Any monocausal explanation, whether focusing on the Ottoman Empire or on anything else, is bound to be full of holes, especially when describing something so incredibly vague as a "shift in power." The question you've asked raises a number of other issues: What sort of shift actually occurred? What constitutes cultural and technological innovation? What even are 'the Ottomans'? Ottoman intellectuals? Ottoman governing practice? The fact that the empire existed?

The short answer is no, the Ottomans probably weren't the primary cause of whatever kind of shift we're talking about, but we'd need to look at the issue from a far less abstract angle in order to attempt to arrive at a useful answer. Do you have an instance of a historian making this claim in which the terms of the question are more clearly defined?