Search results

The combination of strategic orientation and digitalization for sustainable competitive advantage among small businesses is still not given much attention in the literature. Therefore, this study aims to understand the influence of strategic orientation on sustainable competitive advantage while mediating the relationship with digitalization.

This study used a cross-sectional design. This design helped collect data from 234 small businesses in Arusha city, Tanzania. Since the study used latent variables, structural equation modeling (SEM) was used to analyze relationships and conduct confirmatory factor analysis. Through bootstrapping confidence intervals, Hayes's Process was also used to test how digitalization mediates the relationship between strategic orientations and sustainable competitive advantage.

The strategic orientation attributes that include market orientation, entrepreneurial orientation and learning orientation were positively and significantly related to digitalization. Furthermore, the results on digitalization and sustainable competitive advantage show a significant positive relationship. Finally, digitalization was analyzed to mediate the relationship between strategic orientation, market orientation, entrepreneurial orientation, learning orientation and sustainable competitive advantage. Hence, all hypotheses were supported.

This study adopted a cross-sectional design that helped to capture the quantitative information. In addition, the current study is limited to Tanzania's small businesses; thus, the findings cannot assure generalization of the conclusion to other countries because of the differences in social, cultural and technology across countries.

This study integrates the concepts of strategic orientation from the strategic management discipline and digitalization from a technology perspective. As a result, the study adds new knowledge about combining two aspects and determining whether they add value in terms of providing a sustainable competitive advantage. This knowledge comes from digitalization, which acts as a mediator between strategic orientation dimensions and a sustainable competitive advantage.

As family and nonfamily businesses differ in how they do business, the focus of this manuscript is on understanding how strategy-level models can be misinterpreted if family involvement is not considered. Thus, in this manuscript, the focus is on understanding the extent to which strategic orientations (market orientation and technology orientation, which reflect strategic approach), strategic performance metric focus (financial-based, optimization-based and market-based, which reflect strategy evaluations) and strategic audacity (which reflects boldness in envisioning and delivering strategic outcomes) play a role in driving firm performance – in family businesses vs nonfamily businesses. Understanding how these drivers impact performance differently in family vs nonfamily businesses enables companies to better direct their strategic efforts.

After presenting theoretical concepts, authors use regression analysis on a sample of companies in a developing European Union (EU) country (n = 282) to evaluate the impact of strategic orientation, strategic performance metric focus and strategic audacity on firm performance separately in three samples: the full sample (consisting of both family and nonfamily-owned firms), sample of family businesses and the sample of nonfamily businesses.

The role of strategic orientation, strategic audacity and focal goals in driving firm performance differs depending on the company type (family vs nonfamily). In the case of nonfamily businesses, strategic audacity and technology orientation with the focus on efficiencies and markets are driving firm performance. In the case of family businesses, both market and technology orientation are important drivers of performance; the focus on financial and market indicators of performance is positively impacting performance, while the focus on efficiency indicators is diminishing the performance of family businesses. Thus, results show that of the performance drivers for family businesses, some are insignificant (strategic audacity), while some even have a negative impact (focus on optimization-based measures of performance) on family businesses' performance. Moreover, results show that some of the drivers of performance in case of family businesses (market orientation and focus on financial-based measures of performance) are not drivers of outstanding performance in the case of nonfamily businesses.

Best practices differ for family vs nonfamily businesses. In case of family businesses, comparing them to nonfamily businesses, market orientation and the focus on financial-based measures of performance have a greater impact on firm performance, while, at the same time, family businesses should refrain focusing on pursuing optimization-based measures of performance as such pursuit drives down their performance. Understanding the drivers of performance specific to family businesses will enable such firms to better navigate contexts characterized by ambiguity and uncertainty.

The manuscript evaluates how models, generally researched in the overall firm metrics, differ between family businesses and nonfamily businesses, thus delivering new insights into the important marketing concepts.

The vulnerability of the tourism industry to an array of risks, encompassing family-related, small- and medium-sized enterprise-specific, strategic, tourism-specific and external factors, highlights the landscape within which small and medium family enterprises (SMFEs) operate. Although SMFEs are an important stakeholder in the dynamic tourism sector, they are not one homogenous group of firms, but have different strategic orientations. This study aims to investigate the interplay between strategic orientation and risk perception to better understand SMFEs risk perception as it is impacting their decision-making processes, resilience and long-term survival. The authors investigate how different strategic orientations contribute to different perspectives on risk among owner-managers.

Based on a qualitative data corpus of 119 face-to-face interviews, the authors apply various coding rounds to better understand the relationship between strategic orientations and the perceptions of risks. Firstly, the authors analysed the owner–manager interviews and identified three groups of different strategic orientations: proactive and sustainability-oriented SMFE, destination-affirmative and resilience-oriented SMFE and passive SMFE. Secondly, the authors coded the interviews for different risks identified. The authors identified that the three groups show differences in the risk perceptions.

