A Pilot Study on the Validity and Reliability of Dynamic Capabilities, Innovation Culture, Digital Transformation and Sustainable Performance Scales

Yıl 2024, Cilt: 5 Sayı: 2, 87 - 104, 26.12.2024

Mustafa Genç

https://doi.org/10.58767/joinbat.1506113

Öz

The aim of this study is to measure the validity and reliability of dynamic capabilities, innovation culture, digital transformation and sustainable performance scales within the scope of a pilot study. In addition, the correlation between these variables was tested. The data required for the pilot study were collected online from 31 senior executives of companies that stand out with their R&D expenditures. Corrected item-total correlation coefficients and Cronbach alpha coefficients were analysed for the validity and reliability of the scales. According to the results of the analyses, it was decided not to remove any items from the scales. Then, the relationship between dynamic capabilities, innovation culture and digital transformation with sustainable performance was analysed. The results revealed that dynamic capabilities and digital transformation have positive relationships with sustainable performance. However, no significant relationship was found between innovation culture and sustainable performance. The study draws attention to dynamic capabilities, innovation culture and digital transformation for their contribution to sustainable performance. It is thought that the research model explained with dynamic capabilities and innovation culture approaches will contribute to the literature and practitioners.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Dynamic Capabilities, Innovation Culture, Digital Transformation, Sustainable Performance, Pilot Study

Dinamik Yetenekler, İnovasyon Kültürü, Dijital Dönüşüm ve Sürdürülebilir Performans Ölçeklerinin Geçerlilik ve Güvenilirliğine Yönelik Bir Pilot Çalışma

Öz

Bu çalışmanın amacı, bir pilot çalışma kapsamında dinamik yetenekler, inovasyon kültürü, dijital dönüşüm ve sürdürülebilir performans ölçeklerinin geçerlilik ve güvenirliğini ölçmeye yöneliktir. Ayrıca bu değişkenlerin aralarındaki korelasyon test edilmiştir. Pilot çalışma için gerekli olan veriler, Ar-Ge harcaması ile öne çıkan firmaların 31 üst düzey yöneticisinden çevrimiçi olarak toplanmıştır. Ölçeklerin geçerlilik ve güvenilirliği için düzeltilmiş madde toplam korelasyon katsayıları ve Cronbach alpha katsayıları incelenmiştir. Analiz sonuçlarına göre ölçeklerden madde çıkarılmamasına karar verilmiştir. Daha sonra dinamik yetenekler, inovasyon kültürü ve dijital dönüşümün sürdürülebilir performans ile ilişkisi analiz edilmiştir. Korelasyon analizi sonuçları dinamik yetenekler ve dijital dönüşümün sürdürülebilir performans ile pozitif yönde ilişkilere sahip olduğunu ortaya çıkarmıştır. Ancak inovasyon kültürü ve sürdürülebilir performans arasında anlamlı bir ilişki bulunamamıştır. Çalışma, sürdürülebilir performansa olan katkılarından dolayı dinamik yetenekler, inovasyon kültürü ve dijital dönüşüme dikkat çekmektedir. Dinamik yetenekler ve inovasyon kültürü yaklaşımlarıyla açıklanan araştırma modelinin literatüre ve uygulayıcılara katkı sağlayacağı düşünülmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Dinamik Yetenekler, İnovasyon Kültürü, Dijital Dönüşüm, Sürdürülebilir Performans, Pilot Çalışma

