be made for the business sector to develop innovability? and

Q3: What methodologies or instruments are used to identify leadership competencies in innovability?

Through a rigorous analysis of relevant literature, this work intends to shed light on the mechanisms that drive innovability, offering a practical guide to fostering an organizational culture conducive to idea generation, sustainability, and innovation.

Given the increasing pressure on companies to operate sustainably, understanding and developing innovability is crucial not only to maintain competitiveness but also to meet contemporary social and environmental expectations. This work also contributes to the education and training of future leaders by integrating innovability into the curricula of business schools, preparing the next generation to face the challenges of an increasingly complex and sustainability-oriented business environment. Therefore, this study is essential for bridging current gaps in the literature and providing practical tools for implementation. The article is structured as follows: initially, the theoretical framework is presented with the main concepts related to the topic and the gaps in the literature; then, the methodology used is described, followed by the main results, the discussion of the findings, and finally, the conclusion.

LITERATURE REVIEW

Innovability as a link between innovation and sustainability

In a world where environmental and social challenges are becoming increasingly complex, the need to incorporate sustainability and innovation into business education has never been more critical. This is why the concept of innovability arises, referring to an organization’s ability to integrate innovation and sustainability into its strategies and operations, driving progress that generates value for both the company and society and the environment (De la Vega & Barcellos de Paula, 2021). Innovation emerges as a crucial tool for sustaining competitiveness. Effective use of innovation to remain competitive demands identifying inventions, securing funds, and addressing various other factors that incentivise successful adoption of innovation in the market (Loučanová & Olšiaková, 2019). Innovation might serve as a vital asset in the sustainable logistics transition (Ibrahim et al., 2024).

Innovability and innovation leadership share a common foundation in their emphasis on fostering change and creativity within organizations, but they differ significantly in their focus and objectives. While innovation leadership centers on generating novel ideas and solutions, often driven by technological advances or process improvements (Khumalo & Du Plessis, 2023), innovability goes further by explicitly integrating sustainability as a fundamental principle, considering long-term environmental, social, and economic impacts (Zucchella et al., 2024). Although both require visionary leadership that encourages experimentation and collaboration, innovability adopts a more holistic perspective, aligning innovative progress with the well-being of society and the environment (De la Vega & Barcellos de Paula, 2021). Thus, innovability complements innovation leadership by providing a framework that balances novelty and utility with responsibility and sustainability.

Innovability is based on the premise that innovation and sustainability are not contradictory concepts, but rather complement and enhance each other (Zucchella et al., 2024; Valenti et al., 2024). Companies with high innovability are characterized by their ability to identify opportunities in sustainability challenges, developing creative solutions that generate economic, social, and environmental benefits (Dahlgaard‐Park & Dahlgaard, 2010). This holistic approach requires a mindset shift in organizations, moving from a short-term profit-focused business model to one that integrates sustainability in all its dimensions.

Empirical studies have recently explored innovability. Zucchella et al. (2024) present a study on collaborations between multinational companies and smaller startups in the energy sector, focusing on "open innovability” as a key strategy for sustainable development. Through an exploratory and qualitative research approach, they conducted in-depth interviews with participating companies. The results revealed that open innovability, through collaboration between companies, is fundamental for driving sustainable innovation in the energy sector. Key factors for the success of these collaborations were identified, such as the retention of technology ownership by smaller companies, the establishment of a shared vision, and the creation of trust relationships. The benefits of innovability were related to small companies’ access to resources and capabilities, as well as improvements in their visibility and credibility. The study does not mention leadership in innovability; however, it suggests that leadership capable of articulating a common vision integrating innovation and sustainability is essential to drive innovability. A shared vision should be promoted, so exploring how leaders can articulate a vision that integrates innovation and sustainability clearly and convincingly for all organization members is relevant for future studies.

Innovability allows reconciling profitability with social welfare. This is the case with the Brazilian company Suzano, which implemented shared value strategies such as reinventing products and exploring new markets for sustainable products, implementing sustainable practices throughout its value chain, and working in collaboration with local communities. This allowed it to reconcile profitability with social welfare, using "innovability” as a central axis (Tommaso & Pinsky, 2021). This research uses an exploratory and descriptive qualitative approach, employing the interactive qualitative analysis method through in-depth interviews. The results indicate that Suzano’s innovability strategy allowed it to balance profitability with social welfare, establishing itself as a leader in sustainable development in its sector. The benefits of innovability for the company were to generate value for the business and the community, find new innovation opportunities that drove its sustainability strategy, and build trust and legitimacy, which facilitated the implementation of its projects. The study mentions purpose-driven leadership, focused on generating a positive impact on society and the environment. It suggests that this type of leadership, with its focus on generating social and environmental value, could be fertile ground for innovability. Future studies might analyze how this type of leadership influences organizational culture, decision-making, and the capacity for innovation towards sustainability.

Despite advances in understanding innovability and its applicability in the business environment, there is a clear need for further research into the role of leadership in this context. Companies, along with the private sector, require Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) to train graduates not only with technical skills but also with business and social competencies necessary to face the challenges linked to the SDGs (Sánchez-Carrillo et al., 2021). However, Mouritz et al. (2022) argue that traditional teaching methods are insufficient to prepare leaders in sustainability. Although there is abundant literature on leadership, management, sustainability, innovation, creativity, and complex thinking, the effective integration of these topics remains a challenge (Ramírez-Montoya & Portuguez-Castro, 2024; Ramírez-Montoya et al., 2024). To move towards a more sustainable future, it is crucial to address and develop the competencies that constitute leadership in innovability.

Currently, there are limited studies exploring the practical implementation of innovability in business and higher education, particularly in understanding how these two domains can collaborate to cultivate competencies that drive innovation and sustainability effectively (De la Vega & Barcellos de Paula, 2021; Tommaso & Pinsky, 2021; Zucchella et al., 2024). This gap in research underscores the importance of future studies that explore how leadership can be a key driver for the integration of innovation and sustainability in organizations. Specifically, there is a need to examine the role of higher education institutions in shaping leaders who possess the necessary innovability leadership skills. Understanding how these competencies are developed and applied in real-world business contexts will provide valuable insights for bridging the gap between theoretical frameworks and practical implementation of innovability.

Leadership competencies in innovation and sustainability

Developing leadership competencies in innovation and sustainability is essential to address the challenges of the 21st century. This is a complex process that involves the development of skills, knowledge, and attitudes that enable individuals and organizations to make responsible, ethical, and effective decisions in a constantly changing context (Olivares et al., 2021, p. 67). Sustainability leadership is not solely focused on achieving economic benefits but aims to integrate social and environmental dimensions into decision-making by generating a positive impact on society and the environment (Iqbal & Piwowar-Sulej, 2022; Alam, 2022). Various sources approach this topic from different perspectives. For example, the importance of leadership in creating a shared vision, managing change, and promoting innovation is highlighted, crucial aspects for transitioning towards sustainability (Arif, 2016; Alam, 2022). The role of collaboration with internal and external stakeholders as a key element for building sustainable business models is also mentioned (Bocken et al., 2019). Innovative leadership refers to the process by which leaders inspire and encourage team members to think and act innovatively, thereby driving organizational innovation (Shan, 2024). This kind of leadership involves not only the completion of direct tasks but, more importantly, the creation of an environment supportive of innovation, where leaders act as motivators, supporters, and providers of resources (Akkoç et al., 2022). Despite the importance of leadership in innovation and sustainability training, various limitations hinder its implementation and measurement.

A comparative analysis of the literature on leadership competencies in sustainability and innovation and their measurement methods has identified some limitations. The study by Knight and Paterson (2018) established five groups of competencies related to attitudes and behaviors: integrative operator, results driver, change agent, ethically oriented, visionary thinker, through a quantitative analysis. Findings showed that behavioral competencies evolve over time, necessitating periodic updates to maintain their validity. Additionally, sample size is noted as a limitation requiring further validation.

The study by Muff et al. (2022) aims to identify the elements of sustainable leadership. Results indicated that self-awareness is considered the central element of this competency, and evidence suggests that students improve their performance in responsible leadership after taking relevant courses. The article acknowledges that more research is needed to confirm these findings, and the context of the sample is a limitation for generalizing results, as well as the need for assessments with professionals. Lastly, the study by Armani et al. (2020) identified seven attributes related to the role of sustainable leadership, including leadership, interpersonal skills, sustainability focus, organizational culture, principles, and moral values. The study is exploratory and relies on qualitative case studies, so the findings are not generalizable to all organizations or contexts, and it is recommended to continue investigating these results more deeply and include other participants.

