This paper explores the role of institutional entrepreneurship in developing Digital Entrepreneurial Ecosystems (DEE). With much of the literature on DEE focused on organisational-level analysis, there is a need for further research that includes system-level analysis, and specifically research that explores how ecosystem actors support Digital Entrepreneurship (DE) by facilitating adaptation of the institutional environment. We analyse a single longitudinal case study of the Danish FinTech ecosystem, a DEE that developed in the context of a traditional, highly regulated industry and a turbulent global FinTech scene. FinTech DEEs have emerged across the world as a response to a global reshaping of financial institutions that resulted from the global financial crisis and ongoing technological shifts. We use this case to explore two questions: “what institutional forces influence the development of the DEE?”, and “how do institutional entrepreneurs facilitate institutional changes to develop a DEE?” We find the development of the Danish FinTech DEE was enabled and shaped by changes to institutions that support: (i) new collaboration dynamics and mechanisms, particularly between incumbent firms and start-ups, (ii) adaptations to the regulatory framework, and (iii) the development of global connections. Institutional change required collective efforts, depending on different institutional entrepreneurs at different times. Neutral leadership of institutional entrepreneurs became crucial for institutional change. Furthermore, both system and organisation-level agencies influenced institutional change during the development of the DEE. As such, this study contributes to a better understanding of DEE development and, therefore, the conditions that foster DE in the FinTech field. © 2025 The Authors.

In this conceptual paper, we discuss four future scenarios of the financial industry, illustrating a potential industryconfiguration. We take a legitimacy-based perspective on future business models, highlighting interdependencies betweenlegitimacy, regulation policy, and industry structure. We conjecture that the Neo Bank scenario is the most probable in thefuture of Fintech.

New industries emerge from and along diverse pathways. Given their newness, they are subject to different degrees of liabilities and lack legitimacy. New regional industries combine multiple elements, technologies, organisations and institutions that face legitimation challenges to become socially accepted. The legitimation of a new industry depends on the extent to which these elements at the organisation and industry/system levels become legitimised. New non-profit sectoral organisations – Sector NGOs have emerged to assist new industries in overcoming legitimacy challenges. The roles in new industries' legitimation have received scant attention despite their influence on individual-level legitimacy judgment formation and collective-level legitimation. We explore the roles and activities of Sector NGOs to legitimise new industries. Using the multi-level theory of legitimacy, we consider: “In what ways do Sector NGOs influence the legitimation of new industries?” and “How do Sector NGOs influence new industries’ legitimacy quests at the organisational and system levels?”. We suggest that Sector NGOs influence legitimation by developing narratives that promote changes in cognitive and normative structures by knowledge development and sharing, institutional changes, and innovation intermediation. We argue that Sector NGOs' legitimacy-building helps build organisation legitimacy capacities, network alignment, collective visions and actions. 

Public–private collaborations (PPCs) have become pivotal in advancing healthcare globally, leveraging data as a key resource for innovation and service improvement. These collaborations bring together complementary resources and capabilities of public and private actors to address healthcare challenges and generate value that no single actor could achieve alone. Effective data sharing is at the core of successful PPCs. However, data sharing is not without challenges, particularly post-GDPR, which imposes strict rules and enforceable obligations. As privacy laws continue to evolve without context-specific guidelines, PPCs are often left to navigate implementation and develop shared understandings of data-sharing practices on their own. Yet as actors construct the meaning of new practices guided by their institutional logics, diverging understandings of what constitutes acceptable data sharing can develop. This study employs a qualitative multi-case study approach to explore how data-sharing PPCs experience institutional complexity post-GDPR. It examines two PPCs focusing on data-driven healthcare innovation in Finland and Sweden. The findings indicate that when a shared understanding of data-sharing practices cannot be established, dominant actors may retreat into substitute field logics and adopt a passive stance, ultimately stalling collaboration. These dynamics, coupled with communication and coordination issues, lead to frustration and limited progress. Although universities act as neutral intermediaries easing institutional tension and facilitating alignment, their presence alone does not resolve data-sharing complexities. This study contributes to the literature by emphasising the influence of institutional logics in shaping data-sharing dynamics within innovation projects concerning public and private actors, warranting careful attention and management.