Kaynakça

• Ahmadova, G., Delgado-Marquez, B., & Pedauga, L. E. (2021). The curvilinear relationship between digitalization and firm's environmental performance. In Academy of Management Proceedings (Vol. 2021, No. 1, p. 13605). Briarcliff Manor, NY 10510: Academy of Management.
• Akkaya, B. (2020). Covid-19 pandemi sürecinde sağlık kurumu yöneticilerinin dinamik yetenekleri ve sürdürülebilirlik algıları. Yönetim Bilimleri Dergisi, 18(38), 943-960.
• Aktaş, M. T. & Kutay, T. (2024). Dijital Dönüşüm Çağında İmalat: Sürdürülebilirlik 4.0. Ekonomik ve Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 20(1), 37-61.
• Allam, Z., & Jones, D. S. (2021). Future (post-COVID) digital, smart and sustainable cities in the wake of 6G: Digital twins, immersive realities and new urban economies. Land use policy, 101, 105201.
• Al-Qudah, A. A., Hamdan, A., Al-Okaily, M., & Alhaddad, L. (2023). The impact of green lending on credit risk: Evidence from UAE’s banks. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 30(22), 61381-61393.
• Arain, M., Campbell, M. J., Cooper, C. L., & Lancaster, G. A. (2010). What is a pilot or feasibility study? A review of current practice and editorial policy. BMC medical research methodology, 10, 1-7.
• Arend, R. J. (2014). Social and environmental performance at SMEs: Considering motivations, capabilities, and instrumentalism. Journal of Business Ethics, 125, 541-561.
• Ayuso, S., Ángel Rodríguez, M., & Enric Ricart, J. (2006). Using stakeholder dialogue as a source for new ideas: a dynamic capability underlying sustainable innovation. Corporate Governance: The international journal of business in society, 6(4), 475-490.
• Bansal, P. (2005). Evolving sustainably: A longitudinal study of corporate sustainable development. Strategic management journal, 26(3), 197-218.
• Bari, N., Chimhundu, R., & Chan, K. C. (2022). Dynamic capabilities to achieve corporate sustainability: a roadmap to sustained competitive advantage. Sustainability, 14(3), 1531.
• Barin Cruz, L., Ávila Pedrozo, E., & de Fátima Barros Estivalete, V. (2006). Towards sustainable development strategies: a complex view following the contribution of Edgar Morin. Management Decision, 44(7), 871- 891.
• Barkemeyer, R., Holt, D., Preuss, L., & Tsang, S. (2014). What happened to the ‘development’in sustainable development? Business guidelines two decades after Brundtland. Sustainable development, 22(1), 15-32.
• Basiago, A. D. (1998). Economic, social, and environmental sustainability in development theory and urban planning practice. Environmentalist, 19(2), 145-161.
• Beier, G., Niehoff, S., Ziems, T., & Xue, B. (2017). Sustainability aspects of a digitalized industry–A comparative study from China and Germany. International journal of precision engineering and manufacturing-green technology, 4, 227-234.
• Beltrami, M., Orzes, G., Sarkis, J., & Sartor, M. (2021). Industry 4.0 and sustainability: Towards conceptualization and theory. Journal of Cleaner Production, 312, 127733.
• Bonn, I., ve Fisher, J. (2011). Sustainability: the missing ingredient in strategy. Journal of business strategy, 32(1), 5-14.
• Broccardo, L., Truant, E., & Dana, L. P. (2023). The interlink between digitalization, sustainability, and performance: An Italian context. Journal of Business Research, 158, 113621.
• Buzzao, G., ve Rizzi, F. (2021). On the conceptualization and measurement of dynamic capabilities for sustainability: Building theory through a systematic literature review. Business Strategy and the Environment, 30(1), 135-175.
• Büschgens, T., Bausch, A., & Balkin, D. B. (2013). Organizational culture and innovation: A meta‐analytic review. Journal of product innovation management, 30(4), 763-781. Carrillo-Hermosilla, J., Del Río, P., & Könnölä, T. (2010). Diversity of eco-innovations: Reflections from selected case studies. Journal of cleaner production, 18(10-11), 1073-1083.
• Castro, G. D. R., Fernandez, M. C. G., & Colsa, A. U. (2021). Unleashing the convergence amid digitalization and sustainability towards pursuing the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): A holistic review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 280, 122204.
• Chabowski, B. R., Mena, J. A., & Gonzalez-Padron, T. L. (2011). The structure of sustainability research in marketing, 1958–2008: A basis for future research opportunities. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 39, 55-70.
