Market Dynamism and Firm Performance Relation: The Mediating Effects of Positive Environment Conditions and Firm Innovativeness

Cemal Zehir, Dilek Balak

Abstract


There has been a great interest in terms of environment and its effects in the organization. Apart from environmental conditions, market dynamism is emphasized as another important factor that affects firm performance. Organizations have to compete to survive in a changing environment. In our study, we expected to find out significant relationship through dependent variables (operational performance and market performance) and independent variable as market dynamism. Another goal of our study is to reveal the mediation effects of positive environment conditions and firm innovativeness to firm performance. It should be noted that, our study is based on a survey distributed to 327 people who work in companies in Turkey and analysis results represented the mediating effects of positive environment conditions on firm performance. The obtained data from the questionnaires are analysed through the SPSS statistical packaged software. Further, we compared relationship among the factor analysis, reliability, correlations and regressions. Consequently, our hypotheses are supported and positively related.

Keywords


Market Dynamism; Positive Environment Conditions; Firm Innovativeness; Firm Performance

Full Text:

PDF

References


Adegbite, O. E. (2018). The Organization Business Environment Organizational Adaptations, Springer Briefs in Business, DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-63510-1_2

Adler, P. S. and Shenbar, A. (1990). Adapting your technological base: The organizational challenge. Sloan Management Review, 25, 25–37.

Antoncic, B and Hisrich, R. D. (2001). Intrapreneurship: Construct Refinement and Cross-Cultural Validation. Journal of Business Venturing, 16, 495–527.

Auh, S. and Menguc, B. (2005). Top Management Team Diversity and Innovativeness: The Moderating Role of Interfunctional Coordination. Industrial Marketing Management, 34 (3), 249‐261.

Cadogan, J. W., Kuivalainen, O., Sundqvist, S. and Sunqvist, S. (2009). Export Market-Oriented Behaviour and Export Performance: Quadratic and Moderating Effects under Differing Degrees of Market Dynamism and Internationalization. Journal of International Marketing, Vol: 17, No: 4, 71-89.

Calantone, R. J., Cavusgil, S. T. and Zhao, Y. (2002). Learning Orientation, Firm Innovation Capability, and Firm Performance. Industrial Marketing Management, 31, 515‐ 524.

Chang, Y. and Hughes, M. (2012). Drivers of Innovation Ambidexterity in Small-To Medium-Sized Firms. European Management Journal, 30, 1-17.

Chang, Y.; Hughes, M. and Hotho, S. (2011). Internal and external antecedents of SMEs’ innovation ambidexterity outcomes. Management Decision, Vol: 49, No: 10, 1658-1676.

Damanpour F. (1991). Organizational Innovation: A Meta‐Analysis of Effects of Determinants and Moderators. Academy of Management Journal, 34 (3), 555‐ 590.

Dess G. G. and Beard DW. (1984). Dimensions of organizational task environments. Administrative Science Quarterly. 1, 52–73.

Eren, S. S. (2012). Stratejik Esneklik ve Pazar Dinamizminin Girişimsel Pazarlama Odaklılığa Etkisi. Journal of Entrepreneurship and Development, 7 (2), 101-112.

Fuentes-Fuentes M. M, Albacete-Saez C. A., Llorens-Montes F. J. (2004). The Impact of Environmental Characteristics on TQM Principles and Organizational Performance. Omega-International Journal of Management Science, 32(6), 425-442.

Goll, I. and Rasheed A. M .A. (1997). Rational Decision Making and Firm Performance: The Moderating Role of Environment. Strategic Management Journal, 18 (7), 583‐ 591.

Gunday, G., Ulusoy, G., Kılıç, K. and Alpkan, L. (2011). Effects of innovation types on firm performance. Int. J. Production Economics, 133, 662–676.

Han, J. K., Kim, N. and Srivastava, R. K. (1998). Market orientation and organizational performance: Is innovation the missing link? Journal of Marketing, 62(4), 30–45.

