Organizational Strategic Intuition for High Performance: The Role of Knowledge-Based Dynamic Capabilities and Digital Transformation
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
2.1. Knowledge-Based Dynamic Capabilities
2.2. Digital Transformation
2.3. Organizational Strategic Intuition
2.4. High-Performance Organization
2.5. Hypotheses Development
3. Methodology
3.1. Research Design
3.2. Data Analysis Methods
4. Results and Discussions
4.1. Goodness-of-Fit
4.2. Reflective Measurement Models
4.3. Structural Model
4.4. Hypothesis Testing
5. Conclusions
5.1. Theoretical Contributions
5.2. Practical Implications
5.3. Limitations and Future Research
5.4. Conclusion
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Schoemaker, P.; Heaton, S.; Teece, D. Innovation, dynamic capabilities, and leadership. Calif. Manag. Rev. 2018, 61, 15–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Moccia, S.; Zhao, S.; Flanagan, P. Innovation, dynamic capabilities, leadership, and action plan. J. Enterp. Communities 2020, 14, 113–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Calabretta, G.; Gemser, G.; Wijnberg, N. The interplay between intuition and rationality in strategic decision making: A paradox perspective. Organ. Stud. 2017, 38, 365–401. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Kuusela, H.; Koivumäki, S.; Yrjölä, M. M&As get another assist: When CEOs add intuition to the decision mix. J. Bus. Strategy 2020, 41, 57–65. [Google Scholar]
- Jung, C.G. Psychological Types: Bollingen Series XX, Volume 6; Princeton University Press: Princeton, NJ, USA, 1971. [Google Scholar]
- Duggan, W.R. Strategic Intuition: The Creative Spark in Human Achievement; Columbia University Press: New York, NY, USA, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Barney, J. Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. JOM 1991, 17, 99–120. [Google Scholar]
- Jutidharabongse, J.; Aujirapongpan, S.; Ritkaew, S. Dynamic knowledge management capability and strategic intuition of Thai entrepreneurs. Entrep. Sustain. Issues 2020, 7, 2955–2966. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Loonam, J.; Eaves, S.; Kumar, V.; Parry, G. Towards digital transformation: Lessons learned from traditional organizations. Strateg. Chang. 2018, 27, 101–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schoeman, A.; Bick, G.; Barnardo, C. Cape union mart: Digital transformation and customer experience during a crisis. Emerald Emerg. Mark. Case Stud. 2021, 11, 1–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guo, L.; Xu, L. The effects of digital transformation on firm performance: Evidence from China’s manufacturing sector. Sustainability 2021, 13, 12844. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aujirapongpan, S.; Hareebin, Y. The effect of strategic intuition, business analytic, networking capabilities and dynamic strategy on innovation performance: The empirical study Thai processed food exporters. Asian Financ. Econ. Bus. 2020, 7, 259–268. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aujirapongpan, S.; Ru-zhe, J.; Jutidharabongse, J. Strategic intuition capability toward performance of entrepreneurs: Evidence from Thailand. J. Asian Financ. Econ. Bus. 2020, 7, 465–473. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Do, T.; Mai, N. High-performance organization: A literature review. J. Strategy Manag. 2020, 13, 297–309. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Teece, D.J.; Pisano, G.; Shuen, A.A. Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strateg. Manag. J. 1997, 18, 509–533. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brandon-Jones, A.; Knoppen, D. The role of strategic purchasing in dynamic capability development and deployment: A contingency perspective. Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manag. 2018, 38, 446–473. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kaur, V. Knowledge-Based Dynamic Capabilities: The Road ahead in Gaining Organizational Competitiveness; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2019. [Google Scholar]
- Wang, E.; Klein, G.; Jiang, J. IT support in manufacturing firms for a knowledge management dynamic capability link to performance. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2007, 45, 2419–2434. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zheng, S.; Zhang, W.; Wu, X.; Du, J. Knowledge-based dynamic capabilities and innovation in networked environments. J. Knowl. Manag. 2011, 15, 1035–1051. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Denford, J. Building knowledge: Developing a knowledge-based dynamic capabilities typology. J. Knowl. Manag. 2013, 17, 175–194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shikata, N.; Imahashi, H.; Gemba, K. An analysis of diversification dynamics of R&D activities and external collaboration in major manufacturing industries in Japan. Forum Sci. Oeconomia 2021, 9, 79–97. [Google Scholar]