• Chang, R. D., Zuo, J., Zhao, Z. Y., Zillante, G., Gan, X. L., & Soebarto, V. (2017). Evolving theories of sustainability and firms: History, future directions and implications for renewable energy research. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 72, 48-56.
• Chen, Y. S., & Chang, C. H. (2013). The determinants of green product development performance: Green dynamic capabilities, green transformational leadership, and green creativity. Journal of business ethics, 116, 107- 119.
• Crocker, L., & Algina, J. (2006). Introduction to classical and modern test theory. Wadsworth Pub Co. Cybercom Group. (2021). Digital sustainability: Global sustainability as a driver of innovation and growth. del Rosario, R. S. M., & René, D. P. (2017). Eco-innovation and organizational culture in the hotel industry. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 65, 71-80.
• DeVellis, R. F. (2014). Scale development: Theory and applications. Sage publications.
• Di Stefano, G., Peteraf, M., & Verona, G. (2014). The organizational drivetrain: A road to integration of dynamic capabilities research. Academy of Management Perspectives, 28(4), 307-327.
• Dobni, C. B. (2008). The DNA of innovation. Journal of Business Strategy, 29(2), 43-50.
• Drnevich, P. L., & Kriauciunas, A. P. (2011). Clarifying the conditions and limits of the contributions of ordinary and dynamic capabilities to relative firm performance. Strategic management journal, 32(3), 254-279.
• Eisenhardt, K. M., & Martin, J. A. (2000). Dynamic capabilities: what are they?. Strategic management journal, 21(10‐11), 1105-1121.
• Ellström, D., Holtström, J., Berg, E., & Josefsson, C. (2022). Dynamic capabilities for digital transformation. Journal of Strategy and Management, 15(2), 272-286.
• Feroz, A. K., Zo, H., & Chiravuri, A. (2021). Digital transformation and environmental sustainability: A review and research agenda. Sustainability, 13(3), 1530.
• Ferreira, J., Coelho, A., & Moutinho, L. (2020). Dynamic capabilities, creativity and innovation capability and their impact on competitive advantage and firm performance: The moderating role of entrepreneurial orientation. Technovation, 92, 102061.
• Filippou, D., & King, M. G. (2011). R&D prospects in the mining and metals industry. Resources Policy, 36(3), 276-284.
• Gebauer, H. (2011). Exploring the contribution of management innovation to the evolution of dynamic capabilities. Industrial Marketing Management, 40(8), 1238-1250.
• George, D., & Mallery, M. (2010). SPSS for Windows Step by Step: A Simple Guide and Reference, 17.0 update (10a ed.) Boston: Pearson
• Globocnik, D., Rauter, R., & Baumgartner, R. J. (2020). Synergy or conflict? The relationships among organisational culture, sustainability-related innovation performance, and economic innovation performance. International Journal of Innovation Management, 24(01), 2050004.
• Gomez-Trujillo, A. M., & Gonzalez-Perez, M. A. (2021). Digital transformation as a strategy to reach sustainability. Smart and Sustainable Built Environment, 11(4), 1137-1162.
• Gruenhagen, J. H., & Parker, R. (2020). Factors driving or impeding the diffusion and adoption of innovation in mining: A systematic review of the literature. Resources policy, 65, 101540.
• Hartl, E., & Hess, T. (2017). The role of cultural values for digital transformation: Insights from a Delphi study, Twenty-third Americas Conference on Information Systems, Boston.
• Henderson, R. M., & Clark, K. B. (1990). Architectural innovation: The reconfiguration of existing product technologies and the failure of established firms. Administrative science quarterly, 9-30.
• Henriette, E., Feki, M., & Boughzala, I. (2016). Digital transformation challenges.
• Hofmann, K. H., Theyel, G., & Wood, C. H. (2012). Identifying firm capabilities as drivers of environmental management and sustainability practices–evidence from small and medium‐sized manufacturers. Business Strategy and the Environment, 21(8), 530-545.
• Hurley, R. F., & Hult, G. T. M. (1998). Innovation, market orientation, and organizational learning: an integration and empirical examination. Journal of marketing, 62(3), 42-54.
• Jassawalla, A. R., & Sashittal, H. C. (2002). Cultures that support product-innovation processes. Academy of Management Perspectives, 16(3), 42-54.
