Entrepreneurial Leadership Capability on Sustained Competitive Advantage With Strategic Agility Mediation Factor
Abstract
A competitive advantage allows the company to maintain its market position and continue to generate profits over a long period of time. This study aims to assess the impact of entrepreneurial leadership and strategic agility on the enhancement of sustainable competitive advantage within the context of private universities in Indonesia. It intends to investigate whether possessing resources that possess valuable, rare, inimitable, and non-substitutable attributes is a prerequisite for achieving sustainable competitive advantage. The number of samples used in this study was 211 respondents taken from several private universities in Indonesia. The data collected for this research was analyzed utilizing SmartPLS software to examine the interplay between variables. The findings of this study indicate a positive and statistically significant correlation between entrepreneurial leadership capabilities and strategic agility. Additionally, entrepreneurial leadership capabilities have a positive and significant impact on sustainable competitive advantage. Moreover, a positive and significant relationship was identified between strategic agility and sustainable competitive advantage. Furthermore, strategic agility acts as a mediator in the relationship between entrepreneurial leadership capabilities and sustainable competitive advantage.
Keywords: Entrepreneurial Leadership Capability, Higher Education, Indonesia, Strategic Agility, Sustainable Competitive Advantage
Introduction
A sustainable competitive advantage is a state or situation that positions a company in a profitable and superior business position over a considerable period of time (Yadav et al., 2017). It occurs when a company's profitability surpasses the average profitability in its industry and experiences higher profit growth compared to the industry average. Sustainable competitive advantage encompasses the notion of unique advantages possessed by a company that are difficult to replicate or imitate by competitors. These advantages enable the company to preserve its market position and sustain profitability in the long term (Kabue & Kilika, 2016). To maintain a sustainable competitive advantage, companies must continue to invest and develop their competitive advantage, such as through research and development, marketing, and strategic planning (Papadas et al., 2019).
Companies have several types of strategies such as product superiority, customer proximity, and operational excellence, which can drive competitive advantage. The strategy must be sustainable to be able to direct customers and be loyal in the long term. Long-term strategic planning requires a fundamental understanding of how a company can effectively compete in the marketplace. This central concept is commonly referred to as a generic strategy (Bagnoli & Giachetti, 2014). Baumgartner and Rauter (2017) have proposed a framework stating that long-term strategic planning should be derived from a company's pursuit of competitive advantage, which can be achieved through one of the following three generic strategies: 1). Cost Leadership: This strategy focuses on achieving overall low-cost leadership in the industry, aiming to offer products or services at a lower cost compared to competitors; 2). Differentiation: The differentiation strategy involves creating and marketing unique and distinctive products tailored to different customer groups, emphasizing factors that set them apart from competitors; 3). Focus: The focus strategy centers on serving the specialized needs of specific consumer or industrial buyer groups, with an emphasis on either cost or differentiation aspects. These generic strategies serve as the foundation for developing a company's long-term strategic plan and gaining a competitive advantage in the marketplace.
Attaining sustainable competitive advantage is possible for companies that possess resources characterized by valuable, rare, inimitable, and non-substitutable attributes. However, if a company possesses only resources with valuable and rare attributes, it can achieve a competitive advantage but not necessarily sustain it in the long term (Kabue & Kilika, 2016). Technological resources and positioning capabilities are positively related to sustainable competitive advantage outcomes, aligned with the fundamental principle of the Resource-Based View (RBV), it is posited that a company's sustainable competitive advantage stems from its unique resources and superior capabilities. These distinct resources, possessing valuable, rare, inimitable, and non-substitutable attributes, provide the foundation for a company to establish and maintain a competitive edge over its rivals (Ali, 2021; Mao et al., 2016). Numerous researchers have emphasized the significance of enhancing adaptability and adopting information technology as a crucial factor in achieving sustainable competitive advantage. Dyllick and Muff (2016) discovered that integrating sustainability practices enables companies to identify opportunities, mitigate economic, environmental, and social risks, and generate long-term value. Consequently, companies need to adapt to a new development model that can effectively address various changes and incorporate it into their strategic decision-making process. This adaptation involves changes in attitudes, culture, and interests within the organization, as they are closely linked to human resources and contribute to sustainable competitive advantage. Moreover, Baumgartner and Rauter (2017) argue that organizations must continually overcome complex and unpredictable environmental changes in sustainability by dynamically readapting over time.
