Digital Entrepreneurial Orientation and Organizational Performance: The Mediating Role of Digital Innovation Competence and The Moderating Effect of Digital Technology Preparedness

  • Authors

    • Medi Primatori Purnawan Management & Business, Universitas Pancasila, Jakarta, Indonesia
    • Widarto Rachbini Management & Business, Universitas Pancasila, Jakarta, Indonesia
    • Halek Mu’min Business Administration, INTI International University, Nilai, Malaysia
    • Darmanto Management & Business, Sehan University, Seoul, South Korea
    https://doi.org/10.14419/n6q13j78

    Received date: July 20, 2025

    Accepted date: August 26, 2025

    Published date: September 4, 2025

  • Digital entrepreneurial orientation, organizational performance, digital innovation competence, digital technology preparedness, mediation, moderation

  • Abstract

    This research examines the relationship between digital entrepreneurial orientation and organizational performance in Indonesian healthcare organizations, investigating the mediating role of digital innovation competence and the moderating effect of digital technology preparedness. Using PLS-SEM with 250 healthcare organizations in Batam City, the study tests an integrated moderated mediation model grounded in resource-based view, dynamic capabilities theory, and contingency theory. Results demonstrate that digital entrepreneurial orientation significantly influences organizational performance both directly and indirectly through digital innovation competence as a partial mediator. Digital technology preparedness serves as a critical moderator, substantially amplifying the relationship between entrepreneurial orientation and innovation competence at higher preparedness levels. The model explains substantial variance in digital innovation competence and moderate variance in organizational performance, demonstrating strong predictive relevance. These findings contribute to digital entrepreneurship theory by revealing conditional indirect mechanisms through which entrepreneurial orientation creates value in digital transformation contexts. The research extends understanding of how organizational capabilities mediate strategic orientation effects while technological readiness serves as an enabling condition. Practically, Indonesian healthcare organizations should prioritize developing comprehensive digital innovation competencies while simultaneously investing in technological infrastructure, human capital, and organizational culture to maximize entrepreneurial benefits. The study provides actionable insights for healthcare managers navigating digital transformation challenges in emerging markets, emphasizing capability-building approaches over purely strategic positioning.