• Jin, Z., Navare, J., & Lynch, R. (2019). The relationship between innovation culture and innovation outcomes: exploring the effects of sustainability orientation and firm size. R&D Management, 49(4), 607-623.
• Karadağ, H. (2024). Kamu Örgütlerinin Dijital Dönüşümünde Dinamik Yetenekler Yaklaşımı ve Büyük Veri Analitiğinin Rolü. Kamu Yönetimi ve Teknoloji Dergisi, 6(1), 13-39.
• Khan, E. A., & Quaddus, M. (2015). Development and validation of a scale for measuring sustainability factors of informal microenterprises–A qualitative and quantitative approach. Entrepreneurship Research Journal, 5(4), 347-372.
• Kortus, L., & Gutmann, T. (2023). How do firms build dynamic capabilities to develop sustainable products? A multiple case study in the manufacturing industry. Journal of cleaner production, 415, 137887.
• Kristoffersen, E., Blomsma, F., Mikalef, P., & Li, J. (2020). The smart circular economy: A digital-enabled circular strategies framework for manufacturing companies. Journal of business research, 120, 241-261.
• Kumar, R., Singh, K., & Jain, S. K. (2022). An empirical investigation of the relationship among agile manufacturing practices and business performance: A pilot study. Journal of Science and Technology Policy Management, 13(2), 428-455.
• Kump, B., Engelmann, A., Kessler, A., & Schweiger, C. (2019). Toward a dynamic capabilities scale: measuring organizational sensing, seizing, and transforming capacities. Industrial and Corporate Change, 28(5), 1149-1172.
• Li, L. (2022). Digital transformation and sustainable performance: The moderating role of market turbulence. Industrial Marketing Management, 104, 28-37.
• Liao, Y., Deschamps, F., Loures, E. D. F. R., & Ramos, L. F. P. (2017). Past, present and future of Industry 4.0-a systematic literature review and research agenda proposal. International journal of production research, 55(12), 3609-3629.
• Lichtenthaler, U. (2017). Shared value innovation: Linking competitiveness and societal goals in the context of digital transformation. International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management, 14(04), 1750018.
• Lieberman, M. B., & Montgomery, D. B. (1998). First‐mover (dis) advantages: retrospective and link with the resource‐based view. Strategic management journal, 19(12), 1111-1125.
• Liu, D. Y., Chen, S. W., & Chou, T. C. (2011). Resource fit in digital transformation: Lessons learned from the CBC Bank global e‐banking project. Management Decision, 49(10), 1728-1742.
• Lozano, R. (2013). Are companies planning their organisational changes for corporate sustainability? An analysis of three case studies on resistance to change and their strategies to overcome it. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 20(5), 275-295.
• Martín-de Castro, G., Delgado-Verde, M., Navas-López, J. E., & Cruz-González, J. (2013). The moderating role of innovation culture in the relationship between knowledge assets and product innovation. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 80(2), 351-363.
• Martín-de Castro, G., Delgado-Verde, M., Navas-López, J. E., & Cruz-González, J. (2013). The moderating role of innovation culture in the relationship between knowledge assets and product innovation. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 80(2), 351-363.
• Matinaro, V., & Liu, Y. (2017). Towards increased innovativeness and sustainability through organizational culture: A case study of a Finnish construction business. Journal of cleaner production, 142, 3184-3193.
• Matt, D. T., & Rauch, E. (2020). SME 4.0: The role of small-and medium-sized enterprises in the digital transformation. Industry 4.0 for SMEs: Challenges, opportunities and requirements, 3-36.
• Menguc, B., & Ozanne, L. K. (2005). Challenges of the “green imperative”: A natural resource-based approach to the environmental orientation–business performance relationship. Journal of Business research, 58(4), 430-438.
• Mensah, J. (2019). Sustainable development: Meaning, history, principles, pillars, and implications for human action: Literature review. Cogent social sciences, 5(1).
• Moinester, M., & Gottfried, R. (2014). Sample size estimation for correlations with pre-specified confidence interval. The quantitative methods for psychology, 10(2), 124-130.
• Müller, J. M., & Voigt, K. I. (2018). Sustainable industrial value creation in SMEs: A comparison between industry 4.0 and made in China 2025. International Journal of Precision Engineering and Manufacturing-Green Technology, 5, 659-670.
