تأثیرات آینده‌نگاری راهبردی بر عملکرد سازمانی با در نظر گرفتن نقش یادگیری سازمانی و خلق ارزش

نوع مقاله : پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دکتری آینده پژوهی، مدرس دانشگاه بین المللی امام خمینی (ره)

2 دانشیار دانشگاه بین المللی امام خمینی (ره)

3 دانش آموخته کارشناسی ارشد دانشگاه بین المللی امام خمینی (ره)

چکیده

آینده‌نگاری راهبردی نشان‌دهنده روش‌ها، بازیگران، فرآیندها و سیستم‌های موردنیاز برای ارتقا موقعیت رقابتی و به‌تبع آن ارتقای عملکرد سازمانی است و بر همین اساس موردتوجه سازمان­ها و شرکت‌های بسیاری قرارگرفته است. به عبارتی، سازمان‌ها با کاربست قابلیت‌های آینده‌نگاری راهبردی می‌توانند عملکرد خود را برای مواجهه با تغییرات محیطی و آینده سازمان بهبود بخشند. بنابراین هدف این پژوهش بررسی تأثیرات قابلیت­‌های آینده‌نگاری راهبردی بر عملکرد سازمان‌های دفاعی کشور با تأکید بر نقش مهم یادگیری سازمانی و خلق ارزش است. پژوهش حاضر ازنظر هدف کاربردی و ازنظر نحوه گردآوری داده‌ها، پژوهشی توصیفی - همبستگی مبتنی بر روش مدل یابی معادلات ساختاری است. جامعه آماری پژوهش حاضر شامل 80 نفر از کارشناسان و مدیران سازمان‌های دفاعی است که از روش نمونه‌گیری تصادفی ساده استفاده‌شده است. نتایج تحلیل داده‌های پژوهش نشان داد که آینده‌نگاری راهبردی بر یادگیری سازمانی، یادگیری سازمانی بر خلق ارزش و خلق ارزش تأثیر مثبت و معناداری بر عملکرد سازمانی دارد. همچنین بافتار سازمانی و ذهن آگاهی بازیگران در رابطه آینده‌نگاری راهبردی بر یادگیری سازمانی تأثیر مثبت و معناداری دارد.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات

عنوان مقاله [English]

Investigating the effects of strategic foresight on organizational performance by considering the role of organizational learning and value creation

نویسندگان [English]

  • Mahdi Nikooye 1
  • Hakem Ghasem 2
  • Shahriyar Shirooyehpour 3
1 IKIU
2 IKIU
3 IKIU
چکیده [English]

