The Significance of Innovation Orientation in Firm Performance: Technological Capabilities as a Moderating Role
Abstract
Entrepreneurial marketing “EM” is considered to be suitable for small businesses. However, innovation orientation “IO” as an EM dimension is a critical instrument that small and medium-sized businesses can use to obtain a competitive advantage. Thus, the general objective of this study is to explore and describe the significant relationship between IO and firm performance “FP” in SMEs in Khartoum-Sudan utilizing technological capabilities “TCPs” as a moderating variable. The resource-based view “RBV” provides the theoretical foundation for this study regarding the effect of innovation orientation on firm performance through technological capabilities. To achieve this objective, we assumed the following hypothesis: H1: Innovation orientation has a significant relationship with firm performance {profitability, sustainability, and customer satisfaction}. H2: We assume that TCPs can positively moderate the relationship between IO and FP. In this manner, our study is quantitative. Reliable with the purpose of this study. Furthermore, our study relied on the “Positivism philosophy”, a deductive approach to theory development. Accordingly, overall, 255 responses were received in responding to our online questionnaire. To analyze the data firstly PCA, Correlation, and Rotation matrix were utilized to test the appropriateness of the study pre-model and check the validity of the questionnaire measurements. secondly, we used Path analysis to examine the significant relationships between study variables. Consequently, the findings confirm both significant and insignificant relationships between IO and FP. Our analysis revealed significant relationships between innovation orientation, technological capabilities, and firm performance indicators such as profitability, sustainability, and customer satisfaction. Moreover, we found that technological capabilities play a crucial moderating role in enhancing the effects of innovation orientation strategy on firm performance. Anyhow, these results confirmed the partial support of the study’s hypotheses.
Downloads
Metrics
References
2. Ayyagari, M., Demirgüç-Kunt, A., & Maksimovic, V. (2018). Financing SMEs and economic development. In Handbook of Finance and Development (pp. 503-533). Edward Elgar Publishing.
3. Bachmann, J. T., Ohlies, I., & Flatten, T. (2021). Effects of entrepreneurial marketing on new ventures' exploitative and exploratory innovation: The moderating role of competitive intensity and firm size. Industrial Marketing Management, 92, 87-100.
4. Biesok, & Wyród-Wróbel, J. (2011). Customer satisfaction-Meaning and methods of measuring. Marketing and Logistic Problems in the Management of Organization, Wydawnictwo Akademii Techniczno-Humanistycznej W Bielsku-Białej, Bielsko-Biała, 23-41.
5. Blomkvist, K., Kappen, P., & Zander, I. (2017). Gone are the creatures of yesteryear? On the diffusion of technological capabilities in the ‘modern’MNC. Journal of World Business, 52(1), 1-16.
6. Borodako, K., Berbeka, J., Rudnicki, M., & Łapczyński, M. (2023). The impact of innovation orientation and knowledge management on business services performance moderated by technological readiness. European Journal of Innovation Management, 26(7), 674-695.
7. Christmann, P., & Taylor, G. (2006). Firm self-regulation through international certifiable standards: Determinants of symbolic versus substantive implementation. Journal of International Business Studies, 37(6), 863-878.
8. Damanpour, F., & Aravind, D. (2012). Managerial innovation: Conceptions, processes and antecedents. Management and organization review, 8(2), 423-454.
9. Danneels, E. (2002). The dynamics of product innovation and firm competences. Strategic Management Journal, 23(12), 1095-1121.
10. De Mendonca, T. R., & Zhou, Y. (2019). Environmental performance, customer satisfaction, and profitability: A study among large US companies. Sustainability, 11(19), 5418.
11. Ferna, E., & Garcı, F. (2012). Learning from exporting: The moderating effect of technological capabilities.
12. Gupta, A. K., & Gupta, N. (2020). Effect of corporate environmental sustainability on dimensions of firm performance–Towards sustainable development: Evidence from India. Journal of cleaner production, 253, 119948.
13. Hacioglu, G., Eren, S. S., Eren, M. S., & Celikkan, H. (2012). The effect of entrepreneurial marketing on firms’ innovative performance in Turkish SMEs. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 58, 871-878.,
14. Haeussler, C., Patzelt, H., & Zahra, S. A. (2012). Strategic alliances and product development in high technology new firms: The moderating effect of technological capabilities. Journal of business venturing, 27(2), 217-233.
15. Hair, J.F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J. and Anderson, R.E. (2019) Multivariate data analysis. Eighth edition edn. Andover, Hampshire, UK: Cengage Learning, EMEA.
16. Hamad, A. Y. A. (2019), The moderating effect of technological capabilities in the relationship between strategic orientation and service innovation to enhance operational performance in Sudanese services firms p (39-44).
