Proceedings of the International scientific and practical conference ― Cambridge Science and Education Conference‖ (February 23-25, 2026) / Publisher website: www.naukainfo.com. – Cambridge, United Kingdom, 2026. - 289 p.

9 data, AI, and digital platforms as key technologies; the gap remains that the review mainly maps enabling factors, while crisis environments require explicit designs for ―survival-to-growth‖ transitions, where digital investments must be staged, reversible where possible, and linked to concrete shock-specific constraints (liquidity pressure, supply discontinuities, sudden compliance changes). In work [3], a systematic literature review analyzes factors that can enable or threaten digital transformation and explains that digital transformation can both positively and negatively affect firm internationalization; the gap for competitiveness research is that internationalization, ecosystem dependence, and crisis exposure are tightly coupled, yet the literature still under-specifies how enterprises should redesign digital governance (decision rights, partner data exchange, cyber risk controls) to convert international digitalization into robust competitive performance under shocks. In work [4], evidence across 249 empirical studies supports a relatively strong and consistent contribution of organisational agility to performance and highlights persistent issues in definitions and measurement; the gap is particularly relevant for crisis competitiveness because agility is frequently treated as an organisational property, while digital competitiveness requires operationalizing agility into measurable digital routines (e.g., time-to-pivot in digital product/service, reconfiguration speed of processes and networks, and decision latency supported by data infrastructure). In work [5], the European Commission‘s Industry 5.0 framework explicitly reframes industrial competitiveness toward sustainability, human-centricity, and resilience, shifting attention from shareholder-only outcomes to broader stakeholder value; the gap for enterprise-level competitiveness models is that multi-objective constraints (resilience and sustainability alongside cost and differentiation) are rarely translated into concrete digital strategy architectures that resolve trade-offs with metrics and governance. Finally, empirical evidence in work [6] shows that digital transformation has a significant positive effect on supply chain resilience and that this effect can materialize through increased transparency and power, with heterogeneity by industry and regulatory context; the gap is that supply chain resilience is often treated as a functional domain outcome, while competitiveness under crises requires integrating