The Role of Strategic Orientations in the Relationship Between Adaptive Marketing Capabilities and Ambidexterity in Digital Services Firms: The Case of a Highly Competitive Digital Economy

Abstract

As the digital economy progresses aggressively in the UAE, the ways in which different players in the economy interact with each other are changing. Therefore, strategic orientations that enable successful interactions have become a necessity. This study aims to investigate the impact of adaptive marketing capability on market ambidexterity in the presence of strategic orientations. It examines the outside-in and inside-out strategies that form the dynamic capabilities of firms. Furthermore, this study identifies how strategic orientations enable higher firm ambidexterity in highly competitive digital business environments as in the case of the UAE. A quantitative deductive approach using a survey is followed in order to test the proposed hypotheses. The data were collected from senior management-level individuals in 75 firms with the careful selection of demographics. Our study demonstrates a strong correlation between adaptive marketing capability and market ambidexterity. Furthermore, strategic orientations, which are characterised by a culture of proactiveness, responsiveness, and innovativeness, are found to positively mediate the relationship between adaptive marketing capability and market ambidexterity. Additionally, there exists a positive and direct relationship between adaptive marketing capability and market ambidexterity. Finally, this study provides important contributions regarding new forms of dynamic capabilities, such as adaptive marketing capability and market ambidexterity, under the specific intervention of strategic orientations, thus enhancing the body of knowledge on ambidexterity and dynamic capability, which is vital in the digital era. It also presents an enhanced empirical model reflecting the relationships between adaptive marketing capabilities, strategic orientations, and market ambidexterity from both the inside-out and outside-in perspectives.

1. Introduction

Industries have adjusted their strategies to adapt to the new digital economy’s complex and rapidly changing requirements. In order to ensure long-term survival in such a business environment, companies around the world are also constantly seeking new ways to gain a competitive advantage to remain viable, for example, through new business models and value creation streams [1]. Innovations are highly valued as a differentiator in the digital ecosystem by businesses aiming for excellence in such a tough environment [2]. As emphasised by Volz, Kuffner, and Hartmann [3], firms’ performance increasingly depends on interfirm collaboration, shared value creation, and mutual dependencies that span numerous layers of interaction [4], but little is known about how businesses integrate into and co-evolve with the digital ecosystem [5]. Companies must constantly evaluate market trends and technical developments in order to spot chances for value creation and innovation [6,7].

Nevertheless, academics in the field of digital technology and strategic management continue to concentrate on a variety of capability-related concerns [8]. An example of such a critical capability is adaptive marketing capability (AMC), described as a subset of dynamic capabilities by Baden and Fuller [9] in their important and critical elaboration of the nature of adaptive marketing capability and its impact on the resource renewal processes of firms [9,10]. These adaptive capabilities are becoming essential for the innovation of digital products—whether incremental or radical—through the well-known exploration and exploitation activities that typically cause tensions in most firms, especially in the modern context involving the rapid onboarding and adoption of digital technologies [11]. Hence, a unique and evolving ambidextrous capability plays a vital role in differentiating firms [12,13], which is supported by transformational leadership to develop a culture of strategic orientation in their firms. Strategic orientations—including proactive orientations, responsive orientations, and/or innovation orientations—are valuable in developing a customer-centric business culture [14]. Hence, firms can match their resources, competencies, and digital business models with the dynamic digital environment using a framework enabled by strategic orientations [15].

As the digital economy progresses aggressively in the UAE, focusing on data analytics and artificial intelligence-based cloud solutions that promote the higher efficiency of all kinds of services offered to individuals and enterprises, firms are able to utilise the vast opportunities in an open market in which the government is supporting alliance, collaboration, and strategic partnerships [16] as per the UAE 2031 strategy. These factors enable greater learning and knowledge acquisition, leading to the delivery of more innovative digital products that are based on co-design and experimentation between various parties in the digital ecosystem.

Today, the digital ecosystem is witnessing an aggressive competition among the various players which impact their business performance and growth [1]; in order to ensure more flexibility and ambidexterity for competitiveness, the adoption of new operating models and business models puts pressure on marketing and business strategies to match each other more closely. Hence, firms’ market ambidexterity is becoming important and a necessity for survival [17]. Moreover, information and communication technology-driven digital ecosystems are changing how businesses produce, distribute, and extract value across interconnected networks. These dynamic, loosely connected ecosystems encourage cooperation and creativity between businesses, clients, partners, and suppliers [18]. A great example is the Agent-oriented smart factory (AOSF) solution and its framework, which showed great results in terms of developing capabilities that are dynamic in nature [18].

Over time, academics have suggested that more research be conducted on the impact of strategic orientations and culture on organisational capacities and long-term firm survival. The connection between corporate culture, marketing capabilities, and strategic orientations needs to be examined. Therefore, in order to successfully develop ambidextrous capabilities, a deeper understanding of the factors that support or impede their development is required, as is a thorough understanding of how various cultural dimensions affect market orientation and adaptive marketing capability [14,19].

Prior scholars have highlighted the significance of organisational characteristics that improve businesses’ capacity for adaptive marketing, allowing them to more effectively carry out exploration and exploitation tasks concurrently [11,13,14].

Therefore, as a response to calls made by various researchers [11,13,14], this study focuses on examining the relationship between adaptive marketing capability and the enhancement of the market ambidexterity of firms, considering strategic orientations as an antecedent.

This study’s main question is as follows: “what is the role of the mediation of strategic orientations in improving the relationship between firms’ adaptive marketing capability and market ambidexterity?”

This study also answers the following sub-questions:

• Is adaptive marketing capability associated with market ambidexterity?
• Is adaptive marketing capability associated with strategic orientations?
• Are strategic orientations associated with market ambidexterity?

This study also adds to the body of knowledge on adaptive marketing capabilities, as its impact on market ambidexterity has not been extensively considered in the past with respect to highly digitalised and competitive markets such as the UAE. Furthermore, this study supports and expands on previous market ambidexterity-related studies such as [13,20], which considered other important variables such as interneural orientations and transformational leadership (as highlighted above).

This paper is divided into eight sections; it starts with the introduction, followed by a theoretical framework, hypothesis development, methodology, analysis, and discussion, and then ends with a section on the conclusion, limitations, and implications.

2. Theoretical Framework

2.1. Dynamic Capability and Inside-Out and Outside-In Views

The present research utilises Dynamic Capability Theory to offer a theoretical framework for explaining the interplay among adaptive marketing capability, strategic orientations, and ambidextrous marketing capability in the context of digital business environment sustainability. Refer to Figure 1 for an illustration showing how these concepts intersect. Capitalising on outside-in and inside-out strategies, imitable high-order dynamic capabilities are gained, leading to the distinguishment of firms through the sensing, seizure, and transformation of dynamic capabilities [21,22,23].

In contrast to these strategies and in order to stay competitive in the modern world, emphasis on employee engagement and the greater use of technology have emerged as crucial components. An organisation’s future agility and potential can be predicted using strategic foresight and artificial intelligence modelling, which models traits, practices, support systems, maturity levels, and other elements of future change. This can be used to help develop the necessary new competencies, skills, and capacities and to employ tools to create an adaptable culture that will increase engagement and performance and help the strategy be implemented successfully [24].

In addition, the adoption of emerging technologies, including artificial intelligence (AI), is a major factor in predicting a company’s agility, which in turn allows for more proactiveness, market responsiveness, and product innovation. Shafiabady et al.’s [24] findings indicated that the following five advantages of organisational agility were statistically significant: improved customer satisfaction; quicker response to shifting market conditions; quicker adaptation of practices based on lessons learned from successes and failures; more efficient ability to move from strategy formulation to execution; and improved organisational efficiency overall.

This study considers the effects of adaptive capability which are built through an outside-in strategy as an enabler supporting the development of strategic orientations that ultimately support the attainment of higher market ambidexterity. Hence, the mediation of strategic orientation is examined to assess its strategic impact on firms’ market ambidexterity—a dependent variable which, in turn, supports firms’ radical innovation of digital products for long-term survival in the market [11,25].

2.2. Adaptive Marketing Capability and Digital Product Innovation

Adaptive marketing capability is defined as a firm’s ability to adjust and respond rapidly to changes in the market [26]. This is achieved through knowledge acquisition, experimentation, and partnerships [25] and automatically enables the growth of resources that are exploited as soon as possible in order to gain competitive advantage [13,27]. The incremental and radical innovation of digital products is enabled through improving a firm’s adaptive capabilities, as illustrated by [11,28,29] in their study on manufacturing firms in Pakistan’s business environment, which is associated with a high level of turbulence and changes. Their study was focused on showing the significant relationship between adaptive marketing capability and product innovations. By navigating the complicated landscape of the digital economy, digital enterprises can promote digital innovation, digital customer engagement, and digital positioning to gain a competitive edge within the digital ecosystem. Thus, their digital dynamic capabilities grow, ultimately enabling firms with higher adaptive capabilities to offer radically differentiated digital products through strategic alliances and partnerships that maximise value creation.

At present, rapid changes in customer preferences, technology, and competition act to drive and define the economy. To ensure their continued survival, businesses need to be more inventive. According to Hult et al. [30], an organisation’s primary competencies for achieving competitiveness are its innovative ability, organisational learning, market orientation, and entrepreneurial ability, all of which support the development of dynamic capabilities [31].

With markets that are always changing and an abundance of available data and information, businesses run a serious risk of slipping behind their competitors and not living up to customer expectations. Hence, rather than sticking to a traditional approach—which is no longer appropriate in terms of satisfying the constantly shifting expectations of the modern market—businesses are now adopting novel marketing strategies and changing their operational procedures as a result of these issues and concerns [25].

Marketing initiatives and agility in reacting to product or market opportunities are the foundation of adaptive marketing capabilities [32]. If adaptive capabilities are leveraged to respond quickly to market opportunities for product innovation, it will have a subsequent major effect on the marketing positioning of the enterprise [33] and its innovation capability, as illustrated in a previous study [34], implying that market adaption has an impact on innovation.

In contemporary marketing-focused firms that aim to lead their respective industries, the notion of adaptive marketing capability (AMC) has become more and more prevalent. In brief, AMC describes the ability of a company to sense the market, foresee opportunities, adapt their strategies flexibly, and proactively adjust to future developments in the market. This ability ultimately enables companies to outperform their rivals and close the gap between their responses and changes in the market. In order to accomplish this, businesses need to expand or improve their current resources, train their marketing staff appropriately, and test the market. This will allow them to experiment with the market and use their experience with respect to market development to adapt [29,35]. Therefore, at present, companies’ marketing strategies are being shaped by digital technological advancements, causing business plans and strategies to shift and evolve towards higher adaptation and driving their agility.

Finally, it is widely acknowledged that adaptive marketing capability is a useful strategy for understanding the market context, maintaining client relationships, boosting a company’s brand, improving sales channels, improving customer communication, and honing product and service selling tactics, as previously confirmed in [25,36,37].

2.3. Digital Business Model Innovation and Strategic Orientations

The digital era is changing the ways in which people interact, firms collaborate, and service providers carry out co-design processes with their customers, representing highly valuable marketing orientation and a customer-centric nature. All of these players are considered to be collaborating in a competitive open digital ecosystem, necessitating strategic orientations to enable the successful development of relationships and aligned goals and objectives. Hence, new business models and ways of working become vital factors for successfully attaining competitive advantage [31]. As a result, firms are able to perform better through the provision of innovative unique offerings [38,39,40]. Alliances and strategic partnerships, as innovative business models, are thus becoming essential differentiating factors promoting the long-term survival of firms. This further facilitates strategic changes driven by technological and customer behaviour changes, with an increasing need for high agility and responsiveness with raising expectations.

2.4. Adaptive Marketing Capability and Market Ambidexterity

The journey of firms in the search for market leadership through adaptiveness has gained the attention of both scholars and executives globally. This quality endows firms with the ability to be market-sensitive, sense opportunities in a timely manner, and adjust their strategies to assure a faster response to the market than their competition, thus gaining a comparative advantage [13,25,36,40]. This is supported, of course, by the widespread adoption of new technologies driven by the Industry 4.0 paradigm [41]. However, a certain tension between exploration and exploitation exists, with higher adaptiveness driving higher ambidexterity, as shown in a previous study [11]. Thus, the evolution of an ambidextrous strategy is enabled by a firm’s dynamic capability, with adaptiveness considered a high-order capability and macro-foundation in this context [21]. With the integration of the resources that a firm generates as a result of the adaptive capability it gains, along with the balancing of strategic exploration activities (outside-in) with the maximisation of the benefits derived from all exploitation activities (new value propositions offered to customers), firms can become ambidextrous and sustainable [8,12,31,42]. This ultimately enables a high level of interconnection with strategic partners in the ecosystem centred around the customer.

H1. 

Adaptive marketing capability positively impacts market ambidexterity.

2.5. Adaptive Marketing Capability and Strategic Orientations

The marketing orientation of a firm is driven by its ability to understand the needs of customers and fulfilling these needs as per customer requirements [43]. This orientation results in positive effects for firms in terms of their growth, performance, and competitiveness. The adaptive marketing concept evolved later, building upon the abovementioned orientation, and enables a higher-level response to changes through vigilant learning, market experimentation, and partnerships (e.g., open marketing) [25]. In this way, the evolution of organisational culture with higher strategic orientation is supported. Strategic orientations are characterised by their proactiveness, responsiveness, and innovation culture, as well as enabling certain abilities. Strategic corporate orientation ultimately enables high levels of growth [14,44]. Later, scholars suggested examining adaptive marketing capability with respect to other variables; hence, this study developed the following hypothesis for examination in the context of the UAE, which is becoming a landmark in market orientation research due to its unique leadership, which encourages the taking of risks and welcomes partnerships across all domains of business.

H2. 

Adaptive marketing capability positively impacts strategic orientations.

2.6. Strategic Orientation and Market Ambidexterity

Strategic orientations and market ambidexterity are among the highest-ranked aspects regarding organisational behaviour, marketing management, and strategic management. Their impacts on long-term survival are essential [14,31], contributing to the maximisation of the benefits gained through resource renewals and the provision of competitive advantage for long-term sustainability in the market.

Recent studies [11,13,25,28] have pointed out that a firm’s ability to adapt to its market requires a culture that drives strong ambidexterity. In a recent study [11], it was argued that the effects of other variables can enhance market ambidexterity capability, thus leading to radical product innovation. Hence, we propose the following hypothesis:

H3. 

Strategic orientations positively impacts market ambidexterity.

2.7. The Intervening Role of Strategic Orientations

Three categories of strategic orientations are used to categorise firms: innovative, proactive, and responsive market orientations. Firms that are acknowledged for possessing these qualities tend to see positive commercial outcomes. Through the effective allocation of their resources, anticipating the demands of their clients, and collaborating with partners and clients to develop creative solutions, these entities show that they are fully prepared to satisfy the needs of their existing clientele. To develop such strategic orientations, diligent learning, data collection, and experimentation are employed, giving rise to the concept of exploration. The growth of the strategic orientations level of a firm is also influenced by its level of adaptive marketing capability. To increase their marketing capabilities and adaptability, businesses should be receptive to new developments and technologies [45,46], and firms with such a culture consequently tend to develop greater ambidexterity [11,25].

The relationships between organisational culture, marketing capabilities, and strategic orientations have become an increasingly prominent focus of scholarly investigation in recent years. A company’s strategic orientations and culture may have a significant impact on its capacities to cultivate market ambidexterity skills and adapt to changing market conditions. Previous studies [13,25,28] have shown that a company’s culture affects how well it can adapt to its external business environment; this ability, in turn, affects its ambidexterity. Therefore, we propose the following hypothesis:

H4. 

The relationship between adaptive marketing capability and market ambidexterity is mediated by strategic orientations.

As a conclusion, Figure 2 below shows the conceptual models of this research, reflecting the hypotheses and theoretical relationships discussed above. The proposed model builds upon existing models through further elucidating the mediating role of strategic orientations.

The interplay between these three factors can impact a company’s capacity to thrive in a variety of market conditions. Ambidextrous strategies that address both present market wants and future opportunities are more likely to be used by companies that successfully match their strategic orientations with their market demands and have strong adaptive marketing skills. With consumer preferences and market systems that might diverge greatly from those in more established economies, this alignment is particularly important in emerging markets.

Through the comprehension and application of these interrelated tactics, businesses can better position themselves for long-term growth and competitiveness in a variety of geographic and economic contexts, in addition to responding to and adapting to current market problems. In emerging economies, [47] shows the significant interconnection between adaptive capability and strategic orientations, highlighting the effects of market conditions and the effects of strategic orientations.

3. Methodology

This study followed a deductive approach using a quantitative research method. This study was carried out primarily in services firms across the United Arab Emirates, covering information and communication technology, IT, Telecommunication, Aviation, Logistics, and other sectors involving incumbents with more than 15 years in operation, employing over 1000 employees operating in the United Arab Emirates. Due to their high level of competitiveness, the need for orientations to survive, and high innovation requirements, these sectors were considered suitable for our study. Industry 4.0 technologies are changing the levels of firm adaptability, and operating models driving their positioning and market leadership have been reflected through ongoing alliances and partnership trends.

An online questionnaire was used to gather data, following a convenience sampling approach via email due to security limitations observed in the same context and targeting those at the managerial level to respond to this unique strategic topic; in particular, those in the middle and upper management of the firms were targeted.

The data collection process resulted in 79 responses, 4 of which were excluded from a quality assurance point of view. The sample size is adequate considering the careful selection of the demographics of the sample. The measurement tool used is PLS-SEM, which deals effectively with small samples [48]. Additionally, when models have numerous constructs and a lot of elements, PLS-SEM offers solutions with small sample sizes [49]. Moreover, the 10 times rule is satisfied [50].

The instrument was developed using validated scales from Q-1 Journals. The AMC construct was measured using 12 items adopted from [11,29], covering three AMC dimensions (vigilant learning, adaptive market experimentation, and open marketing). Examples of these items include “New market information is shared within the company and distributed to different divisions in a timely manner” and “Through trial and error and experimenting, our firm explores future market trends and develops potentially successful business models”. The strategic orientations factor was measured using 18 items adopted from [14,51], reflecting three dimensions: proactive marketing orientation, reactive marketing orientation, and innovation orientation. Examples of these items include “We continuously try to discover additional needs of our customers of which they are unaware”, “Our strategy for competitive advantage is based on our understanding of customers’ needs”, and “Competitors in this market recognize us as innovation leaders”. Market ambidexterity was measured using the scale adopted by [11,52], covering exploration and exploitation dimensions. Examples of these items include “Our Firm use market information that is consistent with your current product market experiences” and “Our firm used market information that takes the firm beyond current product market experiences through market experiments”. The instrument used a 7-point Likert-scale (in English language only, as we targeted respondents in middle and upper management positions), ranging from Strongly Agree (7) to Strongly Disagree (1), across all construct items.

Sample Characteristics

Table 1. Summary of respondent demographics.

Demographics	#	%
Gender
(1) Male	51	68%
(2) Female	24	32%
	Total: 75	Total: 100%
Education Level
(1) High School (or below)	0	00.00%
(2) Higher Colleges of Technologies (HCT) or Institute Graduate	2	2.67%
(3) University Graduate	25	33.33%
(4) Postgraduate (Master/PhD)	48	64.00%
(5) Others	0	00.00%
	Total: 75	Total: 100%
Position
(1) Lower Management	8	10.67%
(2) Middle Management	37	49.33%
(3) Upper Management	27	36.00%
(4) Other	3	4.00%
	Total: 75	Total: 100%
Years of Experience in the Organisation
(1) 1 to 4 years	4	5.33%
(2) 5 to 10 years	8	10.67%
(3) 11 to 15 years	27	36.00%
(4) 16 years or above	36	48.00%
	Total: 75	Total: 100%
Firm Type
(1) Information Communication Technologies (ICT)	11	14.67%
(2) Telecommunication	9	12.00%
(3) IT	5	6.67%
(4) Aviation	5	6.67%
(5) Hotel	7	9.32%
(6) Logistics	8	10.67%
(7) Media	3	4.00%
(8) Banking	3	4.00%
(9) Others	24	32.00%
	Total: 75	Total: 100%
Firm Age (Years of Operations)
(1) 1–4 Years	4	5.33%
(2) 5–10 Years	0	00.00%
(3) 11–15 Years	6	8.00%
(4) 16–20 Years	20	26.67%
(5) >20 Years	45	60.00%
	Total: 75	Total: 100%
What is the approximate total number of employees?
(1) 1–49	5	6.67%
(2) 50–999	0	00.00%
(3) 1000–4999	38	50.67%
(4) Equal or >5000	32	42.66%
	Total: 75	Total: 100%

summarises the results obtained from the survey. The results indicate a higher male contribution (n = 51, 68%), with much fewer female respondents (n = 24, 32%). The respondents hold university and greater degrees, indicating their fitness (n = 73, 97%), and all held middle and upper management positions in their firms (n = 64, 85.33%). The respondents were mostly experienced individuals, with 10 years or more of experience (n = 63, 84%), and worked in a fairly wide range of sectors (ICT, IT, Telecom, Aviation, Logistics, Hotels, and so on).

4. Analysis

Due to the sample size, which consisted of 75 enterprises [53], the Smart Partial Least Squares–Structural Equation Modelling (Smart PLS-SEM V4.0) variance-based statistical technique was used [54], which maximises the prediction power of variances in the dependent variables (as highlighted by [55]) and, thus, enables higher variance explanation. The model consisted entirely of three variables: adaptive marketing capability (AMC), strategic orientations (SOCs), and market ambidexterity (MAC). Hence, the relationships were tested to evaluate the statistical model (refer to Figure 3 below) after completing the convergent and discriminant validity tests, as summarised in

Table 2. Item cross-loading, VIF, CR, α, and AVE values.

Construct	Item	AMC	MAC	SOCs	VIF	CR	Alpha	AVE
		Cross-Loadings
AMC	VML1	0.529	0.280	0.424	1.198	0.748	0.734	0.438
	VML2	0.603	0.394	0.414	1.215
	VML4	0.804	0.506	0.44	1.953
	AME2	0.762	0.459	0.42	1.764
	AME3	0.669	0.402	0.327	1.468
	OM1	0.556	0.420	0.318	1.220
MAC	MER1	0.591	0.744	0.437	1.386	0.707	0.692	0.45
	MER2	0.433	0.729	0.47	1.409
	MER5	0.331	0.621	0.361	1.342
	MET1	0.500	0.674	0.389	1.282
	MET4	0.171	0.570	0.515	1.183
SOCs	PMO2	0.477	0.433	0.695	1.447	0.767	0.75	0.449
	PMO3	0.357	0.516	0.775	1.762
	RMO3	0.453	0.482	0.741	1.536
	RMO4	0.314	0.185	0.476	1.244
	RMO7	0.414	0.492	0.640	1.297