17. Hart, S. L. (1995). A natural-resource-based view of the firm. Academy of Management Review, 20(4), 986-1014.
18. Hemmert, M., Cross, A. R., Cheng, Y., Kim, J. J., Kotosaka, M., Waldenberger, F., & Zheng, L. J. (2022). New venture entrepreneurship and context in East Asia: a systematic literature review. Asian Business & Management, 21(5), 831-865.
19. Hult, G. T. M., et al. (2004). Market Orientation and Performance: An Integration of Disparate Approaches. Strategic Management Journal, 25(12), 1207-1221.
20. Hult, G. T. M., Hurley, R. F., & Knight, G. A. (2004). Innovativeness: Its antecedents and impact on business performance. Industrial Marketing Management, 33(5), 429-438.
21. Isichei, E. E., Emmanuel Agbaeze, K., & Odiba, M. O. (2020). Entrepreneurial orientation and performance in SMEs: The mediating role of structural infrastructure capability. International Journal of Emerging Markets, 15(6), 1219-1241.
22. Jayawarna, D., Jones, O., & Macpherson, A. (2014). Entrepreneurial potential: The role of human and cultural capitals. International Small Business Journal, 32(8), 918-943.
23. Josh Siepel, Marcus Dejardin. (2020) How do we measure firm performance? A review of issues facing entrepreneurship researchers. 2020. ffhalshs-02571478
24. Kumar, V., Dalla Pozza, I., Petersen, J. A., & Shah, D. (2009). Reversing the logic: The path to profitability through relationship marketing. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 23(2), 147-156.
25. Kura, A. B. (2019). Influence of Marketing Research Application on Customer Attraction, Customer Satisfaction and Retention in Small and Medium Scale Enterprises in Borno State, Nigeria (Doctoral dissertation, Kwara State University (Nigeria)
26. Lichtenthaler, U. (2011). Open innovation: Past research, current debates, and future directions. Academy of Management Perspectives, 25(1), 75-93.
27. Madhani, P. M. (2010). Resource based view (RBV) of competitive advantage: an overview. Resource based view: concepts and practices, Pankaj Madhani, ed, 3-22.
28. Marcuse, P. (1998). Sustainability is not enough. Environment and urbanization, 10(2), 103-112.
29. Narver, J. C., & Slater, S. F. (1990). The effect of a market orientation on business profitability. Journal of Marketing, 54(4), 20-35.
30. Prahalad, C. K., & Hammond, A. (2002). Serving the world's poor, profitably. Harvard Business Review, 80(9), 48-57.
31. Rauch, A., Wiklund, J., Lumpkin, G. T., & Frese, M. (2009). Entrepreneurial orientation and business performance: An assessment of past research and suggestions for the future. Entrepreneurship theory and practice, 33(3), 761-787.
32. Rushe and Waples, (2008) The share price is not something we control. We control innovation, sales and profits.
33. Sadiku-Dushi, N., Dana, L. P., & Ramadani, V. (2019). Entrepreneurial marketing dimensions and SMEs performance. Journal of Business Research, 100, 86-99.
34. Santos, J. B., & Brito, L. A. L. (2012). Toward a subjective measurement model for firm performance. BAR-Brazilian Administration Review, 9, 95-117.
35. Schrettle, S., Hinz, A., Scherrer-Rathje, M., & Friedli, T. (2014). Turning sustainability into action: Explaining firms' sustainability efforts and their impact on firm performance. International Journal of Production Economics, 147, 73-84.
36. Sekaran, U. (2006). Research methods for business. New York: John Wiley & Sons Inc.
37. Sekeran .2003, research method for business, A Skill-Building Approach Fourth Edition, ISBN 0-471-20366-1 -ISBN 0-471-38448-8 (WIE)
38. Selvam, M., Gayathri, J., Vasanth, V., Lingaraja, K., & Marxiaoli, S. (2016). Determinants of firm performance: A subjective model. Int'l J. Soc. Sci. Stud., 4, 90.
39. Seo, R. (2020). Entrepreneurial orientation and innovation performance: insights from Korean ventures. European Journal of Innovation Management, 23(4), 675-695.
40. Srivastava, M. K., Gnyawali, D. R., & Hat, D. E. (2015). Technological Forecasting & Social Change Behavioral implications of absorptive capacity: The role of technological effort and technological capability in leveraging alliance network technological resources.
41. Teece, D. J. (2018). Profiting from innovation in the digital economy: Enabling technologies, standards, and licensing models in the wireless world. Research policy, 47(8), 1367-1387.
42. Trott, P. (2008). Innovation management and new product development. Pearson education
43. Wang, H. L. (2014). Theories for competitive advantage.
44. Wu, J. (2014). Cooperation with competitors and product innovation: Moderating effects of technological capability and alliances with universities. Industrial Marketing Management, 43(2), 199-209.
45. Zhou, K. Z., & Wu, F. (2010). Technological capability, strategic flexibility, and product innovation. Strategic management journal, 31(5), 547-561.
Copyright (c) 2024 Alfateh Fegada, Zoltan Veres
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
.jpg)