Companies that strive to survive in a competitive global environment demonstrate that their corporate culture plays a crucial role in predicting the adoption of technology, this company's attitude is hereinafter referred to as an innovative culture (Widiyati & Murwaningsari, 2021). Therefore, an innovative culture is very important to be built in an organization or company. The process of fostering an innovative culture within an organization involves recognizing that every employee possesses inherent creative potential, thereby establishing an environment where innovation is nurtured and encouraged, a good learner, always curious, creative, and ready for all positive decisions and steps, optimistic, in order to improve performance (Danks et al., 2017). A culture of innovation must be fostered to face challenges. Dynamic market conditions, changing customer demands, rapidly progressive technologies and intense global competition are reinforcing the need to manage change. An environment that enhances risk tolerance, good infrastructure, global-minded human resources and adaptive resilience are needed to build a dynamic corporate culture. Culture as one of the most important factors in managing innovation, although culture can facilitate innovation, culture can also hinder, unless managers are sensitive to the effects of social control and actively form patterns of informal interaction, culture can inhibit innovation and change (Salman et al., 2018).
This study aims to examine the ability of entrepreneurial leadership and strategic agility in increasing sustainable competitive advantage among private universities in Indonesia. In particular, the purpose of this research is to examine the relationship between entrepreneurial leadership capability and strategic agility and sustainable competitive advantage among private universities in Indonesia. Furthermore, this study explores the correlation between strategic agility and sustainable competitive advantage within private universities in Indonesia. Additionally, it investigates whether strategic agility can act as a mediator in the relationship between entrepreneurial leadership capabilities and sustainable competitive advantage among private universities in Indonesia.
Literature Review and Hypotheses Development
The Effect of Entrepreneurial Leadership Ability
Leadership for an entrepreneur is one of the main factors, which is as important as trust and high creativity in supporting business success in achieving goals. Leadership combines creativity and trust into an effective endeavor that has a broad and lively impact (Harrison et al., 2016). Previously, businesses that were built without strong leadership would only be stagnant (not developing) small businesses. The role of a leader in an organization is very important as a maker of strategies and policies, as well as determining the direction and movement of the company/organization, especially in times of crisis. Companies/organizations that make it possible to survive in times of crisis, it can be said that what companies need are leaders who are also agile (Cantermi & Lizote, 2023).
As the leader of a company/organization, one of the important roles is how the leader in the company/organization can move its members towards competition. Entrepreneurial-based leadership focuses on transactions between managers and employees that involve exchange or bargaining relationships. This exchange is based on an agreement regarding the tasks that must be carried out and appreciation for the achievements or fulfillment of these tasks (Anak Agung Sagung & Sri Darma, 2020). This is based on exchange theory which emphasizes the bargaining relationship between leaders and employees. In entrepreneurial leadership, leaders encourage their members to achieve a mutually agreed upon level of performance and jointly carry out the agreement. This exchange creates a mutually beneficial bond between the leader and the team members. To achieve corporate/organizational goals, it is a tough task for leaders, according to Howard et al. (2019) is to prepare an organizational strategic plan well. The success or effectiveness of leadership is not only measured by how to empower subordinates but also the ability to carry out or implement company policies through the way or style of leadership. The pattern or style of leadership is very dependent on the individual characteristics of the leader facing subordinates based on their function as superiors. In line with this leadership style theory, it states that a person's leadership style is influenced by the characteristics of the individual leader and the organizational environment. In the context of entrepreneurial-based leadership, this leadership style tends to focus on giving freedom and support to team members to achieve goals, by prioritizing initiative and creativity. Leaders cannot rely on a tight strategy to develop a sustainable competitive advantage over the long term. Globalization has produced an environment characterized by strong competition, shorter product life cycles, developing technologies, and decreased consumer loyalty (Aryanto et al., 2015; Tanwari, 2020). Leaders must develop the agility and flexibility to avert predictability, transition from one advantage to the next, and continually create new advantages as competitors rapidly attack the odds. Leaders must take advantage of emerging trends, which require establishing highly agile strategic development procedures that require disruptive changes in business management.
