Received: January 17, 2024
Accepted: Aprilr 12, 2024

 

Abstract

Purpose: To empirically analyze the relationship between strategic innovation orientation and organizational performance, which is mediated by intellectual capital.
Design/methodology: This study followed a cross-sectional design with an exploratory scope, using quantitative techniques such as Baron and Kenny’s product of coefficients approach (1986) to analyze the mediating effect. The sample consisted of 1,765 companies in the manufacturing sector in Colombia, and data about this manufacturing industry from 2019 to 2020 were obtained from the Survey of Technological Development and Innovation (EDIT in Spanish).
Findings: The study showed the existence of a statistically significant relationship between strategic innovation orientation and organizational performance. It also demonstrated that intellectual capital plays a mediating role in this relationship.
Conclusions: It is concluded that intellectual capital is a mechanism by which strategic innovation-oriented initiatives translate into better organizational results.
Originality: Observable indicators were used here to operationalize the constructs under analysis, which provided empirical evidence that aspects related to staff knowledge and skills, improving organizational processes, and effective relationships with stakeholders increase the direct effect of strategic innovation orientation on organizational performance. Thus, intellectual capital represents a new mediating mechanism that has been rarely analyzed in previous literature on strategic innovation orientation and its impact on organizational performance.

1. INTRODUCTION

---

Strategic Innovation Orientation (SIO) refers to an organization’s capacity to develop and implement innovation-focused strategies. It encourages the adoption of a proactive and creative approach to enhance efficiency and productivity while participating effectively in a competitive market, thus transforming gaps into opportunities for business growth (Hernández-Betancur et al., 2022; Serafim & Veríssimo, 2021; Chatzopoulou et al., 2022; Kornelius et al., 2021). In recent years, SIO has gained prominence in both academic and practical contexts because it enables companies to adapt to the demands and needs of their environment, fostering competitive advantages that lead to improved organizational performance (Ganesh & Haslinda, 2023; Nugroho et al., 2022). In fact, recent studies confirm the direct impact of SIO on Organizational Performance (OP) by facilitating adaptation to change, improving efficiency and effectiveness, increasing added value for customers, and transforming human talent (Chatzopoulou et al., 2022; Kornelius et al., 2021; Dinu et al., 2023).

Literature in the field has provided theoretical and empirical evidence supporting the relationship between SIO and OP. It shows how organizations can convert internal weaknesses and external market threats into strengths and opportunities leading to organizational improvement and growth (Choi et al., 2021; Chatzopoulou et al., 2022; Schweiger et al., 2019). Additionally, it has allowed companies to evaluate and compare their performance, enabling the rethinking of objectives and strategies (Ayinaddis, 2023; Nürk, 2019). In particular, research has primarily focused on examining the direct relationship between SIO and OP, asserting that SIO enhances OP by fostering competitive advantages and reducing setbacks caused by a lack of environmental knowledge (Chatzopoulou et al., 2022; Nürk, 2019; Chmielewska et al., 2022). Moreover, some studies have identified mediating mechanisms in this relationship, such as: (i) organizational learning, which allows organizations to incorporate and apply new knowledge, yielding positive effects on their achievements and performance (Mu & Di Benedetto, 2011); (ii) organizational culture, which enables companies to effectively adapt to and respond to market demands through dynamic organizational values (Grawe et al., 2009; Hakala, 2011), and (iii) strategic change management, which helps organizations obtain competitive advantages by enabling swift and efficient responses to changing environmental demands, thereby closing existing gaps (Setiadji & Ahmadi, 2020).

Despite significant advances in the literature, today’s knowledge- and innovation-based society places importance on intangible resources when implementing strategies that positively impact organizational outcomes. Therefore, more empirical evidence is needed to understand how employees’ skills and knowledge, organizational structure, and relationships with stakeholders can influence the relationship between SIO and OP. Intellectual Capital (IC), for instance, is an intangible resource (Nawaz & Haniffa, 2017) that encompasses the knowledge, skills, experience, information, and relationships individuals hold within an organization (Dang & Wang, 2022; Gómez-Valenzuela, 2022; Nazir et al., 2021). IC serves as a source of competitive differentiation that drives innovation and adaptation to change, improving efficiency and productivity (Ekaningrum, 2021; Handoyo et al., 2023; Hussein et al., 2023). It also provides a solid foundation for managing a company’s intangible assets and positioning it in the market (Rehman et al., 2023; Bansal et al., 2023). Furthermore, empirical evidence supports the importance of IC dimensions in enhancing OP. When employees’ knowledge, skills, and attitudes are strengthened, organizational processes improve, and relationships with stakeholders are solidified, contributing to better OP (Ekaningrum, 2021; Agostini et al., 2017; Dang & Wang, 2022). This suggests that IC may be a mechanism that enhances the relationship between SIO and OP.

In light of the above, the aim of this study is to empirically examine the relationship between SIO and OP through the mediation of IC. To that end, a cross-sectional and exploratory design was used, employing Baron and Kenny’s (1986) product of coefficients method to analyze such mediating effect. This study makes two key contributions. First, it provides empirical evidence on how SIO directly impacts OP and demonstrates the mediating role of IC in this relationship. Second, the findings offer guidance for organizational managers in decision-making by emphasizing the importance of effectively allocating resources to enhance employees’ skills, strengthen relationships with stakeholders, and consolidate organizational structure for improved performance.

This paper is divided into six sections, including the introduction. Section 2 presents the theoretical framework of the research. Section 3 outlines the methodology. Section 4 presents the results. Section 5 discusses the results. Finally, Section 6 details the main conclusions derived from the research.

2. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

---

Strategic Innovation Orientation (SIO)

SIO is one of the approaches of organizational strategic orientation, which focuses on introducing and enhancing goods and services, as well as optimizing production and organizational processes to gain competitive advantages (Chou & Yang, 2011; Denicolai et al., 2018; Dogan, 2017; Chatzopoulou et al., 2022; Hakala, 2011; Gatignon & Xuereb, 2006; Kumar et al., 2012; Naranjo-Valencia et al., 2011; Yousaf et al., 2020; Mutlu & Sürer, 2016; Adams et al., 2019). Organizations that adopt this approach implement technology surveillance processes, allowing them to leverage practical knowledge to produce new technical solutions. This helps them meet customers’ needs and requirements through new and improved products and services, fostering loyalty and attracting new customers (Do Hyung & Dedahanov, 2014; Yousaf et al., 2020; Mutlu & Sürer, 2016; Adams et al., 2019; Serafim & Veríssimo, 2021; Saqib et al., 2017; Lee et al., 2015; Hortinha et al., 2011; Kocak et al., 2017).