• Nadeem, A., Abedin, B., Cerpa, N., & Chew, E. (2018). Digital transformation & digital business strategy in electronic commerce-the role of organizational capabilities. Journal of theoretical and applied electronic commerce research, 13(2), 1-8.
• O'Neil, I., & Ucbasaran, D. (2016). Balancing “what matters to me” with “what matters to them”: Exploring the legitimation process of environmental entrepreneurs. Journal of Business Venturing, 31(2), 133-152.
• Özdemir, A. & Tan, F.Z. (2023). The impact of digital transformation on organizational agility. Nobel Yayınevi. Ankara.
• Paiola, M., Schiavone, F., Grandinetti, R., & Chen, J. (2021). Digital servitization and sustainability through networking: Some evidences from IoT-based business models. Journal of Business Research, 132, 507- 516.
• Schmidt, A. L., & Scaringella, L. (2020). Uncovering disruptors’ business model innovation activities: evidencing the relationships between dynamic capabilities and value proposition innovation. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 57, 101589.
• Seele, P. (2016). Digitally unified reporting: how XBRL-based real-time transparency helps in combining integrated sustainability reporting and performance control. Journal of Cleaner Production, 136, 65-77.
• Senge, P. M. & Carstedt, G. (2001). Innovating Our Way to the Next Industrial Revolution, MIT Sloan Management Review, 42(2), 24-38.
• Shang, H., Chen, R., & Li, Z. (2020). Dynamic sustainability capabilities and corporate sustainability performance: The mediating effect of resource management capabilities. Sustainable Development, 28(4), 595-612.
• Shevchenko, A., Lévesque, M., & Pagell, M. (2016). Why firms delay reaching true sustainability. Journal of Management Studies, 53(5), 911-935.
• Sivarajah, U., Irani, Z., Gupta, S., & Mahroof, K. (2020). Role of big data and social media analytics for business to business sustainability: A participatory web context. Industrial Marketing Management, 86, 163-179.
• Stock, R. M., Six, B., & Zacharias, N. A. (2013). Linking multiple layers of innovation-oriented corporate culture, product program innovativeness, and business performance: A contingency approach. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 41, 283-299.
• Székely, F., & Knirsch, M. (2005). Responsible leadership and corporate social responsibility:: Metrics for sustainable performance. European Management Journal, 23(6), 628-647.
• Teece, D. J. (2007). Explicating dynamic capabilities: the nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic management journal, 28(13), 1319-1350.
• Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic management journal, 18(7), 509-533.
• Tekdemir, N., & Çakmakoğlu, D. (2024). AB Ülkelerinde Dijital Dönüşümün Sürdürülebilir Kalkınmaya Yansımaları: Kamusal Politikalar Açısından Bir Değerlendirme. Manisa Celal Bayar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 22(1), 149-166.
• Terziovski, M. (2010). Innovation practice and its performance implications in small and medium enterprises (SMEs) in the manufacturing sector: a resource‐based view. Strategic management journal, 31(8), 892- 902. Van Teijlingen, E., & Hundley, V. (2001). The importance of pilot studies. Social research update, (35), 1-4. Vial, G. (2019), Understanding Digital Transformation: A Review and a Research Agenda, The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 28(2), 118-144.
• Warner, K. S., & Wäger, M. (2019). Building dynamic capabilities for digital transformation: An ongoing process of strategic renewal. Long range planning, 52(3), 326-349.
• WCED. (1987), World Commission on Environment and Development. Our Common Future, Oxford University Press: New York. Zailani, S. H. M., Eltayeb, T. K., Hsu, C. C., & Choon Tan, K. (2012). The impact of external institutional drivers and internal strategy on environmental performance. International journal of operations & production management, 32(6), 721-745.
• Zhu, Q., & Sarkis, J. (2004). Relationships between operational practices and performance among early adopters of green supply chain management practices in Chinese manufacturing enterprises. Journal of operations management, 22(3), 265-289.
• Zollo, M., Bettinazzi, E. L., Neumann, K., & Snoeren, P. (2016). Toward a comprehensive model of organizational evolution: Dynamic capabilities for innovation and adaptation of the enterprise model. Global Strategy Journal, 6(3), 225-244.