Organizational Ambidexterity, Digital Transformation, and Strategic Agility for Gaining Competitive Advantage in SMEs

F. Oben Ürü; Ebru Gözükara; Ali Anıl Ünsal

doi:10.54733/smar.1386357

EN TR

Organizational Ambidexterity, Digital Transformation, and Strategic Agility for Gaining Competitive Advantage in SMEs

Abstract

This study aims to examine the effects of strategic agility and environmental dynamism on the relationship between organizational ambidexterity and digital transformation and competitive advantage in small-scale SMEs. A quantitative research method is used in the study. The research population is the managers of 17451 small-scale SMEs in the wholesale and retail trade sector within the provincial borders of Istanbul, which employ less than 50 employees annually and whose annual net sales revenue or financial balance sheet does not exceed 25 million Turkish Liras according to the data of the end of 2020. An online survey was sent to the managers of 450 small-scale SMEs reached by convenience sampling method and the data obtained from 366 valid surveys were analyzed through the Smart PLS program. According to the research results, organizational ambidexterity and digital transformation are positively related to competitive advantage. In addition, it is determined that digital transformation has a partial mediating role on the relationship between small-scale SMEs’ ambidexterity and competitive advantage, and strategic agility has a moderating role on this relationship. On the other hand, it is concluded that environmental dynamism does not have a moderating role on the relationship between small-scale SMEs’ ambidexterity and competitive advantage.

Keywords

organizational ambidexterity, digital transformation, competitive advantage, strategic agility, environmental dynamism

Supporting Institution

This research received no external funding.

Ethical Statement

The study was approved on 07/09/2021 by the Ethics Committee of Istanbul Arel University (DECN-08_2021/12) and adheres to the Turkish Higher Education Institutions Codes for the Responsible and Ethical Conduct of Research.

KOBİ’lerde Rekabet Avantajı Elde Etmek için Örgütsel Çift Yönlülük, Dijital Dönüşüm ve Stratejik Çeviklik

Abstract

Bu çalışmanın amacı, stratejik çevikliğin ve çevresel dinamizmin, örgütsel çift yönlülük ve dijital dönüşüm ile rekabet avantajı ilişkisindeki etkilerini KOBİ’lerde irdelemektir. Çalışmada, nicel araştırma yöntemi kullanılmıştır. Araştırma evreni, 2020 yılı sonu verilerine göre İstanbul il sınırları içerisindeki 50 kişiden az yıllık çalışan istihdam eden ve yıllık net satış hasılatı ya da mali bilançosu 25 Milyon Türk Lirasını aşmayan ve toptan ve perakende ticaret sektöründe yer alan 17451 küçük ölçekli KOBİ’lerin yöneticileridir. Kolayda örnekleme yöntemiyle ulaşılan 450 küçük ölçekli KOBİ’lerin yöneticilerine çevrimiçi anket gönderilmiş ve geçerli sayılan 366 anketten elde edilen veriler Smart PLS programı aracılığıyla analiz edilmiştir. Araştırma sonuçlarına göre, örgütsel çift yönlülük ve dijital dönüşüm ile rekabet avantajının pozitif yönde ilişkili olduğu belirlenmiştir. Ayrıca, dijital dönüşümün, KOBİ’lerin çift yönlülüğü ve rekabet avantajı ilişkisinde kısmi aracı rol üstlendiği ve stratejik çevikliğin ise bu ilişkide düzenleyici rolü olduğu tespit edilmiştir. Buna karşın, çevresel dinamizmin, KOBİ’lerin çift yönlülüğü ve rekabet avantajı ilişkisinde düzenleyici rolünün olmadığı sonucuna varılmıştır.

Keywords

örgütsel çift yönlülük, dijital dönüşüm, rekabet avantajı, stratejik çeviklik, çevresel dinamizm