Intellectual Capital (IC)

IC is an intangible asset based on knowledge that creates value within organizations (Roos et al., 2001; Bontis, 1998; Umanto et al., 2018; Dang & Wang, 2022; Lo et al., 2020; Quintero-Quintero et al., 2021; Gómez-Bayona et al., 2020). It comprises a set of productive resources that boost a company’s capabilities and competencies, enabling it to stand out within the industry and increase customer loyalty and performance (Morales Clark et al., 2020; Ibarra-Cisneros et al., 2020; Pedraza Melo & de la Gala Velásquez, 2022). Thus, the comparative advantages derived from IC are difficult to replicate, leading to a rise in intrinsic value for the company (Morales Clark et al., 2020; García Garnica & Taboada Ibarra, 2012).

According to the literature, IC includes three main components: (i) human capital, which involves employees’ knowledge, skills, training, and application of this knowledge to benefit the organization; (ii) structural capital, which encompasses the organizational structure, processes, routines, and techniques that influence efficiency and effectiveness; and (iii) relational capital, which considers the quality and quantity of relationships with customers, partners, suppliers, the financial sector, allies, and other stakeholders (Zhang et al., 2019; Gómez-Valenzuela, 2022; Roos et al., 2001; Bontis, 1998; Nazir et al., 2021). Moreover, recent studies have proposed that IC can be operationalized through two dimensions: (i) internal IC, which includes aspects of human and structural capital developed internally and aligned with the company’s strategic orientation, and (ii) external IC, which pertains to the organization’s relationships with stakeholders, including suppliers, customers, and a country’s science and technology system, all of which are related to strategy implementation (Restrepo-Ramírez, 2023).

Organizational Performance (OP)

OP refers to achieving strategic objectives to create value for stakeholders (Masa’deh et al., 2018; Chmielewska et al., 2022; Princy & Rebeka, 2019). Consequently, organizations focus their strategic actions on understanding, analyzing, and managing factors that positively impact their performance (Masa’deh et al., 2018; Ekaningrum, 2021). OP can be measured using different approaches, both financial and non-financial (Ekaningrum, 2021; Gunasekaran et al., 2015). Financial metrics include Return On Investment (ROI), profitability, return on sales, and return on invested capital (Mcgivern & Tvorik, 1998; Ekaningrum, 2021). Other indicators include Earnings Before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation, and Amortization (EBITDA) (Maxim, 2023) and Economic Value Added (EVA) (Tudose et al., 2022; Nagarajan, 2015). Non-financial measures encompass effective, efficient, and innovative performance (Rojas et al., 2018; Ekaningrum, 2021). By measuring performance, organizations can validate their competitive advantages and compare themselves with their environment, enabling them to reassess their strategy (Gehrisch & Süß, 2023; Odiri & Ideh, 2021).

Relationship between strategic innovation orientation and organizational performance

Organizations that adopt an SIO encourage employees to explore promising concepts for implementing new ideas, products, or processes, which makes it possible to achieve innovative impacts and contribute to long-term success (Deutscher et al., 2016). As a result, companies can increase productivity, thus fostering the creation of innovative goods and services, which in turn translates into improved OP (Pertuz & Pérez, 2020; Demuner Flores, 2021). SIO guides organizations to actively adopt new technologies for developing products, services, and processes, potentially enhancing their ability to thrive in competitive environments (Grinstein, 2008; Song & Jing, 2017; Walker et al., 2015).

To achieve superior performance, organizations often embrace an SIO to gain a competitive advantage and reduce the performance gap caused by environmental uncertainty (Azar & Ciabuschi, 2017). Therefore, it is possible to assert that SIO has a significant and positive impact on performance (Azar & Ciabuschi, 2017; Magnier-Watanabe & Benton, 2017; Walker et al., 2015). In fact, previous studies have shown a positive relationship between SIO and OP (Schweiger et al., 2019; Magnier-Watanabe & Benton, 2017; Walker et al., 2015; Suryantini et al., 2023). Nonetheless, although most of these studies demonstrate a strong conceptual and empirical association between the two (Schweiger et al., 2019; Demuner Flores, 2021; Ayinaddis, 2023), others have found no clear positive relationship, suggesting that SIO does not naturally result in improved OP (Mu et al., 2017; Chatzopoulou et al., 2022; Kornelius et al., 2021).

Furthermore, organizational leaders and scholars posit that innovative outcomes are beneficial for organizations, which is supported by empirical research showing that innovation strategies and activities positively influence performance (Magnier-Watanabe & Benton, 2017; Walker et al., 2015; Dinu et al., 2023). Given these considerations, the following hypothesis is proposed:

H₁: Strategic innovation orientation positively influences organizational performance.

Relationship between strategic innovation orientation and intellectual capital

The relationship between SIO and IC has not been widely studied in the literature. Most existing research has focused on specific components of SIO, such as technological innovation, process optimization, and product innovation (Bernal González et al., 2020). Hence, the need for a more comprehensive examination of the SIO–IC relationship by considering SIO as a whole. Despite limited research on this relationship, some studies have shown that the use of both tacit and explicit knowledge in SIO has a positive impact on IC (Magnier-Watanabe & Benton, 2017; Giménez, 2021). Additionally, the learning process involved in developing and designing products and services is essential for the activities stemming from SIO and IC (Lin & Chen, 2016; Coad et al., 2016). Furthermore, SIO allows companies to respond quickly and effectively to market demands by optimizing internal resources such as relationships with stakeholders, organizational structure, and employees’ knowledge (Magnier-Watanabe & Benton, 2017; Dang & Wang, 2022).

In short, organizations should aim to develop a balanced portfolio of technological and organizational innovations to navigate changing environments and uncertainties and to strengthen knowledge, organizational structure, and relationships with stakeholders (Azar & Ciabuschi, 2017; Dang & Wang, 2022; Córdoba-Vega & Naranjo-Valencia, 2017; Thien & Hung, 2023). Based on this, the following hypothesis is put forward:

H₂: Strategic innovation orientation positively influences intellectual capital.

Relationship between intellectual capital and organizational performance

Previous research has provided empirical evidence of a positive relationship between IC and OP (Galeitzke et al., 2017; Masood et al., 2023). However, most studies have focused on a specific dimension of IC, i.e., human capital (Díez et al., 2010; Nguyen, 2020; Albertini & Berger-Remy, 2019), structural capital (Lin & Chen, 2016; Verbano & Crema, 2016; Ghlichlee & Goodarzi, 2023), or relational capital (Agostini & Nosella, 2017; Bontis, 1998; Edvinsson & Malone, 1998). This calls for a comprehensive assessment of the impact of IC on OP (Agostini et al., 2017). Also, IC has been studied as a mediating (Agostini et al., 2017; Magnier-Watanabe & Benton, 2017; Javed et al., 2023) or moderating factor (Adams et al., 2019; Schweiger et al., 2019; Agostini et al., 2017) in the relationship between OP and constructs such as dynamism, hostility, tacit and explicit knowledge, and technological innovation (Magnier-Watanabe & Benton, 2017; Schweiger et al., 2019; Agostini et al., 2017; Nguyen, 2020).

