Skip to main content
Have a personal or library account? Click to login
The Effect of Information Communication Technology Readiness and Knowledge Management on Entrepreneurial Strategic Orientation and its Implications on Firm Performance Cover

The Effect of Information Communication Technology Readiness and Knowledge Management on Entrepreneurial Strategic Orientation and its Implications on Firm Performance

Marketing of Scientific and Research Organizations
Volume 47 (2023): Issue 1 (March 2023)
By:  and    
Open Access
|Apr 2023
Figures & tables

Figures & Tables

Table 1.

Barriers to social media use

BARRIERS TO THE USE OF SOCIAL MEDIASMEs
ABCD
Lack of knowledgeXXX
Lack of trainingXXX
Little or any budget for social networksXXXX
Negative perception (it’s waste of time)XX

1 Source: Sosa et al. (2015).

Table 2.

Profile of MSMEs in Mexico

PROFILESSMEs
ABCD
Size
No. of Employees551535
Type of business
IncorporatedYesNoYesYes
Industry
Tourism and gastronomyTravel agencyRestaurantTour operatorHotel
Geographical MarketWorldwideState of Colima MexicoWorldwideWorldwide
Budget
MarketingInformalInformalInformalInformal
Social NetworksInformalInformalInformalInformal

1 Source: Sosa et al. (2015).

Table 3.

Limitations of MSMEs in the UK and Commonwealth countries in increasing entrepreneurial strategic orientation and brand firm performance

FactorChapman, James, Moore, Szczygiel Thompson (2000)Elsammani, Scown & Hackney (2000)Jqcobs Dowsland (2000)Chapel & Feindt (1999)Lewis & Cockrill (2002)Moussi & Davcy (2000)Nath, Akmanakigil, Hjelm (2000)Smith & Webster (2000)Strader & Shaw (2000)Van Akkcrcn & Cavaye (1999)
Lack of financial resources & high costXXXXX
Insufficient Time & amount of work required to maintain EcommerceXXXX
Insufficient Education/Information into benefits & Uncertainty on how to implementXXX
Lack of IT
Expertise/Skills/Training/PersonnelXXXXX
Feras & concerns over SecurityXXXX
CompetitionX
Applicability of Ebusiness to enterpriseX
Legal IssuesX
Cultural Barriers & Infrastructure issuesXX
Low use by customers & suppliers
Hierarchical Trasnaction GovernanceX
Lack of Management
Reluctance to use new systems by employeesX
Lack of Priority

1 Source: Compiled from Sosa et al. (2015), Kauffman (2017), and Jayanagara (2022).

Table 4.

Data Development of micro, small, medium enterprises (MSMEs) and large enterprises (UB) for 2012–2013