- Suh, Y.; Jeon, J. Monitoring patterns of open innovation using the patent-based brokerage analysis. Technol. Forecast Soc. 2019, 146, 595–605. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yun, J.J.; Zhao, X.; Jung, K.; Yigitcanlar, T. The culture for open innovation dynamics. Sustainability 2020, 12, 5076. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, S.; Park, G.; Yoon, B.; Park, J. Open innovation in SMEs—An intermediated network model. Res. Policy 2010, 39, 290–300. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mäkimattila, M.; Melkas, H.; Uotila, T. Dynamics of openness in innovation processes—A case study in the Finnish food industry. Knowl. Process. Manag. 2013, 20, 243–255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yun, J.J.; Won, D.; Park, K. Entrepreneurial cyclical dynamics of open innovation. J. Evol. Econ. 2018, 28, 1151–1174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yun, J.J.; Zhao, X.; Kim, S.A.; Sadoi, Y. Open innovation dynamics of furniture design and function: The difference between IKEA and Nitori. Sci. Technol. Soc. 2022, 27, 172–190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, H.; Han, Z.; Zhou, Y. Optimal degree of openness in open innovation: A perspective from knowledge acquisition & knowledge leakage. Technol. Soc. 2021, 67, 101756. [Google Scholar]
- Gonzalez, R.; Melo, T. Analyzing dynamic capability in teamwork. J. Knowl. Manag. 2019, 23, 1196–1217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cohen, W.; Levinthal, D. Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Adm. Sci. Q. 1990, 35, 128–152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Choi, K.; Jean, R.-J.; Kim, D. The impacts of organizational learning capacities on relationship-specific innovations: Evidence from the global buyer–supplier relationship. Int. Mark. Rev. 2019, 36, 1042–1066. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cordero, P.L.; Ferreira, J. Absorptive capacity and organizational mechanisms: A systematic review and future directions. Rev. Int. Bus. Strategy 2018, 29, 61–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vlaisavljevic, V.; Medina, C.C.; Van Looy, B. The role of policies and the contribution of cluster agency in the development of biotech open innovation ecosystem. Technol. Forecast Soc. Chang. 2020, 155, 119987. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Teixeira, E.; Oliveira, M.; Curado, C. Linking knowledge management processes to innovation: A mixed-method and cross-national approach. Manag. Res. Rev. 2020, 43, 332–349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kotler, P.; Kartajaya, H.; Setiawan, I. Marketing 5.0: Technology for Humanity; Wiley: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2021. [Google Scholar]
- Shahi, C.; Sinha, M. Digital transformation: Challenges faced by organizations and their potential solutions. Int. J. Innov. Sci. 2021, 13, 17–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hess, T.; Matt, C.; Benlian, A.; Wiesböck, F. Options for formulating a digital transformation strategy. MIS Q. Exec. 2016, 12, 123–139. [Google Scholar]
- Peter, M.; Kraft, C.; Lindeque, J. Strategic action fields of digital transformation: An exploration of the strategic action fields of Swiss SMEs and large enterprises. J. Strategy Manag. 2020, 13, 160–180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vial, G. Understanding digital transformation: A review and a research agenda. J. Strateg. Inf. Syst. 2019, 28, 118–144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Warner, K.; Wäger, M. Building dynamic capabilities for digital transformation: An ongoing process of strategic renewal. Long Range Plan. 2019, 52, 326–349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Agrawal, P.; Narain, R.; Ullah, I. Analysis of barriers in implementation of digital transformation of supply chain using interpretive structural modelling approach. J. Model. Manag. 2020, 15, 297–317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yoo, Y.; Henfridsson, O.; Lyytinen, K. The new organizing logic of digital innovation: An agenda for information systems research. Inf. Syst. Res. 2010, 21, 724–735. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nambisan, S. Digital entrepreneurship: Toward a digital technology perspective of entrepreneurship. Entrep. Theory Pract. 2017, 41, 1029–1055. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Garzoni, A.; De Turi, I.; Secundo, G.; Del Vecchio, P. Fostering digital transformation of SMEs: A four levels approach. Manag. Decis. 2020, 58, 1543–1562. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Baber, W.; Ojala, A.; Martinez, R. Effectuation logic in digital business model transformation: Insights from Japanese high-tech innovators. J. Small Bus. Enterp. Dev. 2019, 26, 811–830. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ghadiali, A. Intuition: Access Your Inner Wisdom. Trust Your Instincts. Find Your Path; DK: New York, NY, USA, 2021. [Google Scholar]
- Bajaj, P. Intuition: Awakening the Intelligence of Body and MindI; Hay House Publishers India: New Delhi, India, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Chestney, K. Radical Intuition: A Revolutionary Guide to Using Your Inner Power; New World Library: Novato, CA, USA, 2020. [Google Scholar]
- Okoli, J.; Watt, J. Crisis decision-making: The overlap between intuitive and analytical strategies. Manag. Decis. 2018, 56, 1122–1134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Klein, G.; Calderwood, R.; Clinton-Cirocco, A. Rapid decision making on the fire ground. Proc. Hum. Factors Ergon. Soc. Annu. Meet. 1986, 30, 576–580. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Simon, H. Making management decisions: The role of intuition and emotion. Acad. Manag. Exec. 1987, 1, 57–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Duggan, W.R. Strategic Intuition: The Key to Innovation. 2006. Available online: https://cdn.ymaws.com/www.strategyassociation.org/resource/resmgr/Pastpresentation-MNY/DugganOct08.pdf (accessed on 6 June 2022).
- von Clausewitz, C. On War; Penguin: New York, NY, USA, 1968. [Google Scholar]
- Peters, T.J.; Waterman, R.H. In Search of Excellence: Lessons from America’s Best-Run Companies; HarperCollins Publishers: New York, NY, USA, 1982. [Google Scholar]
- de Waal, A. The characteristics of a high performance organization. Bus. Strategy Ser. 2007, 8, 179–185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Amah, O.E.; Oyetunde, K. Determinants of high-performance organizations in Africa: A conceptual framework and research propositions. IJMESS 2019, 8, 319–333. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, Z.; Jiang, Y.; Yao, Z.; Liu, X.; Zhao, L.; Zhang, X. Congruence in career calling and employees’ innovation performance: Work passion as a mediator. Chin. Manag. Stud. 2021, 12, 363–381. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rahimnia, F.; Molavi, H. A model for examining the effects of communication on innovation performance: Emphasis on the intermediary role of strategic decision-making speed. Eur. J. Innov. Manag. 2021, 24, 1035–1056. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nieves, J.; Osorio, J. Using information technology to achieve management innovation. Acad. Rev. Latinoam. Adm. 2019, 32, 20–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pivec, M.; Macek, A. Employment background influence on social media usage in the field of european project management and communication. J. Bus. Res. 2019, 94, 280–289. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Freeman, R. Ownership when AI robots do more of the work and earn more of the income. JPEO 2018, 1, 74–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- de Waal, A. Success factors of high performance organization transformations. Meas. Bus. Excell. 2018, 22, 375–390. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Mokhtarzadeh, N.; Mahdiraji, H.; Jafarpanah, I.; Jafari-Sadeghi, V.; Cardinali, S. Investigating the impact of networking capability on firm innovation performance: Using the resource-action-performance framework. J. Intellect. Cap. 2020, 21, 1009–1034. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Carcary, M.; Doherty, E.; Conway, G. A dynamic capability approach to digital transformation: A focus on key foundational themes. In Proceedings of the 10th European Conference on Information Systems Management, Evora, Portugal, 8–9 September 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Khin, S.; Ho, T. Digital technology, digital capability and organizational performance: A mediating role of digital innovation. Int. J. Innov. Sci. 2020, 11, 177–195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fernandes, A. The effect of organization culture and technology on motivation, knowledge asset and knowledge management. IJLMA 2018, 60, 1087–1096. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lin, H. A stage model of knowledge management: An empirical investigation of process and effectiveness. J. Inf. Sci. 2007, 33, 643–659. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Secundo, G.; Rippa, P.; Meoli, M. Digital transformation in entrepreneurship education centres: Preliminary evidence from the Italian Contamination Labs network. Int. J. Entrep. Behav. Res. 2020, 26, 1589–1605. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bullini Orlandi, L.; Pierce, P. Analysis or intuition? Reframing the decision-making styles debate in technological settings. Manag. Decis. 2020, 58, 129–145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kock, N.; Hadaya, P. Minimum sample size estimation in PLS-SEM: The inverse square root and gamma-exponential methods. Inf. Syst. J. 2016, 28, 227–261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hair, J.; Risher, J.; Sarstedt, M.; Ringle, C. When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM. Eur. Bus. Rev. 2019, 31, 2–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shmueli, G.; Koppius, O. Predictive analytics in information systems research. MIS Q. 2011, 35, 553–572. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Shmueli, G.; Ray, S.; Velasquez Estrada, J.; Shatla, S. The elephant in the room: Evaluating the predictive performance of PLS models. J. Bus. Res. 2016, 69, 4552–4564. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shmueli, G.; Sarstedt, M.; Hair, J.; Cheah, J.-H.; Ting, H.; Vaithilingam, S.; Ringle, C. Predictive model assessment in PLS-SEM: Guidelines for using PLSpredict. Eur. J. Mark. 2019, 53, 2322–2347. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alvarenga, A.; Matos, F.; Godina, R.; Matias, J. Digital transformation and knowledge management in the public sector. Sustainability 2020, 12, 5824. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Di Vaio, A.; Palladino, R.; Pezzi, A.; Kalisz, D. The role of digital innovation in knowledge management systems: A systematic literature review. J. Bus. Res. 2021, 123, 220–231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bereznoy, A.; Meissner, D.; Scuotto, V. The intertwining of knowledge sharing and creation in the digital platform based ecosystem: A conceptual study on the lens of the open innovation approach. J. Knowl. Manag. 2021, 25, 2022–2042. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Melović, B.; Jocović, M.; Dabić, M.; Backović Vulić, T.; Dudic, B. The impact of digital transformation and digital marketing on the brand promotion, positioning and electronic business in Montenegro. Technol. Soc. 2020, 63, 101425. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shen, Q.; Hua, Y.; Huang, Y.; Ebstein, R.; Yu, X. Knowledge management and modern digital transformation of the property management industry in China. J. Knowl. Manag. 2021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Singh, S.; Sharma, M.; Dhir, S. Modeling the effects of digital transformation in Indian manufacturing industry. Technol. Soc. 2021, 67, 101763. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sayyadi, M. How effective leadership of knowledge management impacts organizational performance. Bus. Inf. Rev. 2019, 36, 30–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, H.; Feng, J.; Zhang, H.; Li, X. The effect of digital transformation strategy on performance: The moderating role of cognitive conflict. Int. J. Confl. Manag. 2020, 31, 441–462. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sousa-Zomer, T.; Neely, A.; Martinez, V. Digital transforming capability and performance: A microfoundational perspective. Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manag. 2020, 40, 1095–1128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- AlMulhim, A. Smart supply chain and firm performance: The role of digital technologies. Bus. Process. Manag. J. 2021, 27, 1353–1372. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Measure | Value | Frequency | Percentage |
---|---|---|---|
Focused market | REM | 127 | 77.91% |
REM and OEM | 36 | 22.09% | |
Operation period | Under 5 years | 13 | 7.98% |
5 to under 10 years | 36 | 22.09% | |
10 to under 15 years | 46 | 28.22% | |
15 to under 20 years | 30 | 18.40% | |
20 years and above | 38 | 23.31% | |
Respondents | CEO | 89 | 54.60% |
Engineer | 58 | 35.58% | |
Senior Technician | 16 | 9.82% |
Discrepancy | Value | HI95 | HI99 | Conclusion |
---|---|---|---|---|
SRMR | 0.062 | 0.060 | 0.065 | Supported |
dULS | 0.404 | 0.384 | 0.439 | Supported |
dG | 0.185 | 0.212 | 0.229 | Supported |
Construct and Indicators | Loading | VIF | α | ρA | ρc | AVE | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Knowledge-based Dynamic Capabilities | 0.840 | 0.847 | 0.893 | 0.676 | |||
Absorptive Capability | 0.827 *** | 1.860 | |||||
Generation Capability | 0.769 *** | 1.629 | |||||
Storage Capability | 0.864 *** | 2.099 | |||||
Adaptation Capability | 0.827 *** | 1.907 | |||||
Digital Transformation | 0.853 | 0.853 | 0.911 | 0.773 | |||
Digital Technology Usage | 0.908 *** | 2.575 | |||||
Encouragement | 0.871 *** | 2.107 | |||||
Barrier Elimination | 0.858 *** | 1.937 | |||||
Organizational Strategic Intuition | 0.802 | 0.814 | 0.883 | 0.716 | |||
Learning from History | 0.878 *** | 1.879 | |||||
Business Strategy Creation | 0.856 *** | 1.758 | |||||
Resolution | 0.802 *** | 1.608 | |||||
High-performance Organization | 0.819 | 0.828 | 0.881 | 0.649 | |||
Innovation Generation | 0.813 *** | 1.755 | |||||
Technology | 0.707 *** | 1.484 | |||||
Internal Environment | 0.854 *** | 2.119 | |||||
External Environment | 0.842 *** | 1.987 |
Constructs | Fornell–Larcker Criterion | HTMT | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
(1) | (2) | (3) | (4) | (1) | (2) | (3) | (4) | |
(1) KBDCs | 0.822 | |||||||
(2) DT | 0.388 | 0.879 | 0.454 | |||||
(3) OSI | 0.538 | 0.620 | 0.846 | 0.644 | 0.744 | |||
(4) HPO | 0.414 | 0.478 | 0.511 | 0.806 | 0.498 | 0.571 | 0.624 |
Construct and Indicators | R2 | Q2 | Q2predict (PLS-SEM) | PLSpredict | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MAE (PLS-SEM) | MAE (LM) | |||||
Digital Transformation | 0.151 | 0.110 (low) | 0.133 | All PLS-SEM less than LM (high) | ||
Digital Technology Usage | 0.087 | 0.367 | 0.370 | |||
Encouragement | 0.105 | 0.348 | 0.351 | |||
Barrier Elimination | 0.108 | 0.320 | 0.323 | |||
Organizational Strategic Intuition | 0.489 (weak) | 0.333 (medium) | 0.276 | Majority of PLS-SEM less than LM (medium) | ||
Learning from History | 0.293 | 0.230 | 0.233 | |||
Business Strategy Creation | 0.166 | 0.263 | 0.266 | |||
Resolution | 0.119 | 0.274 | 0.274 | |||
High-performance Organization | 0.325 (weak) | 0.191 (low) | 0.152 | Majority of PLS-SEM less than LM (medium) | ||
Innovation Generation | 0.096 | 0.343 | 0.349 | |||
Technology | 0.057 | 0.311 | 0.311 | |||
Internal Environment | 0.138 | 0.343 | 0.341 | |||
External Environment | 0.092 | 0.363 | 0.370 |
Hypothesis | Relationships | Effects | β | t-Values | p-Values | Fail to Reject H0 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
H1 | KBDCs -> DT | Direct | 0.388 *** | 4.913 | 0.000 | YES |
H2 | KBDCs -> OSI | Direct | 0.350 *** | 5.285 | 0.000 | YES |
Indirect | 0.188 *** | 3.440 | 0.000 | - | ||
Total | 0.538 *** | 9.699 | 0.000 | - | ||
H3 | DT -> OSI | Direct | 0.484 *** | 6.885 | 0.000 | YES |
H4 | KBDCs -> HPO | Direct | 0.176 * | 2.190 | 0.014 | YES |
Indirect | 0.237 *** | 3.583 | 0.000 | - | ||
Total | 0.414 *** | 5.885 | 0.000 | - | ||
H5 | DT -> HPO | Direct | 0.247 ** | 2.597 | 0.005 | YES |
Indirect | 0.127 ** | 2.376 | 0.009 | - | ||
Total | 0.374 *** | 4.072 | 0.000 | - | ||
H6 | OSI -> HPO | Direct | 0.263 ** | 2.545 | 0.005 | YES |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Songkajorn, Y.; Aujirapongpan, S.; Jiraphanumes, K.; Pattanasing, K. Organizational Strategic Intuition for High Performance: The Role of Knowledge-Based Dynamic Capabilities and Digital Transformation. J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex. 2022, 8, 117. https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc8030117
Songkajorn Y, Aujirapongpan S, Jiraphanumes K, Pattanasing K. Organizational Strategic Intuition for High Performance: The Role of Knowledge-Based Dynamic Capabilities and Digital Transformation. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity. 2022; 8(3):117. https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc8030117
Chicago/Turabian StyleSongkajorn, Yaninee, Somnuk Aujirapongpan, Kritsakorn Jiraphanumes, and Kanittha Pattanasing. 2022. "Organizational Strategic Intuition for High Performance: The Role of Knowledge-Based Dynamic Capabilities and Digital Transformation" Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity 8, no. 3: 117. https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc8030117
APA StyleSongkajorn, Y., Aujirapongpan, S., Jiraphanumes, K., & Pattanasing, K. (2022). Organizational Strategic Intuition for High Performance: The Role of Knowledge-Based Dynamic Capabilities and Digital Transformation. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 8(3), 117. https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc8030117