By directing resources towards enhancing employees’ skills and knowledge—both individually and collectively—organizations can boost productivity (Ekaningrum, 2021; Agostini et al., 2017). Companies should also strengthen relationships with internal and external stakeholders, including employees, suppliers, and customers, to bridge communication gaps and gain a competitive edge in the market (Inkinen, 2015; Nguyen, 2020; Hussein et al., 2023; Ekaningrum, 2021). Additionally, it is important for companies to identify and manage their key production processes to differentiate themselves in the market and enhance productivity (Khan et al., 2019; Ibarra-Cisneros & Hernández-Perlines, 2019; Handoyo et al., 2023). Given this, the following hypothesis is proposed:

H₃: Intellectual capital positively influences organizational performance.

3. METHODOLOGY

---

Sample and data collection

Data for this study were sourced from the most recent version of Colombia’s Survey on Development and Technological Innovation in the Manufacturing Industry (EDIT for its acronym in Spanish) for the 2019–2020 period. This survey was conducted by the National Administrative Department of Statistics (DANE, 2021), covering a population of 7,769 organizations. The analysis focused on companies classified by DANE into the “strict” or “broad” categories, representing companies that achieved innovative results during the study period in both domestic and international markets. Hence, the sample comprised 1,765 organizations falling under these two categories.

Variables and measurements

Indicators from the EDIT associated with each of the constructs under study were identified following Restrepo-Ramírez’s (2023) approach. This author developed a conceptual model using observable indicators from the EDIT linked to the constructs of SIO, IC, and OP and their respective dimensions. His approach comprises three main steps: (i) conducting a literature review to understand the theoretical content of the constructs; (ii) identifying possible indicators from the EDIT that reasonably represent the constructs under study; and (iii) validating content with experts.

Considering this, the measurement scales have already been validated in prior studies, including Restrepo-Ramírez’s work (2023), using the Kuder–Richardson test (Durán-Pérez & Lara-Abad, 2021) to assess reliability. This enabled their adoption in the present study.

Table 1 shows the number of indicators for each construct and dimension. Particularly, it outlines the distribution of the 88 indicators from the EDIT associated with each construct under study. Additionally, two example indicators are provided for each construct or dimension.

Procedure

Descriptive statistics: Since dichotomous variables (1: presence of the attribute; 0: absence of the attribute) were employed, the frequency of each value (1 and 0) was counted for every variable, and the relative frequency was calculated based on the total to determine the importance of each variable in the behavior of the construct.

Mediation model: The proposed mediation model was tested using Baron and Kenny’s product of coefficients method (1986), which involves the following three sequential steps to verify the relationships between the dependent variable (X), the independent variable (Y), and the mediator (M) (Hayes, 2009; Zhao et al., 2010; Pardo & Román, 2013):

1) Estimating the regression coefficient for the direct relationship between the dependent and independent variables: This first step involves confirming that 𝑋 and 𝑌 are related—i.e., the regression coefficient should be different from zero (Hayes, 2009; Zhao et al., 2010; Pardo & Román, 2013)—following the expected direction, as indicated in Equation 1.

Here, 𝑖₁ is the intercept, 𝑐 is the regression coefficient relating 𝑋 to 𝑌, and 𝑒₁ are the random errors (i.e., the portion of 𝑌 not explained by 𝑋). These errors are assumed to be normally distributed with constant variance and independent from one another.

2) Determining whether the independent variable has a significant effect on the mediating variable: This second step involves checking if the coefficient estimated by the linear regression between 𝑋 and 𝑀 (represented by 𝑎) is different from zero (Hayes, 2009; Zhao et al., 2010; Pardo & Román, 2013), as shown in Equation 2.

3) Testing the relationship between the variable of interest and the mediator to estimate the total direct and indirect effects of the model: This third step involves examining whether 𝑀 and 𝑌 are related after controlling for the effect of 𝑋. This means that coefficient 𝑏 should be different from zero (Hayes, 2009; Zhao et al., 2010; Pardo & Román, 2013). This condition is verified by performing a linear regression analysis of 𝑌 explained by 𝑋 and 𝑀, as indicated in Equation 3.

As a result, the relationship between 𝑋 and 𝑌 should significantly decrease when controlling for the effect of 𝑀. In other words, the estimated coefficient 𝑐 from Equation 1 should decrease when testing the entire mediation model (Equation 3) (Hayes, 2009; Zhao et al., 2010; Pardo & Román, 2013).

Moreover, Baron and Kenny’s (1986) method recommends using the Sobel test (Preacher & Leonardelli, 2001) to estimate the indirect effect of the mediation model between 𝑎 and 𝑏, as shown in Equation 4. Here, 𝑎 is the estimated effect between 𝑋 and 𝑀 from Equation 2, 𝑏 is the regression coefficient between 𝑀 and 𝑌 from Equation 3, and 𝑠_𝑎 and 𝑠_𝑏 are their respective standard deviations (Zhao et al., 2010).

Where:

𝑧: statistical significance value

𝑎: estimated effect of SIO on IC

𝑏: estimated effect of IC on OP

𝑠_𝑎 and 𝑠_𝑏: standard errors of the respective estimated effects

The entire procedure was conducted using the mediation package in RStudio, performing bootstrapping with 500 estimates. This involves simulating the model multiple times with randomly sampled subsets from the dataset to ensure results within confidence intervals. Bootstrapping allows for the estimation of the impact of one variable on another, as well as its level of significance. The level of significance should be less than 0.05 to reject the null hypothesis that the estimated parameters are equal to zero, concluding that there is a significant relationship between the variables under analysis (Rivas-Ruiz et al., 2013).

4. RESULTS

---

Descriptive statistics

Table 2 presents the descriptive statistics of the strategic innovation orientation construct.

As observed, a vast majority (84 ­%) of manufacturing companies in Colombia invested in scientific and technological activities, demonstrating an interest in focusing their strategy on innovation. Furthermore, a significant percentage of companies directed their strategy towards internal innovation: 47­ % focused on improving production, distribution, and logistics methods; 25 ­% developed or enhanced organizational methods; and 33­ % concentrated on improving and introducing new marketing techniques. In addition, 34­ % and 31­% of the companies developed new or significantly improved services or goods for the company, respectively. Moreover, there was limited intention to pursue outward innovation, as evidenced by the higher focus on creating new goods on a national scale (31 ­%) rather than in the international market (0.4 ­%).

Table 3 reports the descriptive statistics of the internal intellectual capital construct. Particularly, it provides information about the internal IC of manufacturing companies, including the internal personnel assigned to the different areas (based on their education and training) who participate in scientific, technological, and innovation activities, as well as the internal sources of innovative ideas.

