Year 2017, Volume , Issue , Pages 749 - 766 2017-11-14

STRATEJİ TİPLERİ iLE YENİLİK PERFORMANSI İLİŞKİSİNDE STRATEJİK KARAR VERME HIZININ ŞARTLI DEĞİŞKEN (MODERATÖR) ETKİSİ

Mehtap ÖZŞAHİN [1] , Ebru Beyza BAYARÇELİK [2] , Bora YILDIZ [3]

215 744


Sürdürülebilir rekabet avantajı yaratılmasında en çok incelenen konular arasında strateji ve yenilik kavramları yer almaktadır. Örgütlerin seçtikleri stratejiler, diğer bir ifadeyle stratejik eğilimleri, rekabet avantajı yaratmada, yeni mal/hizmet, yeni pazarlar ve uygulamalarla ortaya çıkmaktadır. Seçilen strateji kadar stratejinin seçilme ve uygulanma hızı da yoğun rekabetin ve hızlı değişimlerin hüküm sürdüğü iş dünyasında sürdürülebilir rekabet avantajının ön koşullarından sayılmaktadır. Bu bağlamda, bu çalışma kapsamında seçilen strateji tipinin (Öncü, Analizci, Savunmacı, Tepkici) ve stratejik karar verme hızının, sürdürülebilir rekabet avantajının göstergelerinden olan yenilik performansına olan etkileri ve strateji tipleri ile yenilik performansı ilişkisinde stratejik karar verme hızının şartı değişken (Moderatör) etkisi araştırılmıştır. Marmara bölgesinde üretim ve hizmet sektöründe faaliyet gösteren 136 orta ve büyük ölçekli işletmenin 333 orta ve üst düzey yöneticisinden elde edilen anketler SPSS 21.00 İstatistik Paket Programı ve bu program için geliştirilen PROCESS makrosu kullanılarak değerlendirilmiştir. Araştırma sonuçları, dört strateji tipinin de yenilik performansıyla ilişkili olduğu ve stratejik karar verme hızının, strateji tiplerinden öncü-analizci strateji ile yenilik performansı ilişkisinde şartlı değişken etkisine sahip olduğu bulgusunu ortaya koymuştur.


