Digital transformation represents the inevitable path for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) to enhance their core competitiveness, develop new quality productive forces, and achieve high-quality development. Taking listed SMEs as the research sample, this paper follows the logical progression of “theoretical logic-configurational paths-practical models”. Based on a holistic set theory perspective, a dynamic configuration perspective, and a multi-trajectory co-evolution perspective, it constructs a TOE integrated analysis framework tailored to the Chinese context to explore how digital transformation propels SMEs towards high-quality development. The framework addresses asymmetrical assumptions, utilizing Linear Growth-based fsQCA to investigate the dynamic mechanisms and enabling mechanisms driving the high-quality development of SMEs. Furthermore, it profoundly analyzes the influencing factors and action paths of the coupling and dynamic linkage of technology, organization, and environment on the high-quality development of SMEs.

The research findings are as follows: (1) Based on the TOE theory, digital technology reshapes the capability system and the resource system. This paper identifies the internal and external driving mechanisms for promoting the high-quality development of SMEs from the perspectives of organization-level elements such as technology, finance, and talents, and institution-level entities such as platforms, organizations, and governments. (2) The configurational paths for digital transformation to empower the high-quality development of SMEs include “intellectual capital-market” competition, “technological capital-talent” autonomy, “digital technology-capital” innovation, “data element-platform” spillover, “digital ecology-resource” dependency, and “digital governance-knowledge” collaboration. (3) Digital transformation collaboratively promotes the high-quality development of SMEs through dynamic mechanisms and enabling mechanisms, including three diversified and equivalent practical modes: “technology-driven structural empowerment” “organization-led psychological empowerment”, and “environment-supported resource empowerment”.