Fatma Gulruh GURBUZ, Sukru Baris HATUNOGLU

8347

ASSESSMENT OF ORGANIZATIONAL AGILITY: ADAPTATION AND VALIDATION OF THE SCALE FOR APPLICATION IN TURKEY

ASSESSMENT OF ORGANIZATIONAL AGILITY: ADAPTATION AND VALIDATION OF THE SCALE FOR APPLICATION IN TURKEY

Purpose- Organizational agility is a critical dynamic capability necessary for organizations that compete in today’s rapidly changing business conditions. In the literature, there are multiple perspectives to draw the borders for an organization’s ability to be agile. Although Organizational Agility is a well-established concept in studies executed in U.S. and Europe, researches performed in Turkey still lack focus on agility dramatically. In order to fill this gap, this study is intended to adapt and validate the measurement scale of Lee, Sambamurthy, Lim and Wei (2015) to be used for companies operating in Turkey. Methodology- Lee et al. (2015) formed a 12-item scale to measure the components of organizational agility which are “proactiveness”, “radicalness”, “responsiveness” and “adaptiveness”. Items to measure these components are translated into Turkish and reviewed for clarity, comprehensibility and risk of ambiguity by the linguistic professionals and academicians in the field. Finally, the scale is tested on a sample of 320 employees in managerial positions of companies that are operating in Turkey. Findings- 12-item scale is tested through exploratory factor analysis to check for any differences in the items’ distribution between the components of the construct. Four factors are formed parallel to the original scale representing proactiveness, radicalness, responsiveness and adaptiveness. As a consequence of very close factor loadings under two different components, one item from the adaptiveness factor is removed. The reliability values of all factors were above the necessary thresholds in the literature. In order to confirm the results of the EFA, AMOS is used for the confirmatory factor analysis and the results showed a very high model fit. Subsequently, discriminant validity and convergent validity tests are executed showing satisfactory output with no errors. Conclusion- The results show that the scale of Lee et al. (2015) can be used to measure the organizational agility of companies in Turkey. For their future studies, researchers can execute these scales on managerial level employees (since organization-wide information is required) to assess the levels of four dimensions of organizational agility.
Keywords:

organizational agility, proactiveness, radicalness responsiveness, adaptiveness,

PDF

___

  • Akkaya, B., Kayalidere, U. A. K., & Tabak, A. (2019). Endüstriyel alanda üretim yapan firmaların örgütsel çevikliği ile firma yöneticilerinin sahip olduğu dinamik yetenekler arasındaki ilişki: manisa organize sanayi bölgesinde (mosb) faaliyet gösteren firmalar üzerine bir araştırma. Yeni Nesil Girişimcilik ve Ekonomi, 1(2), 19-54.
  • Aktaş, B. N., & Ülgen, B. (2021). Yenilikçi insan kaynakları yönetim uygulamalarının örgütsel çeviklik üzerindeki etkisi: Savunma sanayi işletmelerinde bir araştırma. Anadolu İktisat ve İşletme Dergisi, 5(1), 49-73.
  • Bakan, İ., Sezer, B., & Ceylan, K. A. R. A. (2017). Bilgi yönetiminin örgütsel çeviklik ve örgütsel atalet üzerindeki etkisi. Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 7(1), 117-138.
  • Basadur, M., Gelade, G., & Basadur, T. (2014). Creative problem-solving process styles, cognitive work demands, and organizational adaptability. The journal of applied behavioral science, 50(1), 80-115.
  • Basri, S., & Zorlu, K. (2020). Örgüt Kültürü Algisinin Örgütsel Çeviklik Üzerindeki Etkisinin İncelenmesi. Sosyal Ekonomik Araştırmalar Dergisi, 20(39), 147-164.
  • Cegarra-Navarro, J. G., Soto-Acosta, P., & Wensley, A. K. (2016). Structured knowledge processes and firm performance: The role of organizational agility. Journal of Business Research, 69(5), 1544-1549.
  • Çetinkaya, F. F., & Akkoca, Y. (2021). Stratejik Liderlik İle Örgütsel Çeviklik Arasindaki İlişkide Örgütsel İletişimin Araci Rolü. Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 8(1), 66-84.
  • Dove, R. (2005, May). Agile enterprise cornerstones: knowledge, values, and response ability. In IFIP International Working Conference on Business Agility and Information Technology Diffusion (pp. 313-330). Springer, Boston, MA.
  • Goldman, S.L., Nagel, R.N., and Preiss, K., 1995. Agile competitors and virtual organisations: strategies for enriching the customer. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
  • Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2019). Multivariate data analysis Cengage learning. Hampshire, United Kingdom.
  • Harraf, A., Wanasika, I., Tate, K., & Talbott, K. (2015). Organizational agility. Journal of Applied Business Research (JABR), 31(2), 675-686. Iacocca Institute (1991) 21st Century Manufacturing Enterprise Strategy, An Industry-led View. Iacocca Institute, 1.
  • İmamoğlu, S. Z., İnce, H., & Türkcan, H. (2021). Endüstri 4.0 Uygulamalarinin Örgütsel Çeviklik Üzerindeki Etkisi: Kavramsal Bir Çalişma. Atatürk Üniversitesi İktisadi Ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 35(1), 103-124.
  • Kharabe, A., Lyytinen, K., & Grover, V. (2013). Do organizational competencies influence how enterprise systems foster organizational agility?
  • Lee, O. K., Sambamurthy, V., Lim, K. H., & Wei, K. K. (2015). How does IT ambidexterity impact organizational agility?. Information Systems Research, 26(2), 398-417.
  • Lumpkin, G. T., & Dess, G. G. (1996). Clarifying the entrepreneurial orientation construct and linking it to performance. Academy of management Review, 21(1), 135-172.
  • Mathiyakalan, S., Ashrafi, N., Zhang, W., Waage, F., Kuilboer, J. P., & Heimann, D. (2005). Defining business agility: an exploratory study. In Proceedings of the 16th Information Resources Management Conference, (pp. 15-18). San Diego, CA.
  • Menor, L. J., Roth, A. V., & Mason, C. H. (2001). Agility in retail banking: a numerical taxonomy of strategic service groups. Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, 3(4), 273-292.
  • Miller, D., and Friesen, P.H. (1983), Strategy-Making and Environment: The Third Link," Strategic Management Journal, 4(3), 221-235. Ministry of Industry and Commerce, (2021). Ar-Ge merkezleri, https://www.sanayi.gov.tr/istatistikler/istatistiki-bilgiler/mi0203011502.
  • Mrugalska, B., & Ahmed, J. (2021). Organizational agility in industry 4.0: A systematic literature review. Sustainability, 13(15), 8272. Nafei, W. A. (2016). Organizational agility: The key to organizational success. International Journal of Business and Management, 11(5), 296- 309.
  • Najrani, M. (2016). The endless opportunity of organizational agility. Strategic Direction, 32(3), 37-38.
  • Niu, K. H., & Li, H. (2022). Knowledge Management and Organizational Adaptation Effectiveness: An Empirical Study. International Journal of Business Management and Commerce, 7(1), 10-26.