below. The reliability assessment involved the calculation of composite reliability (CR) and Cronbach’s alpha (α) for all constructs. It was found that the α values spanned between 0.692 and 0.750, while the CR values spanned between 0.707 and 0.767. These measures generally surpass the 0.7 threshold, indicating that they are acceptable [56] and, thus, signifying that the chosen measures are robust and dependable. Convergent validity was assessed, and it was found that the AVE values ranged between 0.438 and 0.450. As the CR was above 0.7, the convergent validity was considered acceptable, due to the condition that “if AVE less than 0.5, but composite reliability is higher than 0.6, the convergent validity of the construct is acceptable” [57]. From the discriminant validity results shown in Table 2, all diagonal AVE values were higher than the vertical values, indicating acceptable measures [57]. Furthermore, the cross-loadings of all items across all constructs showed that the square root of AVE for each construct surpassed its correlations with other constructs [58]. Hence, the discriminant validity of the model was confirmed. Finally, the Variance Inflation Factor (VIF) values were below 5, demonstrating that there were no collinearity or common method bias issues [48] as shown in

Table 3. Measurement model.

Construct	Item Weights and Significance	Individual VIF
Adaptive Marketing Capability
VML1	0.219; <0.001	1.198
VML2	0.253; <0.001	1.215
VML4	0.297; <0.001	1.953
AME2	0.276; <0.001	1.764
AME3	0.229; <0.001	1.468
OM1	0.232; <0.001	1.220
Market Ambidexterity
MER1	0.359; <0.001	1.386
MER2	0.318; <0.001	1.409
MER5	0.244; <0.001	1.342
MET1	0.311; <0.001	1.282
MET4	0.246; <0.001	1.183
Strategic Orientations
PMO2	0.275; <0.001	1.447
PMO3	0.266; <0.001	1.762
RMO3	0.283; <0.001	1.536
RMO4	0.150; <0.001	1.244
RMO7	0.275; <0.001	1.297
IO1	0.223; <0.001	1.562

. The latter was supported by the fact that most of the respondents were in middle and upper management and, thus, can be considered to be reliable [59]. It should be noted that Fornell Larcker criteria also found satisfactory, refer to

Table 4. Fornell–Larcker criterion values.

	AMC	MAC	SOCs
AMC	0.662
MAC	0.628	0.671
SOCs	0.593	0.642	0.670

.

In the structural model shown in Figure 4, the path coefficients and ρ values were examined. The direct effects of adaptive marketing capability on market ambidexterity were found to be positive and significant (β = 0.381 and ρ = 0.006 ≤ 0.01), while the effects of adaptive marketing capability on strategic orientations were also positively significant (β = 0.593 and ρ = 0.000 ≤ 0.01). The effects of strategic orientations in terms of the direct relationship with market ambidexterity were found to be significant (β = 0.416 and ρ = 0.004 ≤ 0.01). It is important to highlight that the indirect effects (AMC -> SOCs -> MAC) were also found to be positive and significant (β = 0.247 and ρ = 0.006 ≤ 0.01). Hence, the mediating effects of strategic orientations are significant. The bias of confidence intervals was corrected at the 2.5% (lower band) and 97.5% (higher band) levels for all examined relationships, and the resulting intervals were found to not include zero, confirming the significance of all relationships, as shown in

Table 5. Bootstrapping results.

	Original Sample (O)	Sample Mean (M)	Standard Deviation (STDEV)	T Statistics (|O/STDEV|)	p Values
Direct Effects
AMC -> MAC	0.381	0.395	0.139	2.743	0.006
AMC -> SOCs	0.593	0.620	0.066	8.932	0.000
SOCs -> MAC	0.416	0.409	0.143	2.899	0.004
Total Indirect Effects
AMC -> MAC	0.247	0.252	0.089	2.767	0.006
Specific Indirect Effects
AMC -> SOCs -> MAC	0.247	0.252	0.089	2.767	0.006
Total Effects
AMC -> MAC	0.628	0.647	0.081	7.779	0.000
AMC -> SOCs	0.593	0.62	0.066	8.932	0.000
SOCs -> MAC	0.416	0.409	0.143	2.899	0.004

and

Table 6. Bootstrapping results: bias-corrected confidence intervals.

