نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

دانشجوی دکتری DBA، سازمان مدیریت صنعتی، سمنان، ایران.

چکیده

امروزه، بحث ویژگی‌های مدیریت مناسب و تأثیرات شگرف آن بر عملکرد نوآوری سازمان‌ در شرکت‌های دولتی و خصوصی آشکارا مشاهده می‌شود و اخیراً سبک‌های جدیدی از مدیریت مطرح شده‌‏اند که ممکن است در اجرای راهبردها و تعقیب اهداف سازمان بسیار مؤثر واقع شوند. این پژوهش بررسی می‏‌کندکه چگونه ویژگی‌های مدیریت بر عملکرد نوآوری سازمانی با میانجی‌گری یادگیری سازمانی و تعدیل‌گری خودکنترلی در گروه صنعتی روستا تأثیر می‌گذارند. این مدل با تجزیه‌ و تحلیل پاسخ‌های نظرسنجی جمع‌آوری‌شده از 310 مدیر و کارکنان گروه صنعتی روستا با نرم‌افزار SPSS23 و Smart PLS3 آزمایش شده است. یافته‌های پژوهش نشان می‌دهد در گروه صنعتی روستا، ویژگی‌های مدیریت، تأثیری مثبت و معنادار بر عملکرد نوآوری سازمانی و یادگیری سازمانی دارند و ویژگی‌های مدیریت با میانجی‌گری یادگیری سازمانی تأثیری مثبت و معنادار بر عملکرد نوآوری دارند. همچنین، خودکنترلی به ‌طور مثبت تأثیر ویژگی‌های مدیریت را بر یادگیری سازمانی تعدیل می‌کند.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات

عنوان مقاله [English]

Investigating the impacts of the characteristics of management on the performance of organizational innovation with the mediation of organizational learning and self-control moderation in the Roostagroup. Co

نویسندگان [English]

  • Morteza Akbari Mehrabad
  • Mahmood Akbari Mehrabad

DBA Ph.D. Student, Business Management Department, Industrial Management Organization, Semnan, Iran.

چکیده [English]

Purpose: Today, the discussion on the characteristics of proper management and its tremendous effects on the innovation performance of organizations in both public and private sectors is evident. Recently, new management styles have been proposed that can be highly effective in implementing strategies and achieving organizational goals. This research examines how management characteristics impact organizational innovation performance by mediating organizational learning and moderating self-control in the Village Industrial Group.
Design/Methodology/Approach: The current research is based on objective criteria in the applied research group, employing the time criterion for data collection in the survey research group. It adopts a quantitative research approach based on the nature of the data and focuses on the characteristics of the subject or the research problem in correlation or concordance research. The research involves first-hand data collection through a field research method using the questionnaire technique, emphasizing the depth of comprehensive research. The primary tool for collecting information is a questionnaire, including four standard questionnaires: management characteristics (2001), organizational performance, organizational learning, and self-control. The questionnaire's validity was ensured through face and content validity, using a 5-point Likert scale. Data analysis was performed using SPSS23 statistical software and SmartPLS3 structural equation modeling. The questionnaire, presented as a 5-point Likert scale, underwent validity checks through content validity, with input from managers of the production, quality, and after-sales service management unit, confirming its acceptability. Reliability was established with Cronbach's alpha of 0.880, 0.852, 0.901, and 0.832, respectively. The statistical population of this research includes 1,600 people, encompassing managers, leaders, and workers of the industrial group in the Village. The research sample consists of 310 people, determined through simple random sampling according to Morgan's table.
Findings: This study relies on the resource-based perspective and knowledge-based perspective theories to explain how the Village Industrial Group achieves innovation through its internal and intangible resources. The findings demonstrate significant effects of management characteristics and organizational learning on organizational innovation performance, providing support for the meaning and expansion of these theories. The research findings reveal that management characteristics positively and significantly impact organizational innovation performance in RoostaGroup Co. Additionally, management characteristics positively affect organizational learning in RoostaGroup Co. Management characteristics have a positive mediating effect on organizational learning and a significant impact on innovation performance in RoostaGroup Co. Self-control positively moderates the effect of management characteristics on organizational learning in RoostaGroup Co.
Discussion and Conclusion: The present study investigated the impact of management characteristics on organizational innovation performance with the mediation of organizational learning and moderation of self-control in RoostaGroup Co. The results indicate that management characteristics have a positive effect on innovation performance. Organizational learning plays a mediating role in the relationship between management characteristics and innovation performance, while self-control plays a moderating role.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Management features
  • Organizational learning
  • Innovation performance
  • Self-control
  • Roostagroup Co
  1. Akyürek, S., & Guney, S. (2018). Effects of learning styles and locus of control on the decision-making styles of leader managers. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 14(6), 2317–2328. doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/89515
  2. Chaithanapat, P., Punnakitikashem, P., Khin Khin Oo, N.C.K.K., & Rakthin, S. (2022). Relationships among knowledge-oriented leadership, customer knowledge management, innovation quality, and firm performance in SMEs. Journal of Innovation and Knowledge, 7(1), 100162. doi: 10.1016/j.jik.2022.100162
  3. Chen, S., Su, X., & Wu, S. (2012). Need for achievement, education, and entrepreneurial risk-taking behavior. Social Behavior and Personality. An International Journal, 40(8), 1311–1318. doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2012.40.8.1311
  4. Duarte Alonso, A. (2017). Exploring a developing tourism industry: a resource-based view approach. Tourism Recreation Research, 42(1), 45–58. doi:10.1080/02508281.2016.1239332
  5. Farzaneh, M., Ghasemzadeh, P., Nazari, J.A., & Mehralian, G. (2021). Contributory role of dynamic capabilities in the relationship between organizational learning and innovation performance. European Journal of Innovation Management, 24(3), 655–676. doi:10.1108/EJIM-12-2019-0355
  6. Grant, R. M. (1996). Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 17(S2), 109–122 (Suppl. 2). doi:10.1002/smj.4250171110
  7. Hiller, N. J., Beauchesne, M. M., & Day, D. V. (2014). Executive leadership: CEOs, top management teams, and organizational-level outcomes. The Oxford Handbook of Leadership and Organizations (pp. 556−588). Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199755615.013.028
  8. Hogan, R., Curphy, G.J., & Hogan, J. (1994). What we know about leadership: Effectiveness and personality. American Psychologist, 49(6), 493. doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.49.6.493
  9. Judge, T.A., Piccolo, R.F., & Kosalka, T. (2009). The bright and dark sides of leader traits: a review and theoretical extension of the leader trait paradigm. Leadership Quarterly, 20(6), 855–875. doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2009.09.004
  10. Jung, D.I., Chow, C., & Wu, A. (2003). The role of transformational leadership in enhancing organizational innovation: hypotheses and some preliminary findings. Leadership Quarterly, 14(4-5), 525–544. doi.org/10.1016/S1048-9843(03)00050-X
  11. Kusumawijaya, I.K. (2019). The prediction of need for achievement to generate entrepreneurial intention: a locus of control mediation. International Review of Management and Marketing, 9(4), 54–62. doi:10.32479/irmm.8330
  12. Liu, Y., Li, Y., Hao, X., & Zhang, Y. (2019). Narcissism and learning from entrepreneurial failure. Journal of Business Venturing, 34(3), 496–512. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusvent.2019.01.003
  13. Luo, B., Zheng, S., Ji, H., & Liang, L. (2018). Ambidextrous leadership and TMT-member ambidextrous behavior: the role of TMT behavioral integration and TMT risk propensity. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 29(2), 338–359. doi:10.1080/09585192.2016.1194871
  14. Magno, F., Cassia, F., & Bruni, A. (2017). Adoption and impact of marketing performance assessment systems among travel agencies. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 29(4), 1133–1147. doi:10.1108/IJCHM-07-2015-0328
  15. Onag, A.O., Tepeci, M., & Ba¸salp, A.A. (2014). Organizational learning capability and its impact on firm innovativeness. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 150, 708–717. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.09.029
  16. Penrose, E. (1959). The theory of growth of the firm. Blackwell Publishing. doi.org/10.1093/0198289774.001.0001
  17. Qurrahtulain, K., Bashir, T., Hussain, I., Ahmed, S., & Nisar, A. (2022). Impact of inclusive leadership on adaptive performance with the mediation of vigor at work and moderation of internal locus of control. Journal of Public Affairs, 22(1), e2380 1-9. doi:10.1002/pa.2380
  18. Rambe, P., Modise, D.L., & Chipunza, C. (2018). The combined influence of self-leadership and locus of control on the job performance of engineering workforce in a power generation utility: an empirical perspective. SA Journal of Human Resource Management, 16(1), 1–9. doi:10.4102/sajhrm. v16i0.952
  19. Rehman, K., Poulova, P., Yasmin, F., Haider, S.A., & Jabeen, S. (2019). Empirical investigation of the impacts of knowledge management on organizational learning- A case study of higher education institutions. Academy of Strategic Management Journal, 20, 1–15. org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2014.06.004
  20. Reina, C.S., Zhang, Z., & Peterson, S.J. (2014). CEO grandiose narcissism and firm performance: The role of organizational identification. Leadership Quarterly, 25(5), 958-971. doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2014.06.004
  21. Rotter, J.B. (1966). Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement. Psychological Monographs, 80(1), 1–28. doi.org/10.1037/h0092976
  22. Sattayaraksa, T., & Boon-Itt, S. (2016). CEO TL and the new product development process: the mediating roles of organizational learning and innovation culture. Leadership and Organization Development Journal, 73(6), 730–749. doi:10.1108/LODJ-10-2014-0197
  23. Schumpeter, J.A. (1961). The theory of economic development. Oxford University Press.
  24. Sidek, S., & Zainol, F. A. (2011). Psychological traits and business performance of entrepreneurs in small construction industry in Malaysia. International Business Management, 2(1), 170–185. doi.org/10.52283/nswrca.ajbmr.20110104a04
  25. Solaja, M.O., Idowu, E.F., & James, E.A. (2016). Exploring the relationship between leadership communication style, personality trait, and organizational productivity. Serbian Journal of Management, 11(1), 99–117. doi.org/10.5937/sjm11-8480
  26. Tandon, A. (2021). Leading learning and innovation in organizations: a distributed leadership perspective. Development and Learning in Organizations: An [International Journal]. doi.org/10.1108/dlo-05-2021-0087
  27. Toylan, N.V., Semerci€oz, F., & Hassan, M.U. (2020). Knowledge sharing in strategic alliance relationships: an empirical research on hotels in Turkey. European Journal of Tourism Research, 24, 1–25. doi.org/10.54055/ejtr. v24i.405
  28. Uddin, M.M., Khan, M.A., & Ali, K. (2017). Role of leadership on organizational learning in private universities of Bangladesh. IIUC Studies, 14(2), 9–34. doi.org/10.3329/iiucs. v14i2.39878
  29. Utami, T.L.W., Indarti, N., Sitalaksmi, S., & Makodian, N. (2017). The effect of knowledge sources on innovation capabilities among restaurants and caf_e businesses in Indonesia. Journal of Indonesian Economy and Business, 31(1), 33–50. doi.org/10.22146/jieb.16503
  30. Van, N.T., Phong, L.B., & Loan, L.T. (2018). Antecedents of innovation capability: the role of transformational leadership and organizational learning. International Journal of Business Administration, 9(5), 1–10. doi.org/10.5430/ijba. v9n5p1
  31. Vashdi, D.R., Levitats, Z.S., & Grimland, S. (2019). Which transformational leadership behaviors relate to organizational learning processes? Learning Organization, 26(2), 176–189. doi.org/10.1108/tlo-04-2018-0065
  32. Yu, J., & Chen, S. (2016). Gender moderates firms’ innovation performance and entrepreneurs’ self-efficacy and risk propensity. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 44(4), 679–691. doi:10.2224/sbp.2016.44.4.679
  33. Walsh, J.P., & Ungson, G.R. (1991). Organizational memory. Academy of Management Review, 16(1), 57–91. doi.org/10.2307/258607
  34. Wernerfelt, B. (1984). A resource-based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 5(2), 171–180. org/10.1002/smj.4250050207
  35. Zagoršek, H., Dimovski, V., & Skerlavaj, M. (2009). Transactional and transformational leadership impacts on organizational learning. Journal of East European Management Studies, 14(2), 144–165. doi: 10.5771/0949-6181-2009-2-144