  • References

    1. Adomako, S., & Nguyen, N. P. (2024). Digitalization, inter-organizational collaboration, and technology transfer. Journal of Technology Transfer, 49(4), 1176–1202. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10961-023-10031-Z
    2. Aiken, L., & West, S. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Sage.
    3. Alqahtani, N., Uslay, C., & Yeniyurt, S. (Shen). (2024). Comparing the moderated impact of entrepreneurial orientation, market orientation, and entrepreneurial marketing on firm performance. Journal of Small Business Management, 62(6), 2741–2778. https://doi.org/10.1080/00472778.2023.2272267
    4. Alshanty, A. M., & Emeagwali, O. L. (2019a). Market-sensing capability, knowledge creation and innovation: The moderating role of entrepreneur-ial-orientation. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, 4(3), 171–178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jik.2019.02.002
    5. Alshanty, A. M., & Emeagwali, O. L. (2019b). Market-sensing capability, knowledge creation and innovation: The moderating role of entrepreneur-ial-orientation. Journal of Innovation and Knowledge, 4(3), 171–178. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JIK.2019.02.002
    6. Anderson, J. C. (1987). An Approach for Confirmatory Measurement and Structural Equation Modeling of Organizational Properties. Management Science, 33(4), 525–541. https://doi.org/10.1287/MNSC.33.4.525
    7. Armstrong, J. S., Overton, T. S., & JS Armstrong, T. O. (1977). Estimating Nonresponse Bias in Mail Surveys. Journal of Marketing Research, 14(3), 396–402. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224377701400320
    8. Barney, J. (1991a). Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99–120. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639101700108
    9. Barney, J. (1991b). Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99–120. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639101700108
    10. Barney, J. B., & Hoskisson, R. E. (1990). Strategic groups: Untested assertions and research proposals. Managerial and Decision Economics, 11(3), 187–198. https://doi.org/10.1002/MDE.4090110306
    11. Barnir, A., Watson, W. E., & Hutchins, H. M. (2011). Mediation and Moderated Mediation in the Relationship Among Role Models, Self-Efficacy, Entrepreneurial Career Intention, and Gender. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 41(2), 270–297. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2010.00713.x
    12. Baruch, Y., & Holtom, B. C. (2008). Survey response rate levels and trends in organizational research. Human Relations, 61(8), 1139–1160.
    13. Bharadwaj, A., El Sawy, O. A., Pavlou, P. A., & Venkatraman, N. (2013a). Digital business strategy: Toward a next generation of insights. MIS Quarterly: Management Information Systems, 37(2), 471–482. https://doi.org/10.25300/MISQ/2013/37:2.3
    14. Bharadwaj, A., El Sawy, O. A., Pavlou, P. A., & Venkatraman, N. (2013b). Digital business strategy: Toward a next generation of insights. MIS Quarterly: Management Information Systems, 37(2), 471–482. https://doi.org/10.25300/MISQ/2013/37:2.3
    15. Bharadwaj, A. S. (2000a). A Resource-Based Perspective on Information Technology Capability and Firm Performance: An Empirical Investigation. MIS Quarterly, 24(1), 169. https://doi.org/10.2307/3250983
    16. Bharadwaj, A. S. (2000b). A resource-based perspective on information technology capability and firm performance: An empirical investigation. MIS Quarterly: Management Information Systems, 24(1), 169–193. https://doi.org/10.2307/3250983
    17. Boselie, P., Paauwe, J., & Veld, M. (2020). Human Resource Management and the Resource-Based View. The SAGE Handbook of Human Re-source Management, 472–491. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781529714852.N28
    18. Böttcher, T. P., Weking, J., Hein, A., Böhm, M., & Krcmar, H. (2022). Pathways to digital business models: The connection of sensing and seizing in business model innovation. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 31(4), 101742. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsis.2022.101742
    19. Bouncken, R. B., & Kraus, S. (2022). Entrepreneurial ecosystems in an interconnected world: emergence, governance and digitalization. RMS, 16(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11846-021-00444-1
    20. Boustani, N. M., & Chammaa, C. (2023). Youth Adoption of Innovative Digital Marketing and Cross-Cultural Disparities. Administrative Sciences, 13(6), 151. https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci13060151
    21. Brislin, R., Lonner, W., & Thorndike, R. (1973). Cross-cultural research methods. Wiley.
    22. Cho, H. J., & Pucik, V. (2005). Relationship between innovativeness, quality, growth, profitability, and market value. Strategic Management Jour-nal, 26(6), 555–575. https://doi.org/10.1002/SMJ.461