As can be seen, 74 ­% of the companies allocated personnel for scientific, technological, and innovation activities. Additionally, in 75 % of the companies, personnel with higher education participated in these activities. Regarding sources of innovative ideas, all companies primarily resorted to their internal departments.

Table 4 shows the descriptive statistics of the external intellectual capital construct. Specifically, it outlines the components of external IC, including external personnel by area dedicated to scientific, technological, and innovation activities, as well as external sources of innovative ideas and the relationships with actors in the science, technology, and innovation system.

As observed, 28­% of the companies had researchers involved in scientific, technological, and innovation activities. Additionally, approximately 1­% of the companies under analysis had personnel with doctoral qualifications dedicated to these activities. Regarding the most significant external sources of innovative ideas, 55­% of the companies relied on the internet, 25­% used fairs and exhibitions, and 32­% resorted to standards and technical regulations. The most common actors with whom the companies cooperated were customers (15­%), universities (10­%), and consultants (10­%).

Table 5 presents the descriptive statistics of the organizational performance construct. It highlights aspects of organizational performance such as efficiency, effectiveness, and innovative performance.

Regarding efficiency, 74­ % of the companies reported an increase in productivity, and 52­ % reduced labor costs thanks to scientific, technological, and innovation activities. As for effectiveness, 76 ­% of companies reported improvements in the quality of goods and services, while 82 ­% maintained their participation in the market. Innovative performance, for its part, showed poor results, as, for example, only 6­ % of the companies registered industrial designs.

Mediation model

Table 6 shows the results of the mediation model.

Based on the significance value of the direct relationship (p < 0.05), there is a positive and significant relationship between SIO and OP, which confirms hypothesis 1. After introducing the mediating variable, the relationship between the independent variable (SIO) and the mediator (IC) was tested. This analysis rejected the null hypothesis that the estimated parameters are zero (p<0.05), confirming that SIO positively influences IC and thus confirming hypothesis 2. Then, the mediation model was analyzed, showing that IC has a positive impact on OP, confirming hypothesis 3. Importantly, the mediating effect was examined by considering IC as a whole, rather than focusing on the mediation of each dimension of the construct.

Thus, according to the results of the mediation model, there is a total, positive, and significant indirect effect as a result of the multiplication of the coefficients of the SIO–IC–OP relationship. In other words, IC absorbs a portion of the effect that SIO has on OP, indicating partial mediation.

Table 7 reports the estimated direct and indirect effects based on the coefficients calculated in the linear regression analysis.

As can be seen, the Average Causal Mediation Effect (ACME) of 0.293 indicates the indirect effect of SIO on OP mediated through IC. This effect ranged from 0.204 to 0.40 within a 95% confidence interval. Based on the p-value (p < 0.05), IC significantly explains the relationship between SIO and OP. The Average Direct Effect (ADE) of 0.708, for its part, represents the direct effect of SIO on OP without mediation through IC. This effect ranged from 0.554 to 0.86 within a 95% confidence interval.

The total effect (ACME + ADE) reflects the direct effect of SIO on OP and its indirect effect through IC mediation. Note that the estimated value of the direct relationship before including mediation (1.0009, see Table 6) decreased significantly when IC was introduced as the mediating variable in the model (0.708). This highlights the importance of IC as a mediating mechanism in explaining the relationship between the two constructs. Furthermore, ADE (SIO–OP) was greater than ACME (SIO–IC–OP), which was calculated using the Sobel test (Preacher & Leonardelli, 2001), as shown in Table 8.

Figure 1 illustrates the research model with the estimated results. As shown in this figure, introducing mediation into the model reduced the direct effect of SIO on OP to an estimated coefficient of 0.70, which is statistically significant. This suggests that IC partially mediates the relationship between SIO and OP.

Figure 2 depicts the scatter plot of the mediated relationship. As observed, the model exhibits partial mediation, as the indirect effect explains part of the relationship between SIO and OP but not entirely. Nonetheless, including IC as a mediating variable is crucial because it helps explain what the direct relationship does not fully capture. Note the difference between the model without mediation (black line) and the model after introducing the mediating variable (blue line), indicating partial mediation.

5. DISCUSSION

---

In recent years, SIO has gained significance both theoretically and practically due to its potential impact on the success and sustainability of organizations in highly competitive and dynamic markets (Setiadji & Ahmadi, 2020; Pertuz & Perez, 2020; Demuner Flores, 2021; Bansal et al., 2023). In addition, SIO enhances IC by fostering creative thinking, enabling the acquisition, generation, and transfer of knowledge within organizations (Chen & Lin, 2021; Dang & Wang, 2022; Bernal González et al., 2020; Ayinaddis, 2023; Rehman et al., 2023). Understanding market demands and addressing them with innovative strategies has allowed organizations to achieve high returns. This, in turn, helps them identify new opportunities to expand their range of goods and services, thereby creating differentiation and competitive advantages (Chatzopoulou et al., 2022; Dinu et al., 2023; Hussein et al., 2023).

The results of this study are consistent with those of previous research, providing empirical evidence that supports the positive relationship between innovative strategies and organizational performance (Chatzopoulou et al., 2022; Demuner Flores, 2021; Dinu et al., 2023; Purnomo et al., 2022; Ayinaddis, 2023). Furthermore, this research demonstrated that intellectual capital serves as a new mediating mechanism—an area previously underexplored in the relationship between strategic orientation and organizational performance. These findings are also in line with earlier studies showing the impact of knowledge-based intangible resources such as intellectual capital on organizational performance and market growth (Nguyen, 2020; Gehrisch & Süß, 2023; Handoyo et al., 2023; Hussein et al., 2023).

Moreover, in line with the results of this study, authors such as Nugroho et al. (2022), Dang and Wang (2022), and Bernal González et al. (2020) have emphasized the importance of directing company resources and capabilities towards key areas of knowledge and innovation to achieve better organizational outcomes.

Finally, this study also provides empirical evidence from manufacturing companies in Colombia, highlighting intellectual capital as a new mediating mechanism in the relationship between strategic innovation orientation and organizational performance. By using observable indicators to operationalize the constructs under study, this research contributes an original perspective to the existing body of literature.

6. CONCLUSIONS

---

This study empirically analyzed the relationship between Strategic Innovation Orientation (SIO) and Organizational Performance (OP) both directly and through the mediation of Intellectual Capital (IC). According to the results, there was a partial mediation of IC in this relationship, indicating that IC is a mechanism through which SIO can enhance OP.

The study makes two significant contributions. First, it provides empirical evidence of both the direct and indirect relationship between SIO and OP. It also emphasizes the importance of strengthening IC within organizations to achieve better performance outcomes through SIO. Second, the results suggest that organizational managers should focus on adopting an SIO to adapt to changing market conditions and develop competitive advantages that boost performance. This includes enhancing intangible resources such as IC to maximize positive impacts on performance.