Companies that have agility are considered more able to survive in crisis situations. Joiner (2019) states that in order to develop a level of organizational agility appropriate to the turbulent environmental conditions, executives need to place emphasis on three areas, namely: strategic agility, operational agility (including culture as well as structure and systems), and leadership agility. Agility/agility/dexterity is something that is formed from aspects contained within the individual which of course is also formed through a response to the surrounding environment. To enable executives to build a strategic agile framework, companies must first develop a supportive business model. Strategic agility enables companies to adapt to the ever-changing global competitive landscape. The global market requires leaders to move away from continuous improvement and towards constant innovation. Warner and Wäger (2019) define the concept of dynamic capabilities, arguing that leaders must leverage existing internal and external capabilities while also developing new capabilities. Based on the literature, the first hypothesis in this study is concluded as follows:
Hypothesis 1. Entrepreneurial Leadership Capability has a significant effect on Strategic Agility
Entrepreneurial leadership can be one of the keys in achieving competitive advantage and it influences the customer's assessment of their entire product. This is based on the theory of competitive advantage which states that a business has a competitive advantage when implementing strategies that create higher value for customers than its competitors. These advantages can stem from unique resources and capabilities, difficult for competitors to imitate, or too expensive for competitors to imitate. Leitch and Volery (2017) found that entrepreneurial leadership is considered a source of competitive advantage. Entrepreneurial leadership also influences customer judgments about the usefulness of restaurant products and it is called customer value. Perceptions of entrepreneurial leadership are becoming one of the more important issues in generating customer value. Kim et al. study (2016) and Suhidayat et al. (2016) found a positive relationship between entrepreneurial leadership and customer value in in-flight food service in Korea and the rural banking sector in Indonesia. A product or service purchased by a customer from a company is more satisfying if the customer gets a high value, because it represents the emotional bond that exists between the customer and the company after the customer exploits the product and service and finds that the product or service culture adds value.
When a company possesses a unique capability or resource that its competitors lack or desire, it demonstrates a competitive advantage. The acquisition and retention of a competitive advantage are crucial for the long-term prosperity of an organization. Jones et al. (2018) emphasize that the pursuit of competitive advantage can determine the success or failure of an organization. Consequently, researchers and practitioners in strategic management strive to understand the nature and significance of competitive advantage across different industries. A company can maintain a competitive advantage for a limited period as competitors imitate its strategies and the advantage weakens over time. Therefore, simply having a competitive advantage is not sufficient. Companies must strive to achieve sustainable competitive advantage by constantly adapting to external trends and events. This requires ongoing efforts to stay ahead of the competition and ensure that the advantage is sustained in the long term.
Numerous companies have made efforts to gain a competitive edge by utilizing their resources and capabilities, as suggested by the resource-based perspective. Strategic leaders, following the major group views on strategic leadership and the knowledge-based view, widely acknowledge the significance of investing in human capital and social capital to enhance their businesses' long-lasting competitive advantage. Hunitie (2018) emphasized that all aspects of leadership influence sustainable competitive advantage. In addition, Mahdi et al. (2019) found that leadership is a resource for making strategic decisions that produce sustainable competitive advantages. Thus, leadership capability is a factor that can influence companies/organizations to adopt strategic agility by leveraging internal and external capabilities while continuing to develop new capabilities to adapt and develop in a highly dynamic context to achieve sustainable competitive advantage. On the basis of these explanations, the second hypothesis is concluded as follows:
Hypothesis 2. Entrepreneurial Leadership Capability has a significant effect on Sustainable Competitive Advantage
The Effects of Strategic Agility
Strategic agility refers to the capacity to adapt and reassess an organization's strategy in response to swift changes in the external business environment. Given the diverse and intense sources of change and the ever-increasing dynamism in today's business landscape, organizations have embraced agility as a way to consistently adapt to external challenges and opportunities. The rapid pace of technological advancements, deregulation, and globalization has created a highly competitive business environment where competitive advantages are short-lived. The concept of strategic agility provides companies and organizations with the chance to enhance their flexibility, enabling them to swiftly adapt and respond to changes while implementing actions to manage market uncertainty and risk (Latilla et al., 2021). Organizations that possess strategic agility have the ability to adjust their culture in accordance with market changes, rapidly learn from and adapt to market shifts, and capitalize on external transformations. Additionally, by reorganizing their systems and strategies in a responsive manner in line with environmental changes, these companies can transform external shifts into opportunities (Ahammad et al., 2020).