    23. Choy, C. S., Yew, W. K., & Lin, B. (2006). Criteria for measuring KM performance outcomes in organisations. Industrial Management & Data Sys-tems, 106(7), 917–936. https://doi.org/10.1108/02635570610688850
    24. Cochran, W. G., & Wiley, J. (1977). Sampling Techniques third edition.
    25. Cohen, J. (1988). Set correlation and contingency tables. Applied Psychological Measurement, 12(4), 425–434. https://doi.org/10.1177/014662168801200410
    26. Covin, J. G., Green, K. M., & Slevin, D. P. (2006). Strategic Process Effects on the Entrepreneurial Orientation–Sales Growth Rate Relationship. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 30(1), 57–81. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2006.00110.x
    27. Covin, J. G., & Slevin, D. P. (1989). Strategic management of small firms in hostile and benign environments. Strategic Management Journal, 10(1), 75–87. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250100107
    28. Covin, J. G., & Wales, W. J. (2019). Crafting High-Impact Entrepreneurial Orientation Research: Some Suggested Guidelines. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 43(1), 3–18. https://doi.org/10.1177/1042258718773181
    29. Covin, J., & Slevin, D. (1986). The development and testing of an organization-level entrepreneurship scale (pp. 628–639). Babson College.
    30. Dayan, M., Ng, P. Y., Husain, Z., & Zacca, R. (2023). Effects of constructive politics and market turbulence on entrepreneurial orientation–performance relationship: A moderated mediation model. European Management Journal, 41(3), 385–394. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2022.03.001
    31. de Burgos-Jiménez, J., Vázquez-Brust, D., Plaza-Úbeda, J. A., & Dijkshoorn, J. (2013). Environmental protection and financial performance: An empirical analysis in Wales. International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 33(8), 981–1018. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOPM-11-2010-0374
    32. Dias, A. L., & Lages, L. F. (2021). Measuring market-sensing capabilities for new product development success. Journal of Small Business and En-terprise Development, 28(7), 1012–1034. https://doi.org/10.1108/JSBED-07-2019-0216
    33. Dillman, D. (2007). Mail and internet surveys: The tailored design method. Wiley.
    34. Donbesuur, F., Boso, N., & Hultman, M. (2020). The effect of entrepreneurial orientation on new venture performance: Contingency roles of entre-preneurial actions. Journal of Business Research, 118, 150–161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.06.042
    35. Edwards-Schachter, M., García-Granero, A., Sánchez-Barrioluengo, M., Quesada-Pineda, H., & Amara, N. (2015a). Disentangling competences: Interrelationships on creativity, innovation and entrepreneurship. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 16, 27–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2014.11.006
    36. Edwards-Schachter, M., García-Granero, A., Sánchez-Barrioluengo, M., Quesada-Pineda, H., & Amara, N. (2015b). Disentangling competences: Interrelationships on creativity, innovation and entrepreneurship. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 16, 27–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TSC.2014.11.006
    37. Eggers, F., & Kraus, S. (2011a). Growing Young SMEs in Hard Economic Times: The Impact of Entrepreneurial and Customer Orientations — A Qualitative Study from Silicon Valley. Journal of Small Business and Entrepreneurship, 24(1), 99–111. https://doi.org/10.1080/08276331.2011.10593528
    38. Eggers, F., & Kraus, S. (2011b). Growing Young SMEs in Hard Economic Times: The Impact of Entrepreneurial and Customer Orientations — A Qualitative Study from Silicon Valley. Journal of Small Business & Entrepreneurship, 24(1), 99–111. https://doi.org/10.1080/08276331.2011.10593528
    39. Ferro, E., Saltarella, M., Rotondi, D., Giovanelli, M., Corrias, G., Moncada, R., Cavallaro, A., & Favenza, A. (2023). Digital assets rights manage-ment through smart legal contracts and smart contracts. Blockchain: Research and Applications, 4(3), 100142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bcra.2023.100142
    40. Fornell, C. (1992). A National Customer Satisfaction Barometer: The Swedish Experience. Journal of Marketing, 56(1), 6. https://doi.org/10.2307/1252129
    41. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error. Journal of Mar-keting Research, 18(1).
    42. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1994). Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: Algebra and statistics. Journal of marketing research‏. Advances Methods of Marketing Research, 18(3), 382-388. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378101800313