References

Achrol, R. S., & Stern, L. W. (1988). Environmental determinants of decision-making uncertainty in marketing channels. Journal of Marketing Research, 25(1), 36-50. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378802500104
Ahammad, M. F., Glaister, K. W., & Gomes, E. (2020). Strategic agility and human resource management. Human Resource Management Review, 30(1), 1-3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2019.100700
Akdoğan, Ş., Akdoğan, A., & Cingöz, A. (2019). Organizational ambidexterity: An empirical examination of organizational factors as antecedents of organizational ambidexterity. Journal of Global Strategic Management, 3(2), 17-27. https://doi.org/10.20460/JGSM.2009318458
Battistella, C., De Toni, A., De Zan, G., & Pessot, E. (2017). Cultivating business model agility through focused capabilities: A multiple case study. Journal of Business Research, 73, 65-82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.12.007
Berghaus, S., & Back, A. (2016). Gestaltungsbereiche der digitalen Transformation von Unternehmen: Entwicklung eines Reifegradmodells. DieUnternehmung, 70(2), 98-123. https://doi.org/10.5771/0042-059X-2016-2-98
Bodwell, W., & Chermack, T. J. (2010). Organizational ambidexterity: Integrating deliberate and emergent strategy with scenario planning. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 77(2), 193-202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2009.07.004
Brannen, M. Y., & Doz, Y. (2012). Corporate languages and strategic agility: Trapped in your jargon or lost in translation?. California Management Review, 54(3), 77-97. https://doi.org/10.1525/cmr.2012.54.3.77
Bråthen, M., Doan, E., & Breunig, K. J. (2021). Ambidexterity to overcome digital transformation challenges: A bibliometric review. In Proceedings on the 2021 ISPIM innovation conference: Innovating our common future. International Society for Professional Innovation Management, Berlin, Germany.
Braunscheidel, M. J., & Suresh, N. C. (2009). The organizational antecedents of a firm’s supply chain agility for risk mitigation and response. Journal of Operations Management, 27(2), 119-140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2008.09.006
Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2009). Sosyal bilimler için veri analizi el kitabı: İstatistik, araştırma deseni, SPSS uygulamaları ve yorum (9. Baskı). Pegem Yayınları.