The data unveil that the three groups of SMFEs have several differences in how they perceive risks. Proactive and sustainability-oriented SMFEs prioritize business risks, demonstrating a penchant for innovation and sustainability. Destination-affirmative and resilience-oriented SMFEs perceive a broader range of risks, tying their investments to destination development, emphasizing family and health risks and navigating competitive pressures. Passive SMFEs, primarily concerned with external risks, exhibit limited awareness of internal and strategic risks, resist change and often defer decision-making to successors. The findings underscore how different strategic orientations influence risk perceptions and decision-making processes within SMFEs in the tourism industry.

The authors contribute to existing knowledge include offering a comprehensive status quo of perceived risks for different strategic orientations, a notably underexplored area. In addition, the differences with respect to risk perception shown in the paper suggest that simplified models ignoring risk perception may be insufficient for policy recommendations and for understanding the dynamics of the tourism sector. For future research, the authors propose to focus on exploring the possible directions in which strategic orientation and risk perception influence one another, which might be a limitation of this study due to its qualitative nature.

Varying strategic orientations and risk perceptions highlight the diversity within the stakeholder group of SMFE. Recognizing differences allows for more targeted interventions that address the unique concerns and opportunities of each group and can thus improve the firm’s resilience (Memili et al., 2023) and therefore leading to sustainability destinations development. The authors suggest practical support for destination management organizations and regional policymakers, aimed especially at enhancing the risk management of passive SMFEs. Proactive SMFE could be encouraged to perceive more family risks.

Viewing tourism destinations as a complex stakeholder network, unveiling distinct risk landscapes for various strategic orientations of one stakeholder has the potential to benefit the overall destination development. The proactive and sustainability-oriented SMFEs are highly pertinent as they might lead destinations to further development and create competitive advantage through innovative business models. Passive SMFEs might hinder the further development of the destination, e.g. through missing innovation efforts or succession.

Although different studies explore business risks (Forgacs and Dimanche, 2016), risks from climate change (Demiroglu et al., 2019), natural disasters (Zhang et al., 2023) or shocks such as COVID-19 (Teeroovengadum et al., 2021), this study shows that it does not imply that SMFE as active stakeholder perceive such risk. Rather, different strategic orientations are in relation to perceiving risks differently. The authors therefore open up an interesting new field for further studies, as risk perception influences the decision-making of tourism actors, and therefore resilience.

The aim of this study is to evaluate the relationship between innovative climate, strategic orientation, work motivation, business performance and job performance.

Within the scope of the research, a survey was conducted with 400 engineers working in organizations operating within companies producing spare parts for automobile companies. IBM SPSS 25, IBM SPSS AMOS and LISREL programs were gradually used, and the data obtained were evaluated and analyzed.

The importance of strategic orientation and work motivation for organizations can be seen in the analysis results in terms of their positive effects.

In the production sector, where innovation and competition activities take place, not only strategic decisions but also motivation for employees must be realized within the organizational culture in order for the organizations to be successful. Strategic orientation is effective in achieving innovation and creation to the extent that employees are motivated.

In terms of successful performance, it is very important to manage companies with the right strategic understanding and to involve the employees. In order to realize the innovation climate and to be successful in performance criteria, motivation is considered a key factor, in particular for the automobile sector. Automobile companies are now turning to electric vehicle production using new generation technologies. However, they also attach importance to the use of smart technologies in cars. For this reason, the effects of strategic orientation and work motivation on performance and innovation are investigated in companies producing automobile spare parts.

This study aims to explore how to overcome and address the loss of exploratory innovation, thereby achieving greater success in exploratory innovation. This phenomenon of loss occurs when enterprises decrease their investment in and engagement with exploratory innovation, ultimately leading to an insufficient amount of such innovation efforts. Drawing on dynamic capabilities, this study investigates the relationship between organizational foresight and exploratory innovation and examines the moderating role of breakthrough orientation/financial orientation.

This study used survey data collected from 296 Chinese high-tech companies in multiple industries and sectors.

The evidence produced by this study reveals that three elements of organizational foresight (i.e. environmental scanning capabilities, strategic selection capabilities and integrating capabilities) positively influence exploratory innovation. Furthermore, this positive effect is strengthened in the context of a high-breakthrough orientation. Moreover, the relationships among environmental scanning capabilities, strategic selection capabilities and exploratory innovation become weaker as an enterprise’s financial orientation increases, whereas a strong financial orientation does not affect the relationship between integrating capabilities and exploratory innovation.

Ambidexterity is key to successful enterprise innovation. Compared with exploitative innovation, it is by no means easy to engage in exploratory innovation, which is especially important in high-tech companies. While the loss of exploratory innovation has been observed, few empirical studies have explored ways to promote exploratory innovation more effectively. A key research implication of this study pertains to the role of organizational foresight in the improvement of exploratory innovation in the context of high-tech companies.

This paper contributes to the broader literature on exploratory innovation and organizational foresight and provides practical guidance for high-tech companies regarding ways of avoiding the loss of exploratory innovation and becoming more successful at exploratory innovation.

This paper aims to provide an examination of firms’ strategic orientations, innovativeness and performance with large Korean companies.