Introduction and Aim: With increasing changes and the emergence of new issues in the global community, predicting the future in a changing world has become very difficult for planners. These changes and developments are basically the main problem in planning (Rashidardeh et al., 2017: 66). Visioning and planning to achieve it has always been one of the leading issues of organizations and identifying the factors affecting the future and awareness of the performance of the organization has led to the formation of strategic foresight knowledge. Strategic foresight, according to its capacities and capabilities, gives organizations the ability to identify wide-ranging changes and areas of progress, and by using this ability, provides organizations with appropriate strategies to deal with these changes (Sarpong et al., 2013).
The application of strategic foresight can lead to the formation of organizational outcomes such as value creation and learning that these outcomes play an important role in the future development of organizations (Vishnevskiy et al., 2015). However, it is questionable how application of Strategic Foresight can lead to organizational learning, followed by innovation and value creation in the organization.
Considering the importance of creating organizational learning and also the lack of studies in the field of how to influence strategic foresight capabilities in creating value and improving organizational performance through organizational learning, so the main issue of this study is to find how application  of strategic foresight capabilities influences organizational performance by creating Learning and value creation; Therefore, the purpose of this article is to identify and examine the process by which the application of strategic foresight capabilities can affect organizational performance. At the same time, it expresses the role and relationship of strategic foresight with organizational learning and value creation.
Methodology: The present study is a descriptive correlational study based on structural equation modeling. The statistical population of the study includes experts and managers of Iran’s defensive organizations in which a simple random sampling method was used. A questionnaire (based on previous studies and standard questionnaires) and a five-point Likert scale were used to assess the research variables. To confirm the validity of the questionnaire by content method, the opinions of 10 experts were used. In the present study, among the different approaches of structural equations to fit the model with the research hypotheses, the structural path modeling method with partial least squares approach was used. Cronbach's alpha, combined reliability (CR) and factor loads were used to measure the reliability of the structures. For confirming reliability, Cronbach's alpha should be above 0.7, and finally the value obtained from Smart PLS software for Cronbach's alpha of the research questionnaire variables is equal to 0.950, which indicates the appropriate reliability of the questionnaire.
Findings: According to the first hypothesis test, strategic foresight has a positive and significant effect (t = 2.865> 1.96) on organizational learning. According to the second hypothesis test, organizational learning has a positive and significant effect (t = 5.207> 1.96) on value creation. According to the third hypothesis test, value creation has a positive and significant effect (t = 6.612> 1.96) on organizational performance. According to the fourth hypothesis test, organizational context and mindfulness have a positive and significant moderating role in strategic foresight (t = 2.663> 1.96) on organizational learning.
Discussion and Conclusion: The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of strategic foresight capabilities on organizational performance by considering the role of organizational learning and value creation in Iran defensive organizations. Analysis of the research results shows that the application of strategic foresight capabilities has a positive and significant effect on organizational learning, which is in line with the studies of Yoon et al. (2018), Bootz et al. (2019) and Rhisiart et al. (2015).. The results of the present study indicate that organizational learning has a positive and significant effect on value creation and as a mechanism, explains and facilitates the relationship between strategic foresight and value creation. Findings show that by creating organizational learning, followed by reducing uncertainty and increasing the ability to respond to increasing changes, long-term added value is created for organizations.
The results of this study also show that the variables of mindfulness and organizational context are effective in the relationship between the application of strategic foresight capabilities and organizational learning and have a positive moderating role in this regard, which is consistent with the results of Hemmati et al. (1398).
Analysis of research results shows that value creation (using strategic foresight capabilities) as an interface has a positive and significant effect on organizational performance which is in line with the results of Joneidi (2020), Joneindi et al., (2019) and  Bhat and Arora (2018), with the difference that in this research, the role of organizational learning and value creation has not been studied and only in the research of Sullivan et al. (2012) The role of value creation in improving organizational performance is discussed.
Because value creation is a critical factor in measuring and evaluating organizational performance, defensive organizations are advised to consider ways to reduce the uncontrollable uncertainty created in the environment, increase their ability to respond in a timely manner, avoid threats, and seize opportunities. Also look for mechanisms to influence organizations, institutions, and other stakeholders to take action to increase the number and value of actions taken by other organizations and decision makers to help achieve their organizational goals.
 

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Strategic foresight capabilities
  • Organizational learning
  • Value creation
  • Organizational performance

