Against the backdrop of the synergistic development of digitalization and green transformation, supply chain digitalization (SCD) plays a significant role in supporting companies’ green development; however, it remains unclear how it affects greenwashing. This study uses supply chain innovation and application pilots as a quasi-experimental design and employs panel data from Chinese A-share listed companies (2009–2024) and the difference-in-differences (DID) method to conduct theoretical analysis and empirical testing. The results indicate that SCD significantly curbs corporate greenwashing; this conclusion holds even after robustness tests such as parallel trends tests, propensity score matching, and placebo tests. Mechanism analysis indicates that SCD curbs corporate greenwashing through two channels: (1) enhancing corporate green technological innovation capability and (2) alleviating information asymmetry. Heterogeneity analysis indicates that SCD’s inhibitory effect on corporate greenwashing is more pronounced among firms with higher debt financing costs, greater institutional investor ownership, and greater media coverage. From the perspective of SCD, this study offers insights for promoting corporate green transitions and enhancing ESG transparency, while providing practical guidance for government regulators to combat greenwashing.

Purpose: This study aims to examine whether and how the COVID-19 pandemic altered firms’ auditor switching behavior. Design/methodology/approach: Drawing on crisis management theory, the authors analyze a panel data set of Chinese A-share listed manufacturing firms from 2016 to 2023 using a propensity score matching–difference-in-differences (PSM–DiD) approach. Findings: Pandemic exposure significantly increased auditor switching likelihood. This effect was attenuated by slack resources but amplified when the incumbent auditor was a large audit firm, suggesting that crisis-induced switching reflects strategic adaptation shaped by internal resource endowments and external relational constraints. Practical implications: Managers may leverage auditor switching as a crisis adaptation strategy, though such decisions carry audit quality risks. Regulators should monitor elevated switching rates during crises as potential indicators of governance stress. Originality/value: This paper contributes to the literature by empirically investigating auditor switching as a strategic crisis response. By integrating crisis management theory with established auditor switching perspectives, it complements the “auditor-side” COVID-19 literature with a “client-side” perspective and identifies boundary conditions governing firms’ crisis responses.