The effect of strategic entrepreneurship on dynamic capabilities and organizational ambidexterity in improving innovation performance

Sony Eko Yanuar, Avanti Fontana

Abstract


PT Telkom Indonesia (Persero) Tbk is facing disruption that changes consumer behavior to communicate using online applications such as WhatsApp, Line, Telegram, and Slack, resulting in a decrease in demand and growth of company revenues since 2017. The disruption phenomenon requires Telkom to be able to produce innovations through startups that can become the main business for the company in the future. In improving innovation performance, companies need to adopt a process of strategic entrepreneurship that can build dynamic capabilities to improve innovation performance in a disruptive environment. For strategic entrepreneurship to run effectively, it requires organizational ambidexterity that has an organizational structure that can support the dual needs of opportunity-seeking (OSA) and advantage-seeking (ASA) activities. This study further examines the effectiveness of the influence of strategic entrepreneurship, dynamic capabilities, and organizational ambidexterity on innovation performance. The data in this study were obtained from a survey conducted to the top management of 62 startups that are part of the portfolio of PT Telkom Indonesia (Persero), then used PLS-SEM analysis to test the research hypotheses. The results show that strategic entrepreneurship influences dynamic capabilities, organizational ambidexterity, and innovation performance, but the dimension of entrepreneurial culture has a minimum effect or is not significant in influencing innovation performance in startups. This is contrary to the theory that strategic entrepreneurship has a relationship with innovation performance. This study provides intriguing findings and theoretical contributions in explaining the phenomenon of low innovation performance for startups that run organizational ambidexterity.

Full Text:

PDF

References


Adner, R., & Helfat, C. E. (2003). Corporate effects and dynamic capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 24.

Amit, R., Lucier, C., Hitt, M. A., & Nixon, R. D. (2002). Strategies for creating value in the entrepreneurial millennium, Creating value: Winners in the new business environment: 1–12. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.

Andriopoulos, C. & Lewis, M.W. (2009). Exploitation-Exploration Tensions and Organizational Ambidexterity: Managing Paradoxes of Innovation. Organization Science, 20(4), 696-717.

Babbie, E.R., Halley, F., & Zaino, J. (2007). Adventures in social research: data analysis using SPSS 14.0 and 15.0 for windows. Pine Forge Press.

Barney, J. B. (2002). Gaining and sustaining competitive advantage. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 2, 314–315.

Brorstrom, B. (2002). The world’s richest municipality: The importance of institutions for municipal development. Journal of Economic Issues, (4), 55–78.

Brown, S. L., & Eisenhardt, K. M. (2000). Patching: Restitching business portfolios in dynamic markets. The McKinsey Quarterly.

Buccieria, Dominic., Javalgib, Raj G., & Cavusgilc, Erin. (2019). International new venture performance: Role of international entrepreneurial culture, ambidextrous innovation, and dynamic marketing capabilities. International Business Review, 29(2), 101639.

Cao, Qing., Gedajlovic, Eric., & Zhang, Hongping. (2009). Unpacking organizational ambidexterity: Dimensions, contingencies, and synergistic effects. Organization Science, 782-793.

Chaddad, F., & Reuer, J. (2009). Investment dynamics and financial constraints in IPO firms. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 3(1), 29–45.

Chen, M.-J. (1996). Competitor analysis and inter-firm rivalry: Toward a theoretical integration. Academy of Management Review, 21(1), 100–134.

Chen, M.-J., Fairchild, G. B., Freeman, R. E., Harris, J. D., & Venkataraman, S. (2010). What is strategic management?. Darden Business Publishing.

Chin, W. W. (1998). The partial least squares approach to structural equation modelling.

Modern methods for business research.

Crook, T. R., Ketchen, D. J., Combs, J. G., & Todd, S. Y. (2008). Strategic resources and performance: A meta-analysis. Strategic Management Journal, 29(11), 1141–1154.

Crotty, M. (1998). The foundations of social research: Meaning and perspective in the research process. Sage.

Covin, J. G., & Slevin, D. P. (2002). The entrepreneurial imperatives of strategic leadership. Sexton (Eds.), Strategic entrepreneurship: Creating a new mindset: 309–327. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.

Darling, J., Keefe, M. and Ross, J. (2007). Entrepreneurial leadership strategies and values: Keys to operational excellence. Journal of Small Business and Entrepreneurship, 20(1), 41-54.

Digital Amoeba is corporate innovation lab by Telkom Indonesia. September 22, 2021, https://digitalamoeba.id/

Eggers, F. (2020). Masters of disasters? Challenges and opportunities for SMEs in times of crisis. Journal of Business Research.

Fontana, A., & Musa, Soebowo. (2017). The impact of entrepreneurial leadership measurement validation on innovation management and its measurement validation. International Journal of Innovation Science, 9, 1.

Gaglio, C. M., & Katz, J. (2001). The psychological basis of opportunity identification: Entrepreneurial alertness. Journal of Small Business Economics, 16(2), 95–111.

Ghozali, I., & Latan, H. (2015). Konsep, Teknik, Aplikasi Menggunakan Smart PLS 3.0 Untuk Penelitian Empiris.

Grimm, C., Lee, H., & Smith K. (2006). Strategy as action: Industry rivalry and coordination. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Gupta, A. K., K. G. Smith, C. E. Shalley. (2006). The interplay between exploration and exploitation. Acad. Management J, 49, 693–708.

Gupta, V., MacMillan, I. C., & Surie, G. (2004). Entrepreneurial leadership: Developing and measuring a cross-cultural construct. Journal of Business Venturing, 19(2), 241–260.

Hair Jr, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & William, C, (1995). Black (1995), Multivariate data analysis with readings. New Jersy. Prentice Hall.

