Exploring the effect of SME internal capabilities on firm performance: A perspective of resource advantage theory of competition
-
DOIhttp://dx.doi.org/10.21511/ppm.23(2).2025.39
-
Article InfoVolume 23 2025, Issue #2, pp. 546-560
- 30 Views
-
3 Downloads
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
Firm performance is a business achievement through pro-growth capabilities and strategies. This paper aims to determine SME internal capabilities that can improve firm performance in Indonesia employing the resource advantage theory of competition. The research sample includes small and medium enterprises from the beauty product, food and beverage, and textile industries, the three primary industries that help Indonesia achieve a green economy. The respondents are managers or business owners who understand and handle overall business activities. Using convenience sampling techniques, 194 respondents were obtained and analyzed via partial least squares (PLS) with SMART PLS Ver 4.0 software. Empirical findings prove that service-dominant and responsive marketing orientations positively affect firm performance. Service-dominant orientation does not affect exploitative operational ambidexterity. However, exploitative operational ambidexterity has a significant positive effect on firm performance. The firm-specific marketing ecosystem does not affect firm performance. However, the firm-specific marketing ecosystem positively affects exploitative operational ambidexterity. Further findings indicate that responsive marketing orientation has a stronger relationship to exploitative operational ambidexterity. This paper offers managerial implications for business owners or managers who must modify service-dominant orientation and firm-specific marketing ecosystem to be more adaptive, innovative, and competitive to achieve superior firm performance.
- Keywords
-
JEL Classification (Paper profile tab)M31, L21, L26, O35
-
References79
-
Tables8
-
Figures2
-
- Figure 1. Theoretical framework
- Figure 2. Structural model analysis using bootstrap with subsamples (n = 5,000)
-
- Table 1. Demographic profiles of the samples
- Table 2. Measurement model analysis
- Table 3. Correlation matrix (HTMT ratio)
- Table 4. Coefficient of determination and predictive relevance
- Table 5. Effect size (f2)
- Table 6. PLS predict results
- Table 7. Variance inflation factor (VIF) result of the inner model
- Table 8. Hypotheses testing
-
- Acosta, A. S., Crespo, Á. H., & Agudo, J. C. (2018). Effect of market orientation, network capability and entrepreneurial orientation on international performance of small and medium enterprises (SMEs). International Business Review, 27(6), 1128-1140.
- Akhavan, P., Sanjaghi, M. E., Rezaeenour, J., & Ojaghi, H. (2014). Examining the relationships between organizational culture, knowledge management and environmental responsiveness capability. Vine, 44(2), 228-248.
- Albort-Morant, G., Leal-Rodríguez, A. L., & De Marchi, V. (2018). Absorptive capacity and relationship learning mechanisms as complementary drivers of green innovation performance. Journal of Knowledge Management, 22(2), 432-452.
- Aljuboori, Z. M., Singh, H., Haddad, H., Al-Ramahi, N. M., & Ali, M. A. (2022). Intellectual capital and firm performance correlation: The mediation role of innovation capability in Malaysian manufacturing SMEs perspective. Sustainability, 14(1), Article 154.
- Alves, H., Cepeda-Carrion, I., Ortega-Gutierrez, J., & Edvardsson, B. (2021). The role of intellectual capital in fostering SD-orientation and firm performance. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 22(1), 57-75.
- Ashrafi, A., & Zare Ravasan, A. (2018). How market orientation contributes to innovation and market performance: The roles of business analytics and flexible IT infrastructure. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 33(7), 970-983.
- Ceptureanu, S. I., Ceptureanu, E. G., & Cerqueti, R. (2022). Innovation ambidexterity and impact on the performance in IT companies: The moderating role of business experience. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management, 34(7), 746-759.
- Clauss, T., Kraus, S., Kallinger, F. L., Bican, P. M., Brem, A., & Kailer, N. (2021). Organizational ambidexterity and competitive advantage: The role of strategic agility in the exploration-exploitation paradox. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, 6(4), 203-213.
- Direction, S. (2020). Investing in the edge: Gaining a competitive advantage through targeted investment in competitive pillars. Strategic Direction, 36(9), 37-39.
- Dzenopoljac, A., Dzenopoljac, V., Muhammed, S., Abidi, O., & Kraus, S. (2024). Intra-organizational knowledge sharing, ambidexterity and firm performance: Evaluating the role of knowledge quality. Journal of Knowledge Management, 28(11), 155-178.