Strateji Tipleri, Stratejik Karar Verme Hızı
  • Akbolat, M.(2009),” “Türk Sağlık Sektöründe Mıles Ve Snow’un Stratejik Tipolojisi: Hastaneler Üzerine Bir Araştırma” Gazi Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 11(3) ,127-146.
  • Alegre, J. and Chiva, R. (2008), Assessing the Impact of Organizational Learning Capability on Product Innovation Performance: An Empirical Test, Technovation, 28, pp.315-326.
  • Ancona, D.G., Okhuysen, G.A. and Perlow, L.A. (2001), Taking Time to Integrate Temporal Research, Academy of Management Review, (26): 512-529.
  • Ansoff, H. I. (1987). The concept of corporate strategy. Homewood, IL: Irwin.
  • Aragon-Correa, J.A., Garcia-Moreales, V.J. and Cordon-Pozo, E. (2007), Leadership and Organizational Learning’s Role on Innovation and Performance: Lessons from Spain, Industrial Marketing Management, 36, pp.349-359.
  • Aragón-Sánchez, A. and Sánchez-Marín, G. (2005). Strategic orientation, management characteristics, and performance: A study of Spanish SMEs. Journal of Small Business Management, 43(3): 287–308.
  • Baum, R.J. and Wally, S (2003), Strategic Decision Speed and Firm Performance, Strategic Management Journal, 24, pp.1107-1129.
  • Bourgeois, L.J. and Eisenhardt, Kathleen M. (1988), Strategic Decision Process in High Velocity Environment: Four Cases in the Microcomputer Industry, Management Science, 34, ss.816-835.
  • Boyne, G. A., & Walker, R. M. (2010). Strategic management and public service performance: The way ahead. Public Administration Review, 70(1), 185–192.
  • Campos, H. M., Parellada, F. S., Valenzuela, F. A. A., & Rubio, A. M. (2015). Strategic decision-making speed in new technology based firms. RAI Revista de Administração e Inovação, 12(2), 130-152.
  • Chen, S. T., & Chang, B. G. (2012). The effects of absorptive capacity and decision speed on organizational innovation: A study of organizational structure as an antecedent variable. Contemporary Management Research, 8(1), 27.
  • Colin C. J. Cheng and Eelko K. R. E. Huizingh(2014), “When Is Open Innovation Beneficial? The Role of Strategic Orientation”, Journal of Product Innovation Management, 31(6):1235–1253.
  • Conway, J. M., & Lance, C. E. (2010). What reviewers should expect from authors regarding common method bias in organizational research. Journal of Business and Psychology, 25(3), 325-334.
  • Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. psychometrika, 16(3), 297-334.
  • Csepeti, A. (2010). Research issues of Miles and Snow strategic typology. Budapest Management Review, 41(11): 15–30.
  • D'Aveni, R. A., Dagnino, G. B., & Smith, K. G. (2010). The age of temporary advantage. Strategic Management Journal, 31(13), 1371-1385.
  • Dayan, M., Elbanna, S., & Di Benedetto, A. (2012). Antecedents and consequences of political behavior in new product development teams. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 59(3), 470-482.
  • DeSarbo, W. S., Anthony Di Benedetto, C., & Sinha, I. (2005). Revisiting the Miles and Snow strategic framework: uncovering interrelationships between strategic types, capabilities, environmental uncertainty, and firm performance. Strategic Management Journal, 26(1), 47-74.
  • Eisenhardt, K. M. (1990). Speed and strategic choice: How managers accelerate decision making. California Management Review, 32(3), 39-54.
  • Eisenhardt, K. M., & Martin, J. A. (2000). Dynamic capabilities: what are they?. Strategic management journal, 1105-1121.
  • Eisenhardt, Kathleen M. (1989), “Making Fast Strategic Decisions in High-Velocity Environments”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol.32, No.3, pp.543-576, 1989.
  • Galanou, E., & Katsioloudes, M. (2014). Cultural Integration with Strategic Decision-Making Process in Determining Innovation Performance: Evidence from an Arab Country Setting. Handbook of Research on Organizational Transformations through Big Data Analytics, 188.
  • Gumusluoglu, L., & Acur, N. (2016). Fit among business strategy, strategy formality, and dynamic capability development in new product development. European Management Review.
  • Gupta, B. (2011), “A comparative study of organizational strategy and culture across industry”, Benchmarking: An International Journal Vol. 18 No. 4,pp. 510-528.
  • Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Babin, B. J., & Black, W. C. (2010). Multivariate data analysis: A global perspective (Vol. 7). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.Bektaş, H. (2017). Açıklayıcı Faktör Analizi (1 ed.). İstanbul: BETA Yayıncılık.
  • Hambrick D and Crozier L (1985) Stumblers and stars in the management of rapid growth. Journal of Business Venturing 1: 31–45.
  • Hambrick DC (1983) Some tests of the effectiveness and functional attributes of Miles and Snow’s strategic types. Academy of Management Journal, No. 26, pp. 5–26..
  • Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. Guilford Press.
  • Hu, H. and Hafsi, T. (2010). Strategic change in a shifting institutional context. Journal of Change Management, 10(3): 293–313.
  • Ingram, T.,Kraśnicka, T.,Wronka-Pośpiech, M., Głód,g.,Głód, W. (2016), “Relationships Between Miles and Snow Strategic Types and Organizational Performance in Polish Production Companies”, Journal of Management and Business Administration. Central Europe Vol. 24(1),pp. 17–45.
  • Jones, G. K., Lanctot, A., & Teegen, H. J. (2001). Determinants and performance impacts of external technology acquisition. Journal of Business venturing, 16(3), 255-283.
  • Judge, William Q. and Miller, Alex (1991), Antecedents and Outcomes of Decision Speed in Different Environmental Contexts, Academy of Management Journal, 34(2): 449-463.
  • Kanter, R. M. (1989) When Giants Learn to Dance, London, Simon & Schuster.
  • Kanter, R.M. (1989), When Giants Learn to Dance, New York: Simon & Schuster (Adı Geçen Kaynak: Zahra, Shaker A., A Conceptual Model of Entrepreneurship as Firm Behavior: A Critique and Extension, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Summer, 1993, pp.5-21).
  • Keh, H. T., T. T. M. Nguyen, and H. P. Ng. (2007), “The effects of entrepreneurial orientation and marketing information on the performance of SMEs”. Journal of Business Venturing 22: 592–611.
  • Kline, R.B., (2011), “Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modelling”, 3rd Edition, NY: Guilford Press.
  • Laugen, B.T., Boer, H. and Acur, N. (2006). The new product development improvement motives and practices of Miles and Snow’s prospectors, analyzers and defenders. Creativity & Innovation Management, 15(1): 85–95.
  • Lin, C., H. L. Tsai and J. C. Wu (2014), Collaboration strategy decision-making using the Miles and Snow typology. Journal of Business Research, Volume 67(9), pp. 1979-1990.
  • Lumpkin, G.T. and Dess, G.G. (1996), Clarifying the Entrepreneurial Orientation Construct and Linking it to Performance, The Academy of Management Review, 21 (1), pp.135-172.
  • Mahalanobis, P. C. (1936). On the generalized distance in statistics. Proceedings of the National Institute of Sciences (Calcutta), 2, 49-55.
  • Makadok, R. (1998). Can first-mover and early-mover advantages be sustained in an industry with low barriers to entry/imitation?. Strategic Management Journal, 683-696.
  • McDaniel, S.W. and Kolari, J.W. (1987), “Marketing strategy implications of the Miles and Snow strategic typology”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 51 No. 4, pp. 19-30
  • Miles, R. and Snow, C. (1978), Organizational Strategy, Structure, and Process (Adı Geçen Kaynak: Lumpkin, G.T. and Dess, G.G, Clarifying the Entrepreneurial Orientation Construct and Linking it to Performance, The Academy of Management Review, 1996, 21:1, pp.135-172).
  • Miles, R.E., Snow, C.C., Meyer, A.D., Coleman, JR., H.J. (1978), “Organizational Strategy, Structure, and Process”, The Academy of Management Review, Vol Mintzberg, H. (1978). Patterns in strategy formation. Management science, 24(9), 934-948.
  • Nunnally, J.C., Bernstein, I.H., 1994. Psychometric Theory, 3rd edn. McGraw-Hill, Inc, New York.
  • O’Regan, N. and Ghobadian, A. (2005), “Innovation in SMEs: the impact of strategy orientation and environmental perception”, International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 54 No. 2, pp. 81-97.
  • Park, R. (2015), Autonomy and citizenship behavior: a moderated mediation model”, Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 31(1),pp. 280-295.