PERKEMBANGAN DATA USAHA MIKRO, KECIL, MENENGAH (UMKM) DAN USAHA BESAR (UB) TAHUN 2012–2013
NOINDIKATORSATUANTAHUN 2012TAHUN 2013PERKEMBANGAN TAHUN 2012-2013
JUMLAHPANGSA (%)JUMLAHPANGSA (%)JUMLAHPANGSA (%)
12367891011
1UNIT USAHA (A»B)(Unit)56.539.56057.900.7871.361.2272,41
A. Usaha Mikro, Kecil dan Menengah (UMKM)(Unit)56.534.59299,9957.895.72199,991.361.1292.41
– Usaha Mikro (UMi)(Unit)55.856.17698,7957.189.39398,771.333.2172.39
– Usaha Kecil (UK)(Unit)629.4181,11654.2221,1324.8033,94
– Usaha Menengah(UM)(Unit)48.9970,0952.1060,093.1106.35
B. Usaha Besar (UB)(Unit)4.9680,015.0660,01981.97
2TENAGA KERJA (A*B)(Orang)110.808.154117.681.2446.873.0906,20
A. Usaha Mikro, Kecil dan Menengah (UMKM)(Orang)107.657.50997,16114.144.08296,996.486.5736,03
– Usaha Mikro (UMi)(Orang)99.859.51790,12104.624.46688,904.764.9494,77
– Usaha Kecil (UK)(Orang)4.535.9704,095.570.2314,731.034.26222,80
– Usaha Menengah(UM)(Orang)3.262.0232,943.949.3853,36687.36321,07
B. Usaha Besar (UB)(Orang)3.150.6452,843.537.1623,01386.51712,27
3PDB ATAS DASAR HARGA BERLAKU (A+B)(Rp. MiIyar)8.241.864,39.014.951,2773.086,99,38
A. Usaha Mikro, Kecil dan Menengah (UMKM)(Rp. Milyar)4.869.568,159,085.440.007,960,34570.439,811,71
– Usaha Mikro (UMi)(Rp. Milyar)2.951.120,635,813.326.564,836,90375.444,212,72
– Usaha Kecil (UK)(Rp. Milyar)798.122,29,68876.385.39,7278.263,19,81
– Usaha Menengah(UM)(Rp. Milyar)1.120.325,313,591.237.057,813,72116.732,510,42
B. Usaha Besar (UB)(Rp. Milyar)3.372.296,140,923.574.943,339,66202.647,26,01
4PDB ATAS DASAR HARGA KONSTAN 2000 (A*B)(Rp. Milyar)2.525.120,42.670.314,8145.194,45,75
A. Usaha Mikro, Kecil dan Menengah (UMKM)(Rp. Milyar)1.451.460,257,481.536.918,857,5685.458,55,89
– Usaha Mikro (UMi)(Rp. Milyar)790.825,631,32807.804,5030,2516.978,92,15
– Usaha Kecil (UK)(Rp. Milyar)294.260,711,65342.579,1912,8348.318,516,42
– Usaha Menengah(UM)(Rp. Milyar)366.373,914,51386.535,0714,4820.161,15,50
B. Usaha Besar (UB)(Rp. Milyar)1.073.660.142,521.133.396,0542,4459.735,95,56
5TOTAL EKSPOR NON MIGAS (A+B)(Rp. Milyar)1.185.391,01.161.327,5(24.063,4)(2,03)
A. Usaha Mikro, Kecil dan Menengah (UMKM)(Rp. Milyar)166.626,514,06182.112,715,6815.486,39,29
– Usaha Mikro (UMi)(Rp. Milyar)15.235,21,2915.989,51,38754,34,95
– Usaha Kecil (UK)(Rp. Milyar)32.508,82,7432.051,82,76(457,0)(141)
– Usaha Menengah(UM)(Rp. Milyar)118.882,410,03134.071,411,5415.189,012,78
B. Usaha Besar (UB)(Rp. Milyar)1.018.764,585,94979.214,884,32(39.549,7)(3,88)
6INVESTASI ATAS DASAR HARGA BERLAKU (A+B)(Rp. Milyar)2.283.872,92.609.778,8325.905,814,27
A. Usaha Mikro, Kecil dan Menengah (UMKM)(Rp. Milyar)1.250.801,154,771.655.233,563,42404.432,532,33
– Usaha Mikro (UMi)(Rp. Milyar)175.529,17,69185.717,27,1210.188,15,80
– Usaha Kecil (UK)(Rp. Milyar)452.790,019,83620.216,023,77167.426,036,98
– Usaha Menengah(UM)(Rp. Milyar)622.482,027,26849.300,332,54226.818,336,44
B. Usaha Besar (UB)(Rp. Milyar)1.033.071,945,23954.545,236,58(78.526,6)(7,60)
7INVESTASI ATAS DASAR HARGA KONSTAN 2000 (A+B)(Rp. Milyar)583.426,4607.879,324.452,94,19
A. Usaha Mikro, Kecil dan Menengah (UMKM)(Rp. Milyar)300.175,751,45341.341,656,1541.165,913,71
– Usaha Mikro (UMi)(Rp. Milyar)44.711,37,6642.053,36,92(2.658,0)(5,94)
– Usaha Kecil (UK)(Rp. Milyar)104.726,417,95111.652,818,376.926,46,61
– Usaha Menengah(UM)(Rp. Milyar)150.738,025,84187.635,530,8736.897,524,48
B. Usaha Besar (UB)(Rp. Milyar)283.250,748,55266.537,743,85(16.713,0)(5,90)

1 Source: http://www.depkop.go.id

Figure 1.

Conceptual framework

Table 5.

Gender

GenderFrequencyPercentage
Male287    73.2
Female105    26.8
Total392100

1 Source: SPSS 24 output appendix.

Table 6.

Age

AgeFrequencyPercentage
< 35 years old10426.5
35–45 years old17043.4
> 45 years old11830.1
Total392100      

1 Source: SPSS 24 output appendix.

Table 7.