The authors investigated the impacts of firms’ major key strategic orientations (customer orientation [CO], competitor orientation [PO], technology orientation [TO] and internal/cost orientation [IO]) on firm innovativeness (INNO) and performance outcomes with large Korean companies.

The results of the analysis showed that CO, PO and TO positively influence the innovativeness, which contributes to firm performance.

The authors provide some managerial implications on the multiple roles of strategic orientations on firm INNO and performances, along with limitations of this study and future research directions.

This study aims to investigate three relevant antecedents of digital transformation (digital orientation, digital intensity and digital maturity) and their influences on the financial success of companies.

Building on the strategic management and digital transformation literature, five hypotheses are developed to find the relationships between these antecedents and financial success.

Digital orientation and digital intensity alone do not contribute to the financial success of companies. Specifically, digital intensity serves as a negative moderator between digital orientation and financial success, meaning that it reduces the performance effects of digital orientation. Digital maturity acts as a mediator between digital orientation and the financial success of companies and between digital intensity and the financial success of companies.

This research contributes to the literature on strategic management and digital transformation by providing a further understanding of three relevant antecedents of digital transformation (digital orientation, digital intensity and digital maturity) and how they should be positioned alongside digital transformation settings to achieve financial success.

The motivation for this study comes from decision making related to strategic marketing orientations in international markets. The authors examine if customer orientation and customer relationship orientation perform as two distinct constructs in driving firm innovativeness, and how together they support business growth among export firms. This study aims to suggest a customer-centric strategy for export firms that drive innovativeness and growth.

An international corporation specialized in company information services provided a list of the contact information of Italian companies. The authors sent an email request to respond to an online survey and received 416 effective responses from firms operating in export markets. The authors propose and empirically test a model in which customer orientation, customer relationship orientation and innovativeness predict business growth. This model controls for the effects of firm size, industry and customer type (B2B vs. B2C).

The study findings suggest that customer orientation and customer relationship orientation are two distinct strategic orientations driving innovativeness. However, they do not directly affect business growth. Instead, they require the innovativeness of an exporter to materialize as business growth.

The results of the study recommend business strategies focusing not only on customer needs and satisfaction but also on retaining current customers and building customer relationships in international markets. Firms can learn from international customers and develop effective customer-centric strategies to spread the acquired information into the internal decision-making as it contributes to firm innovativeness and business growth in international markets.

This study is one of the pioneering studies combining customer orientation and customer relationship orientation, showing their theoretical and empirical divergence. This study is also among the first which tests how the two strategic orientations together with innovativeness promote business growth among export firms. The authors add understanding of the synergistic effects both of using customer information and developing deeper relationships on firm innovativeness and performance among exporters.

This article investigates how strategic flexibility (SF) is achieved in small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), exploring whether SF contributes to firm growth and the associated enablers and barriers of SF.

To offer a more nuanced view of SF in SMEs, a qualitative approach is applied. Researchers conducted and analyzed 91 interviews with owners and chief executive officers (CEOs) of SMEs exhibiting high growth and explored whether SF contributes to firm growth and the associated enablers and barriers of SF.

The results show a connection between SF and firm growth and confirm the importance of strategic orientation for SF in SMEs. Contrary to the existing literature, this study found a neutral impact of external networks and a positive impact of slack resources on SF. The lack of competent employees emerged as a considerable barrier to SF in SMEs.

More research focusing on the relationship between SF and firm growth is suggested, as well as further research about the relevance of slack resources and external networks as enablers of SF in SMEs.

Motivating and developing valuable employee competence are the key managerial implications. Additionally, business consultants and business developers in the public sector must find ways to increase business consultants and business developers' relevance to SMEs.

This article explores SF in SMEs, a context of disagreement in previous literature, and finds that SF contributes to SME growth. A qualitative approach is used, enrichening a field dominated by quantitative methodological choices.

This paper aims to examine the relationship between supply integration and firm performance by first, investigating the mediating effects of manufacturing flexibility and mass customization; and second, exploring the moderating role of innovation orientation on the link between internal capabilities and performance.

Resource orchestration and contingency theories are used to address the mediating and moderating effects. A cross-sectional data set on 242 Swedish manufacturers is used to test for the hypotheses using structural equation modeling.

The findings provide support for the mediating roles of manufacturing flexibility and mass customization in the relationship between supply integration and firm performance. However, the results point to contrasting contingent effects of innovation orientation. While innovation orientation positively moderates the association between mass customization and firm performance, it shows a negative impact on the link between flexibility and performance.

The study contributes to the literature on the integrative activities with upstream supply chain actors. Specifically, the authors highlight how specific capability configurations comprising of supply integration, manufacturing flexibility and mass customization lead to firm performance. Moreover, the authors provide insights on the contingency role of innovation, especially if firms consider flexibility or customization capabilities.

While the individual impacts of flexibility and customization on performance have been addressed previously, there is a paucity of research on how these two capabilities are integrated with supply integration. Moreover, there is little known regarding the role of innovation orientation on these integrated relationships.