Strategic agility necessitates a continuous focus on both the internal and external environment, enabling the organization to swiftly gather and utilize information and respond promptly to market changes. By developing strategic agility, a company or organization can enhance the quality of its competitive activities and effectively respond to fluctuations in the business environment, leading to improved performance (Doz, 2020; Kurniawan, 2017). Previous research has primarily examined agility at the organizational level, conceptualizing "strategic agility" as an organizational capability. This capability entails the ability to swiftly identify and capitalize on opportunities, change course if necessary, and avoid obstacles, or move quickly, decisively, and effectively to anticipate, initiate, and capitalize on changes. In addition to the organizational-level research, another study by Ahammad et al. (2020) explores agility within specific organizational contexts, particularly in knowledge-intensive and manufacturing firms. Within these contexts, early research on agility has primarily concentrated on examining the connection between agility and advanced technologies, such as computer-integrated manufacturing. As a result, the manufacturing agility literature has emerged, highlighting key characteristics and principles.
Dynamic capability theory suggests that companies must have dynamic capabilities to respond quickly to market changes and make the right strategic decisions. Strategic agility is considered as one of these dynamic capabilities that is essential for achieving long-term success. Junni et al. (2015) have underscored the significance of strategic agility as dynamic capabilities that empower companies to enact changes, make rapid strategic decisions, and effectively implement those decisions. Strategic agility is recognized as a crucial capability that companies must possess in order to navigate and thrive in dynamic business environments. Muthuveloo and Teoh (2020) hypothesize that a combination of technological, comprehensive environmental scanning, and human resources is critical to organizational performance. However, they argue that what the strategic model needs most is a mechanism to protect companies from the turbulence and uncertainty inherent in today's business landscape. Strategic agility is offered as a way for businesses to maximize their competitiveness and sustain growth.
Strategic agility is a relatively new concept in the field of strategic management, where the concept of agility (adaptability and speed) is applied to corporate strategy (Doz, 2020). By adopting the theory of speed and adaptability, companies are exposed to the importance of speed in taking action and the ability to adapt to a rapidly changing environment. Strategic agility includes the ability to respond quickly to market changes and change strategy as needed. Strategically agile organizations can shift quickly because of their heightened sensitivity to strategic developments, their willingness to make bold and quick decisions, and their ability to quickly reconfigure their resources. Only recently have researchers started to investigate the impact of strategic agility on firm performance. According to Clauss et al. (2021), a positive correlation between strategic agility and performance indicates that strategic agility serves as a source of sustainable competitive advantage, enabling companies to capitalize on economic opportunities. The third hypothesis based on the explanation given above is concluded as follows:
Hypothesis 3. Strategic Agility has a significant effect on Sustainable Competitive Advantage
Every company operating in an industry possesses a competitive advantage, whether it is explicit or implicit. This advantage could be a result of intentional strategic planning or may have emerged implicitly through the activities of different functional departments within the company (Ahammad et al., 2020). If left to their own devices, each functional department tends to pursue strategies based on their professional orientation and the incentives of their leaders. However, the collective approaches of these departments seldom result in the optimal overall strategy for the company.
For a competitive advantage, leaders must effectively manage the company's human resources, knowledge and memory. This is based on the Resource-Based View (RBV) theory which states that a company's unique resources and capabilities are a source of sustainable competitive advantage. This theory supports that companies must manage the company's human resources, knowledge, and memory effectively to create and maintain competitive advantage. Leaders must design an agile business model based on the main strategy of the organization to develop a competitive advantage. Continuously, and in the same context, Hunitie (2018) states that when a company's strategic leadership is successfully implemented, the organization's strategic leadership practices can become a source of competitive advantage. In addition, businesses that are able to develop their capabilities will be able to maintain their competitive advantage. Many companies have attempted to maintain a competitive advantage by leveraging resources and capabilities according to a resource-based perspective. According to Hunitie (2018) view, the majority of strategic leaders believe that investing in human capital and social capital can help their businesses increase their sustainable competitive advantage.