مراجع

  1. Amani, J., Khezr, A., & Mahmoudi, H. (2013). Introduction of structural equation modeling using partial least squares method - PLS - PM and its application in behavioral research, Online Journal of Psychological Knowledge, 1(1), 41-55.
  2. Amer, M., Daim, T. U., & Jetter, A. (2013). A review of scenario planning, Futures, 46, 23-40.
  3. Azar, A., Gholamzadeh, R., & Qanavati, M. (2013). Structural path modeling in management, application of SmartPLS software, Negah Danesh Publications, Tehran.
  4. Barbero, J. L., Casillas, J. C., & Feldman, H. D. (2011). Managerial capabilities and paths to growth as determinants of high-growth small and medium-sized enterprises. International Small Business Journal, 29(6), 671-694.
  5. Bhat, S., & Arora, S. (2018). Influence of strategic foresight capabilities on performance of banks: evidence from baltic states, Global Journal for Research Analysis, 7(10), Retrieved from10.15373/2249555
  6. Bootz, J. P., Monti, R., Durance, P., Pacini, V., & Chapuy, P. (2019). The links between French school of foresight and organizational learning: An assessment of developments in the last ten years. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 140, 92-104.
  7. Cunliffe, A.L. (2008). Orientations to social constructionism: Relationally-responsive social constructionism and its implications for knowledge and learning, Management Learning, 39, 123-139.
  8. Davis, A. (2008). Barrieren bei der Implementierung von corporate foresight im Unternehmen und im strategischen Management.
  9. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of marketing research, 18(1), 39-50.
  10. Garvin, D. A., Edmondson, A. C., & Gino, F. (2008). Is yours a learning organization?. Harvard business review, 86(3), 109.
  11. Grönroos, C., & Ravald, A. (2011). Service as business logic: implications for value creation and marketing. Journal of service management.
  12. Haeffner, M., Leone, D., Coons, L., & Chermack, T. (2012). The effects of scenario planning on participant perceptions of learning organization characteristics. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 23(4), 519-542.
  13. Hemmati, A., Nikooye, M., Mozaffari, M., & Keshavarz Turk, E. (2019). The effects of changing organizational processes on the successful implementation of strategic foresight in sports organizations, Future Studies Management, 119. 90-107.
  14. Hulland, J. (1999). Use of partial least squares (PLS) in strategic management research: A review of four recent studies. Strategic management journal, 20(2), 195-204.
  15. Iden, J., Methlie, L. B., & Christensen, G. E. (2017). The nature of strategic foresight research: A systematic literature review. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 116, 87-97.
  16. Jissink, T., Huizingh, E. K., & Rohrbeck, R. (2015). Corporate foresight and performance: a chain-of-effects model. University of Aarhus Aarhus Working Paper.
  17. Joneidi Jafari, M., Bayat, R., Se Talani, F., & Fazli, S. (2019). Designing a Corporate Foresight Measure and Its Impact on Organizational Performance (Studied Case: Banking Industry).
  18. Joneidi Jafari, M., Darvish, F., Bayat, R., & Fazli, S. (2021). Analytical scenarios to improve the performance of Iranian banking by combining the capabilities of knowledge acquisition capacity and corporate foresight. Quarterly Journal of Parliament and Strategy, 28(105), 433-395.
  19. Khashei, V., Mazlomi, N., & Shahriyari, F. (2016). Organizational performance improvement, the strategy implementation and the organizational learning. Journal of Strategic Management Studies, 7(25), 173-195.
  20. Laihonen, H., Hannula, M., Helander, N., Ilvonen, I., Jussila, J., Kukko, M., ... & Yliniemi, T. (2013). Tietojohtaminen.
  21. Madhani, P. M. (2010). Resource based view (RBV) of competitive advantage. Journal of Human Resource, 6(1), 7-18.
  22. Moore, S. B., & Manring, S. L. (2009). Strategy development in small and medium sized enterprises for sustainability and increased value creation. Journal of cleaner production, 17(2), 276-282.
  23. Nyuur, R. B., Brečić, R., & Sobiesuo, P. (2015). Foresight capabilities and SME product/service adaptiveness: the moderating effect of industry dynamism. International Journal of Foresight and Innovation Policy, 10(2 4), 145-164.
  24. Oyemomi, O., Liu, S., Neaga, I., Chen, H., & Nakpodia, F. (2019). How cultural impact on knowledge sharing contributes to organizational performance: Using the fsQCA approach. Journal of Business Research, 94, 313-319.
  25. Paliokaite, A., & Pačėsa, N. (2015). The relationship between organisational foresight and organisational ambidexterity. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 101, 165-181.
  26. Pies, I., Beckmann, M., & Hielscher, S. (2010). Value creation, management competencies, and global corporate citizenship: An ordonomic approach to business ethics in the age of globalization. Journal of Business Ethics, 94(2), 265-278.
  27. Pirson, M., Langer, E.J., Bodner, T., & Zilcha-Mano, S. (2012). The development and validation of the langer mindfulness scale-enabling a socio-cognitive perspective of mindfulness in organizational contexts, Fordham University Schools of Business Research Paper.