- Foss, N. J., & Saebi, T. (2016). Fifteen years of research on business model innovation: How far have we come, and where should we go? Journal of Management, 43(1), 200-227.
- Frambach, R. T., Fiss, P. C., & Ingenbleek, P. T. M. (2016). How important is customer orientation for firm performance? A fuzzy set analysis of orientations, strategies, and environments. Journal of Business Research, 69(4), 1428-1436.
- García-Granero, E. M., Piedra-Muñoz, L., & Galdeano-Gómez, E. (2018). Eco-innovation measurement: A review of firm performance indicators. Journal of Cleaner Production, 191, 304-317.
- Garrido-Moreno, A., Martín-Rojas, R., & García-Morales, V. J. (2024). The key role of innovation and organizational resilience in improving business performance: A mixed-methods approach. International Journal of Information Management, 77, Article 102777.
- Ghantous, N., & Alnawas, I. (2020). The differential and synergistic effects of market orientation and entrepreneurial orientation on hotel ambidexterity. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 55, Article 102072.
- Graça, P., & Camarinha-Matos, L. M. (2017). Performance indicators for collaborative business ecosystems – Literature review and trends. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 116, 237-255.
- Grewal, D., Roggeveen, A. L., Sisodia, R., & Nordfält, J. (2017). Enhancing customer engagement through consciousness. Journal of Retailing, 93(1), 55-64.
- Haim Faridian, P., & Neubaum, D. O. (2021). Ambidexterity in the age of asset sharing: Development of dynamic capabilities in open source ecosystems. Technovation, 99, Article 102125.
- Hair, J. F. Jr, Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., Sarstedt, M., Danks, N.P., & Ray, S. (2021). An introduction to structural equation modeling. In Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) Using R. Cham: Springer.
- Hair, J. F., & Sarstedt, M. (2019). Factors versus composites: Guidelines for choosing the right structural equation modeling method. Project Management Journal, 50(6), 619-624.
- Hair, J. F., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2019). Multivariate data analysis. Cengage.
- Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2017). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) (2nd ed.). SAGE Publication Inc.
- Hair, J. F., Risher, J. J., Sarstedt, M., & Ringle, C. M. (2019). When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM. European Business Review, 31(1), 2-24.
- Hanifah, H., Halim, H. A., Ahmad, N. H., & Vafaei-Zadeh, A. (2020). Can internal factors improve innovation performance via innovation culture in SMEs? Benchmarking: An International Journal, 27(1), 382-405.
- Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(1), 115-135.
- Hewett, K., Hult, G. T. M., Mantrala, M. K., Nim, N., & Pedada, K. (2022). Cross-border marketing ecosystem orchestration: A conceptualization of its determinants and boundary conditions. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 39(2), 619-638.
- Hunt, S. D., & Morgan, R. M. (1996). The resource-advantage theory of competition: Dynamics, path dependencies, and evolutionary dimensions. Journal of Marketing, 60(4), 107-114.
- Hwang, B. N., Lai, Y. P., & Wang, C. (2023). Open innovation and organizational ambidexterity. European Journal of Innovation Management, 26(3), 862-884.
- Indonesian Chamber of Commerce and Industry. (2025). UMKM Indonesia. KADIN INDONESIA. (In Indonesian).
- Iyer, P., Davari, A., Zolfagharian, M., & Paswan, A. (2019). Market orientation, positioning strategy and brand performance. Industrial Marketing Management, 81, 16-29.
- Jacobides, M. G., Cennamo, C., & Gawer, A. (2018). Towards a theory of ecosystems. Strategic Management Journal, 39(8), 2255-2276.
- Karpen, I. O., Bove, L. L., Lukas, B. A., & Zyphur, M. J. (2015). Service-dominant orientation: Measurement and impact on performance outcomes. Journal of Retailing, 91(1), 89-108.
- Katsifaraki, G. D., & Theodosiou, M. (2024). The role of service-dominant logic strategic orientations in driving customer engagement in online retailing. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 59(1), 99-115.
- Khan, O., Daddi, T., & Iraldo, F. (2020). Microfoundations of dynamic capabilities: Insights from circular economy business cases. Business Strategy and the Environment, 29(3), 1479-1493.