    43. Ghaleb, E. A. A., Dominic, P. D. D., Fati, S. M., Muneer, A., & Ali, R. F. (2021). The Assessment of Big Data Adoption Readiness with a Tech-nology–Organization–Environment Framework: A Perspective towards Healthcare Employees. Sustainability, 13(15), 8379. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13158379
    44. Glover, W. J., Crocker, A., & Brush, C. G. (2024). Healthcare entrepreneurship: An integrative framework for future research. Journal of Business Venturing Insights, 22(May), e00476. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbvi.2024.e00476
    45. Grimpe, C., Murmann, M., & Sofka, W. (2019). Organizational design choices of high-tech startups: How middle management drives innovation performance. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 13(3), 359–378. https://doi.org/10.1002/SEJ.1330
    46. Grimpe, C., Sofka, W., & Kaiser, U. (2023). Competing for digital human capital: The retention effect of digital expertise in MNC subsidiaries. Journal of International Business Studies, 54(4), 657–685. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41267-021-00493-4
    47. Gupta, V. K. (2015). Construction of entrepreneurial orientation: Dispute, demand, and dare. New England Journal of Entrepreneurship, 18(1), 87–89. https://doi.org/10.1108/NEJE-18-01-2015-B006
    48. Ha, H., & Chuah, C. K. P. (2023). Digital economy in Southeast Asia: challenges, opportunities and future development. Southeast Asia: A Multi-disciplinary Journal, 23(1), 19–35. https://doi.org/10.1108/SEAMJ-02-2023-0023
    49. Hair, J., & Alamer, A. (2022). Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) in second language and education research: Guide-lines using an applied example. Research Methods in Applied Linguistics, 1(3). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rmal.2022.100027
    50. Hair, J. F., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2013). Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling: Rigorous Applications, Better Results and Higher Acceptance. Long Range Planning, 46(1–2), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2013.01.001
    51. Hair, J. F., & Sarstedt, M. (2019a). Factors versus Composites: Guidelines for Choosing the Right Structural Equation Modeling Method. Project Management Journal, 50(6), 619–624. https://doi.org/10.1177/8756972819882132
    52. Hair, J. F., & Sarstedt, M. (2019b). Factors versus Composites: Guidelines for Choosing the Right Structural Equation Modeling Method. Project Management Journal, 50(6), 619–624. https://doi.org/10.1177/8756972819882132
    53. Hasheem, M. J., Wang, S., Ye, N., Farooq, M. Z., & Shahid, H. M. (2022). Factors influencing purchase intention of solar photovoltaic technology: An extended perspective of technology readiness index and theory of planned behaviour. Cleaner and Responsible Consumption, 7, 100079. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clrc.2022.100079
    54. Hayes, A. F. (2009). Beyond Baron and Kenny: Statistical mediation analysis in the new millennium. Communication Monographs, 76(4), 408–420. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637750903310360
    55. Hayes, A. F. (2017). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. Guilford publications.
    56. Hayes, A. F., & Preacher, K. J. (2010). Quantifying and testing indirect effects in simple mediation models when the constituent paths are nonlinear. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 45(4), 627–660. https://doi.org/10.1080/00273171.2010.498290
    57. Henseler, J. (2017). Partial least squares path modeling. Advanced Methods for Modeling Markets, 361–381.
    58. Henseler, J., & Sarstedt, M. (2013). Goodness-of-fit indices for partial least squares path modeling. Computational Statistics, 28(2), 565–580. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00180-012-0317-1
    59. Hosseini, A. S., Soltani, S., & Mehdizadeh, M. (2018). Competitive Advantage and Its Impact on New Product Development Strategy (Case Study: Toos Nirro Technical Firm). Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 4(2), 17. https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc4020017
    60. Hunt, S. D. (2013). Antecedents and Affinities: Business Strategy and Institutional Theory. A General Theory of Competition: Resources, Compe-tences, Productivity, Economic Growth, 67–104. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781452220321.N4
    61. Jiang, F., Liu, L. X., & Li, J. (2025). Headquarters–subsidiary exchanges and relationship quality: Moderating roles of subsidiary establishment mode and managers’ identity with the subsidiary. Journal of Business Research, 200. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JBUSRES.2025.115622