Hair Jr, J. F., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2011). PLS-SEM: Indeed, a silver bullet. Journal of marketing theory and practice.

Hair Jr, J. F., Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M., & Mena, J.A. (2012). An assessment of the use of partial least squares structural equation modelling in marketing research. Journal of the academy of marketing science

He, Z., P. Wong. 2004. Exploration vs. exploitation: An empirical test of the ambidexterity hypothesis. Organization Science.

Henderson, R., & Cockburn, I. (1994). Measuring competence? Exploiting firm effects in pharmaceutical markets. Strategic Management Journal, 15, 63–84.

Hitt, M. A., Ireland, R. D., Camp, S. M., & Sexton, D. L. (2001). Strategic entrepreneurship: Strategies for wealth creation. Strategic Management Journal, 22(3– 4), 479–491.

Hitt, Michael A., Ireland, R. Duane., Sirmon, David G., & Trahms, Cheryl A. (2011). Strategic entrepreneurship: Creating value for individuals, organizations, and society. Academy of Management Perspectives, 25(2), 57–75.

Helfat, C., & Peteraf, M. (2003). The dynamic resource-based view: Capability lifecycles. Strategic Management Journal,

(10), 997–1010.

Helfat, C, S Finkelstein, W Mitchell, MA Peteraf, H Singh, DJ Teece and SG Winter (2007). Dynamic Capabilities: Understanding Strategic Change in Organizations. Oxford, U.K.: Blackwell.

Ireland, R. Duane., Hitt, Michael A., & Sirmon, David, G. (2003). A model of strategic entrepreneurship: The construct and its dimensions. Journal of Management, 29(6), 963–989.

Kuratko, D. F., Ireland, R. D., Covin, J. G., & Hornsby, J. S. (2005). A model of middle-level managers’ entrepreneurial behaviour. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 29(6), 699–716.

Lolita Jurksiene Asta Pundziene. (2016). The relationship between dynamic capabilities and firm competitive advantage: the mediating role of organizational ambidexterity. European Business Review, 28, 4.

Makadok, R., & Coff, R. (2002). The theory of value and the value of theory: Breaking new ground versus reinventing the wheel. Academy of Management Review.

March, J. G. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization. Science, 2, 71–87.

McGrath, R. M., & MacMillan, I. C. (2000). The entrepreneurial mindset. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

Morris, M. H. (1998). Entrepreneurial intensity: Sustainable advantages for individuals, organizations, and societies. Westport, CT: Quorum Books.

O’Reilly, C.A. and Tushman, M.L. (2007), “Ambidexterity as a Dynamic Capability: Resolving the Innovator’s Dilemma”, Research in Organizational Behavior. 28, 158-206.

Pavlou, Paul A., & El Sawy, Omar A. (2011). Understanding the elusive black box of dynamic capabilities. Decision Sciences Journal, 42(1), 239 – 273.

Prange, C. and Schlegelmilch, B.B. (2010), “Heading for the Next Innovation Archetype?”, Journal of Business Strategy, 31(1), 46-55.

Sarstedt M., Ringle C.M., & Hair J.f. (2017). Partial least square structural equation modelling. Homburg C., Klarmann M., Vomberg A. Handbook of Marketing Research

Sarkees, M., & Hulland, J. (2009). Innovation and efficiency: It is possible to have it all. Business Horizons.

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.

Sekaran, U., & Bougie, R. (2016). Research methods for business: A skill building approach. John Wiley & Sons.

Senaratne, Chaminda & Wang, Catherine L. (2018). Organisational ambidexterity in UK high-tech SMEs. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 25(6), 1025-1050.

Shane, S., & Venkataraman, S. (2000). The promise of entrepreneurship as a field of research. Academy of Management Review.

Simsek, Z., Heavey, C., Veiga, J.F. & Souder, D. (2009). A Typology for Aligning Organizational Ambidexterity’s Conceptualizations, Antecedents, and Outcomes. Journal of Management Studies.

Sirmon, DG, MA Hitt, RD Ireland, and BA Gilbert (2011). Resource orchestration to create competitive advantage: Breadth, depth, and life cycle effects. Journal of Management, 37, 1390–1412.

Teece, David J., Pisano, Gary & Shuen, Amy. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 509–533.

Teece, David J. (2007). Explicating dynamic capabilities: The nature and micro foundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic Management Journal, 28(13),1319–1350.

Tidd, J. (2014). Conjoint innovation: building a bridge between innovation and

entrepreneurship. International Journal of Innovation Management, 8(1), 1-20.

Utoyo, I., & Fontana, A. (2017). The role of dynamic capabilities in enhancing innovation performance in disruptive environment. In ISPIM Innovation Symposium, 1. The International Society for Professional Innovation Management (ISPIM).

Utoyo, I., Fontana, A., & Satrya, A. (2019). The role of entrepreneurial leadership and configuring core innovation capabilities to enhance innovation performance in a disruptive environment. International Journal of Innovation Management, 1-40.

Venkataraman, S and SD Sarasvathy (2001). Strategy and entrepreneurship: outlines of an untold story. In Handbook of Strategic Management, MA Hitt, E Freeman, and JS Harrison (eds.). Oxford: Blackwell.

Wenke, Kathrin., Zapkau, Florian B., & Schwens, Christian. (2020). Too small to do it all? A meta-analysis on the relative relationships of exploration, exploitation, and ambidexterity with SME performance. Journal of Business Research, 132(3), 653-665.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.33021/icfbe.v3i1.3784

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Editorial Office:

Faculty of Business President University 
Jalan Ki Hajar Dewantara Mekarmukti
Cikarang Utara, Bekasi, Jawa Barat

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