The Influence of Organizational Culture, Alliance Partners, Digital Capability on Firm Performance Mediated by Strategy Flexibility

Pantoko *

Faculty of Economic and Business, Universitas Trisakti, Jakarta, Indonesia.

Asep Hermawan

Faculty of Economic and Business, Universitas Trisakti, Jakarta, Indonesia.

Robert Kristaung

Faculty of Economic and Business, Universitas Trisakti, Jakarta, Indonesia.

*Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.


Abstract

Aims: The study examines the effects of organizational culture, alliance partners, and digital capability on firm performance, mediated by strategy flexibility in the national automotive component industry in Indonesia.

Study Design: The data collection technique was non-probability sampling with purposive sampling method in which the number of samples that met the criteria to be analyzed were 228 companies.

Place and Duration of Study: The population of this study were all automotive component companies located in Jakarta, Banten and West Java, totaling 237. Each sampled company is represented by one respondent, namely a manager or senior manager of an automotive component industry company.

Methodology: Structural Equation Model (SEM).

Results: These findings suggest the importance of flexible strategies for leveraging internal and external resources to enhance performance. Strategy flexibility partially mediates the effects of organizational culture and digital capability on firm performance, and fully mediates the effect of alliance partners.

Conclusion: This study shows the results of the positive influence of Organizational culture, Alliance Partners, Digital Capability, and Strategy Flexibility toward Firm Performance. Strategy Flexibility as a mediating variable can mediate the effect of Organizational Culture, Alliance Partners and Digital Capability on Firm Performance. The implications of this research can be an input for the leaders of the national automotive component industry companies in making a strategic decision to face the challenges of increasingly complex business competition through the implementation of a flexible strategy in the services and processes of the manufacturing industry which has implications for improving company performance.

Keywords: Alliance partners, digital capability, organizational culture, firm performance


How to Cite

Pantoko, Hermawan, A., & Kristaung, R. (2024). The Influence of Organizational Culture, Alliance Partners, Digital Capability on Firm Performance Mediated by Strategy Flexibility. Asian Journal of Economics, Business and Accounting, 24(5), 22–33. https://doi.org/10.9734/ajeba/2024/v24i51289

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Ministry of Industry of Indonesia. No Title; 2022.

Ministry of Finance of Republic of Indonesia; 2020 [cited 2023 Dec 12]. Available: https://www.kemenkeu.go.id

BPS-Statistics Indonesia; 2022 [cited 2023 Nov 9]. Available:https://www.bps.go.id

Gaikindo; 2021 [cited 2024 Jan 30]. Available:https://www.gaikindo.or.id/

Schuldt KS, Gomes G. Influence of organizational culture on the environments of innovation and organizational performance. Gestão & Produção. 2020; 27(3):1–26.

Teece D, Pisano G. The dynamic capabilities of firms: An introduction. Industrial and Corporate Change. 1994;3.

Sudrajat D. The relationships among leadership, entrepreneurial mindset, innovation, and competitive advantage (A conceptual model of logistics service industry). Binus Bus Rev. 2015;6(3):477–85.

Chen Y, Wang Y, Nevo S, Benitez J, Kou G. Improving strategic flexibility with information technologies: Insights for firm performance in an emerging economy. J Inf Technol [Internet]. 2017; 32(1):10–25. Available:https://doi.org/10.1057/jit.2015.26

Wassmer U, Li S, Madhok A. The effect of firm compensation structures on the mobility and entrepreneurship of extreme performers. Strateg Manag J. 2016; 920(October):1–11.

Panuwatwanich K, Nguyen TT. Influence of total quality management on performance of Vietnamese construction firms. Procedia Eng [Internet]. 2017;182: 548–55. Available:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2017.03.151

Phillips F, Chang J, Su YS. When do efficiency and flexibility determine a firm’s performance? A simulation study. J Innov Knowl [Internet]. 2019;4(2):88–96. Available;http://hdl.handle.net/10419/260893

Bhatti A, Rehman SU, Rumman JBA. Organizational capabilities mediates between organizational culture, entrepreneurial orientation, and organizational performance of SMEs in pakistan. Entrep Bus Econ Rev. 2020;8(4): 85–103.

Yesil S, Kaya A. The effect of organizational culture on firm financial performance: Evidence from a developing country. Procedia - Soc Behav Sci [Internet]. 2013; 81:428–37. Available:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.06.455

Baum JAC, Calabrese T, Silverman BS. Don’t go it alone: alliance network composition and startups’ performance in Canadian biotechnology. Strateg Manag J. 2000;21(3):267–94.