	Original Sample (O)	Sample Mean (M)	Bias	2.50%	97.50%
Direct Effects
AMC -> MAC	0.381	0.395	0.014	0.096	0.642
AMC -> SOCs	0.593	0.62	0.027	0.412	0.692
SOCs -> MAC	0.416	0.409	−0.006	0.084	0.653
Total Indirect Effects
AMC -> MAC	0.247	0.252	0.006	0.031	0.396
Specific Indirect Effects
AMC -> SOCs -> MAC	0.247	0.252	0.006	0.031	0.396
Total Effects
AMC -> MAC	0.628	0.647	0.019	0.4	0.746
AMC -> SOCs	0.593	0.620	0.027	0.412	0.692
SOCs -> MAC	0.416	0.409	−0.006	0.084	0.653

and illustrated in Figure 5. Therefore, Hypotheses 1, 2, 3, and 4 were all accepted.

5. Discussion

In the modern business environment, where consumer requirements and expectations are driven by massive changes in the technological landscape, firms strive for excellence in the market by maintaining unique capabilities and competencies that differentiate them from their competition. Such capabilities are dynamic in nature and must be adaptive to enable higher ambidexterity through an intensive focus on building a culture that is proactive, responsive, and innovative.

Adaptive marketing capability involves the timely identification of environmental changes and accordingly adjusting marketing strategies [25], while market ambidexterity involves the exploration of new markets, technologies, and innovative solutions (i.e., exploring futuristic opportunities) while matching the current needs of the market with existing product portfolios (i.e., exploiting current assets) [60]. Hence, the long-term sustainability of firms in the market with high performance levels depends critically on the organisation’s capacity to innovate, absorb, adapt, and reconfigure critical internal and external competencies, as has been argued by previous scholars in studies on the impacts of dynamic capabilities [23,61,62].

Therefore, market ambidexterity can be seen as an important response to the conflicting needs of seizing new and attractive market opportunities (e.g., consumer- and business-related) and optimising a firm’s existing assets, resources, and capabilities [60]. According to research conducted by Akgün and Polat [14], adaptive firms are more capable of innovating and accomplishing strategic objectives. They claimed that the outside-in strategy (AMC) and contextual ambidexterity assist organisations in adjusting to an evolving business environment. In this line, our study showed that market ambidexterity is supported and encouraged by adaptive marketing competence, similar to previous studies [11,25,63]. Our study demonstrated a strong positive correlation between adaptive marketing capability and market ambidexterity in the dynamic digital environment of the UAE (β = 0.381, ρ = 0.006, LB [0.096] 2.5%, and UB [0.642] 97.5% bias-corrected).

Strategic-oriented firms are innovative, proactive, and responsive with respect to market needs, and firms that are acknowledged for possessing these distinctive competencies tend to present higher performance outcomes than those who are not. This is achieved through the effective allocation of resources, anticipating the demands of clients, and collaborating with partners and clients to develop, co-design, and co-create new and innovative solutions, which may be complex in nature. These firms remain fully prepared to satisfy the needs of their loyal customers, as achieved through learning, data sensing, analysing, and product-based experimentation, thus enabling higher ambidexterity and innovative capabilities [11,13,25,46].

Denison [64] asserted that an organisation’s culture can significantly influence the efficacy and rationality of decision-making processes. Furthermore, Rangaswamy and Chaudhary [65] found that a culture that promotes innovation and risk-taking might have a favourable effect on an organisation’s capacity for adaptation. Ali et al. [11] found that adaptive marketing capability and market ambidexterity are significantly but negatively mediated by transformational leadership, which is a crucial enabler of strategic orientations. Hence, they suggested the need for further assessment in order to examine the interactive or combinative role of inside-out and outside-in marketing capabilities in promoting contextual ambidexterity.

Our study’s findings indicate that strategic orientations have a positive and significant mediating association between adaptive marketing capability and market ambidexterity, hence providing further insight with respect to the strategic orientations and ambidexterity literature (β = 0.247, LB [0.031] 2.5%, and UB [0.396] 97.5% bias-corrected). This could be a result of the customer-centric culture and collaboration mindset in the context of the UAE. The alignment between business strategy and market ambidexterity may lead to a higher degree of success. In Teece’s study [66], it was asserted that a company’s capacity for change plays a major role in the development and application of effective business models. If their strategic orientations align with the flexible nature of adaptive marketing capabilities, then firms are able to execute both exploration and exploitation simultaneously.

However, cultural resistance may impose challenges to leadership and business decision-making processes in firms [67]. Ambidextrous and adaptive capabilities could also be hampered if the embedded culture of strategic orientations is reluctant to change or lacks the necessary flexibility. Furthermore, it could be challenging to attain market ambidexterity if an imbalance is caused by an excessive emphasis on either exploration or exploitation activities and routines. Hence, maintaining the balance between these two strategic actions is critical for long-term success [60]. Therefore, it is vital for executives to support and focus on their strategic orientations and engage in transformative programmes.

In addition, Denison [64] concluded, using earlier research, that a company’s culture can significantly influence effectiveness and the strategic decision-making process. Moreover, Rangaswamy and Chaudhary [65] found that a culture that promotes innovation and taking chances can aid a company’s capacity for adaptation. The importance of aligning a company’s culture and strategic orientations with its marketing capabilities was also highlighted by a recent study by Ali et al. [11]. Their results demonstrate that a proactive approach to the market and a culture that encourages innovation and taking measured risks had a major impact on AMC. Similarly, their study discovered that a responsive market orientation and a culture that emphasises customer focus and collaboration had a beneficial impact on a firm’s market ambidexterity capability.

From a theoretical point of view, our study contributes to further elucidating the concept of market ambidexterity and its antecedents, thus enabling firms to continue building up and strategically renewing their resources through the sensing, seizure, and transformation of high-order routines [20]. It also confirms the significant role of strategic orientations in strengthening the relationship between adaptive marketing capability and market ambidexterity, which leads to a sustainable competitive advantage.

This study is also regarded as the first to examine the mediating link between strategic orientations in the setting of the United Arab Emirates, as far as the researchers are aware. This situation is appealing because, as previously mentioned, UAE leadership is guiding the nation toward a robust digital economy through its 2031 agenda.

In summary, this research adds to the body of knowledge regarding the relationships between adaptive marketing capability, strategic orientations as a mediator, and market ambidexterity, concluding that all of the considered relationships are significant and providing new insights—especially regarding the mediating effects of strategic orientations—thus further uncovering the role of culture, as requested by previous scholars. However, more research is needed to identify the specific mediating aspects of strategic orientations that have the greatest impacts on the adaptive capabilities of firms, in turn leading to market ambidexterity. This could help in determining which firms must further develop in order to gain a competitive advantage through the leveraging of their strategic resources.

6. Conclusions

This study reveals the role played by strategic orientations in explaining the positive impact of adaptive marketing capability on market ambidexterity as a result of causal relationships. Our findings show a mediation effect of strategic orientations on strengthening firms’ adaptive marketing capabilities, a subset of dynamic capability related to the ability to balance both exploration and exploitation simultaneously. This study uncovers the culture effects of strategic orientations on enhancing firms’ dynamic capabilities, which are driven by the inside-out and outside-in strategies.

Scholars that have adopted the ambidexterity position argue that a business needs particular processes and capabilities that enable it to adjust to its external environment in order to handle both operations at the same time [25,28,68]. However, scholars have contended that, in order for a firm’s adaptive marketing capabilities to respond to its external environment, they also require other organisational components that may increase their influence [13,25].

The development of market ambidexterity capabilities and adaptability to dynamic market conditions can be significantly impacted by a company’s strategic orientation and culture. Previous studies [13,25,28] have highlighted how a company’s culture affects its capacity to adapt to its external business environment, which, in turn, affects the relationship between this adaptive capability and a market’s ambidexterity. This study thus responds to the call [11,13,14] for the determination of how this important variable (strategic orientations) affects the evolution of the relationship between AMC and MAC, providing further insight to better understand the behaviours associated with dynamic capabilities and their operationalisation. Hence, the research findings also add to the body of knowledge on dynamic capabilities, ambidexterity theory, and strategic orientations. In particular, this study reveals that adaptive marketing capability is a dynamic capability that directly affects a firm’s capacity to attain market ambidexterity [31,62].

Practically, firms may find themselves in a “success trap,” wherein their previous achievements and dominant market position lead to a lack of innovation and complacency [65]. To overcome this barrier, firms must continue to prioritise the demands of their clients. They also need to develop new marketing strategies and capabilities that will help them to stay one step ahead of their competition [69]. In addition, firms operating in a dynamic commercial environment may be forced to develop ambidexterity [68]. Due to their limited resources, businesses functioning in highly dynamic business environments, particularly those in emerging economies, are compelled to seize new market opportunities while also consolidating their existing business. Wang and Rafiq [70] have stated that ambidexterity is vital and required in these circumstances to achieve both short- and long-term positioning, differentiation, and success, thus helping a firm to remain viable.

Finally, this study has limitations similar to those of other relevant studies. This study adopted a cross-sectional survey method, and future researchers could perform longitudinal studies in other non-technological contexts to expand upon the results presented here. Also, the data collection method in this study followed convivence sampling, and the control variables were excluded, which could impact interpretability, so the same should be addressed by future researchers.

Furthermore, other moderation variables could be included in the conceptual model proposed in this study; for example, other organisational aspects such as decision-making effectiveness and business model innovation could be examined as mediators. Additionally, this study did not utilise control variables, which could be considered by future researchers in order to assess the presence of confounding effects.