This study, however, also has limitations. First, it used a cross-sectional design, which does not allow for the analysis of changes in variables over time. To overcome this, future research could consider using a longitudinal approach. Second, IC was analyzed as a whole without considering its individual dimensions; hence, future studies could conduct analyses considering each dimension separately. Finally, the research focused on manufacturing companies in Colombia, so future work could explore other sectors and contexts to validate the generalizability of the results.

CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

---

The authors declare no conflict of financial, professional, or personal interests that may inappropriately influence the results that were obtained or the interpretations that are proposed here.

AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS

---

Carlos Gilberto Restrepo-Ramírez: Principal investigator of the research project. He contributed to the conception and design of the study, the preparation of the database, data processing and analysis, the literature review, the writing of the manuscript, and the responses to the reviewers’ and editors’ comments.

Claudia Inés Sepúlveda-Rivillas: Co-investigator of the research project. She contributed to the conception and design of the study, data processing and analysis, the literature review, the writing of the manuscript, and the responses to the reviewers’ and editors’ comments.

Mariana Gómez-Montoya: Research assistant. She contributed to data processing and analysis, the literature review, the writing of the manuscript, and the responses to the reviewers’ and editors’ comments.

FOOTNOTE

---

• arrow_upward This research was funded by the Research and Consulting Center (CIC for its acronym in Spanish) of the Faculty of Economic Sciences at Universidad de Antioquia. It was part of the research project entitled Impacto de la orientación estratégica en el desempeño empresarial: el efecto mediador del capital intelectual (Impact of Strategic Orientation on Business Performance: The Mediating Effect of Intellectual Capital) under code 2020-32230.