- Kementerian Perindustrian Republik Indonesia. (2020). Laporan Triwulan I Pusat Industri Hijau TA 2020. (In Indonesian).
- Kharabsheh, R. A., Jarrar, K., & Simeonova, B. (2015). The impact of competitive strategies on responsive market orientation, proactive market orientation, learning orientation and organizational performance. Journal of Strategic Marketing, 23(5), 423-435.
- Krammer, S. M. S. (2022). Navigating the New Normal: Which firms have adapted better to the COVID-19 disruption? Technovation, 110, Article 102368.
- Krishnakumar, S. K., Kishore, R., & Suresh, N. C. (2022). Expansive or focused attention? An exploration–exploitation perspective on e-Business systems and firm performance. Production and Operations Management, 31(5), 2038-2066.
- Kucharska, W., & Kowalczyk, R. (2019). How to achieve sustainability? – Employee’s point of view on company’s culture and CSR practice. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 26(2), 453-467.
- Lestari Moerdijat. (2024). Dorong Pengembangan Kewirausahaan Nasional untuk Menopang Indonesia Menjadi Negara Maju. MPR. (In Indonesian).
- Liu, G., Aroean, L., & Ko, W. W. (2023). Service innovation in business ecosystem: The roles of shared goals, coopetition, and interfirm power. International Journal of Production Economics, 255, Article 108709.
- Liu, Q.-R., Liu, J.-M., & He, Z.-P. (2023). Digital transformation ambidexterity and business performance. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 36(5), 1402-1420.
- Lorenzo, J. R. F., Rubio, M. T. M., & Garcés, S. A. (2018). The competitive advantage in business, capabilities and strategy. What general performance factors are found in the Spanish wine industry? Wine Economics and Policy, 7(2), 94-108.
- MacKenzie, S. B., & Podsakoff, P. M. (2012). Common method bias in marketing: Causes, mechanisms, and procedural remedies. Journal of Retailing, 88(4), 542-555.
- Mady, K., Battour, M., Aboelmaged, M., & Abdelkareem, R. S. (2023). Linking internal environmental capabilities to sustainable competitive advantage in manufacturing SMEs: The mediating role of eco-innovation. Journal of Cleaner Production, 417, 137928.
- Malik, A., Mustapha, M. A., Sobri, M. M., Abd Razak, N., Zaidi, N. F., Shukri, M. N., & Sham, A. A. (2021). Optimal reliability and validity of measurement model in confirmatory factor analysis: Different Likert point scale experiment. Journal of Contemporary Issues and Thought, 11(1), 105-112.
- Mitręga, M. (2020). Dynamic marketing capability – Refining the concept and applying it to company innovations. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 35(2), 193-203.
- Nguyen, T. V., & Le, N.-H. (2025). Measuring service-dominant orientation (SDO): A firm-based approach. Management Research Review, 48(3), 341-357.
- Nim, N., Pedada, K., & Hewett, K. (2024). Digital marketing ecosystems and global market expansion: Current state and future research agenda. International Marketing Review, 41(5), 872-885.
- Osiyevskyy, O., Shirokova, G., & Ritala, P. (2020). Exploration and exploitation in crisis environment: Implications for level and variability of firm performance. Journal of Business Research, 114, 227-239.
- Osorio Tinoco, F. F., Hernández-Espallardo, M., & Rodriguez-Orejuela, A. (2020). Nonlinear and complementary effects of responsive and proactive market orientation on firms’ competitive advantage. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 32(4), 841-859.
- Ostrom, A. L., Parasuraman, A., Bowen, D. E., Patrício, L., & Voss, C. A. (2015). Service research priorities in a rapidly changing context. Journal of Service Research, 18(2), 127-159.
- Ozdemir, S., Kandemir, D., & Eng, T. Y. (2017). The role of horizontal and vertical new product alliances in responsive and proactive market orientations and performance of industrial manufacturing firms. Industrial Marketing Management, 64, 25-35.
- Petzold, S., Barbat, V., Pons, F., & Zins, M. (2019). Impact of responsive and proactive market orientation on SME performance: The moderating role of economic crisis perception. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 36(4), 459-472.
- Piao, M., & Zajac, E. J. (2016). How exploitation impedes and impels exploration: Theory and evidence. Strategic Management Journal, 37(7), 1431-1447.
