Agric. Econ. - Czech, 2021, 67(9):363-372 | DOI: 10.17221/151/2021-AGRICECON

The role of innovative work behaviour and knowledge-based dynamic capabilities in increasing the innovative performance of agricultural enterprisesOriginal Paper

Nadežda Jankelová ORCID...*, Zuzana Joniaková
Department of Management, Faculty of Business Management, University of Economics in Bratislava, Bratislava, Slovakia

The purpose of this study is to examine the interrelationships among the variables of the entrepreneurial orientation (EO) of agrarian management, innovative work behaviour (IWB) of employees, knowledge-based dynamic capabilities (KBDC) and innovative performance (IP) of agrarian enterprises. We analysed not only direct effects but also the possibilities of mediating these effects to increase the overall effect on IP. A questionnaire survey was used to collect data from managers of agribusinesses in Slovakia (175 respondents). We used the partial least squares structural equation modelling method and the appropriate software to test the theoretical research model and the proposed hypotheses to examine the relationships among the individual selected constructs in more depth. The findings point to the existence of a statistically significant relationship between EO and IP, which, however, is weaker than the overall effect of the involvement of mediation variables. Each mediation variable (IWB and KBDC) increases the overall effect separately, but their joint mediation action is of the greatest importance, when full mediation takes place. The strength of the relationship between the two main variables is also influenced by the size of the agrarian enterprise such that being larger has a negative moderation effect. Significant differences were also identified in the legal forms of business in favour of companies over agricultural co-operatives (ACs).

Keywords: agricultural management; agriculture; entrepreneurial orientation; innovation; organisational performance

Published: September 24, 2021  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago Chicago Notes IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Jankelová N, Joniaková Z. The role of innovative work behaviour and knowledge-based dynamic capabilities in increasing the innovative performance of agricultural enterprises. Agric. Econ. - Czech. 2021;67(9):363-372. doi: 10.17221/151/2021-AGRICECON.
Share...
Download citation
  • BibTeX (.bib)
  • Bookends (.ris)
  • EasyBib (.ris)
  • EndNote (.enw)
  • EndNote 8 (.xml)
  • ISI WoS (.isi)
  • Medlars (.medlars)
  • Mendeley (.ris)
  • MODS (.xml)
  • Papers (.ris)
  • RefWorks (.txt)
  • RefManager (.ris)
  • RIS (.ris)
  • MS Word (.xml)
  • Zotero (.ris)
    • Open full article

    Supplementary files:

    Download file151-021 Agricecon ESM.pdf

    File size: 432.73 kB

    References

    1. Ambrus A. (2020): Difficulties of application precision technology on a Hungarian farm. Economics of Agriculture, 2: 28-37.
    2. Berthet E.T., Hickey G.M., Klerkx L. (2018): Opening design and innovation processes in agriculture: Insights from design and management sciences and future directions. Agricultural Systems, 165: 111-115. Go to original source...
    3. Boğan E., Dedeoğlu B.B. (2017): The effects of perceived behavioral integrity of supervisors on employee outcomes: Moderating effects of tenure. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 26: 511-531. Go to original source...
    4. Bolin J.H. (2014): Hayes Andrew F. (2013): Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis: A Regression-Based Approach. New York, USA, the Guilford Press: Book Review. Journal of Educational Measurement, 51: 335-337. Go to original source...
    5. Cabello-Medina C., López-Cabrales Á., Valle-Cabrera R. (2011): Leveraging the innovative performance of human capital through HRM and social capital in Spanish firms. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 22: 807-828. Go to original source...
    6. Carolan M. (2020): Automated agrifood futures: Robotics, labor and the distributive politics of digital agriculture. The Journal of Peasant Studies, 47: 184-207. Go to original source...
    7. Chin W.W. (2010): How to write up and report PLS analyses. In: Esposito Vinzi V., Chin W.W., Henseler J., Wang H. (eds.): Handbook of Partial Least Squares: Concepts, Methods and Applications. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg: 655-690. Go to original source...
    8. Damanpour F., Aravind D. (2012): Managerial innovation: Conceptions, processes and antecedents. Management and Organization Review, 8: 423-454. Go to original source...
    9. Darnhofer I. (2021): Resilience or how do we enable agricultural systems to ride the waves of unexpected change? Agricultural Systems, 187: 102-104. Go to original source...
    10. De Jong J., Den Hartog D. (2010): Measuring innovative work behaviour. Creativity and Innovation Management, 19: 23-36. Go to original source...
    11. Dias C., Rodrigues R.G., Ferreira J.J. (2021): Small agricultural businesses' performance - What is the role of dynamic capabilities, entrepreneurial orientation, and environmental sustainability commitment? Business Strategy and the Environment, 30: 1898-1912. Go to original source...
    12. Fleming A., Jakku E., Fielke S., Taylor B.M., Lacey J., Terhorst A., Stitzlein C. (2021): Foresighting Australian digital agricultural futures: Applying responsible innovation thinking to anticipate research and development impact under different scenarios. Agricultural Systems, 190: 1-10. Go to original source...
    13. Gardašević J., Brkić I., Krstić T. (2020): Innovations in agricultural and wine production sector. Journal of Agronomy, Technology and Engineering Management, 3: 448-454.
    14. Hair J.F., Hollingsworth C.L., Randolph A.B., Chong A.Y.L. (2017): An updated and expanded assessment of PLS-SEM in information systems research. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 117: 442-458. Go to original source...
    15. Henseler J., Ringle C.M., Sarstedt M. (2015): A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43: 115-135. Go to original source...
    16. Huberty M. (2015): Awaiting the second big data revolution: From digital noise to value creation. Journal of Industry Competition and Trade, 15: 35-47. Go to original source...
    17. Jiang X., Li Y. (2009): An empirical investigation of knowledge management and innovative performance: The case of alliances. Research Policy, 38: 358-368. Go to original source...
    18. Jimenéz-Jimenéz D., Sanz-Valle R. (2011): Innovation, organizational learning, and performance. Journal of Business Research, 64: 408-417. Go to original source...
    19. Kaya B., Abubakar A.M., Behravesh E., Yildiz H., Mert I.S. (2020): Antecedents of innovative performance: Findings from PLS-SEM and fuzzy sets (fsQCA). Journal of Business Research, 114: 278-289. Go to original source...
    20. Kock N. (2015): Common method bias in PLS-SEM: A full collinearity assessment approach. International Journal of e-Collaboration, 11: 1-10. Go to original source...
    21. Laborde D., Martin W., Swinnen J., Vos R. (2020): COVID-19 risks to global food security. Science, 369: 500-502. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    22. Ogbonnaya C., Valizade D. (2018): High performance work practices, employee outcomes and organizational performance: A 2-1-2 multilevel mediation analysis. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 29: 239-259. Go to original source...
    23. Prange C., Pinho J.C. (2017): How personal and organizational drivers impact on SME international performance: The mediating role of organizational innovation. International Business Review, 26: 1114-1123. Go to original source...
    24. Rauch A., Wiklund J., Lumpkin G.T., Frese M. (2009): Entrepreneurial orientation and business performance: An assessment of past research and suggestions for the future. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 33: 761-787. Go to original source...
    25. Rijswijk K., Klerkx L., Turner J.A. (2019): Digitalisation in the New Zealand agricultural knowledge and innovation system: Initial understandings and emerging organisational responses to digital agriculture. NJAS - Wageningen Journal of Life Sciences, 90-91: 1-14. Go to original source...
    26. Ringle C.M., Sarstedt M., Mitchell R., Gudergan S.P. (2020): Partial least squares structural equation modeling in HRM research. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 31: 1617-1643. Go to original source...
    27. Roberts N., Grover V. (2012): Investigating firm's customer agility and firm performance: The importance of aligning sense and respond capabilities. Journal of Business Research, 65: 579-585. Go to original source...
    28. Roldán J., Sánchez-Franco M.J. (2012): Variance-based structural equation modeling: Guidelines for using partial least squares in information systems research. In: Mora M., Gelman O., Steenkamp A.L., Raisinghani M. (eds.): Research Methodologies, Innovations and Philosophies in Software Systems Engineering and Information Systems. Hershey, Pennsylvania, USA, IGI Global: 193-221. Go to original source...
    29. Rose D.C., Chilvers J. (2018): Agriculture 4.0: Broadening responsible innovation in an era of smart farming. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems, 2: 1-7. Go to original source...
    30. Schaffer B.S., Riordan C.M. (2003): A review of cross-cultural methodologies for organizational research: A best-practices approach. Organizational Research Methods, 6: 169-215. Go to original source...
    31. Seo R. (2019): Entrepreneurial orientation and innovation performance: Insights from Korean ventures. European Journal of Innovation Management, 4: 675-695. Go to original source...
    32. Shan P., Song M., Ju X. (2016): Entrepreneurial orientation and performance: Is innovation speed a missing link? Journal of Business Research, 69: 683-690. Go to original source...
    33. Toffolutti V., Stuckler D., McKee M. (2020): Is the COVID-19 pandemic turning into a European food crisis? European Journal of Public Health, 30: 626-627. Go to original source... Go to PubMed...
    34. Wang C., Walker E., Redmond J. (2007): Explaining the lack of strategic planning in SMEs: The importance of owner motivation. International Journal of Organisational Behaviour, 12: 1-16.
    35. West J. (2014). Challenges of funding open innovation platforms: Lessons from Symbian Ltd. In: Chesbrough H., Vanhaverbeke W., West J. (eds.): New Frontiers in Open Innovation. Oxford, United Kingdom, Oxford University Press: 71-93. Go to original source...
    36. Zheng S., Wu X., Du J. (2011): Knowledge-based dynamic capabilities and innovation in networked environments. Journal of Knowledge Management 15: 1035-1051. Go to original source...

    This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY NC 4.0), which permits non-comercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is properly cited. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.


    Return to the content