REFERENCES

---

• arrow_upward Adams, P., Bodas Freitas, I. M., & Fontana, R. (2019). Strategic orientation, innovation performance and the moderating influence of marketing management. Journal of Business Research, 97, 129-140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.12.071
• arrow_upward Agostini, L., & Nosella, A. (2017). Enhancing radical innovation performance through intellectual capital components. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 18(4), 789-806. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIC-10-2016-0103
• arrow_upward Agostini, L., Nosella, A., & Filippini, R. (2017). Does intellectual capital allow improving innovation performance? A quantitative analysis in the SME context. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 18(2), 400-418. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIC-05-2016-0056
• arrow_upward Albertini, E., & Berger-Remy, F. (2019). Intellectual capital and financial performance: A meta-analysis and research agenda. M@n@gement, 22, 216-249. https://doi.org/10.3917/mana.222.0216
• arrow_upward Ayinaddis, S. G. (2023). The effect of innovation orientation on firm performance: evidence from micro and small manufacturing firms in selected towns of Awi Zone, Ethiopia. Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 12(1), 26. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13731-023-00290-3
• arrow_upward Azar, G., & Ciabuschi, F. (2017). Organizational innovation, technological innovation, and export performance: The effects of innovation radicalness and extensiveness. International Business Review, 26(2), 324-336. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibusrev.2016.09.002
• arrow_upward Bansal, S., Garg, I., Jain, M., & Yadav, A. (2023). Improving the performance/competency of small and medium enterprises through intellectual capital. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 24(3), 830-853. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIC-07-2021-0189
• arrow_upward Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of personality and social psychology, 51(6), 1173-1182. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173
• arrow_upward Bernal González, I., Pedraza Melo, N. A., & Castillo Hernández, L. (2020). El capital humano y su relación con el desempeño organizacional. Revista Espacios, 41(22), 213–227. https://www.revistaespacios.com/a20v41n22/a20v41n22p14.pdf
• arrow_upward Bontis, N. (1998). Intellectual capital: an exploratory study that develops measures and models. Management Decision, 36(2), 63–76. https://doi.org/10.1108/00251749810204142
• arrow_upward Chatzopoulou, E.-C., Manolopoulos, D., & Agapitou, V. (2022). Corporate social responsibility and employee outcomes: interrelations of external and internal orientations with job satisfaction and organizational commitment. Journal of Business Ethics, 179(3), 795-817. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-021-04872-7
• arrow_upward Chen, Y., & Lin, Z. (2021). Business intelligence capabilities and firm performance: A study in China. International Journal of Information Management, 57, 102232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2020.102232
• arrow_upward Chmielewska, M., Stokwiszewski, J., Markowska, J., y Hermanowski, T. (2022). Evaluating Organizational Performance of Public Hospitals using the McKinsey 7-S Framework. BMC Health Services Research, 22(1), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-021-07402-3
• arrow_upward Choi, J., Kim, B., Han, C. H., Hahn, H., Park, H., Yoo, J., & Jeong, M. K. (2021). Methodology for assessing the contribution of knowledge services during the new product development process to business performance. Expert Systems with Applications, 167, 113860. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2020.113860
• arrow_upward Chou, C., & Yang, K. P. (2011). The interaction effect of strategic orientations on new product performance in the high-tech industry: A nonlinear model. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 78(1), 63–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2010.07.018
• arrow_upward Coad, A., Segarra, A., & Teruel, M. (2016). Innovation and firm growth: does firm age play a role? Research Policy, 45(2), 387-400. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2015.10.015
• arrow_upward Córdoba-Vega, J. M., & Naranjo Valencia, J. C. (2017). Incidencia de la inversión en innovación en las ventas de productos innovadores. Evidencia empírica en empresas manufactureras de Colombia. Información tecnológica, 28(2), 153-166. http://dx.doi.org/10.4067/S0718-07642017000200017
• arrow_upward Dang, V. T., & Wang, J. (2022). Building competitive advantage for hospitality companies: The roles of green innovation strategic orientation and green intellectual capital. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 102, 103161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2022.103161
• arrow_upward Demuner Flores, M. del R. (2021). Capacidad de innovación en empresas mexicanas: mediación en la relación orientación al aprendizaje-rendimiento empresarial. Acta Universitaria, 31, 1-19. https://doi.org/10.15174/au.2021.3185
• arrow_upward Denicolai, S., Zucchella, A., & Moretti, F. (2018). Not So Similar After All: Exploring the Diversity of Strategic Orientations for Innovation. International Journal of Innovation Management, 22(04), 1850036. https://doi.org/10.1142/s1363919618500366
• arrow_upward Departamento Administrativo Nacional de Estadística. (2021). Boletín Técnico. Encuesta de Desarrollo e Innovación Tecnológica en la Industria manufacturera (EDIT X). 2019-2020. https://www.dane.gov.co/index.php/estadisticas-por-tema/tecnologia-e-innovacion/encuesta-de-desarrollo-e-innovacion-tecnologica-edit
• arrow_upward Deutscher, F., Zapkau, F. B., Schwens, C., Baum, M., & Kabst, R. (2016). Strategic orientations and performance: A configurational perspective. Journal of Business Research, 69(2), 849–861. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.07.005
• arrow_upward Díez, J. M., Ochoa, M. L., Prieto, M. B., & Santidrián, A. (2010). Intellectual capital and value creation in Spanish firms. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 11(3), 348–367. https://doi.org/10.1108/14691931011064581
• arrow_upward Dinu, E., Vătămănescu, E.-M., Stăneiu, R.-M., & Rusu, M. (2023). An exploratory study linking intellectual capital and technology management towards innovative performance in KIBS. Sustainability, 15(2), 1356. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15021356
• arrow_upward Do Hyung, L., & Dedahanov, A. (2014). Firm performance and entrepreneurial, market and technology orientations in Korean technology intensive SMEs. Asian Social Science, 10(22), 37–47. https://doi.org/10.5539/ass.v10n22p37
• arrow_upward Dogan, E. (2017). A strategic approach to innovation. Journal of Management Marketing and Logistics, 4(3), 290-300. http://doi.org/10.17261/Pressacademia.2017.491
• arrow_upward Durán-Pérez, F. B., & Lara-Abad, G. E. (2021). Aplicación del coeficiente de confiabilidad de Kuder Richardson en una escala para la revisión y prevención de los efectos de las rutinas formadas durante el periodo de confinamiento a partir de la identificación del seguimiento de medidas de seguridad de comida y de descanso. Boletín Científico de La Escuela Superior Atotonilco de Tula, 8(15), 51–55. https://doi.org/10.29057/esat.v8i15.6693
• arrow_upward Edvinsson, L., & Malone, M. (1998). Capital intelectual: descobrindo o valor real de sua empresa pela identificação de seus valores internos. Makron Books.
• arrow_upward Ekaningrum, Y. (2021). The influence of intellectual capital elements of company performance. The Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business, 8(1), 257–269. https://scholar.unair.ac.id/en/publications/the-influence-of-intellectual-capital-elements-on-company-perform
• arrow_upward Galeitzke, M., Steinhöfel, E., Orth, R., & Kohl, H. (2017). Intellectual capital-driven technology and innovation management. International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management, 14(05), 1750028. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219877017500286
• arrow_upward Ganesh, R., y Haslinda, A. (2023). Contributory role of innovative capabilities in Malaysian small and medium enterprises performance. International Journal of Services, Economics and Management, 14(1), 78-107. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJSEM.2023.129594
• arrow_upward García Garnica, A., & Taboada, Ibarra E. L. (2012). Teoría de la empresa: Las propuestas de Coase, Alchian y Demsetz, Williamson, Penrose y Nooteboom. Economía: Teórica y Práctica. Nueva Época, (36), 9-42. https://www.scielo.org.mx/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0188-33802012000100002
• arrow_upward Gatignon, H., & Xuereb, J.-M. (2006). Strategic Orientation of the Firm and New Product Performance. Journal of Marketing Research, 34(1), 77-90. https://doi.org/10.2307/3152066
• arrow_upward Gehrisch, M. G., & Süß, S. (2023). Organizational behavior in international strategic alliances and the relation to performance – a literature review and avenues for future research. Management Review Quarterly, 73, 1045–1107. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11301-022-00268-7