Homburg, C., Krohmer, H. and Workman, J. P. (1999). Strategic Consensus and Performance: The Role of Strategy Type and Market-Related Dynamism. Strategic Management Journal, Vol: 20, No: 4, 339-357.

Hult G., Tomas M., Hurley R. F. and Knight G. A. (2004). Innovativeness: Its antecedents and impact on business performance. Industrial Marketing Management, 33, 429-438.

Ikhsan, K.; Almahendra, R. and Budiarto, T. (2017). Contextual Ambidexterity in SME’s In Indonesia: A Study on How it Mediates Organizational Culture and Firm Performance and How Market Dynamism Influences its Role on Firm Performance. International Journal of Business and Society, Vol: 18 No: 2, 369-390.

Laforet, S. (2011). A framework of organizational innovation and outcomes in SMEs. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research, 17(4), 380–408.

Lawson, B. and Samson, D. (2001). Developing innovation capability in organisations: A dynamic capabilities approach. International Journal of Innovation Management, 5(03), 377–400.

Li, M. and Simerly, R. L. (1998). The Moderating Effect of Environmental Dynamism on the Ownership and Performance Relationship. Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 19, 169–179.

Lumpkin, G. T. and Dess, G. G. (2001). Linking Two Dimensions of Entrepreneurial Orientation to Firm Performance: The Moderating Role of Environment and Industry Life Cycle. Journal of Business Venturing 16, 429–451.

Matsuo, M. (2006). Customer Orientation, Conflict, and Innovativeness in Japanese Sales Departments. Journal of Business Research, 59, 242‐250.

Porter, M.E. (1991). Towards a Dynamic Theory of Strategy. Strategic Management Journal, 12, 95-117.

Rahman, S. and Bullock, P. (2005). Soft TQM, Hard TQM and Organisational Performance Relationships: An Empirical Investigation. Omega, 33, 73 – 83.

Rajapathirana, R. P. J. and Hui, Y. (2018). Relationship between innovation capability, innovation type, and firm performance. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, Vol: 3, 44–55.

Rubera, G. and Kirca, Ahmet H. (2012). Firm Innovativeness and Its Performance Outcomes: A Meta-Analytic Review and Theoretical Integration. Journal of Marketing, Vol. 76, No. 3, 130-147.

Sen, F. K. and Egelhoff, W. G. (2000). Innovative capabilities of a firm and the Use of Technical Alliances. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 47(2), 174–183.

Tanriverdi, H. and Zehir, C. (2006). Impact of Learning Organizations’ Applications and Market Dynamism on Organizations’ Innovativeness and Market Performance. The Business Review, 6(2), 238-245.

Thornhill, S. (2006). Knowledge, innovation and firm performance in high- and low-technology regimes. Journal of Business Venturing, 21, 687–703.

Ting, H. F., Wang, H. B. and Wang, D. S. (2012). The moderating role of environmental dynamism on the influence of innovation strategy and firm performance. International Journal of Innovation. Management and Technology, Vol. 3, No. 5, 517-520.

Tushman ML. and Anderson P. (1986). Technological discontinuities and organizational environments. Administrative Science Quarterly, 31, 439–465.

Venkatraman, N. and V. Ramanujam (1986). Measurement of business performance in strategy research: A comparison of approaches'. Academy of Management Review, Vol: 11, 801-814.

Yıldız, S, Baştürk, F. and Taştan Boz, I. (2014). The Effect of Leadership and Innovativeness on Business Performance. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 150, 785–793.

Zahra, S. A. and Garvis, D. M. (2000). International Corporate Entrepreneurship and Firm Performance: The Moderating Effect of International Environmental Hostility. Journal of Business Venturing, 15, 469–492.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.5195/emaj.2018.152

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.




Copyright (c) 2018 Cemal Zehir, Dilek Balak

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