Measuring leadership in innovation and sustainability is a complex process that requires considering various variables, using appropriate measurement instruments, and accounting for the influence of external factors. It is crucial to adopt a holistic and contextualized approach to understand the real impact of leadership in generating long-term value. Overcoming these limitations requires a joint effort by educational institutions, businesses, and governments to create an environment conducive to training leaders capable of guiding society towards a more sustainable future. However, according to the previous literature review, the development of indicators measuring sustainable and innovative leadership competencies is still limited, necessitating ongoing validation and deeper analysis of the components of innovability competency according to the context in which it develops.

Challenges in identifying leadership competencies in innovation and sustainability in Higher Education

Identifying leadership competencies in innovation and sustainability poses challenges due to the complex and multifaceted nature of these concepts. In terms of innovation, it can manifest in various ways, from creating new products and services to implementing more efficient processes (Manzoor et al., 2023). Moreover, innovation does not always yield short-term tangible results, complicating the measurement of both the innovation itself and the leadership that drives it (Lago et al., 2023). Innovation competence was found to mediate the relationship between innovation education and entrepreneurial intention (Iddris et al., 2022). Innovation education helps students to be competent by ensuring how to find innovative objects to start and maintain a new business (Sabarguna, 2017). Moreover, the alignment between entrepreneurial tasks and emerging technologies, such as generative AI tools, has been identified as a key factor in enhancing students’ ability to effectively leverage technology (Marchena Sekili & Portuguez-Castro, 2025), thereby optimizing their performance and fostering long-term business sustainability. The scales and questionnaires used to assess leadership in innovation and sustainability must be carefully selected and validated for the specific context (Zhou et al., 2021), making it crucial to establish clear and specific indicators that capture the essence of innovation in a particular context.

Similarly, sustainability encompasses economic, social, and environmental dimensions that require the evaluation of multiple variables and indicators. Assessing the impact of leadership on sustainability involves analyzing how leaders’ decisions and actions contribute to long-term objectives in each of these dimensions, which can be a complex and subjective process (Hossain et al., 2024; Iqbal & Piwowar-Sulej, 2022). Perceptions of leadership vary among individuals and groups, and a leader’s influence on innovation and sustainability often develops in collaboration with other actors, further complicating the identification and measurement of an individual leader’s influence (Zhou et al., 2021). Therefore, a longitudinal and systemic approach is necessary to understand the real impact of leadership on innovation and sustainability, recognizing that these are not isolated events but continuous processes that evolve over time.

The success of innovation and sustainability initiatives can also depend on external factors. Elements such as market conditions, governmental regulations, and resource availability can influence these outcomes (Gozali et al., 2018). Additionally, a leader may have a direct impact on their team but can also indirectly influence other teams or the organization as a whole through organizational culture, policies, and incentive systems, making it challenging to unravel the individual contributions of each actor within this complex web of relationships and processes (Dianingrum et al., 2022). In this context, effectively measuring innovability requires tools and methods that can capture both the direct and indirect influences of leadership on innovation and sustainability through diverse measurement approaches that can offer a more comprehensive view and minimize the limitations of a single instrument.

The role of higher education institutions in developing leadership competencies for innovability.

Modern companies increasingly emphasize sustainability as a strategic priority, seeking leaders who can balance economic growth with social and environmental considerations. Studies reveal that businesses prioritize specific leadership qualities, such as the ability to innovate responsibly, manage diverse teams, and adapt to global challenges (Purcell et al., 2019; Strukelj et al., 2023). Leaders are expected to develop and implement strategies that not only promote organizational success but also address societal challenges like climate change and inequality (Alam, 2022; Manzoor et al., 2023). Moreover, the demand for collaborative and inclusive leadership has grown, with companies requiring individuals who can build alliances, engage stakeholders, and navigate complex interdependencies.

To meet these demands, HEIs have integrated sustainability and innovation into their academic and co-curricular programs. Many universities now offer courses and specializations that focus on topics such as corporate social responsibility, circular economy, and social innovation (Iqbal & Piwowar-Sulej, 2022; Hueske & Pontoppida, 2020). Leadership programs have also evolved to include training on transformational leadership, equipping students with the skills to lead organizational change and foster sustainable practices (Strukelj et al., 2023). University business incubators provide a platform for students to apply their knowledge by supporting startups that address sustainability challenges. These incubators offer mentorship, funding opportunities, and access to networks, helping students develop innovative solutions with practical applications (Almansour, 2022). Additionally, HEIs establish partnerships with companies to create experiential learning opportunities, such as internships and real-world sustainability projects, which allow students to engage directly with the challenges faced by businesses.

Despite these efforts, some studies suggest that graduates often lack the practical skills required to address sustainability challenges in a business context. For example, while students may learn about sustainability frameworks, they may not fully understand how to implement them in complex organizational environments (Mzyece et al., 2021). This highlights a need for greater collaboration between HEIs and the business sector to align training programs with industry demands (Purcell et al., 2019). By strengthening this collaboration, HEIs can ensure that their graduates are well-prepared to address the multifaceted challenges of innovability in the workplace.

This study is designed to deepen the understanding of innovability competence, a crucial emerging concept for integrating sustainability and innovation into business practices. The objectives are to identify the essential components of innovability competence, provide evidence-based recommendations for its development in corporate environments, and critically evaluate current methodologies and tools used for its measurement. Areas for improvement are highlighted, and opportunities for future research are identified. This research is significant for business leaders and executives, human resources and organizational development professionals, as well as academics in universities and business schools who seek to integrate and teach leadership competencies in innovation and sustainability effectively.

METHODOLOGY

A systematic review typically requires considerably more effort than a traditional review. The process is akin to primary scientific research and involves the meticulous and systematic gathering, measuring, and synthesizing of data (Sage Research Methods, 2020). The Systematic Literature Review (SLR) conducted for this research followed the protocol outlined by Kitchenham and Charters (2007), which involves reviewing a protocol to specify the research question. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were determined, and three research questions (RQ: 1-3) presented in the Introduction section were established for analyzing the articles. The systematic approach ensures that the review is not only comprehensive but also objective and replicable, providing a solid foundation for drawing reliable conclusions and making informed recommendations that contribute to the field of study. By addressing these research questions, the review aims to illuminate the pathways through which organizations and their leaders can harness the dual powers of innovation and sustainability to drive meaningful progress.

Search strategy

The search was conducted in the Scopus and Web of Science (WOS) databases using the following search string for both databases: “sustainability AND innovation AND leadership AND business AND ‘higher education’”. This query yielded 16 articles from Scopus and 64 from WOS. After removing eight duplicate articles and one that did not meet the inclusion criteria. Only scientific articles were retained, a total of 53 articles remained for analysis based on the three research questions. Figure 1 illustrates the steps followed to arrive at the total number of articles for analysis. This systematic approach ensures the review comprehensively encompasses the relevant literature, addressing the defined research questions effectively.

Figure 1. Prisma flow diagram to show the search strategy

Source: Developed by authors and based on Page et al. (2021).

Inclusion and exclusion criteria

The inclusion and exclusion criteria are set with the purpose of capturing and incorporating the questions that the Systematic Literature Review (SLR) aims to answer. The criteria are designed to enhance the efficiency of article retrieval for analysis. Table 1 displays the inclusion and exclusion criteria that were followed.

Table 1. Inclusion and exclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria	Exclusion criteria
Papers published between 2015 and 2024	Those papers prior to the 2015
Scientific papers	Outreach articles
Papers containing the keywords sustainability, innovation, leadership, business and "higher education”	Papers not related to the research topic

These criteria facilitate a targeted and efficient search, ensuring that the articles selected for review are directly pertinent to the research questions of the SLR, thereby enhancing the overall quality and relevance of the review process. This methodical approach helps in building a solid foundation for synthesizing the existing literature and identifying gaps for future research.

Phases of the research process

• Identification: The search string initially identified 16 articles in Scopus and 64 articles in WOS.
• Selection: The articles were selected based on their relevance to higher education studies and their potential to address the research questions, yielding a total of 80 articles. Duplicate articles were removed, leaving 72 articles.
• Inclusion: One article that did not meet the inclusion criteria was removed, and only the scientific articles were included, resulting in a final count of 53 papers. Once the documents were selected, a content analysis was conducted to address the research questions, categorizing the information to support the analysis. The thematic synthesis involved coding the selected articles based on predefined categories related to innovability leadership competencies. Each article was systematically reviewed, and themes were identified through an iterative process, ensuring that both explicit and implicit themes were captured. The content analysis facilitated the identification of recurring patterns and gaps in the literature, allowing for a more comprehensive synthesis of the findings.
• Reporting: The results of the in-depth analysis of the articles are presented in tables and graphs to make the information more comprehensible to readers, and explanatory text is included beneath the figures and tables to supplement the information.

RESULTS

The answers to the research questions based on the analysis of the 53 studies consulted are presented below.

What characteristics should a leader in innovability possess?

To answer the characteristics of an innovability leader, the consulted articles were examined to determine the main characteristics of a leader in innovation and sustainability. From this analysis, five key categories were deduced, which are detailed in Table 2.

Table 2. Characteristics of innovability leadership

Category	Authors
Strategic Leadership and Innovation Vision	Purcell et al., 2019; Kompella, 2024; Arif, 2016; Camacho-de la Parra et al., 2023; Mzyece et al., 2021; Lago et al., 2023; Khumalo & Du Plessis, 2023; Barykin et al., 2023; Rinaldi et al., 2018; Hannon et al., 2019; Costa et al., 2022
Innovation Culture and Collaboration	Arif., 2016; Camacho-de la Parra et al., 2023; Almansour, 2022; Iqbal & Piwowar-Sulej, 2022; Manzoor et al., 2023; Dianingrum et al., 2022; Strukelj et al., 2023; Hossain et al., 2024; Taleb et al., 2023; Lago et al., 2023; McAdam et al., 2021; Rinaldi et al., 2018
Education and Training in Innovation and Entrepreneurship	Suparno et al., 2024; Iqbal & Piwowar-Sulej, 2022; Saif, Goh et al., 2023; Zhou et al., 2021; Wakkee, van der Sijde et al., 2019; Costa et al., 2019; Yu, Qiu and Gupta, 2022
Sensitivity to Megatrends and Sustainable Practices	Camacho-de la Parra et al., 2023; Eustaquio et al., 2024; Purcell et al., 2019; Ritchie-Dunham et al., 2023; Wardhani & Rahadian, 2021; Islam & Iyer-Raniga, 2023; Tan & Omar, 2022; Alam, 2022; McAdam et al., 2021; Ritchie-Dunham et al., 2023
Development of Interpersonal and Emotional Leadership Skills	Islam & Iyer-Raniga, 2023; Alam, 2022; Dianingrum et al., 2022; McAdam et al., 2021; Shafait, Meyer & Sroka, 2021; Wakkee et al., 2019; Manzoor et al., 2023; Lago et al., 2023; Kompella, 2024; Khumalo & Du Plessis, 2023; Ge & Li, 2019

Strategic leadership and innovation vision centers on leaders who adopt a strategic approach focused on sustainability and innovation. This approach is oriented towards achieving the SDGs and solving real-world problems (Mzyece et al., 2021; Purcell et al., 2019). Such leadership embodies a holistic vision that integrates innovation with environmental and social impact (Arif, 2016; Barykin et al., 2023; Camacho-de la Parra et al., 2023; Lago et al., 2023), managing change with a strategic and transformative mindset (Costa et al., 2022; Hannon et al., 2019; Kompella, 2024). These leaders seek to turn sustainability challenges into opportunities for innovation, enabling them to implement effective actions and ensure long-term sustainable processes (Khumalo & Du Plessis, 2023; Rinaldi et al., 2018).

Innovation culture and collaboration is characterized by the importance of developing an organizational environment where innovation, collaboration, and co-creation are essential elements. In this area, a culture that engages all stakeholders and builds strong partnerships is fostered (Almansour, 2022; Arif, 2016; Iqbal & Piwowar-Sulej, 2022; Manzoor et al., 2023) to promote experimentation and the generation of innovative ideas (Strukelj et al., 2023; Taleb et al., 2023). Projects are developed that create a positive impact through co-creation, reflecting values of care, mutual respect, and respect for the environment (Camacho-de la Parra et al., 2023; Dianingrum et al., 2022; Rinaldi et al., 2018). Additionally, there is flexibility and speed in responding to environmental changes, adapting strategies, business models, and innovation processes (Hossain et al., 2024; Lago et al., 2023; McAdam et al., 2021).

Education and training in innovation and entrepreneurship focuses on the value of education in developing innovative and sustainable solutions. The emphasis is placed on having a high creative potential and creating an environment that fosters the generation of innovative ideas (Ashal et al., 2023; Taleb et al., 2023; Zhou et al., 2021). Continuous training to develop the skills necessary for sustainable and effective solutions is essential (Ong & Khan, 2023; Suparno et al., 2024; Wakkee et al., 2019). This approach also includes ongoing investment in professional development, preparing leaders who can steer the transformation towards innovation and sustainability (Costa et al., 2022; Iqbal & Piwowar-Sulej, 2022; Yu et al., 2022).

Sensitivity to megatrends and sustainable practices addresses the need to understand how global megatrends such as climate change, emerging technology, and globalization impact systems and demand innovative and sustainable solutions. This category promotes a commitment to ethics and values that guide the development of sustainable solutions (Alam, 2022; Camacho-de la Parra et al., 2023; Eustaquio et al., 2024). The importance of adopting a strategic approach that is aware of the megatrends impacting the planet (Purcell et al., 2019; Ritchie-Dunham et al., 2023; Wardhani & Rahadian, 2021) is emphasized, allowing for the identification and management of ecological practices such as the circular economy (Islam & Iyer-Raniga, 2023). Moreover, the integration of sustainability into curriculum is promoted, guiding the development of specific competencies that enable individuals to confront and lead in the face of growing environmental and social challenges (Alam, 2022; Eustaquio et al., 2024; Igwe, 2022; McAdam et al., 2021).

Emotional leadership and development of interpersonal competencies highlights the importance of leaders who not only lead by example and inspire others but also empower and effectively motivate their teams. This leadership approach involves building strong relationships based on trust, empathy, and collaboration, adopting an innovative and global mindset that focuses on customer needs and the well-being of employees and stakeholders (Alam, 2022; Islam & Iyer-Raniga, 2023). These leaders excel in emotional intelligence, knowledge management skills, and a commitment to sustainability, which are essential for fostering an environment where benevolence and integrity prevail (Dianingrum et al., 2022; McAdam et al., 2021; Shafait et al., 2021). They also actively promote creativity and experimentation, continuously preparing themselves through professional development and adapting agilely to environmental changes (Ge & Li, 2019; Lago et al., 2023; Manzoor et al., 2023). This type of leadership not only improves the work environment but also facilitates access to complementary resources and fosters extensive cooperation, which is crucial for organizational success in a constantly evolving world (Ge & Li, 2019; Kompella, 2024; Khumalo & Du Plessis, 2023).

According to the literature reviewed, an innovability leader should exhibit a combination of strategic vision, the ability to foster collaboration, a commitment to sustainability, and advanced interpersonal skills. These characteristics enable them to transform challenges into innovative opportunities that benefit both their organization and the broader environment. In practice, this should translate into leading by example, empowering teams, promoting a culture of creativity and experimentation, and developing sustainable solutions that respect and enhance both human and natural resources. In this sense, innovability is a comprehensive approach that aligns business needs with ethical and environmental imperatives, thereby ensuring a positive and lasting impact on society and the economy.

What specific recommendations can be made for the business sector to develop innovability?

To identify recommendations for developing innovability in companies, the consulted articles were examined to determine the best practices for integrating innovation and sustainability into organizations. From this analysis, five key categories were deduced, which are detailed in Table 3.

Table 3. Recommendations for developing innovability in companies

Category	Authors
Leadership and Organizational Culture	Ritchie-Dunham et al., 2023; Kompella, 2024; Camacho-de la Parra et al., 2023; Eustaquio et al., 2024; Khumalo & Du Plessis, 2023; Dianingrum et al., 2022; Ge & Li, 2019; Lago et al., 2023; Liu et al., 2024; Suparno et al., 2024
Education, Training, and Skill Development	Arif, 2016; Camacho-de la Parra et al., 2023; Almansour, 2022; Iqbal & Piwowar-Sulej, 2022; Manzoor et al., 2023; Zhang, & Ma, 2023; Dianingrum et al., 2022; Strukelj et al., 2023; Hossain et al., 2024; Taleb et al., 2023; Lago et al., 2023; McAdam et al., 2021; Rinaldi et al., 2018
Innovation and Sustainability in Operations	Suparno et al., 2024; Iqbal & Piwowar-Sulej, 2022; Taleb et al., 2023; Ong,& Khan, 2023; Zhou et al., 2021; Wakkee et al., 2019; Costa et al., 2022; Yu et al., 2022
Collaboration and Continuous Learning	Arif, 2016; Almansour, 2022; Mzyece et al., 2021; Khumalo & Du Plessis, 2023; Islam & Iyer-Raniga, 2023; Lago et al., 2023; Igw et al., 2022; Kompella, 2024; Đorđević, 2021; Ritchie-Dunham et al., 2023; Purcell et al., 2019
Evaluation, Monitoring, and Adaptability	Sann et al., 2023; Strukelj et al., 2023; Islam & Iyer-Raniga, 2023; Zhou et al., 2021; Ritchie-Dunham et al., 2023; Filippaios & Benson, 2019; Igwe et al., 2022; Lago et al., 2023; Liu et al., 2024; Shafait et al., 2021; Wakkee et al., 2019

In the category of leadership and organizational culture, it is crucial for companies to integrate sustainability into their corporate mission, establishing a strong framework that promotes a culture of innovation and collaboration at all levels of the organization. This involves fostering leadership that is not only strategic and collaborative but also develops and empowers other leaders within the company to encourage adaptability and cooperation among their teams (Ge & Li, 2019; Lago et al., 2023; Ritchie-Dunham et al., 2023). Moreover, it is essential to cultivate an environment where innovation and employee well-being are valued (Dianingrum et al., 2022), actively involving employees in decision-making processes so that they feel more engaged and motivated (Lago et al., 2023; Liu et al., 2024; Saif et al., 2023), as well as promoting a diverse and inclusive environment (Camacho-de la Parra et al., 2023). Finally, continuous training of business leaders in sustainability principles is essential to ensure that the vision of innovability remains relevant and evolves with global and market demands (Eustaquio et al., 2024; Kompella, 2024; Khumalo & Du Plessis, 2023; Suparno et al., 2024).

In the category of education, training, and skill development, it is fundamental for companies to invest in business education to promote a culture of continuous innovation. This includes training employees in quality management methodologies to optimize processes and apply innovation efficiently to problem-solving (Arif, 2016; Alam, 2022; Lisdiono et al., 2023; Tan & Omar, 2022; Zheng et al., 2024;). Additionally, it is essential to develop skills that enable employees to innovate while understanding the social impact of their innovations, ensuring that business initiatives contribute positively to society (Kompella, 2024). Integrating sustainability into leadership development programs helps align business goals with global sustainability objectives (Iqbal & Piwowar-Sulej, 2022; Khumalo & Du Plessis, 2023; Manzoor et al., 2023; Ritchie-Dunham et al., 2023), while fostering emotional intelligence and knowledge management prepare employees to handle complex challenges and collaborate effectively (Liu et al., 2024; Shafait et al., 2021; Wakkee et al., 2019). Finally, promoting a culture of self-awareness and ethical values is crucial for maintaining a work environment that values integrity and mutual respect, essential elements for a true culture of innovation (Alam, 2022; Dianingrum et al., 2022).

In the category of innovation and sustainability in operations, companies should focus on integrating sustainability at the core of innovation. This includes using eco-friendly materials and reducing environmental impacts across all aspects of production and operations (Islam & Iyer-Raniga, 2023; Khumalo & Du Plessis, 2023; Strukelj et al., 2023). It is essential to develop products and services that are not only innovative but also sustainable, ensuring that each new offering contributes positively to the environment and society (Ge & Li, 2019; Taleb et al., 2023; Zhou et al., 2021). Adopting circular economy principles is another key strategy, allowing companies to close production and consumption loops to maximize resource efficiency (Arif, 2016; Islam & Iyer-Raniga, 2023; Qin, Duan, Al-Hourani & Alsaadi, 2022). Furthermore, promoting the creation of sustainable value through value-based business models can differentiate a company in the market, while implementing advanced Industry 4.0 technologies can enhance business performance and facilitate eco-innovation, enabling operations to be more agile and less harmful to the environment (Filippaios & Benson, 2019; Lago et al., 2023; McAdam et al., 2021).

In the category of collaboration and continuous learning, it is crucial for companies to foster both internal and external collaboration to unlock new innovation opportunities. Creating dedicated spaces for knowledge exchange and interdisciplinary collaboration can catalyze creativity and accelerate the development of innovative solutions (Almansour, 2022; Khumalo & Du Plessis, 2023). Establishing strategic partnerships within the innovation ecosystem, including collaborations with other companies, universities, and institutions, is fundamental to integrating diverse perspectives and expertise that enrich projects and reinforce sustainability goals (Igwe et al., 2022; Islam & Iyer-Raniga, 2023; Lago et al., 2023). Additionally, promoting a culture of collaboration among employees is essential to maintain a vibrant, innovation-oriented work environment where idea exchange becomes the norm (Đorđević, 2021; Kompella, 2024; Mzyece et al., 2021). Lastly, collaborating through specific partnerships to address sustainability challenges allows companies to adopt a more integrated and effective approach to solving complex problems, ensuring that joint efforts lead to more substantial and lasting results (Purcell et al., 2019; Ritchie-Dunham et al., 2023).

In the category of evaluation, monitoring, and adaptability, it is essential for companies to implement robust tracking and evaluation systems for their innovability initiatives. This involves using specifically tailored indicators to measure progress and the real impact of innovations in terms of sustainability and business effectiveness (Islam & Iyer-Raniga, 2023; Strukelj et al., 2023; Zhou et al., 2021). Additionally, it is crucial to continuously reassess and adjust training programs to ensure they are aligned with the evolving needs of the business environment, enabling employees to stay ahead in relevant skills and knowledge (Alam, 2022; Filippaios & Benson, 2019; Igwe et al., 2022). Establishing clear and objective metrics helps organizations better understand the return on investment in innovation and make proactive adjustments (Lago et al., 2023; Sann et al., 2023). On the other hand, developing organizational agility to quickly respond to environmental changes is fundamental to maintaining competitiveness and market relevance (Lago et al., 2023). Finally, fostering a culture that values problem-solving and internal entrepreneurship encourages employees to take initiative and seek creative solutions to challenges, thus driving a continuous cycle of innovation and improvement (Liu et al., 2024; Shafait et al., 2021; Wakkee et al., 2019).

What methodologies or instruments are used to identify leadership competencies in innovability?

To answer the question of what methods or instruments are being used to identify innovability leadership competence, articles that address methods/instruments for identifying both innovation leadership competence and sustainability leadership competence were considered. The results are presented in Table 4.

Table 4. Methods/Instruments for identifying innovability leadership competence

Method	Authors
Quantitative method	Suparno et al., 2024;Camacho-de la Parra et al., 2023; Eustaquio et al., 2024; Iqbal & Piwowar-Sulej, 2022; Manzoor et al., 2023; Khumalo & Du Plessis, 2023; Đorđević, 2021; Taleb et al., 2023; Alam, 2022;Ong & Khan, 2023; Zhou et al., 2021; Zheng et al., 2024; Lisdiono et al., 2023; Filippaios & Benson, 2019; Alyahya et al., 2022; Liu et al., 2024; Shafait et al., 2021; Qin et al., 2022; Liu, Alnafrah & Zhou, 2024; Gugissa et al., 2021; Yu et al., 2022
Qualitative method	Purcell et al., 2019; Ritchie-Dunham et al., 2023; Kompella, 2024;Almansour, 2022; Mzyece et al., 2021; Alam, 2022; Islam & Iyer-Raniga, 2023; Ge & Li, 2019; Wardhani & Rahadian, 2021;Tennakoon et al., 2023; Tan & Omar, 2022; McAdam et al., 2021; Rinaldi et al., 2018; Buono et al., 2015; Sipos et a.l, 2021; Wakkee et al., 2019; Azalanzazllay et al., 2022; Hannon et al., 2019; Costa et al., 2022
Mixed methods	Pepin et al., 2024; Lago et al., 2023; Barykin et al., 2023; Sann et al., 2023
Bibliometric study	Strukelj et al., 2023
Literature review	Hueske & Pontoppida, 2020; Igwe et al., 2022

Among the articles that employed a quantitative method, several used measurement instruments, such as questionnaires. For example, Suparno et al. (2024) utilized a questionnaire to measure the relationship between business education, creativity, and innovation. Eustaquio et al. (2024) developed a questionnaire aimed at understanding how sustainability leadership (SL) and transformational leadership (TL) influence social innovation and the teaching of sustainability in HEIs. In the study by Dianingrum et al. (2022), a questionnaire collected subordinate responses regarding the paternalistic leadership of their superiors, covering three dimensions: authoritarianism, benevolence, and morality. Hossain et al. (2024) used a questionnaire to gather data from a sample of Malaysian manufacturing companies. Taleb et al. (2023) employed a structured questionnaire to collect data from micro-entrepreneurs in Malaysia, with the objective of testing the effects of entrepreneurial leadership, opportunity recognition, and innovation capacity on the business success of microenterprises. Ong and Khan (2023) used a questionnaire to identify competencies related to green leadership, green creativity, and green intrinsic motivation in university students. Qin et al. (2022) used a questionnaire distributed to managers, heads, and assistants of Turkish pharmaceutical companies, which included questions related to the three dimensions of Total Quality Management (TQM): customer focus, process management, and leadership. Ashal et al., 2023) employed a questionnaire with 54 statements, 35 of which were divided into four dimensions: conducive learning environment, learning processes and practices, leadership that reinforces learning, and creating a learning structure. The remaining 19 statements were divided into five dimensions: new business initiatives, innovation capacity, self-renewal, proactivity, and risk-taking.