  • Overby, E., Bharadwaj, A., & Sambamurthy, V. (2005). A framework for enterprise agility and the enabling role of digital options. In IFIP International Working Conference on Business Agility and Information Technology Diffusion (pp. 295-312). Springer, Boston, MA.
  • Özdemir, S., & Akatay, A. (2020). İnsan Kaynaklari Yönetimi Uygulamalarinin Örgütsel Dayaniklilik Ve Örgütsel Çeviklik Üzerindeki Etkisi. Route Educational & Social Science Journal, 57, 167-196.
  • Ozeroglu, E., & Kocyigit, Y. (2020). Hastane İşletmelerinde Örgütsel Çeviklik: Vizyoner Liderliğin Rolü. Research Journal of Business and Management, 7(1), 13-22.
  • Podsakof PM, MacKenzie SB, Podsakof NP, (2016). Recommendations for creating better concept definitions in the organizational, behavioral, and social sciences. Org Res Methods 19(2), 159–203.
  • Rafi, N., Ahmed, A., Shafique, I. and Kalyar, M.N. (2021), “Knowledge management capabilities and organizational agility as liaisons of business performance”, South Asian Journal of Business Studies, In Press.
  • Ramanujam, V. and Venkatraman, N. (1987) Planning Systems Characteristics and Planning Effectiveness. Strategic Management Journal, 8, 453-468.
  • Rindova, V. P., & Kotha, S. (2001). Continuous “morphing”: Competing through dynamic capabilities, form, and function. Academy of management journal, 44(6), 1263-1280.
  • Sağır, M., & Oraç, E. (2020). Yapısal Bilgi Süreçleri, Yapısal Sermaye ve Örgütsel Çeviklik Arasındaki Etkileşim. Ekonomi İşletme ve Yönetim Dergisi, 4(1), 110-136.
  • Sambamurthy, V., Bharadwaj, A., & Grover, V. (2003). Shaping agility through digital options: Reconceptualizing the role of information technology in contemporary firms. MIS quarterly, 27(2), 237-263.
  • Sambamurthy, V., Wei, K. K., Lim, K., & Lee, D. (2007). IT-enabled organizational agility and firms' sustainable competitive advantage. ICIS 2007 proceedings, 91.
  • Sharifi, H., & Zhang, Z. (1999). A methodology for achieving agility in manufacturing organisations: An introduction. International Journal of Production Economics, 62(1-2), 7-22.
  • Subramaniam, M., & Youndt, M. A. (2005). The influence of intellectual capital on the types of innovative capabilities. Academy of Management journal, 48(3), 450-463.
  • Triaa, W., Gzara, L. and Verjus, H. (2016), Organizational agility key factors for dynamic business process management. IEEE 18th Conference on Business Informatics (CBI), pp. 64-73.
  • Wageeh, A. N. (2016). Organizational agility: The key to organizational success. International Journal of Business and Management, 11(5), 296-309.
  • Walter, A. T. (2021). Organizational agility: ill-defined and somewhat confusing? A systematic literature review and conceptualization. Management Review Quarterly, 71(2), 343-391.
  • Watkins, M. W. (2018). Exploratory factor analysis: A guide to best practice. Journal of Black Psychology, 44(3), 219-246
  • Yusuf, Y., Sarhadi, M. and Gunasekaran, A. (1999) Agile Manufacturing: The Drivers, Concepts and Attributes. International Journal of Production Economics, 62, 33-43.
  • Zahra, S. A., & Covin, J. G. (1995). Contextual influences on the corporate entrepreneurship-performance relationship: A longitudinal analysis. Journal of business venturing, 10(1), 43-58.
  • Rima Zitkiene & Mindaugas Deksnys, (2018). Organizational Agility Conceptual Model. Montenegrin Journal of Economics, Economic Laboratory for Transition Research (ELIT), 14(2), 115-129
Journal of Management Marketing and Logistics-Cover
  • Yayın Aralığı: Yılda 4 Sayı
  • Başlangıç: 2014
  • Yayıncı: PressAcademia
Arşiv
Sayıdaki Diğer Makaleler

WHAT CHANGED IN THE PROBLEMS AND SOLUTIONS OF ENTERPRISES IN THE PRE-COVID-19 / COVID-19 PERIOD? EVALUATION OF THE SURVEY RESULTS OF SWORN-IN CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS OF ISTANBUL

Nazim EKREN, Elcin Aykac ALP, Mefule Findikci ERDOGAN, Kubra Hatice BILDIK

ASSESSMENT OF ORGANIZATIONAL AGILITY: ADAPTATION AND VALIDATION OF THE SCALE FOR APPLICATION IN TURKEY

Fatma Gulruh GURBUZ, Sukru Baris HATUNOGLU

TURKEY'S ROLE IN SILK ROAD ROUTES: ENERGY SUPPLY SECURITY OF EUROPEAN UNION AFTER UKRAINE – RUSSIAN WAR

Yavuz TORAMAN

A RESEARCH ON THE ROLE OF LEADER MEMBER EXCHANGE IN THE RELATIONSHIP OF EMPLOYEE VOICE AND INNOVATIVE WORK BEHAVIOR

Resat SEKERDIL, Evrim GUNES