Chan, A., Ngai, E., & Moon, K. (2017). The effect of strategic and manufacturing flexibilities and supply chain agility on firm performance in the fashion industry. European Journal of Operational Research, 259(2), 486-499. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2016.11.006
Chan, H. K., Yee, R. W., Dai, J., & Lim, M. K. (2016). The moderating effect of environmental dynamism on green product innovation and performance. International Journal of Production Economics, 181(B), 384-391. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2015.12.006
Clauss, T., Kraus, S., Kallinger, F. L., Bican, P. M., Brem, A., & Kailer, N. (2021). Organizational ambidexterity and competitive advantage: The role of strategic agility in the exploration-exploitation paradox. Journal of Innovation and Knowledge, 6(4), 203-213. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jik.2020.07.003
Duncan, R. B. (1976). The ambidextrous organization: Designing dual structures for innovation. In R. H. Kilmann, L. R. Pondy, & D. R. Slevin (Eds.), The management of organization design: Strategies and implementation (pp. 167-188, Vol. I). North-Holland.
Fitzgerald, M., Kruschwitz, N., Bonnet, D., & Welch, M. (2014). Embracing digital technology: A new strategic imperative. MIT Sloan Management Review, 55(2), 1-12.
Fleisher, C. S., & Bensoussan, B. E. (2003). Strategic and competitive analysis: Methods and techniques for analyzing business competition. Prentice Hall.
Fourné, S. P. L., Rosenbusch, N., Heyden, M. L. M., & Jansen, J. J. P. (2019). Structural and contextual approaches to ambidexterity: A meta-analysis of organizational and environmental contingencies. European Management Journal, 37(5), 564-576. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2019.04.002
Gibson, C. B., & Birkinshaw, J. (2004). The antecedents, consequences, and mediating role of organizational ambidexterity. Academy of Management Journal, 47(2), 209-226. https://doi.org/10.5465/20159573
Gil-Gomez, H., Guerola-Navarro, V., Oltra-Badenes, R., & Lozano-Quilis, J. A. (2020). Customer relationship management: Digital transformation and sustainable business model innovation. Economic Research-Ekonomska Istraživanja, 33(1), 2733-2750. https://doi.org/10.1080/1331677X.2019.1676283
Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2021). A Primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) (3rd Edition). SAGE.
Hair, J. F., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2011). PLS-SEM: Indeed a silver bullet. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 19(2), 139-152. https://doi.org/10.2753/MTP1069-6679190202
Henriette, E., Feki, M., & Boughzala, I. (2016). Digital transformation challenges. In Proceedings Mediterranean Conference on Information Systems (MCIS), Cyprus.
Henseler, J., Dijkstra, T. K., Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M., Diamantopoulos, A., Straub, D. W., Ketchen, D. J., Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., & Calantone, R. J. (2014). Common beliefs and reality about PLS: Comments on Rönkkö and Evermann (2013). Organizational Research Methods, 17(2), 182-209. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428114526928
Hock, M., Clauss, T., & Schulz, E. (2016). The impact of organizational culture on a firm’s capability to innovate the business model. R&D Management, 46(3), 433-450. https://doi.org/10.1111/radm.12153
Hofer, C. W., & Schendel, D. (1978). Strategy formulation: Analytical concepts. West Pub. Co.
Hu, L.-t., & Bentler, P. M. (1998). Fit indices in covariance structure modeling: Sensitivity to underparameterized model misspecification. Psychological Methods, 3(4), 424-453. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.3.4.424
Hughes, M. (2018). Organisational ambidexterity and firm performance: Burning research questions for marketing scholars. Journal of Marketing Management, 34(1-2), 178-229. https://doi.org/10.1080/0267257X.2018.1441175
Hulland, J. (1999). Use of partial least squares (PLS) in strategic management research: A review of four recent studies. Strategic Management Journal, 20(2), 195-204. https://www.jstor.org/stable/3094025
Jiao, H., Alon, I., & Cui, Y. (2011). Environmental dynamism, innovation, and dynamic capabilities: the case of China. Journal of Enterprising Communities: People and Places in the Global Economy, 5(2), 131-144. https://doi.org/10.1108/17506201111131550
Junni, P., Sarala, R., Tarba, S., & Weber, Y. (2015). The role of strategic agility in acquisitions. British Journal of Management, 26(4), 596-616. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.12115
Kenny, D. A. (2018). Moderation. https://davidakenny.net/cm/moderation.htm (Accessed: 28 September 2022).
Kofler, T. (2018). Das digitale Unternehmen. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-57617-5
Krejcie, R. V., & Morgan, D. W. (1970). Determining sample size for research activities. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 30(3), 607-610. https://doi.org/10.1177/001316447003000308
Lavikka, R., Smeds, R., & Jaatinen, M. (2015). A process for building inter-organizational contextual ambidexterity. Business Process Management Journal, 21(5), 1140-1161. https://doi.org/10.1108/BPMJ-12-2013-0153
Liu, D., Chen, S., & Chou, T. (2011). Resource fit in digital transformation: Lessons learned from the CBC Bank Global e‐banking project. Management Decision, 49(10), 1728-1742. https://doi.org/10.1108/00251741111183852
Lubatkin, M. H., Simsek, Z., Ling, Y., & Veiga, J. F. (2006). Ambidexterity and performance in small-to medium-sized firms: The pivotal role of top management team behavioral integration. Journal of Management, 32(5), 646-672. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206306290712
March, J. G. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization Science, 2(1), 71-87. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2.1.71
Morakanyane, R., Grace, A. A., & O'Reilly, P. (2017). Conceptualizing digital transformation in business organizations: A systematic review of the literature. Bled eConference, Bled, Slovenia. https://doi.org/10.18690/978-961-286-043-1.30
Moreno-Luzon, M., & Pasola, J. V. (2011). Ambidexterity and total quality management: Towards a research agenda. Management Decision, 49(6), 927-947. https://doi.org/10.1108/00251741111143612
Preda, G. (2014). Organizational ambidexterity and competitive advantage: Toward a research model. Management and Marketing Journal, (1), 67-74.
Probst, G., & Raisch, S. (2005). Organizational crisis: The logic of failure. Academy of Management Perspectives, 19(1), 90-105. https://doi.org/10.5465/ame.2005.15841958
Rosing, K., & Zacher, H. (2017). Individual ambidexterity: The duality of exploration and exploitation and its relationship with innovative performance. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 26(5), 694-709. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2016.1238358
Scherer, R. F., Wiebe, F. A., Luther, D. C., & Adams, J. S. (1988). Dimensionality of coping: Factor stability using the ways of coping questionnaire. Psychological Reports, 62(3), 763-770. https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.1988.62.3.763
Schilke, O. (2014). On the contingent value of dynamic capabilities for competitive advantage: The nonlinear moderating effect of environmental dynamism. Strategic Management Journal, 35(2), 179-203. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2099
Schuchmann, D., & Seufert, S. (2015). Corporate learning in times of digital transformation: A conceptual framework and service portfolio for the learning function in banking organisations. International Journal of Advanced Corporate Learning, 8(1), 31-39. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijac.v8i1.4440
Ståhle, P., & Grönroos, M. (2009). Dynamic intellectual capital: Knowledge management in theory and practice. Werner Soderstrom Osakeyhtio, Porvoo.
TURKSTAT. (2022). Turkish Statistical Institute. https://data.tuik.gov.tr/Turcat (Accessed: 30 October 2022).
Ürü Sanı, F. O., Wolff, R. A., & Demir, B. (2016). Çevresel determinizmin stratejik karar alma sürecindeki rolü. Eurasian Academy of Sciences Social Sciences Journal, 1(1), 444-465.
Ürü, F. O., & Ünsal, A. A. (2022). KOBİ’lerde örgütsel çift yönlülük, dijital dönüşüm, rekabet avantajı, stratejik çeviklik ve çevresel olumsuzluk arasındaki ilişkiler. İşletme Araştırmaları Dergisi, 14(4), 3238-3258. https://doi.org/10.20491/isarder.2022.1560
Ürü, F. O., Çalışkan, S. C., Atan, Ö., & Aksu, M. (2011). How much entrepreneurial characteristics matter in strategic decision-making?. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 24, 538-562. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.09.112
Westerman, G., Tannou, M., Bonnet, D., Ferraris, P., & McAfee, A. (2017). The digital advantage: How digital leaders outperform their peers in every industry. Capgemini Consulting, and MIT Sloan Management Report.
Yaşar Uğurlu, Ö., Çolakoğlu, E., & Öztosun, E. (2019). Stratejik çevikliğin firma performansına etkisi: Üretim işletmelerinde bir araştırma. İş ve İnsan Dergisi, 6(1), 93-106.
Yazıcıoğlu, Y., & Erdoğan, S. (2004). SPSS uygulamalı bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri. Detay Yayıncılık.