Cai and Szeidl (2018) propose that entrepreneurial leadership plays a crucial role in developing and implementing appropriate strategies to effectively respond to change and achieve strategic agility. They argue that organizations require leaders who possess entrepreneurial behavior, viewing change as an opportunity for business growth, embracing innovation, and adapting to evolving environments in order to enhance competitiveness. Existing literature also emphasizes the significance of entrepreneurial leaders in inspiring and motivating followers by demonstrating and encouraging opportunity-driven processes. Entrepreneurial leadership contributes to the creation of new business processes, products, and services by recognizing and capitalizing on opportunities (Joiner, 2019). Thus, entrepreneurial leadership emerges as a key determinant in determining whether agility can impact a company's competitiveness.
To generate competitive advantage effectively, leaders must leverage internal and external capabilities while also developing new capabilities. To survive in a highly dynamic context, leaders must develop new competencies that support the company's specific strategy. In addition, leader competencies must be updated regularly to respond to shifts and changes in the environment (Harrison et al., 2016). Utilizing dynamic capability theory enables managers to create firm-specific advantages for optimal positioning and identification, and pursuit of opportunities. On the basis of the explanation above, the fourth hypothesis is concluded as follows:
Hypothesis 4. Strategic agility mediates Entrepreneurial Leadership Capability to Sustainable Competitive Advantage
Figure 1 depicts the conceptual framework for this study. This study proposes a direct and indirect relationship between entrepreneurial leadership capability and sustainable competitive advantage. Strategic Agility is argued to mediate the relationship between entrepreneurial leadership capability and sustainable competitive advantage.
Research Methods
The research method used is to use quantitative research methods. This study uses regression analysis techniques to identify the relationship between two or more variables and to predict the value of a variable based on other variables. Regression analysis helps in testing hypotheses and identifying factors that contribute to changes in variables. The data collection process uses a survey method where data is collected through questionnaires given to respondents. The number of samples used in this study were 211 respondents taken from several private universities in Indonesia. The sample was selected using a purposive sampling technique. This research was conducted by developing a model to analyze the performance of Private Higher Education from the aspect of obtaining the number of SMA and Academic students in Private Higher Education in Indonesia. This study utilized primary data collected from participants through a structured questionnaire. The questionnaire included inquiries pertaining to the variables under investigation, namely entrepreneurial leadership capability, strategic agility, and sustainable competitive advantage. The questionnaire employed a Likert scale ranging from 1 to 7, representing responses from "strongly disagree" to "strongly agree." The collected data were subsequently analyzed using SmartPLS software to examine the relationships between the variables.
Results
In this study, before examining the relationship between entrepreneurial leadership capability, strategic agility, and sustainable competitive advantage, it is necessary to first test the goodness of the indicators for each of these latent variables. This latent variable indicator test aims to determine whether or not the indicators used to measure latent variables are good or not. Indicators of latent variables are good if the STD. The loading factor obtained is > 0.6. Furthermore, reliability and validity tests were also carried out. The reliability test aims to measure the consistency of the questionnaire/variable indicator used to measure the effect of the independent variables on the dependent variable. While the validity test aims to determine whether the questionnaire/indicator used for each variable is valid or not. The questionnaire/indicator is reliable if the Cronbach's alpha (α) value is > 0.6 or it can be seen from the composite reliability value > 0.7. Meanwhile, the questionnaire/indicator of the variables used is valid if the Average Variance Extracted (AVE) value is > 0.5.
The results of the initial tests carried out to determine the goodness of the indicators used latent variables in this study can be seen in table 1 above. The standard loading factor values obtained by the entrepreneurial leadership capability variable range from 0.808 – 0.879, strategic agility ranges from 0.825 – 0.904, and sustainable competitive advantage ranges from 0.834 – 0.956. This value is above 0.6, which means that the indicator of the latent variable used is good. Furthermore, the results of testing the validity and reliability can be seen in table 2. In the reliability test, the table shows Cronbach's Alpha (α) and composite reliability values obtained by entrepreneurial leadership capability (0.885; 0.916), strategic agility (0.914; 0.936), and sustainable competitive advantage (0.944; 0.957). This means that the questionnaires/indicators used in this study were reliable. In the validity test, the Average Variance Extracted (AVE) value obtained by entrepreneurial leadership capability (0.685), strategic agility (0.744), and sustainable competitive advantage (0.818) variables. From the results of the validity test, it can be concluded that the questionnaire/indicator of the variables used in this study is valid.