• arrow_upward Ghlichlee, B., & Goodarzi, A. (2023). Strategic human resource practices and new product development performance: the mediating role of intellectual capital. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 24(3), 730-756. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIC-11-2020-0360
• arrow_upward Giménez, M. (2021). Capital Intelectual: Gestión Innovadora En Las Organizaciones Inteligentes. Gerentia, (2), 101–126. https://investigacionuft.net.ve/revista/index.php/Gerentia/article/view/476/563
• arrow_upward Gómez-Bayona, L., Londoño-Montoya, E., & Mora-González, B. (2020). Modelos de capital intelectual a nivel empresarial y su aporte en la creación de valor. Revista CEA, 6(11), 165–184. https://doi.org/10.22430/24223182.1434
• arrow_upward Gómez-Valenzuela, V. (2022). Intellectual capital factors at work in Dominican firms: understanding their influence. Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 11(1), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13731-022-00205-8
• arrow_upward Grawe, S. J., Chen, H., & Daugherty, P. J. (2009). The relationship between strategic orientation, service innovation, and performance. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Managemen, 39(4), 282–300. https://doi.org/10.1108/09600030910962249
• arrow_upward Grinstein, A. (2008). The relationships between market orientation and alternative strategic orientations: A meta-analysis. European Journal of Marketing, 42(1–2), 115–134. https://doi.org/10.1108/03090560810840934
• arrow_upward Gunasekaran, A., Irani, Z., Choy, K.-L., Filippi, L., & Papadopoulos, T. (2015). Performance measures and metrics in outsourcing decisions: A review for research and applications. International Journal of Production Economics, 161, 153-166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2014.12.021
• arrow_upward Hakala, H. (2011). Strategic orientations in management literature: Three approaches to understanding the interaction between market, technology, entrepreneurial and learning orientations. International Journal of Management Reviews, 13(2), 199–217. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2370.2010.00292.x
• arrow_upward Handoyo, S., Suharman, H., Ghani, E. K., & Soedarsono, S. (2023). A business strategy, operational efficiency, ownership structure, and manufacturing performance: The moderating role of market uncertainty and competition intensity and its implication on open innovation. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 9(2), 100039. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joitmc.2023.100039
• arrow_upward Hayes, A. F. (2009). Beyond Baron and Kenny: Statistical mediation analysis in the new millennium. Communication Monographs, 76(4), 408-420. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637750903310360
• arrow_upward Hernández-Betancur, J. E., Montoya-Restrepo, L. A., & Montoya-Restrepo, I. A. (2022). Momento de la decisión estratégica: caso de estudio en el sector textil. Revista CEA, 8(16), e1878. https://doi.org/10.22430/24223182.1878
• arrow_upward Hortinha, P., Lages, C., & Lages, L. F. (2011). The trade-off between customer and technology orientations: Impact on innovation capabilities and export performance. Journal of International Marketing, 19(3), 36–58. https://doi.org/10.1509/jimk.19.3.36
• arrow_upward Hussein, M. K., Al-tekreeti, R. B. N., Hasan, M. F., & Flayyih, H. H. (2023). The Moderate Role of the Perceived Orientation of Information Technology in the Relationship between Human Capital and Organizational Innovation Mediating Orientations to Learning: Literature Review. Ishtar Journal of Economics and Business Studie, 4(1), 1-8. https://ishtareconomics.org/index.php/About/article/view/14
• arrow_upward Ibarra-Cisneros, M. A., & Hernández-Perlines, F. (2019). La influencia del capital intelectual en el desempeño de las pequeñas y medianas empresas manufactureras de México: el caso de Baja California. Innovar, 29(71), 79-96. https://doi.org/10.15446/innovar.v29n71.76397
• arrow_upward Ibarra-Cisneros, M. A., Hernández-Perlines, F., & Rodríguez-García, M. (2020). Intellectual capital, organisational performance and competitive advantage. European Journal of International Management, 14(6), 976-998. https://roderic.uv.es/rest/api/core/bitstreams/0efe5c67-024c-45a5-a0af-414fc8723088/content
• arrow_upward Inkinen, H. (2015). Review of empirical research on intellectual capital and firm performance. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 16(3), 518-565. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIC-01-2015-0002
• arrow_upward Javed, H. A., Khan, N. A., Michalk, S., Khan, N. U., & Kamran, M. (2023). High-performance work system and innovation capabilities: The mediating role of intellectual capital. Administrative Sciences, 13(1), 23. https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci13010023
• arrow_upward Khan, N. U., Shuangjie, L., Khan, S. Z., & Anwar, M. (2019). Entrepreneurial orientation, intellectual capital, IT capability, and performance. Human Systems Management, 38(3), 297–312. https://doi.org/10.3233/HSM-180393
• arrow_upward Kocak, A., Carsrud, A., & Oflazoglu, S. (2017). Market, entrepreneurial, and technology orientations: impact on innovation and firm performance. Management Decision, 55(2), 248-270. https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-04-2015-0146
• arrow_upward Kornelius, H., Supratikno, H., Bernato, I., & Widjaja, A. W. (2021). Strategic Planning and Firm Performance: The Mediating Role of Strategic Maneuverability. Journal of Asian Finance, Economics, and Business, 8(1), 479–486. https://doi.org/10.13106/jafeb.2021.vol8.no1.479
• arrow_upward Kumar, K., Boesso, G., Favotto, F., & Menini, A. (2012). Strategic orientation, innovation patterns and performances of SMEs and large companies. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 19(1), 132–145. https://doi.org/10.1108/14626001211196442
• arrow_upward Lee, D. H., Dedahanov, A. T., & Rhee, J. (2015). Moderating role of external networks and mediating effect of innovation performance on the relationship between technology orientation and firm performance. Asian Journal of Technology Innovation, 23(3), 321–334. https://doi.org/10.1080/19761597.2015.1120498
• arrow_upward Lin, Y.-L., & Chen, T.-Y. (2016). How does strategic orientation influence intellectual capital through value creating activities. Business Research Review, 2(1), 13–32. https://brr-net.com/issues/Vol_2_No_1_June_2016/2.pdf
• arrow_upward Lo, C., Wang, C., & Chen, Y.-C. (2020). The mediating role of intellectual capital in open innovation in the service industries. Sustainability, 12(12), 5220. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12125220
• arrow_upward Magnier-Watanabe, R., & Benton, C. (2017). Management innovation and firm performance: The mediating effects of tacit and explicit knowledge. Knowledge Management Research and Practice, 15(3), 325–335. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41275-017-0058-6
• arrow_upward Masa’deh, R., Al-Henzab, J., Tarhini, A., & Obeidat, B. Y. (2018). The associations among market orientation, technology orientation, entrepreneurial orientation and organizational performance. Benchmarking: An International Journal, 25(8), 3117–3142. https://doi.org/10.1108/BIJ-02-2017-0024
• arrow_upward Masood, F., Channa, K. A., & Shah, S. M. M. (2023). The effect of the components of intellectual capital on organisational performance: evidence from the telecom industry. International Journal of Knowledge Management Studies, 14(4), 457-479. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJKMS.2023.133858
• arrow_upward Maxim, L. G. (2023). EBITDA, one of the most important indicators regarding the financial sustainability of retail companies. Economic convergence in European Union, XXX, 134-143.
• arrow_upward Mcgivern, M. H., & Tvorik, S. J. (1998). Vision driven organizations: Measurement techniques for group classification. Management Decision, 36(4), 241–264. https://doi.org/10.1108/00251749810211045
• arrow_upward Morales Clark, L. E., Jacobo-Hernández, C. A., Ochoa-Jiménez, S., & Ibarra-Morales, L. E. (2020). Intellectual capital and organizational performance: the case of basic education institutions in Mexico. Revista Científica Pensamiento y Gestión, (47), 180–202. https://doi.org/10.14482/pege.47.6342
• arrow_upward Mu, J., & Di Benedetto, C. A. (2011). Strategic orientations and new product commercialization: mediator, moderator, and interplay. R&D Management, 41(4), 337–359. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9310.2011.00650.x
• arrow_upward Mu, J., Thomas, E., Peng, G., & Di Benedetto, A. (2017). Strategic orientation and new product development performance: The role of networking capability and networking ability. Industrial Marketing Management, 64, 187–201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2016.09.007
