| Literature DB >> 35767588 |
Krzysztof Borodako1, Jadwiga Berbeka1, Michał Rudnicki1, Mariusz Łapczyński1, Mariusz Kuziak1, Krzysztof Kapera1.
Abstract
Contemporary conditions of the functioning of enterprises mean that they are increasingly looking for opportunities to improve organizational performance in strategic management. Scientists are looking for optimal solutions, an appropriate combination of assets and resources, so the debate in the field of strategic orientations is still valid and gaining in importance. Several studies have explored the construct of market orientation, but few include technological orientation with the moderating effects of company assets. In the era of the highly competitive technology market, the area of technological business service providers are particularly interesting, but still undiscovered. This paper examines the effects of market orientation and technological orientation on organizational performance with the inclusion of organizational culture and human resources as moderators. Using questionnaire responses from technological business service providers (n = 689), a regression analysis was conducted to confirm the hypotheses. The results established evidence of positive relationships between market orientation-organizational performance and technological orientation-organizational performance, although in technological firms, the market orientation had a stronger correlation with organizational performance than the technological orientation. Moreover, the organizational culture and human resources play a moderating role in the relationships of market orientation-organizational performance and technological orientation-organizational performance, while weak human resources management weakens relationships market orientation-organizational performance and technological orientation-organizational performance and strong organizational culture reduce the effect of market orientation on organizational performance, significantly reducing the effect of technological orientation on firm performance.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35767588 PMCID: PMC9242498 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0270737
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.752
Fig 1The proposed research model.
Sample description.
| Market presence | Items | % | Size [employees] | Items | % | Industry | Items | % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 64 | 9.29 |
| 523 | 75.91 |
| 73 | 10.60 |
|
| 138 | 20.03 |
| 102 | 14.80 |
| 293 | 42.52 |
|
| 171 | 24.82 |
| 41 | 5.95 |
| 323 | 46.88 |
|
| 156 | 22.64 |
| 23 | 3.34 | |||
|
| 160 | 23.22 |
Basic descriptive statistics of the constructs.
| Variables | Mean | Standard deviation | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | TO1 | 4.04 | 1.05 | |||||||||||
| 2 | TO2 | 3.85 | 1.13 | 0.76 | ||||||||||
| 3 | TO3 | 3.72 | 1.14 | 0.63 | 0.70 | |||||||||
| 4 | TO4 | 3.6 | 1.26 | 0.51 | 0.57 | 0.66 | ||||||||
| 5 | MO1 | 3.8 | 1.16 | 0.52 | 0.57 | 0.51 | 0.48 | |||||||
| 6 | MO2 | 3.65 | 1.15 | 0.53 | 0.61 | 0.60 | 0.54 | 0.75 | ||||||
| 7 | MO3 | 3.82 | 1.11 | 0.53 | 0.58 | 0.55 | 0.50 | 0.69 | 0.82 | |||||
| 8 | MO4 | 3.8 | 1.11 | 0.55 | 0.62 | 0.58 | 0.53 | 0.69 | 0.82 | 0.87 | ||||
| 9 | P1 | 3.27 | 1.03 | 0.42 | 0.51 | 0.51 | 0.49 | 0.53 | 0.60 | 0.54 | 0.58 | |||
| 10 | P2 | 3.27 | 1.18 | 0.33 | 0.34 | 0.34 | 0.31 | 0.36 | 0.36 | 0.32 | 0.37 | 0.50 | ||
| 11 | P3 | 3.85 | 0.98 | 0.49 | 0.46 | 0.42 | 0.37 | 0.47 | 0.48 | 0.50 | 0.52 | 0.50 | 0.53 | |
Sample size = 689, p<0.001
TO–technological orientation, MO–market orientation, OP–organizational performance
Results of confirmatory factor analysis.
| Construct | Items | Cronbach’s Alpha | Composite Reliability (CR) | Average Variance Extracted (AVE) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| TO | 4 | 0.874 | 0.937 | 0.789 |
| MO | 4 | 0.932 | 0.979 | 0.920 |
| OP | 3 | 0.753 | 0.807 | 0.582 |
TO–technological orientation, MO–market orientation, OP–organizational performance
Result of correlations and square root of AVEs (on the diagonal).
| Mean | Standard deviation | TO | MO | OP | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TO | 15.213 | 3.907 | 0.888 | ||
| MO | 15.064 | 4.124 | 0.705 | 0.959 | |
| OP | 10.395 | 2.615 | 0.586 | 0.620 | 0.762 |
TO–technological orientation, MO–market orientation, OP–organizational performance, p < 0.001
Results of cross-loadings.
| TO | MO | OP | |
|---|---|---|---|
| TO-1 |
| 0.257 | 0.225 |
| TO-2 |
| 0.352 | 0.202 |
| TO-3 |
| 0.312 | 0.193 |
| TO-4 |
| 0.297 | 0.177 |
| MO-1 | 0.316 |
| 0.245 |
| MO-2 | 0.356 |
| 0.218 |
| MO-3 | 0.306 |
| 0.182 |
| MO-4 | 0.345 |
| 0.242 |
| OP-1 | 0.310 | 0.455 |
|
| OP-2 | 0.145 | 0.104 |
|
| OP-3 | 0.260 | 0.316 |
|
TO—technological orientation; MO—market orientation; OP–organizational performance
Multiple regression results.
| Moderators | MO | TO | R2 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coefficient (95% confidence interval) | SE | t | p | Coefficient (95% confidence interval) | SE | t | p | ||
| Technological business service providers | 0.412 (0.331; 0.492) | 0.041 | 10.131 | 0.000 | 0.295 (0.214; 0,376) | 0.041 | 7.238 | 0.000 | 0.428 |
| Low level of OC | 0.336 (0.228; 0.444) | 0.056 | 6.044 | 0.000 | 0.344 (0,236; 0,452) | 0.056 | 6.174 | 0.000 | 0.389 |
| High level of OC | 0.383 (0.275; 0.491) | 0.055 | 7.004 | 0.000 | 0.131 (0,023;0,239) | 0.055 | 2.388 | 0.018 | 0.204 |
| Low level of HR | 0.349 (0.225; 0.473) | 0.063 | 5.577 | 0.000 | 0.262 (0,138; 0,386) | 0.063 | 4.195 | 0.000 | 0.314 |
| High level of HR | 0.429 (0.332; 0.525) | 0.049 | 8.731 | 0.000 | 0.218 (0,122; 0,314) | 0.049 | 4.434 | 0.000 | 0.321 |
| Low HR + Low OC | 0.329 (0.315; 0.343) | 0.007 | 4.749 | 0.000 | 0.319 (0,305; 0,333) | 0.007 | 4.608 | 0.000 | 0.354 |
| Low HR + High OC | 0.118 (-0.137; 0.373) | 0.128 | 0.920 | 0.361 | -0.026 (-0,281; 0,229) | 0.128 | -0.206 | 0.837 | 0.013 |
| High HR + Low OC | 0.281 (0.109; 0.453) | 0.087 | 3.238 | 0.002 | 0.321 (0,149; 0,493) | 0.087 | 3.694 | 0.000 | 0.245 |
| High HR + High OC | 0.465 (0.349; 0.581) | 0.059 | 7.863 | 0.000 | 0.103 (-0,013; 0,219) | 0.059 | 1.745 | 0.082 | 0.262 |
Remark: Estimates (coefficients) refer to the relationship between the independent variables MO and TO and the dependent variable OP.