Research PaperNo Access

ORGANISATIONAL ADAPTABILITY: A STUDY OF THE MEDIATING ROLE OF LEADERSHIP IN THE INFLUENCE OF STRATEGIES, COMPLEXITY, AND TECHNOLOGY

P. RAMESH

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2965-8650

Department of Management, Aditya School of Management Studies, Ayodhya Nagar, Kakinada, Andhra Pradesh, 533003, India

E-mail Address: palimesh1@gmail.com

Corresponding author.

Search for more papers by this author

VEENA BHAVIKATTI

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2039-6930

Department of MBA, AMC Engineering College, Bannerghatta, Bangalore-560083, India

Search for more papers by this author

B. OMNAMASIVAYA

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2179-9291

Department of Management, Gonna Institute of Information Technology and Sciences, Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh, 530053, India

Search for more papers by this author

GORLI CHAITANYA

https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7234-3617

Gonna Institute of Information Technology and Sciences, Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh. 530053, India

Search for more papers by this author

TEJASWINI

https://orcid.org/0009-0006-8792-2797

Commerce & Management, Jain (Deemed to Be University), Bengaluru, Karnataka. 560069, India

Search for more papers by this author

SONY HIREMATH

https://orcid.org/0009-0002-7049-3130

Former Guest Faculty, Management, Karnataka State Akkamahadevi Women's Unviersity, State Highway 12, Athani Road, Janashakti Campus, Torvi, Vijayapura, Karnataka - 586108, India

Search for more papers by this author

H. SANTOSHI GONDESI

https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8191-3669

Gonna Institute of Information Technology and Sciences, Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh, 530053, India

Search for more papers by this author

, and

JADA KAMESWARI

Department of Management Studies, Malla Reddy College of Engineering and Technology (MRCET), Dhullapally, Maisammaguda, Medchal, Hyderabad, Telangana-500100, India

Search for more papers by this author

https://doi.org/10.1142/S1363919623500366Cited by:1 (Source: Crossref)

Abstract

Organisational adaptation is the capacity of an organisation to recognise the need to evolve and grasp possibilities in unpredictable circumstances. To position their organisations for flexibility in a world that is becoming more complicated, leadership needs to focus on change, dispersed, and contextual characteristics. A key idea concerning the conditions necessary for organisational adaptation is the theory of dynamic capabilities. This paper intends to highlight the role that leadership plays in mediating the impact of strategy, technology, and complexity on organisational adaptation. Structural equation modelling is used to test the suggested hypothesis. Professionals at a multinational organisation in India participated in the study. This study has a sample number of 252 and employed a simple random sampling technique. The results show that strategies and complexity impact the adaptability rate of an organisation and leadership mediates the relationship between strategies, technology, and complexity of organisational adaptability. In addition, it indicates that strategic adaption also improves business performance positively and effectively.

Keywords:

References

Acharya, S (2019). Beyond learning outcomes: Impact of organizational flexibility on strategic performance measures of commercial e-learning providers. Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management, 20(1), 31–41. Crossref, Google Scholar
AlNuaimi, BK, SK Singh, S Ren, P Budhwar and D Vorobyev (2022). Mastering digital transformation: The nexus between leadership, agility, and digital strategy. Journal of Business Research, 145, 636–648. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
Alrowwad, AA, SH Abualoush and RE Masa’deh (2020). Innovation and intellectual capital as intermediary variables among transformational leadership, transactional leadership, and organizational performance. Journal of Management Development, 39(2), 196–222. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
Arsawan, IWE, NK ssy De Hariyanti, IMADS Atmaja, D Suhartanto and V Koval (2022). Developing organizational agility in SMEs: An investigation of innovation’s roles and strategic flexibility. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 8(3), 149. Crossref, Google Scholar
Awa, HO, OU Ojiabo and LE Orokor (2017). Integrated technology-organization-environment (TOE) taxonomies for technology adoption. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 30(6), 893–921. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
Bamel, UK and N Bamel (2018). Organizational resources, KM process capability and strategic flexibility: A dynamic resource-capability perspective. Journal of Knowledge Management, 22(7), 1555–1572. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
Bass, BM (1990). From transactional to transformational leadership: Learning to share the vision. Organizational Dynamics, 18(3), 19–31. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
Batool, F, J Mohammad and SR Awang (2022). The effect of servant leadership on organisational sustainability: The parallel mediation role of creativity and psychological resilience. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 43(1), 71–95. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
Bhargavi, S and A Yaseen (2016). Leadership styles and organizational performance. Strategic Management Quarterly, 4(1), 87–117. Google Scholar
Birasnav, M, R Mittal and A Dalpati (2019). Integrating theories of strategic leadership, social exchange, and structural capital in the context of buyer–supplier relationship: An empirical study. Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management, 20, 219–236. Crossref, Google Scholar
Blackmore, J (2011). Leadership in pursuit of purpose: Social, economic and political transformation. Counterpoints, 409, 21–36. Google Scholar
Boylan, SA and KA Turner (2017). Developing organizational adaptability for complex environment. Journal of Leadership Education, 16(2), 183–198. Crossref, Google Scholar
Chaudhry, AQ and H Javed (2012). Impact of transactional and laissez faire leadership style on motivation. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 3(7). Google Scholar
Chen, CA (2014). Revisiting organizational age, inertia, and adaptability: Developing and testing a multi-stage model in the nonprofit sector. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 27(2), 251–272. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
Choudrie, J and YK Dwivedi (2005). Investigating the research approaches for examining technology adoption issues. Journal of Research Practice, 1(1), D1. Google Scholar
Christie, A, J Barling and N Turner (2011). Pseudo-Transformational Leadership: Model Specification and Outcomes 1. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 41(12), 2943–2984. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
Daryani, SM and A Amini (2016). Management and organizational complexity. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 230, 359–366. Crossref, Google Scholar
Dooley, K (2002). Organizational complexity. International Encyclopedia of Business and Management, 6, 5013–5022. Google Scholar
Gazi, MAI, MA Islam, FA Sobhani and BK Dhar (2022). Does job satisfaction differ at different levels of employees? Measurement of job satisfaction among the levels of sugar industrial employees. Sustainability, 14(6), 3564. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
Gomes, AR (2014). Transformational leadership: Theory, research, and application to sports. In Contemporary Topics and Trends in the Psychology of Sports, C Mohiyeddini (Ed.), pp. 53–114. Nova Science Publishers. Google Scholar
Gong, Y, Y Le, X Zhang, X Chen and H Zeng (2021). Organizational adaptability influenced by practice strategy, environmental dynamism, and absorptive capacity. Complexity, 2021, 1–15. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
Gupta, B (2011). A comparative study of organizational strategy and culture across industry. Benchmarking: An International Journal, 18(4), 510–528. Crossref, Google Scholar
Haque, AU, R Faizan and A Cockrill (2017). The relationship between female representation at strategic level and firm’s competitiveness: Evidences from cargo logistic firms of Pakistan and Canada. Polish Journal of Management Studies, 15(2), 69–81. Crossref, Google Scholar
Heredia, J, M Castillo-Vergara, C Geldes, FMC Gamarra, A Flores and W Heredia (2022). How do digital capabilities affect firm performance? The mediating role of technological capabilities in the “new normal”. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, 7(2), 100171. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
Imran, M, F Ismail, I Arshad, F Zeb and H Zahid (2022). The mediating role of innovation in the relationship between organizational culture and organizational performance in Pakistan’s banking sector. Journal of Public Affairs, 22, e2717. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
Judge, TA and JE Bono (2000). Five-factor model of personality and transformational leadership. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(5), 751. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
Juvika, J and A Ardi (2023). The influence of digital transformational leadership on organizational performance through intellectual capital mediation and innovation factors at PT. XYZ. Jurnal Ekonomi, 12(3), 869–876. Google Scholar