In other quantitative studies consulted, no specific instrument was mentioned (Alam, 2022; Arif, 2016; Camacho-de la Parra et al., 2023; Iqbal & Piwowar-Sulej, 2022; Zhou et al., 2021). In Đorđević’s (2021) study, data were collected through paper and online surveys targeting leaders and members of public and private universities. Regarding the techniques used, Jayashree et al. (2022) study was conducted using a Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) with data collected from 314 Malaysian SMEs. The article by Zheng et al. (2024) involves a descriptive study to globally analyze carbon emissions, followed by cross-sectional dependence (CD) statistics and slope heterogeneity (SH) analysis. A cross-sectional quantitative survey was conducted in Lisdiono et al. (2023) research; Barykin et al. (2023) applied a fuzzy decision-making modeling technique; a cross-sectional research design is presented in Shafait et al. (2021) article; Liu et al. (2024) article used Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) with bias correction and unsupervised machine learning techniques across 30 OECD countries. In Yu et al. (2022) article, a procedure is described for evaluating the effectiveness of a supplier training program, which proved useful in a practical situation faced by an original equipment manufacturer (OEM) in the automotive industry.

In the articles that utilized a qualitative methodological approach, the case study technique was prominently used (Azalanzazllay et al., 2022; Buono et al., 2015; Costa et al., 2022; Ge & Li, 2019; Islam & Iyer-Raniga, 2023; Kompella, 2024; McAdam et al., 2021; Mzyece et al., 2021; Purcell et al., 2019; Ritchie-Dunham et al., 2023; Strukelj et al., 2023; Tennakoon et al., 2023; Sipos et al., 2021;). On the other hand, Almansour’s (2022) article describes a qualitative study aimed at understanding entrepreneurs’ perceptions of the support received in university business incubators and its alignment with the SDGs and technological innovations. Alam (2022) used a qualitative approach, employing interviews and document analysis to collect data on leadership and governance structures in private universities in Bangladesh. Wardhani and Rahadian (2021) conducted a qualitative content analysis to explore the sustainability strategies of palm oil companies in Indonesia and Malaysia. A phenomenological approach was applied to examine the lived experiences of participants working or having worked in Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) clinics in Singapore in Tan and Omar’s (2022) article. In Wakkee et al. (2019) article, multiple observations of complex processes were conducted, useful for theory building. Hannon et al. (2019) research employed a collaborative philosophy and the NIZAC strategy and action framework, which had a positive potential in challenging and supporting the group of participating universities and organizations, in collaboration with host cities/communities/business sectors.

Only four articles were found to use a mixed-methods approach. Pepin et al. (2024) article focuses on the creation and evaluation of a tool called the "Responsible Business Model Canvas” (RBMC) to integrate sustainability into business models. Lago et al. (2023) research analyzes the role of cooperation and technological orientation in the innovation capacity of startups and presents the German Startup Monitor (GSM). Barykin et al. (2023) study applied a fuzzy decision-making modeling technique. The UNIQUAL scale was developed and validated in the article by Sann et al. (2023).

DISCUSSION

In the current context, innovability emerges as a relevant approach for companies to achieve sustainable and innovative development, and the development of leaders with this competence is crucial to achieving it. Regarding the first question related to the characteristics that a leader in innovability should possess, the literature reveals that there is no clear definition of leadership with this competence, and there are also challenges in its delimitation and conceptualization. As shown in Table 2, the literature review carried out in this research identified five categories that can be considered key elements of the innovability competency: a strategic vision, the ability to foster collaboration, a commitment to sustainability, and advanced interpersonal skills. These characteristics could be identified through the analysis of articles related to innovation and sustainability. For instance, Tommaso and Pinsky (2022) emphasize the importance of purpose-driven leadership as a key element in translating sustainability into strategy, directly influencing profitability, social well-being, and sustainable economic development. Additionally, collaboration is identified as a fundamental component for the success of innovability. Zucchella et al. (2024) indicate that cooperation among companies can drive sustainable innovation. Furthermore, trust emerges as a crucial factor in collaboration for innovation, particularly in the context of open innovation, where establishing solid trust relationships is essential for sharing knowledge and resources, yet this study further suggests that fostering a culture of collaboration is not just beneficial but essential for sustaining innovability in the long term. Although the literature does not yet offer a unified definition of innovability leadership, it is suggested that leaders in this area should possess a strategic vision, the ability to foster collaboration, a firm commitment to sustainability, and advanced interpersonal skills.

Developing innovability within companies requires a multifaceted approach that integrates innovation and sustainability into the culture, processes, and business strategy. Regarding the second question related to recommendations for developing innovability in companies, few empirical studies were found on the implementation of this approach. As shown in Table 2, the review of articles with recommendations for implementing innovation and sustainability allowed for the delineation of some guidelines, which are related to leadership development and organizational culture, education and skill development, innovation and sustainability in operations, collaboration, and evaluation. These actions, derived from the literature, are noted by the authors as beneficial for promoting these behaviors within the organization (Almansour, 2022; Iqbal & Piwowar-Sulej, 2022; Ritchie-Dunham et al., 2023). However, the scarcity of empirical studies supporting the implementation of this multifaceted approach in companies makes it difficult to identify best practices and measure success (Kompella, 2024). These findings are important because they allow corroborating the importance of innovation and sustainability in organizations, and above all, they constitute evidence to justify that in the field of business it is necessary that both concepts are integrated, since the literature review allowed identifying that in the challenging context we are currently facing, success in the economic and business field cannot be separated from social and environmental welfare, thus setting a guideline to emphasize the relevance of the implementation of innovation in business and its inclusion in the curricula of higher education institutions. Despite this, the existing literature offers a valuable theoretical framework for further exploring the innovability approach, and the development of more empirical studies will provide a more comprehensive understanding of the challenges and opportunities in building a sustainable future through innovation and sustainability.

In this research, few instruments were identified that establish a link between innovation and sustainability in their measurement, and it was found that there are no instruments specifically designed to measure innovability. The SLR identified two articles that include innovation and sustainability in their measurement: the study by Eustaquio et al. (2024), which aims to understand how sustainability leadership (SL) and transformational leadership (TL) influence the level of social innovation and the teaching of sustainability in Higher Education Institutions (HEIs), and the study by Almansour (2022), which seeks to understand entrepreneurs’ perceptions of the support received in university business incubators and its alignment with the SDGs and technological innovations. The concept of innovability refers to an organization’s ability to integrate innovation and sustainability into its strategies and operations, driving progress that creates value for both the company and society and the environment (De la Vega & Barcellos de Paula, 2021). The results of this study highlight the need to design and validate an instrument focused on measuring innovability competence in higher education students to establish strategies that strengthen this competence, which is important in the business environment and for generating social benefits.

CONCLUSION

In the studies analyzed, findings on leadership competencies in innovation and sustainability were identified, but rarely addressed jointly, and there remains no solid research base on innovability as a distinct concept. Innovability bridges innovation and sustainability, offering a framework for aligning progress with environmental and social responsibility. However, its implementation faces challenges such as the lack of standardized metrics, limited empirical evidence, and a need to identify specific leadership skills that drive innovability. These include strategic vision, fostering collaboration, commitment to sustainability, and emotional intelligence. While some cases, like Suzano (Tommaso & Pinsky, 2021), illustrate its potential, more research is needed to develop measurement tools, compare innovability with established leadership models, and document its application in diverse contexts. These steps are crucial to solidify innovability as a valuable construct in business and education.

The study reaffirms the importance of innovability leadership competencies and proposes a conceptual framework for their integration into organizations. The responses to the study’s three key questions—regarding the definition of innovability, the characteristics of leadership in this area, and the recommendations for implementing it—underscore the need for further theoretical clarification. In this context, innovability is presented as a dynamic and adaptable construct that relies not only on the technical and strategic skills of leaders but also on their ability to influence organizational culture. This theoretical approach can serve as a foundation for future studies aimed at developing more integrated and precise models of innovability leadership.

Furthermore, the identification of five main categories of innovability leadership suggests that these characteristics could be studied in greater depth and connected with specific organizational outcomes. This would enrich the theory in this emerging field by providing a more detailed understanding of how these competencies impact innovation and sustainability within companies. Therefore, there is an urgent need to continue researching these theoretical aspects to build a more solid and coherent conceptual framework that guides both future research and business practice.

Additionally, this study highlights the critical role of HEIs in cultivating innovability competencies. HEIs are uniquely positioned to bridge the gap between theoretical frameworks and practical applications, equipping future leaders with the skills needed to address sustainability and innovation challenges in organizations. By embedding sustainability and innovation within academic curricula, fostering experiential learning opportunities, and promoting interdisciplinary approaches, HEIs contribute to advancing both the theoretical understanding and practical implementation of innovability leadership. Further research could explore how the educational strategies employed by HEIs directly influence the development of these competencies and their subsequent impact on organizational success.

In practical terms, this study offers clear guidelines for companies and educational institutions to design leadership training and development programs that integrate innovability. The responses to the key questions highlight the importance of fostering a collaborative and trusting environment within organizations. These implications suggest that companies should adopt more structured approaches to integrating innovation and sustainability into their business strategies by implementing purpose-driven leadership programs and creating collaboration mechanisms that overcome the barriers of power asymmetry.

For educational institutions, these findings imply the need to incorporate content and practices that prepare students to lead with a holistic and sustainable vision. Additionally, the review of articles allowed for the delineation of practical guidelines that, while derived from the literature, require empirical validation to ensure their effectiveness in different business contexts. This approach provides an initial framework that organizations can use to promote innovability, but it also underscores the need to continue exploring its application in practice through more specific and contextually relevant empirical studies.

The development of innovability competencies has significant implications for business schools, especially in the training of leaders who can integrate innovation and sustainability into business strategies. Business schools, as centers for training future leaders, play a crucial role in preparing their students to face the contemporary challenges of the global business environment. Incorporating innovability into academic programs means not only teaching traditional management and leadership techniques but also fostering a mindset that integrates sustainability as a central axis of innovation.

The research results also highlighted the utility of designing and validating an instrument to measure innovability competence, as it is a valuable concept to integrate into companies, linking innovation and entrepreneurship with sustainability. This not only benefits the profitability of the organizations where it is implemented but also generates social value. Having a measurement instrument will enable the development of strategies that allow higher education students to strengthen their knowledge, skills, and attitudes toward innovability, preparing them to be leaders in companies that drive this vision of promoting both innovation and sustainability: innovability.

The study encountered limitations, such as the scarcity of empirical studies addressing the implementation of innovability leadership within companies, highlighting a gap in the literature that needs to be addressed. The responses to the study’s questions indicate that while there are promising theoretical frameworks, the lack of empirical validation limits their applicability in real-world scenarios, making it difficult to identify best practices and accurately measure their success.

The absence of specific measurement tools to evaluate innovability competence represents another significant limitation. This lack hinders the empirical validation of the proposed theoretical findings and limits companies’ ability to effectively assess and develop these competencies in their leaders. Therefore, it is essential for future research to focus on developing methodologies and evaluation tools that can be adapted to different organizational and cultural contexts.

Additionally, the study relied solely on a review of the existing literature, which, while comprehensive, does not provide insights from practical fieldwork. Future research should incorporate interviews with business leaders to better understand their needs regarding innovability competencies. This approach would allow for a more nuanced understanding of the specific skills and attributes required in different organizational settings. Moreover, analyzing the curricula of business programs in HEIs would provide valuable insights into how these competencies are being addressed, and whether existing academic programs are aligned with industry demands.

Directions for future research focus on the need to address the gaps identified in this study. It is crucial to develop empirical studies that validate the innovability leadership characteristics identified in the literature and explore how these characteristics can be cultivated and evaluated in various organizational settings. The responses to the key study questions suggest that future research should focus on creating evaluation tools that allow for accurate and reliable measurement of innovability competencies.

It would also be valuable to investigate how cultural and sectoral contexts influence the effectiveness of innovability leadership. This could lead to the customization of training and development strategies based on the specific needs of each organization. In this way, not only will the theoretical understanding of the subject be expanded, but practical tools will also be provided, enabling companies to lead in an increasingly complex and competitive environment, achieving a balance between innovation, sustainability, and business success.

Finally, the impact of developing innovability competencies in business schools is crucial, as these institutions must prepare future leaders to face global challenges centered on sustainability and innovation. Integrating the innovability approach into the curriculum involves adapting academic programs to include purpose-driven leadership, collaboration, and trust-building, equipping students with essential skills to lead in an ever-evolving business environment. This not only enhances the employability of graduates but also positions business schools as pioneers in education for sustainable business development.

Acknowledgement

The authors would like to acknowledge the financial support of Writing Lab, Institute for the Future of Education, Tecnologico de Monterrey, México, in the production of this work.

References

Akkoç, İ., Türe, A., Arun, K., & Okun, O. (2022). Mediator effects of psychological empowerment between ethical climate and innovative culture on performance and innovation in nurses. Journal of Nursing Management, 30(7), 2324–2334. https://doi.org/10.1111/jonm.13849

Alam, G. M. (2022). The relationship between figureheads and managerial leaders in the private university sector: A decentralised, competency-based leadership model for sustainable higher education. Sustainability, 14(19), 12279.

Almansour, M. (2024). Business incubators and entrepreneurial training: Leveraging technological innovations and digital marketing. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 71, 13586-13597. https://doi.org/10.1109/TEM.2022.3180212

Alyahya, M. A., Elshaer, I. A., Abunasser, F., Mahmoud Hassan, O. H., & Sobaih, A. E. (2022). E-learning experience in higher education amid COVID-19: Does gender really matter in a gender-segregated culture? Sustainability, 14(6), 3298.

Arif, S. (2016). Leadership for change: Proposed organizational development by incorporating systems thinking and quality tools. Business Process Management Journal, 22(5), 939–956.

Armani, A. B., Petrini, M., & Santos, A. C. (2020). What are the attributes of sustainable leadership? Review of Business Management, 22(4), 820–835.

Ashal, N., Masa’deh, R., & Twaissi, N. M. (2023). The impact of learning organization on intrapreneurship: The case of Jordanian pharmaceutics. Sustainability, 15(16), 12211. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151612211

Azalanzazllay, N. N., Lim, S. A. H., Ungku Zainal Abidin, U. F., & Cherrafi, A. (2022). Uncovering readiness factors influencing the Lean Six Sigma pre-implementation phase in the food industry. Sustainability, 14(14), 8941. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14148941

Barykin, S. E., Sergeev, S. M., Mottaeva, A. B., Purwatiningsih, L., Said, J., Yusoff, H., … Abdul Manan, D. I. (2023). Evaluating energy financing considerations and sustainable energy innovation with the role of financial development and energy development. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 30, 6849–6863.

Bocken, N., Strupeit, L., Whalen, K. & Nußholz, J. (2019). A review and evaluation of circular business model innovation tools. Sustainability, 11(8), 2210. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11082210

Buono, A. F., Haertle, J., & Kurz, R. (2015). UN-supported principles for responsible management education (PRME): Global context, regional implementation, and the role of signatories. In The UN Global Compact: Fair competition and environmental and labour justice in international markets (Advances in Sustainability and Environmental Justice, Vol. 16, pp. 1-15). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

Camacho-de la Parra, S., Arredondo-Trapero, F. G., Guerra-Leal, E. M., & Vázquez-Parra, J. C. (2023). Anthropocentrism and ethics of care in environmental ethics based on gender variable. Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education, 15(5), 1454–1466.

Chang, J. (2017). Assessing adverse effects of inferior innovations with brand innovability: perspectives of consumer innovativeness. Journal of Technology Management & Innovation, 12(4), 55-64.