The next analysis test is the fit model test as exhibits in Table 3. The model fit test is an important step in statistical analysis which aims to test the extent to which the model used in the study matches the observed data. The model fit test ensures that the model used can properly describe the patterns in the data and is in accordance with the proposed hypothesis. This test has important significance in validating the model used in research.
To evaluate the suitability of the model in describing the relationship between variables in the study, one can refer to some of the statistics in the summary of model fit. One of the statistics used is Standardized Root Mean Squared Residual (SRMR), where a value lower than 0.10 indicates that the model fits well. In addition, you can also see the Normal Fit Index (NFI) value, which is close to 1.0 indicating that the model is getting better or more suitable to the data. In this study, the SRMR value obtained was 0.052, smaller than 0.10, and the NFI value obtained was 0.916, very close to 1.0. Therefore, it can be concluded that the model used in this study is good or in accordance with the observed data.
In this study there are 4 hypotheses to be tested. The first hypothesis examines the effect of entrepreneurial leadership capability on strategic agility. The second hypothesis explores the impact of entrepreneurial leadership capability on sustainable competitive advantage. The third hypothesis investigates the influence of strategic agility on sustainable competitive advantage. The fourth hypothesis examines the role of strategic agility as a mediator variable, mediating the relationship between entrepreneurial leadership capability and sustainable competitive advantage. The hypothesis is positive and significant if the T statistics value is > 1.96 or it can also be seen with a P value <0.05 as shown in Figure 2.
Table 4 displays the results of the hypothesis testing in this study indicate that the first hypothesis, which posited that entrepreneurial leadership capability has an impact on strategic agility, is supported. The obtained T statistics value of 12.560 with a P value of 0.000 signifies that the first hypothesis can be accepted. Similarly, the second hypothesis, examining the effect of entrepreneurial leadership capability on strategic agility, also yields a positive and significant value, with a T statistics value of 2.310 and a P value of 0.022. Thus, the second hypothesis is also supported by the data. The results of the hypothesis testing support the third hypothesis, which suggests that strategic agility has a significant effect on sustainable competitive advantage. The obtained T statistics value of 2.979 with a P value of 0.003 indicates that the third hypothesis is supported and has a notable impact. Furthermore, the results also support the fourth hypothesis, which posits strategic agility as a mediating variable in the relationship between entrepreneurial leadership capability and sustainable competitive advantage. The obtained T statistics value of 2.912 with a P value of 0.004 suggests that the fourth hypothesis can be accepted. These findings demonstrate that strategic agility plays a positive and significant role in mediating the relationship between entrepreneurial leadership capability and sustainable competitive advantage.
Conclusion
Based on the analysis and hypothesis testing conducted in this study, it can be concluded that there is a positive and significant relationship between entrepreneurial leadership capabilities and strategic agility within private universities in Indonesia. This shows that entrepreneurial leadership skills play a role in increasing the ability of private tertiary institutions to respond to environmental changes and adapt quickly (strategic agility). The findings of the study demonstrate that entrepreneurial leadership capabilities have a positive and significant impact on sustainable competitive advantage in private tertiary institutions. This suggests that the presence of effective entrepreneurial leadership abilities contributes to the creation of a sustainable competitive advantage for these institutions. Additionally, a positive and significant relationship is observed between strategic agility and sustainable competitive advantage. This implies that private tertiary institutions that possess the ability to adapt rapidly and respond to environmental changes are more likely to maintain a sustainable competitive advantage. Furthermore, strategic agility is found to act as a mediator in the relationship between entrepreneurial leadership capabilities and sustainable competitive advantage. In other words, strategic agility plays a role in mediating the effects of entrepreneurial leadership capabilities on the attainment of a sustainable competitive advantage. This shows that strategic agility has an important role in linking entrepreneurial leadership abilities with the achievement of sustainable competitive advantage. This research study presents compelling evidence that entrepreneurial leadership capabilities and strategic agility significantly contribute to enhancing sustainable competitive advantage in private universities within Indonesia.