  • Parnell J.A,Long, Z., Lester, d., (2015), “Competitive strategy, capabilities and uncertainty in small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs) in China and the United States”, Management Decision,Vol. 53 No. 2, pp. 402-431.
  • Parnell, J.A. (2010), “Strategic clarity, business strategy and performance”, Journal of Strategy and Management, Vol. 3, pp. 304-324.
  • Parnell, J.A., Lester, D.L., Long, Z. and Köseoglu, M.A. (2012), “How environmental uncertainty affects the business strategy-performance link in SMEs: evidence from China, Turkey, and the United States”, Management Decision, Vol. 50, pp. 546-568.
  • Pinto, J. C., & Curto, J.D. (2007). The organizational configuration concept as a contribution to the performance explanation: The case of the pharmaceutical industry in Portugal. European Management Journal, 25(1), 60–78.
  • Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of applied psychology, 88(5), 879.
  • Porter, M. (1996), What is Strategy?, Harvard Business Review, 74 (6), pp.61-78.
  • Siemsen, E., Roth, A., & Oliveira, P. (2010). Common method bias in regression models with linear, quadratic, and interaction effects. Organizational research methods, 13(3), 456-476.
  • Slater, S. F., Hult, G. T. M., & Olson, E. M. (2010). Factors influencing the relative importance of marketing strategy creativity and marketing strategy implementation effectiveness. Industrial Marketing Management, 39(4), 551–559.
  • Slater, S. F., Olson, E. M., & Hult, G. T. M. (2006). The moderating influence of strategic orientation on the strategy formation capability–performance relationship. Strategic Management Journal, 27(12), 1221-1231.
  • Slater, S.F. and Olson, E.M. (2000). Strategy type and performance: The influence of sales force management. Strategic Management Journal, 21: 813–829.
  • Song, M., Di Benedetto, C. A., & Nason, R. W. (2007). Capabilities and financial performance: The moderating effect of strategic type. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 35(1), 18-34.
  • Souitaris, V., & Maestro, B. M. (2010). Polychronicity in top management teams: The impact on strategic decision processes and performance of new technology ventures. Strategic Management Journal, 31(6), 652-678.
  • Storey, C. and Hughes, M. (2013). The relative impact of culture, strategic orientation and capability on new service development performance. European Journal of Marketing, 47 (5/6), 833-856.
  • Swayne, Linda E., Duncan, W. Jack And Gınter, Peter M (2006) Strategic Management of Health Care Organizations, Fifth edition, Blackwell Publishing.
  • Tang, Z. and Tang, J. (2012). Entrepreneurial orientation and SME performance in China’s changing environment: The moderating effects of strategies. Asia Pacifc Journal of Management, 29(2):409–431.
  • Varadarajan, P. R. and Clark, T. (1994). Delineating the scope of corporate, business, and marketing strategy. Journal of Business Research, 31(2), 93-105.
  • Walker, O.C., Jr. and Ruekert, R.W. (1987). Marketing’s role in the implementation of business strategies: A critical review and conceptual framework. Journal of Marketing, 51(July), 15–33.
  • Wally, Stefan and Baum, J. Robert, (1994), Personal and Structural Determinants of the Pace of Strategic Decision Making, Academy of Management Journal, Vol.37, No.4, 932-956.
  • Zahra, S. A. and Pearce II, J. A. (1990) Research evidence on the Miles-Snow typology, Journal of Management, 16, 4, 751–768..
  • Zahra, S. A., & Pearce, J. A. (1990). Research evidence on the Miles-Snow typology. Journal of management, 16(4), 751-768.
  • Zajac, E.J., Shortell, S.M., (1989), “Changing Generic strategies: Likelihood, Direction and Performance Implication”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 10, No: 5, pp. 413-430.
  • Zehir, C., & Özşahin, M. (2008). A field research on the relationship between strategic decision-making speed and innovation performance in the case of Turkish large-scale firms. Management Decision, 46(5), 709-724.
  • Zuckerman, Alan M. (2002), Improve Your Competitive Strategy A Guide for The Healthcare Executive, Health Administration Pres, Chicago.
Subjects Social
Journal Section Articles
Authors

