RISS 학술연구정보서비스

검색

인기 검색어

    다국어 입력

    http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.

    변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.

    예시)
    • 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
    • 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
    닫기
    KCI우수등재

    정보기술역량과 조직학습이 기업성과에 미치는 영향 = 조직민첩성의 역할을 중심으로

    한글로보기

    https://www.riss.kr/link?id=A100856855

    • 0

      상세조회
    • 0

      다운로드
    서지정보 열기
    • 내보내기
    • 내책장담기
    • 공유하기
      • URL 복사
    • 오류접수
    인용문이 복사되었습니다.

    부가정보

    다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract) kakao i 다국어 번역

    Current business environments are increasingly hyper-competitive and rapidly changing due to globalization and the advancement of information and communication technologies. In order to identify opportunities and threats from such turbulent environments and respond to them appropriately, many companies are putting effort into developing dynamic capabilities. Organizational agility, as a type of dynamic capability of an organization that helps companies rapidly adapt to dynamic environment, plays an important role in sustaining competitive advantage and enhancing organizational performance. Despite the importance of organizational agility, however, there has been little empirical research on its antecedents and impacts. Based on the dynamic capability theory, this study proposes a theoretical research model that explains formation and consequence of organizational agility and tests it empirically. We propose information technology competency and organizational learning as formation factors of organizational agility, while suggesting organizational performance as its consequence factor. With this motivation, this study has three research objectives. First, this study proposes a role of dynamic capability that organizations can use to appropriately respond to changing business environments. In particular, we conceptualize organizational agility as being one of the most important dynamic capabilities of organizations and examine its role in an organizational setting. Second, this study introduces and tests a theoretical model accounting for the relationships among information technology competency, organizational learning, organizational agility, and organizational performance. In addition, this study examines a mediating role of organizational agility between its antecedents and organizational performance. Third, we aim to provide insights on how to create and improve organizational agility by analyzing the research findings. This suggests the direction for the management on how to deploy organizational resources. In order to test the proposed model, the overall approach employed was a field study using the structural equation model. We developed our data collection instrument by adopting existing validated questions wherever possible. Organization-level samples collected from 84 companies were used to empirically examine the proposed research model. We carried out data analysis using a twostep methodology with LISREL 8.7. The first step in the data analysis was to establish the convergent and discriminant validity of the constructs. In the second step, we examined the structural model based on the cleansed measurement model. The empirical results supported the proposed model and identified the mediation role of organizational agility. As a result of the analysis, the following findings were discussed. First, information technology competency significantly influenced both organizational agility and organizational learning. Second, it was revealed that organizational learning significantly influenced organizational agility. Third, organizational agility was found to have an impact on organizational performance. In conclusion, the theoretical and practical implications of this study were discussed, along with its limitations.
    번역하기

    Current business environments are increasingly hyper-competitive and rapidly changing due to globalization and the advancement of information and communication technologies. In order to identify opportunities and threats from such turbulent environmen...

    Current business environments are increasingly hyper-competitive and rapidly changing due to globalization and the advancement of information and communication technologies. In order to identify opportunities and threats from such turbulent environments and respond to them appropriately, many companies are putting effort into developing dynamic capabilities. Organizational agility, as a type of dynamic capability of an organization that helps companies rapidly adapt to dynamic environment, plays an important role in sustaining competitive advantage and enhancing organizational performance. Despite the importance of organizational agility, however, there has been little empirical research on its antecedents and impacts. Based on the dynamic capability theory, this study proposes a theoretical research model that explains formation and consequence of organizational agility and tests it empirically. We propose information technology competency and organizational learning as formation factors of organizational agility, while suggesting organizational performance as its consequence factor. With this motivation, this study has three research objectives. First, this study proposes a role of dynamic capability that organizations can use to appropriately respond to changing business environments. In particular, we conceptualize organizational agility as being one of the most important dynamic capabilities of organizations and examine its role in an organizational setting. Second, this study introduces and tests a theoretical model accounting for the relationships among information technology competency, organizational learning, organizational agility, and organizational performance. In addition, this study examines a mediating role of organizational agility between its antecedents and organizational performance. Third, we aim to provide insights on how to create and improve organizational agility by analyzing the research findings. This suggests the direction for the management on how to deploy organizational resources. In order to test the proposed model, the overall approach employed was a field study using the structural equation model. We developed our data collection instrument by adopting existing validated questions wherever possible. Organization-level samples collected from 84 companies were used to empirically examine the proposed research model. We carried out data analysis using a twostep methodology with LISREL 8.7. The first step in the data analysis was to establish the convergent and discriminant validity of the constructs. In the second step, we examined the structural model based on the cleansed measurement model. The empirical results supported the proposed model and identified the mediation role of organizational agility. As a result of the analysis, the following findings were discussed. First, information technology competency significantly influenced both organizational agility and organizational learning. Second, it was revealed that organizational learning significantly influenced organizational agility. Third, organizational agility was found to have an impact on organizational performance. In conclusion, the theoretical and practical implications of this study were discussed, along with its limitations.

    더보기

    참고문헌 (Reference)

    1 곽기영, "기반 조직민첩성이 기업성과에 미치는 영향: 동적역량이론 관점" 2010

    2 Kalakota, R, "e-business 2.0: Roadmap for Success" Addison-Wesley 2001

    3 Thomas, J., "Understanding Strategic Learning: Linking Organizational Learning, Knowledge Management, and Sensemaking" 12 (12): 331-345, 2001

    4 Nevis, E. C., "Understanding Organizations as Learning Systems" 36 : 73-85, 1995

    5 Taylor, S, "Understanding Information technology Usage: A Test of Competing Models" 6 (6): 144-176, 1995

    6 Cronin,M, "Unchained Value: The New Logic of Digital Business" Harvard Business School Press 2000

    7 Makadok,R, "Towards a Synthesis of the Resource-Based and Dynamic-Capability Views of Rent Creation" 22 (22): 387-401, 2001

    8 Dickson,P, "Toward a General Theory of Competitive Rationality" 56 (56): 69-83, 1992

    9 Schein,E, "Three Culture of Management: The Key to Organizational Learning" 38 (38): 9-20, 1996

    10 Nastanski,M, "The Value of Active Scanning to Senior Executives" 23 (23): 426-436, 2004

    1 곽기영, "기반 조직민첩성이 기업성과에 미치는 영향: 동적역량이론 관점" 2010

    2 Kalakota, R, "e-business 2.0: Roadmap for Success" Addison-Wesley 2001

    3 Thomas, J., "Understanding Strategic Learning: Linking Organizational Learning, Knowledge Management, and Sensemaking" 12 (12): 331-345, 2001

    4 Nevis, E. C., "Understanding Organizations as Learning Systems" 36 : 73-85, 1995

    5 Taylor, S, "Understanding Information technology Usage: A Test of Competing Models" 6 (6): 144-176, 1995

    6 Cronin,M, "Unchained Value: The New Logic of Digital Business" Harvard Business School Press 2000

    7 Makadok,R, "Towards a Synthesis of the Resource-Based and Dynamic-Capability Views of Rent Creation" 22 (22): 387-401, 2001

    8 Dickson,P, "Toward a General Theory of Competitive Rationality" 56 (56): 69-83, 1992

    9 Schein,E, "Three Culture of Management: The Key to Organizational Learning" 38 (38): 9-20, 1996

    10 Nastanski,M, "The Value of Active Scanning to Senior Executives" 23 (23): 426-436, 2004

    11 Daniel, E. M, "The Role of Dynamic Capabilities in e-business Transformation" 12 : 282-296, 2003

    12 Grant,R, "The Resource-Based Theory of Competitive Advantage" 33 (33): 114-135, 1991

    13 Li, T., "The Relationships between Market-Driven Learning and New Product Success in Export Markets" 16 (16): 476-503, 1999

    14 Bettis, R, "The New Competitive Landscape" 16 : 7-19, 1995

    15 Levinthal, D, "The Myopia of Learning" 14 : 95-112, 1993

    16 Senge,P, "The Fifth Discipline" Doubleday 1990

    17 Atuahene-Gima, K., "The Contingent Value of Responsive and Proactive Market Orientations for New Product Program Performance" 22 : 464-482, 2005

    18 Brown, S, "The Art Continuous Change: Linking Complexity Theory and Time-paced Evolution in Relentlessly Shifting Organizations" 42 (42): 1-34, 1997

    19 Christopher, M, "Supply Chain Migration from Lean and Functional to Agile and Customized" 5 (5): 206-213, 2000

    20 Anderson, J. C., "Structural Equation Modeling in Practice: Review and Recommended Two-Step Approach" 103 (103): 411-423, 1988

    21 Gefen, D., "Structural Equation Modeling and Regression: Guidelines for Research Practice" 4 : 1-70, 2000

    22 Venkatraman,N, "Strategic Orientation of Business Enterprises" 35 (35): 942-962, 1989

    23 Ansoff,H.I, "Strategic Issue Management" 2 (2): 32-148, 1980

    24 Amit, R, "Strategic Assets and Organizational Rent" 13 (13): 33-46, 1993

    25 Sambamurthy, V., "Shaping Agility through Digital Options: Reconceptualizing the Role of Information Technology in Contemporary Firms" 27 (27): 237-263, 2003

    26 Bradly, S. P, "Sense and Respond: Capturing Value in the Network Era" Harvard Business School Press 1998

    27 Narver, J., "Responsive and Proactive Market Orientation and New-Product Success" 21 : 334-347, 2004

    28 Dove,R, "Response Ability: The Language, Structure, and Culture of the Agile Enterprise" John Wiley and Sons 2001

    29 Sampler,J, "Redefining Industry Structure for the Information Age" 19 : 343-355, 1998

    30 Fichman,R, "Real Options and IT Platform Adoption; Implications for Theory and Practice" 2 (2): 132-154, 2004

    31 Rao,M, "Overview: The Social Life of KM Tools, in Knowledge Management Tools and Techniques: Practitioners and Experts Evaluate KM Solutions" Butterworth-Heinimann 1-73, 2004

    32 Huber,G.P, "Organizational Learning: The Contributing Processes and the Literatures" 2 (2): 99-115, 1991

    33 Brodtrick,O, "Organizational Learning and Innovation: Tools for Revitalizing Public Services" 64 (64): 83-96, 1998

    34 Therin, F, "Organizational Learning and Innovation in High-Tech Small Firms" 2003

    35 Andreu, R, "Organizational Learning and Core Capabilities Development: The Role of IT" 5 : 111-127, 1996

    36 Yeung, A., "Organizational Learning Capability: Generating and Generalizing Ideas with Impact" Oxford University Press 1999

    37 Fiol, C, "Organizational Learning" 10 (10): 806-813, 1985

    38 Moorman, C, "Organizational Improvisation and Organizational Memory" 23 (23): 698-723, 1997

    39 Malhotra,Y, "Organizational Controls as Enablers and Constraints in Successful Knowledge Management Systems Implementation in Knowledge management and Business Model Innovation" Idea Group Publishing 326-336, 2001

    40 Kusunoki, K., "Organizational Capabilities in Product Development of Japanese Firms: A Conceptual Framework and Empirical Findings" 9 (9): 699-718, 1998

    41 Collis,D.J, "Organization Structure, Environment and Performance: The Role of Strategic Choice" 6 : 1-22, 1994

    42 Wheeler,B.C, "NEBIC: A Dynamic Capabilities Theory for Assessing Net-Enablement" 13 (13): 125-146, 2002

    43 Hair, J. T., "Multivariate Data Analysis, 5th ed" Prentice Hall 1-730, 1998

    44 Lindblom, A., "Market-Sensing Capability and Business Performance of Retail Entrepreneurs" 4 (4): 219-236, 2008

    45 Kohli, A, "Market Orientation: The Construct, Research Propositions, and Managerial Implications" 54 : 1-18, 1990

    46 Slaster, S, "Market Orientation and the Learning Organization" 59 (59): 63-74, 1995

    47 Maltz, E, "Market Intelligent Dissemination across Functional Boundaries" 33 : 47-61, 1996

    48 Sinkula,J, "Market Information Processing and Organizational Learning" 58 (58): 35-45, 1994

    49 Day,G, "Managing the Market Learning Process" 17 (17): 240-252, 2002

    50 Broadbent, M, "Management by Maxim: How business and IT managers can create IT Infrastructures" 38 (38): 77-92, 1997

    51 Meyers, P. W, "Learning in New Technology Development Teams" 7 : 79-88, 1989

    52 Handzic,M, "Knowledge Management: Through the Technology Class" World Scientific Publishing 2004

    53 Dove,R, "Knowledge Management, Response Ability, and the Agile Enterprise" 3 (3): 18-35, 1999

    54 Santhanam, R, "Issues in Linking Information Technology Capability to Firm Performance" 27 (27): 125-153, 2003

    55 Barney,J, "Is the Resource-based View a Useful Perspective for Strategic Management Research? Yes" 26 (26): 41-56, 2001

    56 McAfee, A, "Investing in the IT That Makes a Competitive Difference" 99-107, 2008

    57 Kohli,R, "Innovating to Create IT-Based New Business Opportunities at United Parcel Service" 6 (6): 199-210, 2007

    58 Powell, T. C, "Information Technology as Competitive Advan tage: The Role of Human, Business, and Technology Resource" 18 (18): 375-405, 1997

    59 Mata, F. J., "Information Technology and Sustained Competitive Advantage: A Resource- Based Analysis" 19 (19): 487-505, 1995

    60 Cooper, R. B, "Information Technology Development Creativity: A Case Study of Attempted Radical Change" 24 (24): 245-276,

    61 King, A. A, "Incumbent Entry into New Market Niches: The Role of Experience and Managerial Choice in the Creation" 48 (48): 171-186, 2002

    62 Piccoli, G, "IT-Dependent Strategic Initiatives and Sustained Competitive Advantage: A Review and Synthesis of the Literature" 29 (29): 747-776, 2005

    63 Tippins, M, "IT Competency and Firm Performance: IS Organizational Learning A Missing Link" 24 (24): 754-760, 2003

    64 Rackoff, N., "IS is for Competitive Advantage: Implementation of a Planning Process" 9 : 285-294, 1985

    65 Cash, J, "IS Redraws Competitive Boundaries" 63 (63): 134-142, 1985

    66 Williams,J, "How Sustainable is Your Competitive Advantage" 34 : 29-51, 1992

    67 Hedberg,B, "How Organizations Learn and Unlearn, In Handbook of Organizational Design" Oxford University Press 3-27, 1981

    68 Porter, M, "How Information Technology Gives You Competitive Advantage" 63 (63): 149-160, 1985

    69 Pavlou, P. A, "From IT Leveraging Competence to Competitive Advantage in Turbulent Environments: The Case of New Product Development" 17 (17): 198-227, 2006

    70 McQuarrie, E, "Focus Groups and the Development of New Products: Some Guidelines" 3 : 40-47, 1986

    71 Barney,J, "Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage" 17 (17): 99-120, 1991

    72 Weerawardena,J, "Exploring the Role of Market Learning Capability in Competitive Strategy" 37 (37): 407-429, 2003

    73 March,J, "Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning" 2 (2): 71-87, 1991

    74 Vandenbosch, B, "Executive Support Systems and Learning: A Model and Empirical Test" 12 (12): 99-130, 1995

    75 Fornell, C, "Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error" 40 : 440-465, 1981

    76 Hambrick,C, "Environmental Scanning and Organizational Strategy" 3 : 159-174, 1982

    77 Dollinger,M.J, "Environmental Boundary Spanning and Information Processing Effects on Organizational Performance" 27 (27): 351-368, 1984

    78 Dess, G, "Environment, Structure, and Consensus in Strategy Formulation: A Conceptual Integration" 12 (12): 313-330, 1987

    79 Overby, E., "Enterprise Agility and the Enabling Role of Informational Technology" 15 : 120-131, 2006

    80 Eisenhardt, K, "Dynamic Capabilities: What are they" 21 (21): 1105-1121, 2000

    81 Ambrosini, V, "Dynamic Capabilities: An Exploration of How Firms Renew Their Resource Base" 20 (20): S9-S24, 2009

    82 Teece, D. J., "Dynamic Capabilities and Strategic Management" 18 (18): 509-533, 1997

    83 Tapscott, D, "Digital Capital: Harnessing Power of Business Webs" Harvard Business School Press 2000

    84 Ross, J., "Develop Long-Term Competitiveness through IT Assets" 38 (38): 31-42, 1996

    85 Zollo, M, "Deliberate Learning and the Evolution of Dynamic Capabilities" 13 : 339-351, 2002

    86 Treacy, M, "Customer Intimacy and Other Value Disciplines" 71 (71): 84-93, 1993

    87 Porter,M, "Competitive advantage: Creating and Sustaining Superior Performance" Free Press 1985

    88 Daft, R., "Chief Executive Scanning, Environmental Characteristic, and Company Performance: An Empirical Study" 9 : 123-139, 1988

    89 Van Oosterhout, M., "Change Factors Requiring Agility and Implications for IT" 15 : 132-145, 2006

    90 Grewal, R, "Building Organizational Capabilities for Managing Economic Crisis: the Role of Market Orientation and Strategic Flexibility" 2 (2): 67-80, 2001

    91 Weill, P., "Building IT Infrastructure for Strategic Agility" 44 (44): 57-65, 2002

    92 Sarkis,J, "Benchmarking for Agility" 8 (8): 88-107, 2001

    93 Hiltz, S, "Asynchronous Learning Network as Virtual Classroom" 40 (40): 44-49, 1997

    94 Bagozzi, R.P., "Assessing Construct Validity in Organizational Research" 36 : 99-120, 1991

    95 Chau,P.Y.K, "An Empirical Investigation on Factors Affecting the Acceptance of CASE by Systems Developers" 30 : 269-280, 1996

    96 Jackson, M, "An Agility Analysis from a Production System Perspective" 14 (14): 482-488, 2003

    97 Katayama, H, "Agility, Adaptability and Leanness: A Comparison of Concepts and a Study of Practice" 60 : 43-51, 1999

    98 Ramasesh, R., "Agility in Manufacturing Systems: an Exploratory Modeling Framework and Simulation" 12 (12): 534-548, 2001

    99 Vázquez-Bustelo, D., "Agility Drivers, Enablers and Outcomes: Empirical Test of an Integrated Agile Manufacturing Model" 27 (27): 1303-1332, 2007

    100 Yusuf, Y. Y, "Agile Supply Chain Capabilities: Determinants of Competitive Objectives" 159 : 379-392, 2004

    101 Kidd,P.T, "Agile Manufacturing: Forging New Frontiers" Addison-Wesley 1995

    102 Sharifi, H, "Agile Manufacturing in Practice Application of Methodology" 21 (21): 772-794, 2001

    103 Goldman, S. L., "Agile Competitors and Virtual Organizations: Strategies for Enriching the Customer" Van Nostrand Reinhold 1995

    104 Zahra, S, "Absorptive Capacity: A Review, Reconceptualization and Extension" 27 (27): 185-203, 2002

    105 Cohen, W. M, "Absorptive Capacity: A New Perspective on Learning and Innovation" 1 (1): 128-152, 1990

    106 Bharadwaj,A, "A Resource-Based Perspective on Information Technology Capability and Firm Performance: An Empirical Investigation" 24 (24): 169-196, 2000

    더보기

    동일학술지(권/호) 다른 논문

    분석정보

    View

    상세정보조회

    0

    Usage

    원문다운로드

    0

    대출신청

    0

    복사신청

    0

    EDDS신청

    0

    동일 주제 내 활용도 TOP

    더보기

    주제

    연도별 연구동향

    연도별 활용동향

    연관논문

    연구자 네트워크맵

    공동연구자 (7)

    유사연구자 (20) 활용도상위20명

    인용정보 인용지수 설명보기

    학술지 이력

    학술지 이력
    연월일 이력구분 이력상세 등재구분
    2022 평가 계속평가 신청대상 (등재유지)
    2017-01-01 등재 우수등재학술지 선정 (계속평가)
    2013-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
    2010-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
    2008-01-01 등재 등재 1차 FAIL (등재유지) KCI등재
    2006-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
    2004-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
    2001-07-01 등재 등재학술지 선정 (등재후보2차) KCI등재
    1999-01-01 등재 등재후보학술지 선정 (신규평가) KCI등재후보
    더보기

    학술지 인용정보

    학술지 인용정보
    기준연도 WOS-KCI 통합IF(2년) KCIF(2년) KCIF(3년)
    2016 1.45 1.45 1.48
    KCIF(4년) KCIF(5년) 중심성지수(3년) 즉시성지수
    1.64 1.69 2.793 0.2
    더보기

    이 자료와 함께 이용한 RISS 자료

    나만을 위한 추천자료

    해외이동버튼