The contribution of this research is important in providing an understanding of the factors that influence competitive advantage among private universities in Indonesia. These findings underscore the importance of entrepreneurial leadership in helping private tertiary institutions adapt quickly to changing environments and create sustainable competitive advantages. This contribution also provides insight into the importance of strategic agility as a mediator in the relationship between entrepreneurial leadership abilities and sustainable competitive advantage. The findings of this research can become the basis for private tertiary institutions to develop more effective strategies in increasing their competitiveness in the higher education sector. Nonetheless, this study has several limitations that need to be acknowledged such as the limited research sample, where in this study the sample was used only at private tertiary institutions in Indonesia, so the results may not be directly applicable to state tertiary institutions or outside the territory of Indonesia. Therefore, the authors recommend for further research that research can be expanded to involve more tertiary institutions of various types and geographical locations, including state universities, so that the results can be generalized more generally. In addition, research can use different research methods such as involving mixed methods to combine quantitative and qualitative approaches, so as to provide a more comprehensive understanding of the factors that influence competitive advantage in higher education.
Acknowledgment
The authors are grateful to the Accounting Research Institute, (ARI- HICoE), Universiti Teknologi MARA, Shah Alam, Malaysia, and the Ministry of Higher Education for providing research funding.
References
Ahammad, M. F., Glaister, K. W., & Gomes, E. (2020). Strategic agility and human resource management. Human Resource Management Review, 30(1), 100700. DOI:
Ali, A. (2021). Determining Mediating Role of Managerial Commitment and Technological Capability Between Environmental Management Accounting and Organisational Efficiency: A Case of Middle Eastern Countries. Arthatama, 5(2), 27-38.
Anak Agung Sagung, M. A., & Sri Darma, G. (2020). Revealing the digital leadership spurs in 4.0 industrial revolution. Asri, AASMAN, & Darma, GS, Revealing the digital leadership spurs in, 4, 93-100.
Aryanto, R., Fontana, A., & Afiff, A. Z. (2015). Strategic Human Resource Management, Innovation Capability and Performance: An Empirical Study in Indonesia Software Industry. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 211, 874-879. DOI:
Bagnoli, C., & Giachetti, C. (2014). Aligning knowledge strategy and competitive strategy in small firms. Journal of Business Economics and Management, 16(3), 571-598. DOI:
Baumgartner, R. J., & Rauter, R. (2017). Strategic perspectives of corporate sustainability management to develop a sustainable organization. Journal of Cleaner Production, 140, 81-92. DOI:
Cai, J., & Szeidl, A. (2018). Interfirm Relationships and Business Performance*. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 133(3), 1229-1282. DOI:
Cantermi, B. D. A., & Lizote, S. A. (2023). Leadership and organizational culture in small companies. Revista de Administração da UFSM, 15, 634-656.
Clauss, T., Abebe, M., Tangpong, C., & Hock, M. (2021). Strategic Agility, Business Model Innovation, and Firm Performance: An Empirical Investigation. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 68(3), 767-784. DOI:
Danks, S., Rao, J., & Allen, J. M. (2017). Measuring Culture of Innovation: A Validation Study of the Innovation Quotient Instrument (Part One): Culture of Innovation. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 29(4), 427-454. DOI:
Doz, Y. (2020). Fostering strategic agility: How individual executives and human resource practices contribute. Human Resource Management Review, 30(1), 100693. DOI:
Dyllick, T., & Muff, K. (2016). Clarifying the meaning of sustainable business: Introducing a typology from business-as-usual to true business sustainability. Organization & Environment, 29(2), 156-174. DOI:
Harrison, C., Paul, S., & Burnard, K. (2016). Entrepreneurial leadership: A systematic literature review. International Review of Entrepreneurship, 14(2).
Howard, T. L., Ulferts, G. W., & Hannon, J. (2019). Leadership styles of small business owners: Linking theory to application. Journal of Leadership, Accountability and Ethics, 16(2), 47-55.
