Strategic Planning for a Digital Health Innovation Hub at a Saudi Academic Medical Center: Qualitative Case Study.

Background: Rapid digital transformation is reshaping health care, but many digital initiatives struggle to deliver sustained organizational value when they are introduced as stand-alone technologies rather than as part of an institutional strategy. In Saudi Arabia, Vision 2030 has intensified pressure on academic medical centers to strengthen digital capability, localize innovation, and reduce dependence on externally driven solutions. Objective: This study aimed to examine organizational factors shaping digital health innovation at King Saud University Medical City (KSUMC) and to develop a preliminary strategic planning framework for a digital health innovation hub tailored to that setting. Methods: We conducted a qualitative exploratory case study at KSUMC between April and June 2025. Fourteen stakeholders from clinical, administrative, research, governance, educational, and innovation-related roles were recruited using maximum variation purposive sampling. Semistructured interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis. Reporting was guided by the COREQ (Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research). Diffusion of innovation theory and systems thinking informed interpretation, while a context-actor-mechanism-outcome lens was used to examine how institutional conditions shaped innovation processes. No patient data were collected. Results: Five interrelated themes were identified. First, leadership support existed at a symbolic level, but middle-management translation and risk tolerance were inconsistent. Second, innovation was constrained by workload, fragmented systems, and weak operational support, which meant that project work was often treated as discretionary rather than embedded. Third, knowledge transfer and commercialization pathways were fragmented; participants repeatedly described unclear routes from idea generation to prototyping, regulatory review, and market engagement. Fourth, incentives and innovation capability were misaligned with institutional expectations, particularly for clinicians and trainees. Fifth, Vision 2030 created strategic legitimacy and momentum, but participants also cautioned that an overreliance on consultant-led or vendor-led approaches could weaken internal capability building. These findings informed a preliminary framework centered on governance, knowledge transfer, partnership structures, workforce development, and phased implementation rather than a validated institutional model. Conclusions: At KSUMC, digital health innovation is shaped not only by technology availability but also by organizational culture, intermediary structures, governance design, and the extent to which innovation work is made operationally feasible. The framework proposed here should therefore be understood as a preliminary planning model derived from one qualitative case study. Its main contribution is to specify how knowledge transfer, commercialization, and institutional capability building can be integrated into a digital health strategy within a Saudi academic medical center.