- Randhawa, K., Wilden, R., & Gudergan, S. (2021). How to innovate toward an ambidextrous business model? The role of dynamic capabilities and market orientation. Journal of Business Research, 130, 618-634.
- Rehman, S., Mohamed, R., & Ayoup, H. (2019). The mediating role of organizational capabilities between organizational performance and its determinants. Journal of Global Entrepreneurship Research, 9(1), Article 30.
- Rojas-Córdova, C., Williamson, A. J., Pertuze, J. A., & Calvo, G. (2023). Why one strategy does not fit all: A systematic review on exploration – Exploitation in different organizational archetypes. Review of Managerial Science, 17(7), 2251-2295.
- Rua, O., França, A., & Fernández Ortiz, R. (2018). Key drivers of SMEs export performance: The mediating effect of competitive advantage. Journal of Knowledge Management, 22(2), 257-279.
- Russell, M. G., & Smorodinskaya, N. V. (2018). Leveraging complexity for ecosystemic innovation. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 136, 114-131.
- Ryan, P., Geoghegan, W., & Hilliard, R. (2018). The microfoundations of firms’ explorative innovation capabilities within the triple helix framework. Technovation, 76, 15-27.
- Sahoo, S. (2019). Quality management, innovation capability and firm performance: Empirical insights from Indian manufacturing SMEs. The TQM Journal, 31(6), 1003-1027.
- Sangthong, M. (2019). The effect of the Likert point scale and sample size on the efficiency of parametric and nonparametric tests. Thailand Statistician, 18(1), 55-64.
- Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M., & Hair, J. F. (2020). Handbook of market research. Springer.
- Sharma, S., & Conduit, J. (2016). Co-creation culture in health care organizations. Journal of Service Research, 19(4), 438-457.
- Shimizu, K., & Hitt, M. A. (2004). Strategic flexibility: Organizational preparedness to reverse ineffective strategic decisions. Academy of Management Executive, 18(4), 44-59.
- Srinita, S. (2019). The effect of service quality, innovation towards competitive advantages and sustainable economic growth: Marketing mix strategy as mediating variable. Benchmarking: An International Journal, 26(4), 1336-1356.
- Taouab, O., & Issor, Z. (2019). Firm performance: Definition and measurement models. European Scientific Journal, 15(1), 93-106.
- Úbeda-García, M., Claver-Cortés, E., Marco-Lajara, B., & Zaragoza-Sáez, P. (2020). Toward a dynamic construction of organizational ambidexterity: Exploring the synergies between structural differentiation, organizational context, and interorganizational relations. Journal of Business Research, 112, 363-372.
- Venugopal, A., Krishnan, T. N., Upadhyayula, R. S., & Kumar, M. (2020). Finding the microfoundations of organizational ambidexterity – Demystifying the role of top management behavioural integration. Journal of Business Research, 106, 1-11.
- Wang, Y., Yan, F., Jia, F., & Chen, L. (2023). Building supply chain resilience through ambidexterity: An information processing perspective. International Journal of Logistics Research and Applications, 26(2), 172-189.
- Wei, Y. (S.), Samiee, S., & Lee, R. P. (2014). The influence of organic organizational cultures, market responsiveness, and product strategy on firm performance in an emerging market. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 42(1), 49-70.
- Wenke, K., Zapkau, F. B., & Schwens, C. (2021). 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, 653-665.
- Whitelock, V. (2018). Business analytics and firm performance: Role of structured financial statement data. Journal of Business Analytics, 1(2), 81-92.
- Wilden, R., & Gudergan, S. (2017). Service-dominant orientation, dynamic capabilities and firm performance. Journal of Service Theory and Practice, 27(4), 808-832.
- Yiu, H. L., Ngai, E. W. T., & Lei, C. F. (2020). Impact of service-dominant orientation on the innovation performance of technology firms: Roles of knowledge sharing and relationship learning. Decision Sciences, 51(3), 620-654.
- Zhang, J. Z., & Chang, C. W. (2020). Consumer dynamics: theories, methods, and emerging directions. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 49(1), 166-196.
- Zhang, J., & Du, M. (2019). Appropriating value from industrial buyer-seller relationships by leveraging network capability. Management Decision, 57(11), 2911-2939.
- Zhang, Q., Zhang, J., & Tang, W. (2017). Coordinating a supply chain with green innovation in a dynamic setting. 4or, 15(2), 133-162.