Hunitie, M. (2018). Impact of strategic leadership on strategic competitive advantage through strategic thinking and strategic planning: a bi-meditational research. Business: Theory and Practice, 19(0), 320-330. DOI:
Joiner, B. (2019). Leadership Agility for organizational agility. Journal of Creating Value, 5(2), 139-149. DOI:
Jones, T. M., Harrison, J. S., & Felps, W. (2018). How applying instrumental stakeholder theory can provide sustainable competitive advantage. Academy of Management Review, 43(3), 371-391. DOI:
Junni, P., Sarala, R. M., Tarba, S. Y., & Weber, Y. (2015). The Role of Strategic Agility in Acquisitions: Strategic Agility in Acquisitions. British Journal of Management, 26(4), 596-616. DOI:
Kabue, L. W., & Kilika, J. M. (2016). Firm resources, core competencies and sustainable competitive advantage: An integrative theoretical framework. Journal of management and strategy, 7(1), 98-108. DOI:
Kim, S., Kim, I., & Hyun, S. S. (2016). First-class in-flight services and advertising effectiveness: Antecedents of customer-centric innovativeness and brand loyalty in the United States (US) airline industry. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 33(1), 118-140. DOI:
Kurniawan, R. (2017). Effect of environmental performance on environmental disclosures of manufacturing, mining and plantation companies listed in Indonesia stock exchange. Arthatama, 1(1), 6-17.
Latilla, V. M. M., Urbinati, A., Cavallo, A., Franzò, S., & Ghezzi, A. (2021). Organizational re-design for business model innovation while exploiting digital technologies: A single case study of an energy company. International journal of innovation and technology management, 18(02), 2040002. DOI:
Leitch, C. M., & Volery, T. (2017). Entrepreneurial leadership: Insights and directions. International Small Business Journal: Researching Entrepreneurship, 35(2), 147-156. DOI:
Mahdi, O. R., Nassar, I. A., & Almsafir, M. K. (2019). Knowledge management processes and sustainable competitive advantage: An empirical examination in private universities. Journal of Business research, 94, 320-334. DOI:
Mao, H., Liu, S., Zhang, J., & Deng, Z. (2016). Information technology resource, knowledge management capability, and competitive advantage: The moderating role of resource commitment. International Journal of Information Management, 36(6), 1062-1074. DOI:
Muthuveloo, R., & Teoh, A. P. (2020). Optimisation of Organisational Performance via I-Top Strategic Agility Model. Journal of Entrepreneurship, Business and Economics, 8(2), 154-174.
Papadas, K.-K., Avlonitis, G. J., Carrigan, M., & Piha, L. (2019). The interplay of strategic and internal green marketing orientation on competitive advantage. Journal of Business Research, 104, 632-643. DOI:
Salman, R., Arshad, D., Bakar, L., & Shabbir, M. (2018). The effect of innovative cultural processes on performance of small and medium size enterprises. Management Science Letters, 8(10), 1039-1048.
Suhidayat, T., Affandi, A., & Sidharta, I. (2016). Service Quality on Customer Value; Perspective from Rural Banking Sectors in Bandung, Indonesia. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 6(12). DOI:
Tanwari, A. (2020). A study on assessing the relationship between green marketing and brand loyalty in manufacturing sector of Greece: a moderating role of green supply chain practices. Arthatama, 4(1), 44-55.
Warner, K. S. R., & Wäger, M. (2019). Building dynamic capabilities for digital transformation: An ongoing process of strategic renewal. Long Range Planning, 52(3), 326-349. DOI:
Widiyati, D., & Murwaningsari, E. (2021). Achieving green competitive advantage through organizational green culture, business analytics and collaborative competence: The mediating effect of eco-innovation. International Journal of Social and Management Studies, 2(4), 98-113.
Yadav, P. L., Han, S. H., & Kim, H. (2017). Sustaining Competitive Advantage Through Corporate Environmental Performance: Environmental Performance as a Competitive Advantage. Business Strategy and the Environment, 26(3), 345-357. DOI:
Copyright information
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
About this article
Publication Date
15 November 2023
Article Doi
eBook ISBN
978-1-80296-130-0
Publisher
European Publisher
Volume
131
Print ISBN (optional)
-
Edition Number
1st Edition
Pages
1-1281
Subjects
Technology advancement, humanities, management, sustainability, business
Cite this article as:
Rizki, L. T., Lisdiono, P., & Said, J. (2023). Entrepreneurial Leadership Capability on Sustained Competitive Advantage With Strategic Agility Mediation Factor. In J. Said, D. Daud, N. Erum, N. B. Zakaria, S. Zolkaflil, & N. Yahya (Eds.), Building a Sustainable Future: Fostering Synergy Between Technology, Business and Humanity, vol 131. European Proceedings of Social and Behavioural Sciences (pp. 604-618). European Publisher. https://doi.org/10.15405/epsbs.2023.11.52