  28. Pouru, L., Dufva, M., & Niinisalo, T. (2019). Creating organisational futures knowledge in Finnish companies. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 140, 84-91.
  29. Rashid Ardeh, H., Khazaei, S., & Moghadam Zanjani, M. V. (2017). Banking industry's future ahead with scenario-based planning approach. Journal of Strategic Management Studies, 8(30), 65-89.
  30. Rhisiart, M., Miller, R., & Brooks, S. (2015). Learning to use the future: developing foresight capabilities through scenario processes. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 101, 124-133.
  31. Rohrbeck, J.O., & Schwarz, P. (2013). The value contribution of strategic foresight: insights from an empirical study of large european companies, Technological Forecasting and Social Change. 80, 1593-1606
  32. Rohrbeck, R. (2010). Corporate foresight: towards a maturity model for the future orientation of a firm. Springer Science & Business Media.
  33. Rohrbeck, R. (2012). Exploring value creation from corporate-foresight activities. Futures, 44(5), 440-452.
  34. Rohrbeck, R., & Gemünden, H. G. (2011). Corporate foresight: Its three roles in enhancing the innovation capacity of a firm. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 78(2), 231-243.
  35. Rohrbeck, R., & Kum, M. E. (2018). Corporate foresight and its impact on firm performance: A longitudinal analysis. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 129, 105-116.
  36. Rohrbeck, R., & Schwarz, J. O. (2013). The value contribution of strategic foresight: Insights from an empirical study of large European companies. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 80(8), 1593-1606.
  37. Sarpong, D., & Hartman, D. (2018). Fading memories of the future: the dissipation of strategic foresight among middle managers. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 30(6), 672-683.
  38. Sarpong, D., & Maclean, M. (2011). Scenario thinking: A practice-based approach for the identification of opportunities for innovation. Futures, 43(10), 1154-1163.
  39. Sarpong, D., & Maclean, M. (2012). Mobilising differential visions for new product innovation. Technovation, 32(12), 694-702.
  40. Sarpong, D., Maclean, M., & Alexander, E. (2013). Organizing strategic foresight: A contextual practice of ‘way finding’. Futures, 53, 33-41.
  41. Schumacher, R. A. L., & Richard, J. (2009). A beginner's guide to structure equation modeling, translated by: Vahid Ghasemi. Tehran, Sociologists Publications.
  42. Schwartz, A. E., Stiefel, L., & Wiswall, M. (2013). Do small schools improve performance in large, urban districts? Causal evidence from New York City. Journal of Urban Economics, 77, 27-40.
  43. Serenko, A. (2013). Meta-analysis of scientometric research of knowledge management: discovering the identity of the discipline. Journal of Knowledge Management.
  44. Stubbart, C. I., & Knight, M. B. (2006). The case of the disappearing firms: empirical evidence and implications. Journal of Organizational Behavior: The International Journal of Industrial, Occupational and Organizational Psychology and Behavior, 27(1), 79-100.
  45. Sullivan, U. Y., Peterson, R. M., & Krishnan, V. (2012). Value creation and firm sales performance: The mediating roles of strategic account management and relationship perception. Industrial Marketing Management, 41(1), 166-173.
  46. Tenenhaus, M., Vinzi, V. E., Chatelin, Y. M., & Lauro, C. (2005). PLS path modeling. Computational statistics & data analysis, 48(1), 159-205.
  47. Vecchiato, R. (2012). Environmental uncertainty, foresight and strategic decision making: An integrated study. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 79(3), 436-447.
  48. Vecchiato, R. (2015). Creating value through foresight: First mover advantages and strategic agility. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 101, 25-36.
  49. Vecchiato, R., Favato, G., Di Maddaloni, F., & Do, H. (2020). Foresight, cognition, and long‐term performance: Insights from the automotive industry and opportunities for future research. Futures & Foresight Science, 2(1), 25.
  50. Vishnevskiy, K., Karasev, O., & Meissner, D. (2015). Integrated roadmaps and corporate foresight as tools of innovation management: the case of Russian companies. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 90, 433-443.
  51. Wetzels, M., Odekerken-Schröder, G., & Van Oppen, C. (2009). Using PLS path modeling for assessing hierarchical construct models: Guidelines and empirical illustration. MIS quarterly, 177-195.
  52. Wiklund, J. (1999). The sustainability of the entrepreneurial orientation—performance relationship. Entrepreneurship theory and practice, 24(1), 37-48.
  53. Wu, D. (2009). Measuring performance in small and medium enterprises in the
  54. Yoon, J., Kim, Y., Vonortas, N. S., & Han, S. W. (2018). Corporate foresight and innovation: the effects of integrative capabilities and organisational learning. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 30(6), 633-645.
فصلنامه مطالعات مدیریت راهبردی
دوره 12، شماره 48
دی 1400
صفحه 49-64

فایل ها

سابقه مقاله

  • تاریخ دریافت: 24 دی 1399
  • تاریخ بازنگری: 18 فروردین 1400
  • تاریخ پذیرش: 20 اردیبهشت 1400

هم رسانی

ارجاع به این مقاله

آمار