Costa, F. H. de O., Moraes, C. C. de, Silva, A. L. da, Delai, I., Chaudhuri, A., & Pereira, C. R. (2022). Does resilience reduce food waste? Analysis of Brazilian supplier-retailer dyad. Journal of Cleaner Production, 338, 130488. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.130488

De la Vega Hernández, I. M., & Barcellos de Paula, L. (2021). Scientific mapping on the convergence of innovation and sustainability (innovability): 1990–2018. Kybernetes, 50(10), 2917-2942. https://doi.org/10.1108/K-05-2020-0328

De Tommaso, S. F. N., & Pinsky, V. (2022). Creating shared value: the case of innovability at Suzano in Brazil. Innovation & Management Review, 19(3), 208-221. https://doi.org/10.1108/INMR-07-2021-0120

Dianingrum, M., Wiwiek Adawiyah, Z., Siti, Z., Purwidianti, W., & Kesimpulan, T. (2022). Casting the power of paternalistic leadership and affective trust for innovative behavior in higher education institutions. Quality - Access to Success, 23(187).

Đorđević, A., Klochkov, Y., Arsovski, S., Stefanović, N., Shamina, L., & Pavlović, A. (2021). The impact of ICT support and the EFQM criteria on sustainable business excellence in higher education institutions. Sustainability, 13(14), 7523.

Eustaquio Henrique, J., Leal Filho, W., Lange Salvia, A., Guimarães, Y. M., Brandli, L. L., Trevisan, L. V., & Cristina, A. (2024). Implementing sustainability in teaching: The role of sustainability leadership and transformational leadership in the context of higher education institutions. Sustainable Development.

Fang, J., & O’Toole, J. (2023). Embedding sustainable development goals (SDGs) in an undergraduate business capstone subject using an experiential learning approach: A qualitative analysis. The International Journal of Management Education, 21(1), 1-13.

Filippaios, F., & Benson, V. (2018). Agile digital skills examination for the digital economy: Knowledge and social capital management frameworks through social networking. In A. Visvizi, M. D. Lytras, & L. Daniela (Eds.), The future of innovation and technology in education: Policies and practices for teaching and learning excellence (pp. 55-69). Emerald Publishing Limited.

Gozali, L., Masrom, M., Zagloel, T. Y. M., Haron, H. N., Dahlan, D., Daywin, F. J., ... Susanto, E. H. (2018). Critical success and moderating factors effect in Indonesian public universities’ business incubators. International Journal of Technology, 9(5), 1049-1060.

Gugissa, D. A., Ingenbleek, P. T. M., van Trijp, H. C. M., Teklehaimanot, M. L., & Tessema, W. K. (2021). When natural resources run out, market knowledge steps in: Lessons on natural resource deployment from a longitudinal study in a resource-scarce region of Ethiopia. Business Strategy and the Environment, 30, 1598–1609. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2696

Hannon, J., Zaman, A., Rittl, G., Rossi, R., Meireles, S., & Palandi, F. E. D. (2019). Moving toward zero waste cities: A nexus for international zero waste academic collaboration (NIZAC). In W. Leal Filho & U. Bardi (Eds.), Sustainability on university campuses: Learning, skills building and best practices (pp. 365-379). World Sustainability Series. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-15864-4_24

Hossain, M. I., Tabash, M. I., Chong, L.-L., & Ong, T. S. (2024). Green smart technologies adoption and green innovation performance: The mediating role of green innovation behaviour. FIIB Business Review, 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1177/23197145231225335

Hueske, A.-K., & Pontoppidan, C. A. (2020). GEROCO: A model for integrating sustainability in management education at HEIs. In E. Sengupta, P. Blessinger, & C. Mahoney (Eds.), Leadership strategies for promoting social responsibility in higher education (Innovations in Higher Education Teaching and Learning, Vol. 24, pp. 93-109). Emerald Publishing Limited.

Ibrahim, M. D., Pereira, M. A., & Caldas, P. (2024). Efficiency analysis of the innovation-driven sustainable logistics industry. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 96, 102050. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seps.2024.102050

Iddris, F., Dogbe, C. S. K., & Kparl, E. M. (2022). Innovation education and entrepreneurial intentions among postgraduate students: The role of innovation competence and gender. Cogent Education, 9(1), 2083470. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2083470

Iqbal, Q., & Piwowar-Sulej, K. (2022). Sustainable leadership in higher education institutions: Social innovation as a mechanism. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 23(8), 1–20.

Islam, M. T., & Iyer-Raniga, U. (2023). Circular business model value dimension canvas: Tool redesign for innovation and validation through an Australian case study. Sustainability, 15(15), 11553.

Jayashree, S., Nurul, M., Agamudai, C., Gunasekaran, A., Rauf, A. (2022). Testing an adoption model for Industry 4.0 and sustainability: A Malaysian scenario. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 31, 313-330. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spc.2022.02.015

Kitchenham, B., and Charters, S. (2007). Guidelines for performing systematic literature reviews in SE. https://doi.org/10.1145/1134285.1134500

Knight, B., & Paterson, F. (2018). Behavioural competencies of sustainability leaders: An empirical investigation. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 31(3), 557-580.

Kompella, L. (2024). Service innovations, value-driven business model, and institute growth: Insights from a higher-education institute. International Journal of Educational Management, Vol. ahead-of-print No. ahead-of-print.

Khumalo, S., & Du Plessis, T. (2023). Knowledge transfer: Graduates’ capability to demonstrate and produce business innovation. South African Journal of Information Management, 25(1), 1-12.

Lago, N., Marcon, A., Luis, J., Olteanu, Y., & Fichter, K. (2023). The role of cooperation and technological orientation on startups’ innovativeness: An analysis based on the microfoundations of innovation. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 192, 122604–122604.

Lisdiono, P., Said, J., Yusoff, H., Hermawan, A., & Abdul Manan, D. I. (2023). Information technology capabilities and enterprise resilience of state-owned enterprises for sustainable competitiveness: The mediating role of leadership capabilities. Journal of Nusantara Studies, 8(3), 382-407.

Liu, Y., Alnafrah, I., & Zhou, Y. (2024). A systemic efficiency measurement of resource management and sustainable practices: A network bias-corrected DEA assessment of OECD countries. Resources Policy, 90, 104771.

Liu, J., Wen, H., Wen, R., Zhang, W., Cui, Y., & Wang, H. (2024). Influence mechanism of undergraduate students’ green innovation behavior: AMO perspective and multilevel empirical study. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education.

Loučanová, E., & Olšiaková, M. (2019). Distribution flow identification in cooperation and support for ecological innovation introduction in Slovak enterprises. Acta Logistica, 6(1), 5-8. https://doi.org/10.22306/al.v6i1.111

Makower, J. (2021). State of green business. S&P Global. Retrieved from

Manzoor, A., Zhang, B., & Ma, H. (2023). Knowledge-oriented leadership in powering team performance and sustainable competitive advantages through innovation: Evidence from higher education institutions. Sustainability, 15(20), 14715.

Marchena Sekli, G., Portuguez-Castro, M. (2025). Fostering entrepreneurial success from the classroom: Unleashing the potential of generative AI through technology-to-performance chain. A multi-case study approach. Education and Information Technologies, 1-29. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-025-13316-y

McAdam, M., Miller, K., & McAdam, R. (2021). A micro level investigation of stakeholder motives on university technology transfer business models. Studies in Higher Education, 46(5), 951–964.

Mouritz, M., Newman, P., Newman, R., Bryant, J., Smith, A., & Olsen, E. (2022). Leadership in Sustainability: Collective Wisdom, Conversations, Creativity, Contemplation and Courage, the Five Pillars of a Master’s Teaching Unit. Sustainability, 14(9), 5070. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14095070

Muff, K., Delacoste, C., & Dyllick, T. (2021). Responsible leadership competencies in leaders around the world: Assessing stakeholder engagement, ethics and values, systems thinking and innovation competencies in leaders around the world. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 29(1), 273–292.

Mzyece, M., Soumonni, O., & Townsend, S. A. (2021). African leadership university: Implementation strategies for innovative mass higher education. Emerald Emerging Markets Case Studies, 11(2).

Olivares Olivares, S. L., López Islas, José Rafael; Pineda Garín, M.; Rodríguez Chapa, J.A., Aguayo Hernández, C.H., & Peña Ortega,L.O. (2021). Modelo Educativo Tec21: Retos para una vivencia que transforma. Monterrey, México: Editorial Digital. Tecnológico de Monterrey.

Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., … Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372, n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71

Pepin, M., Tremblay, M., Audebrand, L. K., & Chassé, S. (2024). The responsible business model canvas: Designing and assessing a sustainable business modeling tool for students and start-up entrepreneurs. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 25(3), 514-538.