Details

Primary Language

English

Subjects

Strategy

Journal Section

Research Article

Authors

F. Oben Ürü ^*
0000-0002-1960-5857
Türkiye

Ebru Gözükara
0000-0003-0337-5337
Türkiye

Ali Anıl Ünsal
0000-0003-1890-8773
Türkiye

Publication Date

March 27, 2024

Submission Date

November 5, 2023

Acceptance Date

February 18, 2024

Published in Issue

Year 2024 Volume: 5 Number: 1

DOI

https://doi.org/10.54733/smar.1386357

IZ

https://izlik.org/JA58TA47FD

APA

Ürü, F. O., Gözükara, E., & Ünsal, A. A. (2024). Organizational Ambidexterity, Digital Transformation, and Strategic Agility for Gaining Competitive Advantage in SMEs. Sosyal Mucit Academic Review, 5(1), 1-23. https://doi.org/10.54733/smar.1386357

AMA

1.Ürü FO, Gözükara E, Ünsal AA. Organizational Ambidexterity, Digital Transformation, and Strategic Agility for Gaining Competitive Advantage in SMEs. SMAR. 2024;5(1):1-23. doi:10.54733/smar.1386357

Chicago

Ürü, F. Oben, Ebru Gözükara, and Ali Anıl Ünsal. 2024. “Organizational Ambidexterity, Digital Transformation, and Strategic Agility for Gaining Competitive Advantage in SMEs”. Sosyal Mucit Academic Review 5 (1): 1-23. https://doi.org/10.54733/smar.1386357.

EndNote

Ürü FO, Gözükara E, Ünsal AA (March 1, 2024) Organizational Ambidexterity, Digital Transformation, and Strategic Agility for Gaining Competitive Advantage in SMEs. Sosyal Mucit Academic Review 5 1 1–23.

IEEE

[1]F. O. Ürü, E. Gözükara, and A. A. Ünsal, “Organizational Ambidexterity, Digital Transformation, and Strategic Agility for Gaining Competitive Advantage in SMEs”, SMAR, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 1–23, Mar. 2024, doi: 10.54733/smar.1386357.

ISNAD

Ürü, F. Oben - Gözükara, Ebru - Ünsal, Ali Anıl. “Organizational Ambidexterity, Digital Transformation, and Strategic Agility for Gaining Competitive Advantage in SMEs”. Sosyal Mucit Academic Review 5/1 (March 1, 2024): 1-23. https://doi.org/10.54733/smar.1386357.

JAMA

1.Ürü FO, Gözükara E, Ünsal AA. Organizational Ambidexterity, Digital Transformation, and Strategic Agility for Gaining Competitive Advantage in SMEs. SMAR. 2024;5:1–23.

MLA

Ürü, F. Oben, et al. “Organizational Ambidexterity, Digital Transformation, and Strategic Agility for Gaining Competitive Advantage in SMEs”. Sosyal Mucit Academic Review, vol. 5, no. 1, Mar. 2024, pp. 1-23, doi:10.54733/smar.1386357.

Vancouver

1.F. Oben Ürü, Ebru Gözükara, Ali Anıl Ünsal. Organizational Ambidexterity, Digital Transformation, and Strategic Agility for Gaining Competitive Advantage in SMEs. SMAR. 2024 Mar. 1;5(1):1-23. doi:10.54733/smar.1386357

Cited By

A Study on the Mediating Role of Brand Trust in the Impact of Omnichannel Integration Quality on Brand Loyalty

Sosyal Mucit Academic Review

https://doi.org/10.54733/smar.1808797

Responsible digital transformation and sustainable performance: role of organisational ambidexterity

International Journal of Organizational Analysis

https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOA-07-2025-5795

Ambidextrous SMEs for a sustainable society. A narrative review considering digitalization, open innovation, human resources and green innovation

Next Research

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nexres.2025.100839

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.