Katsaros, KK, AN Tsirikas and GC Kosta (2020). The impact of leadership on firm financial performance: The mediating role of employees’ readiness to change. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 41(3), 333–347. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
Kim, T and M Rhee (2009). Exploration and exploitation: Internal variety and environmental dynamism. Strategic Organization, 7(1), 11–41. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
Kodama, M (2019). Business innovation through holistic leadership-developing organizational adaptability. Systems Research and Behavioral Science, 36(4), 365–394. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
Kucharska, W and T Rebelo (2022). Transformational leadership for researcher’s innovativeness in the context of tacit knowledge and change adaptability. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 1–22. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
Lopez-Cabrales, A, M Bornay-Barrachina and M Diaz-Fernandez (2017). Leadership and dynamic capabilities: The role of HR systems. Personnel Review, 46(2), 255–276. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
McCleskey, JA (2014). Situational, transformational, and transactional leadership and leadership development. Journal of Business Studies Quarterly, 5(4), 117. Google Scholar
Melitski, J, D Gavin and J Gavin (2010). Technology adoption and organizational culture in public organizations. International Journal of Organization Theory & Behavior, 13(4), 546–568. Crossref, Google Scholar
Miles, RE, CC Snow, AD Meyer and HJ Coleman Jr (1978). Organizational strategy, structure, and process. Academy of Management Review, 3(3), 546–562. Crossref, Google Scholar
Mintzberg, H (1978). Patterns in strategy formation. Management Science, 24(9), 934–948. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
Moldoveanu, M (2004). An intersubjective measure of organizational complexity: A new approach to the study of complexity in organizations. Emergence-Mahwah-Lawrence Erlbaum, 6(3), 9. Google Scholar
Moldoveanu, MC and RM Bauer (2004). On the relationship between organizational complexity and organizational structuration. Organization Science, 15(1), 98–118. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
Moore, JH and Z Wang (2017). Mentoring top leadership promotes organizational innovativeness through psychological safety and is moderated by cognitive adaptability. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 318. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
Naveed, RT, H Alhaidan, H Al Halbusi and AK Al-Swidi (2022). Do organizations really evolve? The critical link between organizational culture and organizational innovation toward organizational effectiveness: Pivotal role of organizational resistance. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, 7(2), 100178. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
Obiwuru, TC, AT Okwu, VO Akpa and IA Nwankwere (2011). Effects of leadership style on organizational performance: A survey of selected small scale enterprises in Ikosi-Ketu council development area of Lagos State, Nigeria. Australian Journal of Business and Management Research, 1(7), 100. Google Scholar
Oliveira, T and MF Martins (2011). Literature review of information technology adoption models at firm level. Electronic Journal of Information Systems Evaluation, 14(1), 110–121. Google Scholar
O’reilly Iii, CA and ML Tushman (2008). Ambidexterity as a dynamic capability: Resolving the innovator’s dilemma. Research in Organizational Behavior, 28, 185–206. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
Politis, JD (2002). Transformational and transactional leadership enabling (disabling) knowledge acquisition of self-managed teams: The consequences for performance. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 23(4), 186–197. Crossref, Google Scholar
Prajogo, DI and AS Sohal (2006). The relationship between organization strategy, total quality management (TQM), and organization performance—the mediating role of TQM. European Journal of Operational Research, 168(1), 35–50. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
Saghafian, M, K Laumann and MR Skogstad (2021). Stagewise overview of issues influencing organizational technology adoption and use. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 630145. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
Schmitz, C and S Ganesan (2014). Managing customer and organizational complexity in sales organizations. Journal of Marketing, 78(6), 59–77. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
Schoemaker, PJ, S Heaton and D Teece (2018). Innovation, dynamic capabilities, and leadership. California Management Review, 61(1), 15–42. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
Schulze, JH and F Pinkow (2020). Leadership for organisational adaptability: How enabling leaders create adaptive space. Administrative Sciences, 10(3), 37. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
Simon, HA (2013). Administrative Behavior. Simon and Schuster. Google Scholar
Teece, DJ (2007). Explicating dynamic capabilities: The nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic Management Journal, 28(13), 1319–1350. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
Uhl-Bien, M and M Arena (2017). Complexity leadership: Enabling people and organizations for adaptability. Organizational Dynamics. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
Uhl-Bien, M and M Arena (2018). Leadership for organizational adaptability: A theoretical synthesis and integrative framework. The Leadership Quarterly, 29(1), 89–104. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
Van Knippenberg, D and SB Sitkin (2013). A critical assessment of charismatic—transformational leadership research: Back to the drawing board? The Academy of Management Annals, 7(1), 1–60. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
Xu, L, Y Jin, J Hu and H Li (2018). A case study on the influence of the leadership style of Chinese private enterprises on strategic execution—with strategic flexibility as a mediating variable. Journal of Shanghai Second Polytechnic University, 35(2), 153–161. Google Scholar
Zhao, H and Q Zhou (2019). Exploring the impact of responsible leadership on organizational citizenship behavior for the environment: A leadership identity perspective. Sustainability, 11(4), 944. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar