Paving the path toward strategic agility: A methodological perspective and an empirical investigation

TY - JOUR

T1 - Paving the path toward strategic agility

T2 - A methodological perspective and an empirical investigation

AU - Nejatian, Majid

AU - Zarei, Mohammad Hossein

AU - Rajabzadeh, Ali

AU - Azar, Adel

AU - Khadivar, Ameneh

N1 - Copyright © and Moral Rights are retained by the author(s) and/ or other copyright owners. A copy can be downloaded for personal non-commercial research or study, without prior permission or charge. This item cannot be reproduced or quoted extensively from without first obtaining permission in writing from the copyright holder(s). The content must not be changed in any way or sold commercially in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders.

PY - 2019/7/3

Y1 - 2019/7/3

N2 - Purpose: For organizations competing in volatile environments, strategic agility is the key for sustaining in the market. It is essential for such organizations to identify the main agility indicators that contribute to their strategic core. The purpose of this paper is to propose and test a systematic methodology that identifies key agility indicators through prioritization and establishing the intra- and inter-relationships among them. Design/methodology/approach: The methodology consists of four phases. Phase I forms a pool of agility key performance indicators (KPIs). Phase II categorizes and ranks the KPIs based on their importance and the gap that exists between their current and desired level. Using interpretive structural modeling, phase III establishes the intra-relationships among the KPIs as well as agility attributes, agility enablers and improvement paths, collectively referred to as agility indicators. Finally, phase IV analyzes the inter-relationships among agility indicators using three consecutive houses of quality. Findings: To demonstrate the capability of the proposed methodology, it was applied to a dairy food company operating in a competitive environment. The application could address the shortcomings of previous agility methodologies and helped the company to assign resources to the right agility indicators with the highest influence on strategic agility. Research limitations/implications: The methodology was applied to a single organization only. The application does not include long-term post-implementation observations and measurement of strategic agility. Practical implications: Practitioners can benefit from the methodology to identify the right agility indicators of their organization and assign organizational resources for the improvement of such indicators. The methodology ensures selecting indicators that contribute to organization’s strategic agility, although ostensibly seem unrelated. Originality/value: The paper contributes to the literature of strategic and organizational agility by proposing a systematic methodology that considers both intra- and inter-relationships among agility indicators. The methodology also makes a decent contribution in addressing organizational ambidexterity by analyzing mutually exclusive indicators pertaining to current and future opportunities for the organization.

AB - Purpose: For organizations competing in volatile environments, strategic agility is the key for sustaining in the market. It is essential for such organizations to identify the main agility indicators that contribute to their strategic core. The purpose of this paper is to propose and test a systematic methodology that identifies key agility indicators through prioritization and establishing the intra- and inter-relationships among them. Design/methodology/approach: The methodology consists of four phases. Phase I forms a pool of agility key performance indicators (KPIs). Phase II categorizes and ranks the KPIs based on their importance and the gap that exists between their current and desired level. Using interpretive structural modeling, phase III establishes the intra-relationships among the KPIs as well as agility attributes, agility enablers and improvement paths, collectively referred to as agility indicators. Finally, phase IV analyzes the inter-relationships among agility indicators using three consecutive houses of quality. Findings: To demonstrate the capability of the proposed methodology, it was applied to a dairy food company operating in a competitive environment. The application could address the shortcomings of previous agility methodologies and helped the company to assign resources to the right agility indicators with the highest influence on strategic agility. Research limitations/implications: The methodology was applied to a single organization only. The application does not include long-term post-implementation observations and measurement of strategic agility. Practical implications: Practitioners can benefit from the methodology to identify the right agility indicators of their organization and assign organizational resources for the improvement of such indicators. The methodology ensures selecting indicators that contribute to organization’s strategic agility, although ostensibly seem unrelated. Originality/value: The paper contributes to the literature of strategic and organizational agility by proposing a systematic methodology that considers both intra- and inter-relationships among agility indicators. The methodology also makes a decent contribution in addressing organizational ambidexterity by analyzing mutually exclusive indicators pertaining to current and future opportunities for the organization.

KW - Balanced scorecard

KW - House of quality

KW - Interpretive structural modelling

KW - Organizational agility

KW - Quality function deployment

KW - Strategic agility

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85067019373&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1108/JEIM-10-2018-0233

DO - 10.1108/JEIM-10-2018-0233

M3 - Article

VL - 32

SP - 538

EP - 562

JO - Journal of Enterprise Information Management

JF - Journal of Enterprise Information Management

SN - 1741-0398

IS - 4

ER -