Author: Mehtap ÖZŞAHİN
Institution: YALOVA ÜNİVERSİTESİ
Country: Turkey


Author: Ebru Beyza BAYARÇELİK
Institution: İSTANBUL GELİŞİM ÜNİVERSİTESİ
Country: Turkey


Author: Bora YILDIZ
Institution: İSTANBUL ÜNİVERSİTESİ
Country: Turkey


Dates

Publication Date: November 14, 2017

Bibtex @research article { ulikidince323657, journal = {Uluslararası İktisadi ve İdari İncelemeler Dergisi}, issn = {1307-9832}, eissn = {1307-9859}, address = {Kenan ÇELİK}, year = {2017}, volume = {}, pages = {749 - 766}, doi = {10.18092/ulikidince.323657}, title = {STRATEJİ TİPLERİ iLE YENİLİK PERFORMANSI İLİŞKİSİNDE STRATEJİK KARAR VERME HIZININ ŞARTLI DEĞİŞKEN (MODERATÖR) ETKİSİ}, key = {cite}, author = {ÖZŞAHİN, Mehtap and BAYARÇELİK, Ebru Beyza and YILDIZ, Bora} }
APA ÖZŞAHİN, M , BAYARÇELİK, E , YILDIZ, B . (2017). STRATEJİ TİPLERİ iLE YENİLİK PERFORMANSI İLİŞKİSİNDE STRATEJİK KARAR VERME HIZININ ŞARTLI DEĞİŞKEN (MODERATÖR) ETKİSİ. Uluslararası İktisadi ve İdari İncelemeler Dergisi, (), 749-766. DOI: 10.18092/ulikidince.323657
MLA ÖZŞAHİN, M , BAYARÇELİK, E , YILDIZ, B . "STRATEJİ TİPLERİ iLE YENİLİK PERFORMANSI İLİŞKİSİNDE STRATEJİK KARAR VERME HIZININ ŞARTLI DEĞİŞKEN (MODERATÖR) ETKİSİ". Uluslararası İktisadi ve İdari İncelemeler Dergisi (2017): 749-766 <http://dergipark.org.tr/ulikidince/issue/29068/323657>
Chicago ÖZŞAHİN, M , BAYARÇELİK, E , YILDIZ, B . "STRATEJİ TİPLERİ iLE YENİLİK PERFORMANSI İLİŞKİSİNDE STRATEJİK KARAR VERME HIZININ ŞARTLI DEĞİŞKEN (MODERATÖR) ETKİSİ". Uluslararası İktisadi ve İdari İncelemeler Dergisi (2017): 749-766
RIS TY - JOUR T1 - STRATEJİ TİPLERİ iLE YENİLİK PERFORMANSI İLİŞKİSİNDE STRATEJİK KARAR VERME HIZININ ŞARTLI DEĞİŞKEN (MODERATÖR) ETKİSİ AU - Mehtap ÖZŞAHİN , Ebru Beyza BAYARÇELİK , Bora YILDIZ Y1 - 2017 PY - 2017 N1 - doi: 10.18092/ulikidince.323657 DO - 10.18092/ulikidince.323657 T2 - Uluslararası İktisadi ve İdari İncelemeler Dergisi JF - Journal JO - JOR SP - 749 EP - 766 VL - IS - SN - 1307-9832-1307-9859 M3 - doi: 10.18092/ulikidince.323657 UR - https://doi.org/10.18092/ulikidince.323657 Y2 - 2017 ER -
EndNote %0 International Journal of Economics and Administrative Studies STRATEJİ TİPLERİ iLE YENİLİK PERFORMANSI İLİŞKİSİNDE STRATEJİK KARAR VERME HIZININ ŞARTLI DEĞİŞKEN (MODERATÖR) ETKİSİ %A Mehtap ÖZŞAHİN , Ebru Beyza BAYARÇELİK , Bora YILDIZ %T STRATEJİ TİPLERİ iLE YENİLİK PERFORMANSI İLİŞKİSİNDE STRATEJİK KARAR VERME HIZININ ŞARTLI DEĞİŞKEN (MODERATÖR) ETKİSİ %D 2017 %J Uluslararası İktisadi ve İdari İncelemeler Dergisi %P 1307-9832-1307-9859 %V %N %R doi: 10.18092/ulikidince.323657 %U 10.18092/ulikidince.323657
ISNAD ÖZŞAHİN, Mehtap , BAYARÇELİK, Ebru Beyza , YILDIZ, Bora . "STRATEJİ TİPLERİ iLE YENİLİK PERFORMANSI İLİŞKİSİNDE STRATEJİK KARAR VERME HIZININ ŞARTLI DEĞİŞKEN (MODERATÖR) ETKİSİ". Uluslararası İktisadi ve İdari İncelemeler Dergisi / (November 2017): 749-766. https://doi.org/10.18092/ulikidince.323657
AMA ÖZŞAHİN M , BAYARÇELİK E , YILDIZ B . STRATEJİ TİPLERİ iLE YENİLİK PERFORMANSI İLİŞKİSİNDE STRATEJİK KARAR VERME HIZININ ŞARTLI DEĞİŞKEN (MODERATÖR) ETKİSİ. IJEAS. 2017; 749-766.
Vancouver ÖZŞAHİN M , BAYARÇELİK E , YILDIZ B . STRATEJİ TİPLERİ iLE YENİLİK PERFORMANSI İLİŞKİSİNDE STRATEJİK KARAR VERME HIZININ ŞARTLI DEĞİŞKEN (MODERATÖR) ETKİSİ. Uluslararası İktisadi ve İdari İncelemeler Dergisi. 2017; 766-749.