Benjamin BA, Podolny JM. Status, quality, and social order in the California wine industry. Adm Sci Q [Internet]. 1999;44(3): 563–89. Available:https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.2307/2666962

Xu S, Cavusgil E. Knowledge breadth and depth development through successful R&D alliance portfolio configuration: An empirical investigation in the pharmaceutical industry. J Bus Res [Internet]. 2019;101:402–10. Available:https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0148296319302838

Vives X. Nash equilibrium with strategic complementarities. J Math Econ [Internet]. 1990;19(3):305–21. Available:https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/030440689090005T

von Hippel E. Cooperation between rivals: Informal know-how trading. Res Policy [Internet]. 1987;16(6):291–302. Available:https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0048733387900151

Rindfleisch A, Moorman C. The acquisition and utilization of information in new product alliances: A strength-of-ties perspective. J Mark. 2001;65(2):1–18.

Hamel G, Prahalad CK. Strategic Intent. Harv Bus Rev. 1989;(May-June):63–76.

Deeds DL, Hill CWL. Strategic alliances and the rate of new product development: An empirical study of entrepreneurial biotechnology firms. J Bus Ventur [Internet]. 1996;11(1):41–55. Available:https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0883902695000879

Khin S, Ho TCF. Digital technology, digital capability and organizational performance. Int J Innov Sci [Internet]. 2020;11(2):177–95. Available:https://doi.org/10.1108/IJIS-08-2018-0083

Yazdi PG, Azizi A, Hashemipour M. A hybrid methodology for validation of optimization solutions effects on manufacturing sustainability with time study and simulation approach for SMEs. Sustain. 2019;11(5):1–26.

Manuti A, Monachino D. Managing knowledge at the time of artificial intelligence: An explorative study with knowledge workers. East Eur J Psycholinguist. 2020;7(2):179–90.

Barney J. Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. J Manage. 1991; 17(1):99–120.

Jones R, Ostroy J. Flexibility and uncertainty. Rev Econ Stud. 1984;51(1): 13–32.

Cyert RM, March. JG. A Behavioral Theory of the Firm. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Blackwell Publishers; 1992.

Worren N, Moore K, Cardona P. Modularity, strategic flexibility, and firm performance: A study of the home appliance industry. Strateg Manag J. 2002;23(12): 1123–40.

Nadkarni S, Narayanan VK. Strategic schemas, strategic flexibility, and firm performance: The moderating role of industry clockspeed. Strateg Manag J [Internet]. 2007;28(3):243–70. Available:http://www.jstor.org/stable/20142437

Dai Y, Goodale JC, Byun G, Ding F. Strategic flexibility in new high-technology ventures. J Manag Stud. 2018;55(2):265–94.

Dyer JH, Singh H. The relational view: Cooperative strategy and sources of interorganizational competitive advantage. Acad Manag Rev [Internet]. 1998;23(4): 660–79. Available:http://www.jstor.org/stable/259056

Lavie D. The competitive advantage of interconnected firms: An extension of the resource-based view. Acad Manag Rev [Internet]. 2006;31(3):638–58. Available:http://www.jstor.org/stable/20159233

Ebben JJ, Johnson AC. Efficiency, flexibility, or both? Evidence linking strategy to performance in small firms. Strateg Manag J [Internet]. 2005;26(13): 1249–59. Available:http://www.jstor.org/stable/20142308

Shen H, Mei N, Gao Y. Matching entrepreneurial orientation and operations strategy for manufacturing firms in China. Oper Manag Res [Internet]. 2020;13(1): 39–52. Available:https://doi.org/10.1007/s12063-020-00154-z

Lin Z (John), Yang H, Arya B. Alliance partners and firm performance: Resource complementarity and status association. Strateg Manag J [Internet]. 2009;30(9): 921–40. Available:http://www.jstor.org/stable/27735465

Chege SM, Wang D, Suntu SL. Impact of information technology innovation on firm performance in Kenya. Inf Technol Dev [Internet]. 2020;26(2):316–45. Available:https://doi.org/10.1080/02681102.2019.1573717

Lan T, Chen Y, Li H, Guo L, Huang J. From driver to enabler: the moderating effect of corporate social responsibility on firm performance. Econ Res Istraživanja [Internet]. 2021;34(1):2240–62. Available:https://doi.org/10.1080/1331677X.2020.1862686

Sekaran, U. and Bougie R. Research methods for business . United Kingdom: John Wiley & Sons Ltd. 2016;2016.

Henseler J, Ringle CM, Sarstedt M. A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. J Acad Mark Sci [Internet]. 2015; 43(1):115–35. Available:https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8

Hair Jr JF, Hult GTM, Ringle CM, Sarstedt M. A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM). 2nd ed. Los Angeles: SAGE Publications, Inc; 2017;390.