    62. Jr., J. F. H., Matthews, L. M., Matthews, R. L., Sarstedt, M., Hair Jr., J. F., Matthews, L. M., Matthews, R. L., & Sarstedt, M. (2017). PLS-SEM or CB-SEM: updated guidelines on which method to use. International Journal of Multivariate Data Analysis, 1(2), 107. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJMDA.2017.087624
    63. Kang, H. (2021). Sample size determination and power analysis using the G*Power software. Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Profes-sions, 18. https://doi.org/10.3352/JEEHP.2021.18.17
    64. Katsifaraki, G. D., & Theodosiou, M. (2024). The Role of Service-Dominant Logic Strategic Orientations in Driving Customer Engagement in Online Retailing. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 59(1), 99–115. https://doi.org/10.1177/10949968231180497
    65. Kline, R. B. (1999). Nunnally, jc, & bernstein, ih (1994). Psychometric Theory. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 17, 275–280.
    66. Kline, R. B. (2023). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. Guilford publications.
    67. Kuo, F.-I., Fang, W.-T., & LePage, B. A. (2022). Proactive environmental strategies in the hotel industry: eco-innovation, green competitive ad-vantage, and green core competence. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 30(6), 1240–1261. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2021.1931254
    68. Kusa, R. (2023a). The mediating role of competitive and collaborative orientations in boosting entrepreneurial orientation’s impact on firm perfor-mance. Entrepreneurial Business and Economics Review, 11(4), 25–42. https://doi.org/10.15678/EBER.2023.110402
    69. Kusa, R. (2023b). The mediating role of competitive and collaborative orientations in boosting entrepreneurial orientation’s impact on firm perfor-mance. Entrepreneurial Business and Economics Review, 11(4), 25–42. https://doi.org/10.15678/EBER.2023.110402
    70. Lawrence, P. R., & Lorsch, J. W. (1967). New management job: The integrator. Harvard Business Review.
    71. Lawrence, P. R., Lorsch, J. W., & Garrison, J. S. (1967). Organization and environment: Managing differentiation and integration.
    72. Lima, C., Batista, M., Relvas, S., & Barbosa-Póvoa, A. (2023). Optimizing the Design and Planning of a Sugar-Bioethanol Supply Chain under Un-certain Market Conditions. Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.iecr.3c00085
    73. MacKenzie, S. B., & Podsakoff, P. M. (2012). Common Method Bias in Marketing: Causes, Mechanisms, and Procedural Remedies. Journal of Re-tailing, 88(4), 542–555. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JRETAI.2012.08.001
    74. MacKenzie, S. B., Podsakoff, P. M., Podsakoff, N. P., MacKenzie, Podsakoff, P. M., & Podsakoff, P. M. (2011). Construct Measurement and Val-idation Procedures in MIS and Behavioral Research: Integrating New and Existing Techniques. MIS Quarterly, 35(2), 293. https://doi.org/10.2307/23044045
    75. MacKinnon, D. P., Coxe, S., & Baraldi, A. N. (2012). Guidelines for the Investigation of Mediating Variables in Business Research. Journal of Business and Psychology, 27(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10869-011-9248-Z
    76. MacKinnon, D. P., Lockwood, C. M., & Williams, J. (2004). Confidence limits for the indirect effect: Distribution of the product and resampling methods. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 39(1), 99–128.
    77. Mai, N. K., Do, T. T., & Ho Nguyen, D. T. (2022). The impact of leadership competences, organizational learning and organizational innovation on business performance. Business Process Management Journal, 28(5–6), 1391–1411. https://doi.org/10.1108/BPMJ-10-2021-0659
    78. Mariani, J., Wince-Smith, D. L., Evans, C., & Eggers, W. D. (2023). Revisiting the government’s role in catalyzing modern innovation. In Deloitte Insights.
    79. Maxwell, D., & Van der Vorst, R. (2003). Developing sustainable products and services. Journal of Cleaner Production, 11(8 SPEC.), 883–895. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-6526(02)00164-6
    80. Nambisan, S. (2017). Digital Entrepreneurship: Toward a Digital Technology Perspective of Entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Prac-tice, 41(6), 1029–1055. https://doi.org/10.1111/etap.12254
    81. Nasiri, M., Ukko, J., Saunila, M., & Rantala, T. (2020). Managing the digital supply chain: The role of smart technologies. Technovation, 96–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TECHNOVATION.2020.102121
    82. Oduro, S., De Nisco, A., & Mainolfi, G. (2023). Do digital technologies pay off? A meta-analytic review of the digital technologies/firm perfor-mance nexus. Technovation, 128, 102836. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2023.102836