• arrow_upward Mutlu, H. M., & Sürer, A. (2016). Effects of market, e-marketing, and technology orientations on innovativeness and performance in Turkish health organizations. Health marketing quarterly, 33(2), 95-111. https://doi.org/10.1080/07359683.2016.1166807
• arrow_upward Nagarajan, K. (2015). Economic Value Added (Eva): A Performance Measure of Strategic Finance. CLEAR International Journal of Research in Commerce & Management, 6(11), 89-91. https://ijrcm.org.in/article_info.php?article_id=6047
• arrow_upward Naranjo‐Valencia, J. C., Jiménez‐Jiménez, D., & Sanz‐Valle, R. (2011). Innovation or imitation? The role of organizational culture. Management Decision, 49(1), 55–72. https://doi.org/10.1108/00251741111094437
• arrow_upward Nawaz, T., & Haniffa, R. (2017). Determinants of financial performance of Islamic banks: an intellectual capital perspective. Journal of Islamic Accounting and Business Research, 8(2), 130-142. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIABR-06-2016-0071
• arrow_upward Nazir, M. I., Tan, Y., & Nazir, M. R. (2021). Intellectual capital performance in the financial sector: Evidence from China, Hong Kong, and Taiwan. International Journal of Finance & Economics, 26(4), 6089–6109. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijfe.2110
• arrow_upward Nguyen, V. C. (2020). Human capital, capital structure choice and firm profitability in developing countries: An empirical study in Vietnam. Accounting, 6(2), 127-136. https://doi.org/10.5267/j.ac.2019.11.003
• arrow_upward Nugroho, A., Prijadi, R., & Kusumastuti, R. D. (2022). Strategic orientations and firm performance: the role of information technology adoption capability. Journal of Strategy and Management, 15(4), 691-717.  https://doi.org/10.1108/JSMA-06-2021-0133
• arrow_upward Nürk, J. (2019). Smart information system capabilities of digital supply chain business models. European Journal of Business Science and Technology, 5(2), 143-184. https://doi.org/10.11118/EJOBSAT.V5I2.175
• arrow_upward Odiri, V. I. O., & Ideh, A. O. (2021). Determinants of organizational performance in Nigeria: Evidence from service firms. Humanities and Social Sciences Letters, 9(1), 86-95. https://doi.org/10.18488/journal.73.2021.91.86.95
• arrow_upward Pardo, A., & Román, M. (2013). Reflections on the Baron and Kenny model of statistical mediation. Anales de psicologia, 29(2), 614-623. https://www.redalyc.org/pdf/167/16726244036.pdf
• arrow_upward Pedraza Melo, N. A., & de la Gala Velásquez, B. (2022). The mediating role of structural capital in the relationship between human capital and performance in the public administrations of Mexico and Peru. Estudios Gerenciales, 38(164), 320-333. https://doi.org/10.18046/j.estger.2022.164.5087
• arrow_upward Pertuz, V., & Pérez, A. (2020). Organizational learning conditions and innovation management practices: An analysis of medium-sized firms. Información Tecnológica, 31(3), 209–218. https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-07642020000300209
• arrow_upward Preacher, K. J., & Leonardelli, G. J. (2001). Calculation for the Sobel test: An interactive calculation tool for mediation tests. https://quantpsy.org/sobel/sobel.htm
• arrow_upward Princy, K., & Rebeka, E. (2019). Employee commitment on organizational performance. International Journal of Recent Technology and Engineering, 8(3), 891-895. https://www.ijrte.org/wp-content/uploads/papers/v8i3/C4078098319.pdf
• arrow_upward Purnomo, S., Purwandari, S., & Sentosa, I. (2022). Sustainability MSMEs Performance and Income Distribution: Role of Intellectual Capital and Strategic Orientations.  Journal of Distribution Science, 20(4), 85-94. https://doi.org/10.15722/JDS.20.04.202204.85
• arrow_upward Quintero-Quintero, W., Blanco-Ariza, A. B., & Garzón-Castrillón, M. A. (2021). Intellectual capital: A review and bibliometric analysis. Publications, 9(4), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.3390/publications9040046
• arrow_upward Rehman, S. U., Ashfaq, K., Bresciani, S., Giacosa, E., & Mueller, J. (2023). Nexus among intellectual capital, interorganizational learning, industrial Internet of things technology and innovation performance: a resource-based perspective. Journal of intellectual capital, 24(2), 509-534. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIC-03-2021-0095
• arrow_upward Restrepo-Ramírez, C. G. (2023). Orientación estratégica a la innovación como motor de desarrollo del desempeño organizativo a través del fortalecimiento del capital intelectual: evidencia estructural basada en datos objetivos [Tesis Doctoral, Universidad de Valencia].
• arrow_upward Rivas-Ruiz, R., Castelán-Martínez, O. D., Pérez, M., & Talavera, J. O. (2013). Clinical research XVII. χ2 test, from the expected to the observed. Revista Médica del Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social, 51(5), 552-557. https://www.medigraphic.com/cgi-bin/new/resumenI.cgi?IDARTICULO=45299
• arrow_upward Rojas, M., Jaimes, L., & Valencia, M. (2018). Efectividad, eficacia y eficiencia en equipos de trabajo. Espacios, 39(6), 1–15. https://www.revistaespacios.com/a18v39n06/a18v39n06p11.pdf
• arrow_upward Roos, G., Bainbridge, A., & Jacobsen, K. (2001). Intellectual capital analysis as a strategic tool. Strategy & Leadership, 29(4), 21–26. https://doi.org/10.1108/10878570110400116
• arrow_upward Saqib, M., Baluch, N. H., & Udin, Z. M. (2017). Moderating role of technology orientation on the relationship between knowledge management and SMEs’ performance in Oman: A conceptual study. International Journal of Economic Perspectives, 11(1), 433–441. https://www.proquest.com/openview/718ca15363b6f84054c92ebab9b282ed/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=51667
• arrow_upward Schweiger, S. A., Stettler, T. R., Baldauf, A., & Zamudio, C. (2019). The Complementarity of Strategic Orientations: A Meta‐Analytic Synthesis and Theory Extension. Strategic Management Journal, 40(11), 1822–1851. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.3042
• arrow_upward Serafim, G. H., & Veríssimo, J. M. C. (2021). The relationship between strategic orientation, service innovation, and performance in hotels in Angola. Sustainability, 13(11), 6256. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13116256
• arrow_upward Setiadji, A., & Ahmadi, M. (2020). The Assessment of Strategic Planning and Strategic Change Management to Improve Organizational Performance. International Journal of Advanced Science and Technology, 29(5), 682–698. http://sersc.org/journals/index.php/IJAST/article/view/9598
• arrow_upward Song, L., & Jing, L. (2017). Strategic orientation and performance of new ventures: empirical studies based on entrepreneurial activities in China. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 13(4), 989–1012. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-017-0433-z
• arrow_upward Suryantini, N. P. S., Moeljadi, M., Aisjah, S., & Ratnawati, K. (2023). The sustainable competitive advantage of SMEs towards Intellectual Capital: the role of technology adoption and strategic flexibility. Intellectual Economics, 17(1), 30-56. https://doi.org/10.13165/IE-23-17-1-02
• arrow_upward Thien, T. H., & Hung, N. X. (2023). Intellectual capital and investment efficiency: The mediating role of strategic management accounting practices. Cogent Business & Management, 10(2), 2207879. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2023.2207879
• arrow_upward Tudose, M. B., Rusu, V. D., & Avasilcai, S. (2022). Financial performance – determinants and interdependencies between measurement indicators. Business, Management and Economics Engineering, 20(1), 119-138. https://doi.org/10.3846/bmee.2022.16732
• arrow_upward Umanto, Wijaya, C., & Atmoko, A. W. (2018). Intellectual capital performance of regional development banks in Indonesia. Banks and Bank Systems, 13(3), 36-47. http://dx.doi.org/10.21511/bbs.13(3).2018.04
• arrow_upward Verbano, C., & Crema, M. (2016). Linking technology innovation strategy, intellectual capital and technology innovation performance in manufacturing SMEs. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 28(5), 524–540. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537325.2015.1117066
• arrow_upward Walker, R. M., Chen, J., & Aravind, D. (2015). Management innovation and firm performance: An integration of research findings. European Management Journal, 33(5), 407–422. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2015.07.001
• arrow_upward Yousaf, S., Anser, M. K., Tariq, M., Sahibzada Jawad, S. U. R., Naushad, S., & Yousaf, Z. (2020). Does technology orientation predict firm performance through firm innovativeness? World Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Sustainable Development, 17(1), 140–151. https://doi.org/10.1108/WJEMSD-11-2019-0091
• arrow_upward Zhang, M., Lettice, F., & Pawar, K. (2019). Effects of intellectual capital and university knowledge in indigenous innovation: evidence from Indian SMEs. Production Planning and Control, 30(10–12), 799–812. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537287.2019.1582090
• arrow_upward Zhao, X., Lynch Jr, J. G., & Chen, Q. (2010). Reconsidering Baron and Kenny: Myths and truths about mediation analysis. Journal of Consumer Research, 37(2), 197-206. https://doi.org/10.1086/651257