Formal education

Formal educationFrequencyPercentage
Elementary-senior high school  68    17.3
Bachelor268    68.4
Master  53    13.5
Doctoral    3      0.8
Total392100

1 Source: SPSS 24 output appendix.

Table 8.

Length of business

Length of businessFrequencyPercentage
< 1 year  56    14.3
1–5 year(s)155    39.5
> 5 years181    46.2
Total392100

1 Source: SPSS 24 output appendix.

Table 9.

Turnover per year

Turnover per yearFrequencyPercentage
< 100 IDR million  54    13.8
100 — IDR 150 million185    47.2
> IDR 150 million153    39.0
Total392100

1 Source: SPSS 24 output appendix.

Table 10.

Research variable reliability test results

NoVariableNilai Cronbach’s alphaDecision
1ICT readiness0.924Reliable
2Knowledge management0.932Reliable
3Entrepreneurial strategic orientation0.938Reliable
4Firm performance0.939Reliable

1 Source: SPSS 24 output appendix. Reliability Test.

Figure 2.

Structural equation modeling (Standardised Solutions)

Source: Processing Results with LISREL 8.80.

Figure 3.

Structural equation modeling (T values)

Source: Processing results with LISREL 8.80.

Table 11.

Model fit index

GOF indicatorExpected sizeEstimated resultsConclusion
Absolute fit size
RMSEARMSEA < 0,080,073Good fit
Incremental fit size
NFINFI > 0.990,91Good fit
NNFINNFI > 0,900,92Good fit
CFICFI > 0,900,92Good fit
IFIIFI > 0,900,92Good fit
RFIRFI > 0,900,91Good fit
GFIGFI > 0,900,92Good fit
AGFIAGFI > 0,900,90Good fit
RMSEA: The Root Mean Square Error Approximation
NFI: Normed-Fit Index
NNFI: Non Normed-Fit Index
CFI: Comparative Fit Index
IFI: Incremental Fit Indices
RFI: Relative Fit Index
GFI: Goodness of Fit Index
AGFI: Adjust Goodness of Fit Index

1 Source: Processing results with LISREL 8.80.

Figure 4.

Structural Models (Estimates)

Source: Processing results with LISREL 8.80.

Table 12.

Direct and indirect results of SEM

Source: Processing results with LISREL 8.80.

Table 13.

Structural equation modeling coefficient evaluation

PathEstimatedt-valueConclusion
ICT readiness has a positive effect and significantly on entrepreneurial strategic orientation0.488.29Accepted
Knowledge management has a positive effect and significantly on entrepreneurial strategic orientation0.254.79Accepted
ICT readiness and knowledge management have a positive effect and significantly on entrepreneurial strategic orientationFvalue
212.651		R Square
0.34		Accepted
ICT readiness has a positive effect and significantly on firm performance0.215.14Accepted
Knowledge management has a positive and significant effect on firm performance0.174.87Accepted
Entrepreneurial Strategic Orientation has a positive effect and significantly on firm performance0.6913.75Accepted
ICT readiness, knowledge management and entrepreneurial strategic orientation simultaneously have a positive and significant effect on firm performanceFvalue
235.529		R Square
0.80		Accepted

1 Source: Processing results with LISREL 8.80.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/minib-2023-0005 | Journal eISSN: 2353-8414 | Journal ISSN: 2353-8503
Journal RSS Feed
Language: English, Polish
Page range: 71 - 104
Submitted on: Jan 3, 2023
Accepted on: Mar 16, 2023
Published on: Apr 11, 2023
Published by: ŁUKASIEWICZ RESEARCH NETWORK – INSTITUTE OF AVIATION
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Keywords:
SMEs,
firm performance,
entrepreneurial strategic orientation,
knowledge management,
information communication technology readiness
JEL:
O3
Related subjects:
Business and economics,
Business management,
Marketing, sales, customer relations,
Management, organization, corporate governance,
Business development, change management, cooperation,
Key competences in scholarly research

© 2023 Oscar Jayanagara, Kelly Azaryas Chen, published by ŁUKASIEWICZ RESEARCH NETWORK – INSTITUTE OF AVIATION
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.

Volume 47 (2023): Issue 1 (March 2023)
Previous article
Next article