    83. Osei, D. B. (2024). Digital infrastructure and innovation in Africa: Does human capital mediates the effect? Telematics and Informatics, 89, 102111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2024.102111
    84. Palacios-Fenech, J., & Vrain, E. (2024). Measuring the adoption and discontinuance of low carbon digitally-enabled innovations: Exploring repeat survey quality. Journal of Cleaner Production, 434, 140311. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.140311
    85. Parida, V., Sjödin, D., & Reim, W. (2019). Reviewing literature on digitalization, business model innovation, and sustainable industry: Past achievements and future promises. Sustainability, 11(2), 391. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11020391
    86. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common Method Biases in Behavioral Research: A Critical Review of the Literature and Recommended Remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879–903. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879
    87. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2012). Sources of method bias in social science research and recommendations on how to control it. Annual Review of Psychology, 63(Volume 63, 2012), 539–569. https://www.annualreviews.org/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-psych-120710-100452
    88. Quayson, M., Bai, C., Sun, L., & Sarkis, J. (2023). Building blockchain‐driven dynamic capabilities for developing circular supply chain: Rethinking the role of sensing, seizing, and reconfiguring. Business Strategy and the Environment, 32(7), 4821–4840. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.3395
    89. Quinton, S., Canhoto, A., Molinillo, S., Pera, R., & Budhathoki, T. (2018). Conceptualising a digital orientation: antecedents of supporting SME performance in the digital economy. Journal of Strategic Marketing, 26(5), 427–439. https://doi.org/10.1080/0965254X.2016.1258004
    90. Rauch, A., & Hulsink, W. (2015). Putting entrepreneurship Education where the intention to Act lies: An investigation into the impact of entrepre-neurship education on entrepreneurial behavior. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 14(2), 187–204. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMLE.2012.0293
    91. Rauch, A., Wiklund, J., Lumpkin, G. T., & Frese, M. (2009a). Entrepreneurial orientation and business performance: An assessment of past research and suggestions for the future. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 33(3), 761–787. https://doi.org/10.1111/J.1540-6520.2009.00308.X
    92. Rauch, A., Wiklund, J., Lumpkin, G. T., & Frese, M. (2009b). Entrepreneurial orientation and business performance: An assessment of past research and suggestions for the future. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 33(3), 761–787. https://doi.org/10.1111/J.1540-6520.2009.00308.X
    93. Rhyne, L. C. (1986). The relationship of strategic planning to financial performance. Strategic Management Journal, 7(5), 423–436. https://doi.org/10.1002/SMJ.4250070504
    94. Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M., & Hair, J. F. (2017). Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling. Handbook of Market Research, 1–40. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-05542-8_15-1
    95. Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M., Henseler, J., & Hair, J. F. (2014). On the Emancipation of PLS-SEM: A Commentary on Rigdon (2012). Long Range Planning, 47(3), 154–160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2014.02.007
    96. Schiavi, G. S., & Behr, A. (2018). Emerging technologies and new business models: a review on disruptive business models. Innovation and Man-agement Review, 15(4), 338–355. https://doi.org/10.1108/INMR-03-2018-0013
    97. Shirokova, G., Shakina, E., Bacon-Gerasymenko, V., & Wales, W. (2022). Entrepreneurial orientation as a mediator of ADHD – Performance rela-tionship: A staged quasi-replication study. Journal of Business Venturing Insights, 17. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JBVI.2022.E00312
    98. Siemsen, E., Roth, A. V., & Balasubramanian, S. (2008). How motivation, opportunity, and ability drive knowledge sharing: The constraining-factor model. Journal of Operations Management, 26(3), 426–445. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2007.09.001
    99. Sjödin, D., Liljeborg, A., & Mutter, S. (2024). Conceptualizing ecosystem management capabilities: Managing the ecosystem-organization interface. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 200, 123187. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2023.123187
    100. Sobaih, A. E. E., & Elshaer, I. A. (2022). Personal Traits and Digital Entrepreneurship: A Mediation Model Using SmartPLS Data Analysis. Math-ematics, 10(21), 3926. https://doi.org/10.3390/math10213926