Portuguez-Castro, M., & Castillo-Martínez, I. (2024). Shaping a sustainable future: A systematic review of leadership competencies in sustainability in business. In 22nd International Conference on ECONOMICS - FINANCE - MANAGEMENT (ICEFM2024) Proceeding. Poland: Institute of Economics, Polish Academy of Sciences.

Purcell, W. M., Henriksen, H., & Spengler, J. D. (2019). Universities as the engine of transformational sustainability toward delivering the sustainable development goals: “Living labs” for sustainability. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 20(8), 1343-1357.

Qin, S., Duan, X., Al-hourani, A. F., & Alsaadi, N. (2022). Evaluation of total quality management in Turkish pharmaceutical companies: A case study. Sustainability, 14(16), 10181.

Ramírez-Montoya, M. S., & Portuguez-Castro, M. (2024). Expanding horizons for the future with an open educational model for complex thinking: External and internal validation. On the Horizon, 32(1), 32-48.

Ramírez-Montoya, M. S., Basabe, F. E., Carlos Arroyo, M., Azeneth Patiño, I., & Portuguez-Castro, M. (2024). Modelo abierto de pensamiento complejo para el futuro de la educación. Editorial Octaedro.

Rinaldi, C., Cavicchi, A., Spigarelli, F., Lacchè, L., & Rubens, A. (2018). Universities and smart specialisation strategy: From third mission to sustainable development co-creation. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 19(1), 67-84.

Ritchie-Dunham, J. L., Gonçalves, A. C., Huerta, M. A., Mataix, C., Lumbreras, J., Moreno-Serna, J., … Purcell, W. M. (2023). Advancing sustainability leadership by shifting relational ‘agreement structures’: A transformational higher education change program. Journal of Integrative Environmental Sciences, 20(1).

Sabarguna, B. S. (2017). Innovation oriented education model as a solution for undergraduate unemployment prepared for biomedical engineering study program. International Information Institute (Tokyo). Information, 20(9A), 6361–6368 https://www.proquest. com/openview/ac5de1c8df95b84ada

Saif, N., Goh, Ong, J.W., & Khan, I. (2023). Green transformational and transactional leadership in fostering green creativity among university students. Global Journal of Environmental Science & Management (GJESM), 9(3), 577.

Sánchez-Carrillo, J., Cadarso, M., & Tobarra, M. (2021). Embracing higher education leadership in sustainability: A systematic review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 298, 1-12.

Sann, R., Lai, P.-C., Liaw, S.-Y., & Chen, C.-T. (2023). Multidimensional scale development and validation: University service quality (UNIQUAL). Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Insights, 6(5), 2565-2594.

Shafait, Z., Zhu, Y., Meyer, N., & Sroka, W. (2021). Emotional intelligence, knowledge management processes, and creative performance: Modelling the mediating role of self-directed learning in higher education. Sustainability, 13(5), 2933.

Shan J. (2024). A study on the impact of perceived innovation leadership on team innovation performance: Taking innovation climate as the mediating variable. Journal of Infrastructure. Policy and Development, 8(7), 7242. https://doi.org/10.24294/jipd.v8i7.7242

Sipos, N., Pap, N., Gonda, T., & Jarjabka, Á. (2021). Feasibility and sustainability challenges of the Süleyman’s Türbe cultural-tourism centre project in Szigetvár, Hungary. Sustainability, 13(10), 5337.

Sreenivasan, J., Reza, M. N. H., Malarvizhi, C. A. N., Gunasekaran, A., & Rauf, M. A. (2022). Testing an adoption model for Industry 4.0 and sustainability: A Malaysian scenario. Sustainable Production and Consumption, 31, 313-330.

Štrukelj, T., Dankova, P., & Hrast, N. (2023). Strategic transition to sustainability: A cybernetic model. Sustainability, 15(22), 15948.

Suparno, S., Nur Wafa, H., Lutfia, A., Narmaditya, B. S., Adha, M. A., & Mohd Shafiai, M. H. (2024). Does entrepreneurship education matter for product innovations? The mediating role of Indonesian students’ creativity. Cogent Education, 11(1).

Taleb, T. S. T., Hashim, N., & Zakaria, N. (2023). Entrepreneurial leadership and entrepreneurial success: The mediating role of entrepreneurial opportunity recognition and innovation capability. Sustainability, 15(7), 5776.

Tan, Y. Y., & Omar, R. (2022). Green practices and innovations of the traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) industry in Singapore: Idea worth sharing. Sustainability, 14(18), 11588.

Tennakoon, H., Hansen, J. M., Saridakis, G., Samaratunga, M., & Hansen, J. W. (2023). Drivers and barriers of social sustainable development and growth of online higher education: The roles of perceived ease of use and perceived usefulness. Sustainability, 15(10), 8319.

Terán-Yépez, G. M., Marín-Carrillo, M., Capobianco-Uriarte, M. P., & Casado-Belmonte, M. P. (2023). Exploring the perceived importance of sustainability education techniques of business and management students. In Multifaceted analysis of sustainable strategies and tactics in education (pp. 88-112). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-6684-6035-1.ch004

Valenti, A., Scalisi, F., Sposito, C., Dellamotta, L., & Masserdotti, A. (2024). Energy, emotional technology and cultural value of data – Creating user awareness through storytelling. AGATHÓN, International Journal of Architecture, Art and Design, 15, 70–83.

Wakkee, I., van der Sijde, P., Vaupell, C., & Ghuman, K. (2019). The university’s role in sustainable development: Activating entrepreneurial scholars as agents of change. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 141, 195-205.

Wardhani, R., & Rahadian, Y. (2021). Sustainability strategy of Indonesian and Malaysian palm oil industry: A qualitative analysis. Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, 12(5), 1077-1107.

Yu, V. F., Qiu, M., & Gupta, J. N. D. (2022). Improving supplier capability through training: Evidence from the Chinese automobile industry. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 163, 107825. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2021.107825

Zheng, L., Umar, M., Safi, A., & Khaddage-Soboh, N. (2024). The role of higher education and institutional quality for carbon neutrality: Evidence from emerging economies. Economic Analysis and Policy, 81, 406-417.

Zhou, D., Danshina, S., Kurilova, A., & Lis, M. (2021). The impact of an enterprise’s intellectualization on its leadership potential. Sustainability, 13(17), 9670.

Zucchella, A., Sanguineti, F., & Contino, F. (2024). Collaborations between MNEs and entrepreneurial ventures: A study on open innovability in the energy sector. International Business Review, 33, 102228.

Biographical notes

May Portuguez-Castro, Ph. D. in Educational Innovation from Tecnológico de Monterrey. Professor Researcher in Centrum Graduate Business School, Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú. She is member of the Business Studies Research Group at the same institution. She is a Level 1 Researcher in the National System of Researchers (Mexico) and a Level 3 Renacyt Researcher with Concytec, Peru. Additionally, she is a member of the Steering Committee of the Digital Transformation Affinity Group of AACSB in the United States. Her research focuses on the use and development of technologies in education, business education, and entrepreneurship, topics on which she has published scientific articles in high-impact journals and participated in various international conferences.

Isolda Margarita Castillo Martínez, Ph.D. in Educational Innovation from Tecnológico de Monterrey. She is a member of the National System of Researchers of the National Council of Humanities, Sciences, and Technologies at the Candidate level. She coordinated the UNESCO Chair “Open Educational Movement for Latin America” residency in 2021, 2023 and 2025 under the direction of Dr. María Soledad Ramírez Montoya, and coordinated the project OpenResearchLab: innovation with artificial intelligence and robotics to scale levels of reasoning mastery for complexity, funded by NOVUS at Tecnológico de Monterrey. She is a professor at the Benemérita Escuela Normal de Coahuila and is part of the GO-GN Graduate Network. Her research focuses on research competencies, academic literacy, and reasoning for complexity.

Authorship contribution statement

May Portuguez-Castro: Conceptualization, Formal Analysis, Literature Investigation, Methodology, Project Administration, Software, Supervision, Validation, Visualization, Writing Original Draft, Writing – Review & Editing. Isolda Margarita Castillo Martínez: Data Curation, Literature Investigation, Validation, Visualization, Writing Original Draft – Review & Editing.

Conflicts of interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Citation (APA Style)

Portuguez-Castro, M., & Castillo Martínez, I.M. (2025). Leadership competencies for innovability: Bridging theory and practice for sustainable development. Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management, and Innovation 21(2), 15-32. https://doi.org/10.7341/20252122

---

Received 30 August 2024; Revised 22 December 2024; Accepted 13 January 2025.

This is an open access paper under the CC BY license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode).