This study aims to investigate whether there is a difference in KOSDAQ-listed manufacturing enterprise utilization of MCS (the use of more-bureaucratic and less-bureaucratic MCS) according to corporate life cycle stages (growth and maturity stages), a...
This study aims to investigate whether there is a difference in KOSDAQ-listed manufacturing enterprise utilization of MCS (the use of more-bureaucratic and less-bureaucratic MCS) according to corporate life cycle stages (growth and maturity stages), and to investigate the relationship between an organization’s dynamic capabilities (market orientation, entrepreneurship, innovativeness, and absorptive capability) and organizational performance (financial and non-financial performance) as a result.
For this purpose, a survey was conducted to collect and analyze the data on KOSDAQ-listed manufacturing enterprises. The results of the study can be summarized as follows.
First, it was confirmed that there is a difference in the use of MCS according to corporate life cycle stage (growth or maturity stage). KOSDAQ-listed enterprise on growth-stage was utilizing less-bureaucratic MCS and was mainly utilizing more-bureaucratic MCS on maturity-stage. This supports the results of previous studies that the growth-stage enterprises that have an unstable management environment and limited resources and the maturity-stage enterprises that focus on stable growth deal with the environment they are in by making different choices in the selection and utilization of MCS.
Second, the use of more-bureaucratic and less-bureaucratic MCS according to corporate life cycle showed a difference in the relationship with dynamic capabilities. The use of less-bureaucratic MCS on growth-stage was found to have a significantly positive impact on dynamic capabilities. The use of more-bureaucratic MCS on maturity-stage had a significantly negative impact on dynamic capabilities.
Third, in the relationship between dynamic capabilities and organizational performance, most dynamic capabilities were found to have a significantly positive impact on the organization’s financial and non-financial performance. These study results are significant in that a wide range of empirical evidence, that makes it possible to interpret the relationships between MCS, organizational capability, and organizational performance, was found; this is unlike previous studies that revealed only the relationship between MCS and dynamic capabilities.
Fourth, the KOSDAQ-listed manufacturing enterprises were improving their organizational performance by utilizing MCS by life cycle stage. The growth-stage enterprises were improving corporate financial and non-financial performance indirectly by strengthening market orientation and innovativeness through the use of less-bureaucratic MCS. On the other hand, the maturity-stage enterprises were improving corporate financial performance directly through the use of more-bureaucratic MCS; and also, the utilization of corporate internal information had an indirect impact on the improvement of financial performance.
Finally, it was confirmed that managers’ educational background has an important impact on growth-stage and maturity-stage enterprise utilization of MCS, and that large enterprise support of the system has a positive impact on stable operations as enterprises grow into the maturity stage.
In conclusion, this study confirms that the use of less-bureaucratic MCS plays an important role in strengthening core competences needed for the continued success of growth-stage enterprises. In addition, it confirms the importance of the efficient management of limited corporate resources in the growth of enterprises. Thus, it provides the managerial and practical implications in the growth and development of KOSDAQ-listed enterprises through these findings.