    101. Stratton, S. J. (2021). Population Research: Convenience Sampling Strategies. Prehospital and Disaster Medicine, 36(4), 373–374. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1049023X21000649
    102. Suder, M., Kusa, R., Duda, J., & Karpacz, J. (2025). Exploring impact of entrepreneurial orientation on firm performance – moderators’ variability under changing market conditions. Review of Managerial Science, 19(3), 797–842. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11846-024-00775-9
    103. Sun, Y., Tan, C. W., Lim, K. H., Liang, T. P., & Yeh, Y. H. (2024). Strategic contexts, strategic orientations and organisational technology adop-tion: A configurational approach. Information Systems Journal, 34(4), 1355–1401. https://doi.org/10.1111/ISJ.12497
    104. Tech Collective. (2024). The evolution of the digital economy in Southeast Asia - Tech Collective. https://techcollectivesea.com/2024/12/18/evolution-digital-economy-southeast-asia/
    105. Teece, D. J. (2020). Hand in glove: Open innovation and the dynamic capabilities framework. Strategic Management Review, 1(2), 233–253.
    106. Teece, D. J. D. (2007). Explicating dynamic capabilities: The nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic Man-agement Journal, 28(13), 1319–1350. https://doi.org/10.1002/SMJ.640
    107. Teece, D. J., & D.J., T. (2007). Explicating dynamic capabilities: the nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance david. 28(13), 1319–1350. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/smj.640
    108. Tehseen, S., Ramayah, T., & Sajilan, S. (2017). Testing and Controlling for Common Method Variance: A Review of Available Methods. Journal of Management Sciences, 4(2), 142–168. https://doi.org/10.20547/JMS.2014.1704202
    109. Trinugroho, I., Pamungkas, P., Wiwoho, J., Damayanti, S. M., & Pramono, T. (2022). Adoption of digital technologies for micro and small business in Indonesia. Finance Research Letters, 45. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.FRL.2021.102156
    110. [109]Van de Vijver, F., & Hambleton, R. K. (1996). Translating Tests. European Psychologist, 1(2), 89–99. https://doi.org/10.1027/1016-9040.1.2.89
    111. van Tonder, C., Bossink, B., Schachtebeck, C., & Nieuwenhuizen, C. (2024). The effect of digitally-driven business model innovation on business performance. Journal of Small Business & Entrepreneurship, 36(6), 944–977. https://doi.org/10.1080/08276331.2023.2239039
    112. Varadarajan, R., Welden, R. B., Arunachalam, S., Haenlein, M., & Gupta, S. (2022). Digital product innovations for the greater good and digital marketing innovations in communications and channels: Evolution, emerging issues, and future research directions. International Journal of Re-search in Marketing, 39(2), 482–501. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijresmar.2021.09.002
    113. Venkatraman, N. (1990). PERFORMANCE IMPLICATIONS OF STRATEGIC COALIGNMENT: A METHODOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE. Journal of Management Studies, 27(1), 19–41. https://doi.org/10.1111/J.1467-6486.1990.TB00751.X
    114. Wang, H., Beigi, M., & Baruch, Y. (2024). Career success and geographical location: A systematic review and future research agenda. International Journal of Management Reviews. https://doi.org/10.1111/IJMR.12386
    115. Westley, F., & Antadze, N. (2010). Making a difference: Strategies for scaling Social Innovation for greater impact. The Public Sector Innovation Journal, 15(2).
    116. Williams, J., & MacKinnon, D. P. (2008). Resampling and distribution of the product methods for testing indirect effects in complex models. Struc-tural Equation Modeling, 15(1), 23–51. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705510701758166
    117. World economy forum. (2023, December 12). How Southeast Asia can become a $1 trillion digital economy | World Economic Forum. https://www.weforum.org/stories/2023/12/how-southeast-asia-can-become-trillion-digital-economy/
    118. Zaman, S. A. A., Vilkas, M., Zaman, S. I., & Jamil, S. (2025). Digital technologies and digitalization performance: the mediating role of digitaliza-tion management. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 36(2), 307–333. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMTM-04-2024-0176
    119. Zollo, M., & Winter, S. G. (2002). Deliberate learning and the evolution of dynamic capabilities. 13(3), 339–351.

  • Downloads

  • How to Cite

    Purnawan, M. P. ., Rachbini, W. ., Mu’min , H. ., & Darmanto. (2025). Digital Entrepreneurial Orientation and Organizational Performance: The Mediating Role of Digital Innovation Competence and The Moderating Effect of Digital Technology Preparedness. International Journal of Accounting and Economics Studies, 12(5), 172-187. https://doi.org/10.14419/n6q13j78