The Diginomics team met with Prof. Dr. David Bendig during his recent visit to Bremen, where he presented his work at our Brownbag seminar. We discussed his academic journey, research interests, and insights on current trends in entrepreneurship and innovation.

**This interview has been edited for length and clarity.**

Chris Johnson

Your research interests include corporate entrepreneurship, innovations management and strategic management. What sparked your initial interest in these areas as a younger scholar?

David Bendig:

Well originally, I’m a finance and accounting guy, at least from a student perspective. Back then in Germany, there weren’t many entrepreneurship courses. That’s really something that only started to emerge broadly around 2010.

Then I went into practice, and when I had the opportunity to pursue a PhD, it was very interesting to me. I had always been interested in entrepreneurship. I went to start-up meetups and was generally very engaged in corporate transformation projects. I’d done some practical work in that space, and that’s where the interest came from so I thought now’s the time to do something truly entrepreneurial.

That’s also why I went to Aachen, because it was known, and still is, for having a strong research group focused on entrepreneurship, innovation, and similar topics. It's not just a niche there; it's a large and active group. And once you're there you’re sitting between scholars and start-ups so you naturally find relevant topics to work on.

Chris Johnson:

I took a look through your Google Scholar profile and was curious how your research interests have developed over time. I noticed a mix between conceptual papers and more empirical, data-driven ones. Do you define yourself more strongly as one or the other? Or how do you create that balance?

David Bendig:

I think it’s important, especially for young scholars, to try out different things. I come from a clear empirically quantitative background so I’m the "methods guy”. That’s my foundation. I was good with secondary capital market data, which was a niche [in entrepreneurship] at the time. But I realized I couldn’t build a full career just on that. So I set myself the challenge and told myself; "In the next project, I’ll be the conceptual person." That’s very tough, but you learn by doing.

It was the same when I did my first survey study. A colleague invited me, and they said, “You’ll do the structural equation modelling.” I initially thought, “I can’t do that.” But it was Tessa Flatten from TU Dortmund who showed me how, and that helped a lot. So, it’s been a journey of continuously learning new things. Still, if you look at where I’m strongest, it’s with numbers, no doubt.

Chris Johnson:

Would you say that conceptual papers are somehow reserved for more experienced scholars? It seems like when we study emerging phenomena, we need to conceptualize them first, but conceptual pieces can be quite hard to grasp, at least from my experience.

David Bendig:

Absolutely. It's not black and white, of course. But the reality, especially for young scholars, is that publishing conceptual pieces in top-tier journals is quite rare…unless you’re collaborating with someone very established who knows how to frame those ideas. For me, I started doing more conceptual work after I got tenure. That’s when I began aiming for impact papers, that is, things that reach a wider audience, including practitioners. But before tenure? Not really…as I didn’t have the security, and maybe I was just being cautious.

Chris Johnson:

I imagine tenure gives you more freedom to explore a broader set of interests. On that note, and I think our early-career audience will find this interesting, you mentioned a kind of pressure for younger scholars to focus on A-journals. But looking at your profile, I also saw quite a few conference papers mixed in with the top publications. What do you think are some advantages of working on conference papers as well as aiming for the A-journals?

David Bendig:

Again, it goes back to trying things out. I really believe in experimenting throughout your career where you shouldn’t just do one thing over and over. So I’ve always tried to explore different topics and formats. Sometimes I’ve failed…actually, I’ve failed often. For example, in 2018 we were pretty early on the blockchain topic. We had some good initial token offering studies, solid empirical work, but we never got it beyond ICIS. The journals just weren’t ready for that back then. Now in 2025, crypto is a mainstream topic in business journals. But in 2018, not at all. The journals can be quite conservative, especially with emerging topics.

Chris Johnson:

That’s something we talk about among the PhD students here. On the one hand, conference papers are a chance to workshop ideas for future journal submissions. On the other hand, there’s this worry that if you publish something in proceedings, it limits your ability to publish it in a journal afterward. What’s your take on that? How do you navigate that line?

David Bendig:

That really depends on the field. Information Systems, for example, is more aligned with natural sciences in that they publish full proceedings like ICIS, ECIS, and so on. But that’s not the case in management, marketing, or general business. In those fields, conferences are seen more as places to get feedback on early-stage work. It’s understood that you’ll rewrite and develop it further before aiming for a journal. Some journals even have formal rules. For instance, the Journal of Strategic Information Systems (JSIS) requires a certain percentage of new content if you’re submitting something that was in a conference proceeding. So yes, it varies by field.

Chris Johnson:

Moving on, what are some emerging research topics or methodological trends that you think young scholars should be paying attention to right now?

David Bendig:

Well, academia is still a bit slow, but we are catching up with practical trends. Back in the day, we were too slow with blockchain. But now I see a better connection between academic work and real-world developments. Artificial Intelligence is obviously huge right now. As someone recently joked, "everyone and their mother is doing AI." Of course, you have to be careful as it’s becoming oversaturated. But yes, digital and sustainability topics are both big. Within those, there are many subtopics: data governance, ecological footprints, ESG metrics, etc. And increasingly, mainstream journals are interested in those.

Chris Johnson:

Right. I’ve seen that some of your recent papers touch on sustainability, like measuring carbon output in companies. Did that interest come from personal motivation or more from recognizing a research opportunity?

David Bendig:

It actually started with a PhD student who wanted to work on that in 2019. Back then, it wasn’t as common as it is today. But I thought, “Why not, let’s try it.” I found it fascinating because finally we had quantitative data. In the past, we relied on subjective ESG ratings. But now we had real, measurable data from sources like the Carbon Disclosure Project and science-based targets. And interestingly, in that area, academia and practice were really aligned. Both faced the same challenge: how do we measure sustainability performance? That made it a compelling space to be in.

Chris Johnson:

What were some key steps you took early in your career that helped you get where you are now? And what are some early-career pitfalls you think young scholars should avoid?

David Bendig:

First, I would always recommend defining clear goals. Ambitious but achievable ones. Ask yourself: What journals do I want to publish in? What conferences should I attend? Who are the key scholars in my field? Understanding the community really helped me a lot.

One pitfall I often see is pessimism. I get it…mid-career pressures without tenure are real. But my own PhD advisor said, “Don’t listen to the pessimists, we’ll make it.” And he was right. Every one of his PhD students who wanted to stay in academia made it.

Having a positive mindset and a good environment matters a lot. If you work hard, stick to your goals like publishing in A-journals, getting external funding, and teaching experience – you can get there. It might take longer, and there will be setbacks, but don’t lie to yourself: if you want to be a business professor, journal publications are key.

Chris Johnson:

Thanks, David!

-END-