Unleashing the importance of creativity, experience and intellectual capital in the adaptation of export marketing strategy and competitive position

Abstract

Export marketing strategy has become an exciting research topic in strategic management literature because of its momentous role in sustainable competitive advantage and performance of firms. However, it is not yet recognized what factors enable top management team in adaptation of the export marketing strategy. This research aims to unleash how the intangible skills; creativity, business experience and intellectual capital facilitate marketing managers in adaptation of the expert marketing strategy (product, price, promotion and distribution) that can spur sustainable competitive performance. We collected data from 293 SMEs and used structural equation modeling for testing the hypotheses. The results indicate that the intangible skills; creativity, experience and intellectual capital do not directly contribute to sustainable competitive performance. However, creativity has a significant influence on product, price, promotion and distribution strategy, experience has a significant influence on product, price and promotion strategy and intellectual capital is only a significant predictor of product strategy. In the dimensions of export marketing strategy, product, price and distribution significantly while promotion does not significantly contribute to sustainable competitive performance. Moreover, export marketing strategy adaptation fully mediates the relationship between creativity and sustainable competitive performance as well as between experience and sustainable competitive performance while it does not mediate the path between intellectual capital and sustainable competitive performance. The findings recommend SMEs to emphasize highly skilled marketing staff who have competencies (experience, creative and intellectual) in order to build an effective export marketing strategy—resulting sustainable competitive performance. Further implications are discussed.

Role of human resource practices, leadership and intellectual capital in enhancing organisational performance: the mediating effect of organisational agility

“…In the healthcare sector, IC refers to the intangible assets possessed by hospitals that can be utilised to gain a competitive edge (Li et al, 2019;Omoush, 2019). Within IC, intellectual agility is a significant component, denoting the capacity of an organisation's staff to adapt structures and devise ground-breaking approaches to tackle challenges (Ali et al, 2020). This perception is attentively connected to OA, which relates to an organisation's ability to adjust its strategic direction or reallocate resources to create value (Aldiabat, 2022).…”

“…, 2019; Omoush, 2019). Within IC, intellectual agility is a significant component, denoting the capacity of an organisation’s staff to adapt structures and devise ground-breaking approaches to tackle challenges (Ali et al. , 2020).…”

The Relationship Between Intellectual Capital and Competitive Advantage: A Meta-Analysis Study

“…Note: Studies included in the meta-analysis are marked with a "*" in the bibliography. 0,510 0,130 0,017 0,255 0,765 3,918 0,000 -0,07 Kamukama, 2013 0,310 0,144 0,021 0,027 0,592 2,144 0,032 -0,60 Taie, 2014 1,099 0,099 0,010 0,905 1,292 11,150 0,000 1,55 Pourmozafari et al, 2014 0,576 0,067 0,005 0,445 0,708 8,587 0,000 0,11 Chahal & Bakshi, 2015 0,377 0,055 0,003 0,270 0,484 6,908 0,000 -0, 45 Ngah & et al, 2016 0,436 0,085 0,007 0,268 0,603 5,099 0,000 -0,28 Chaudhry et al, 2016 0,497 0,046 0,002 0,408 0,587 10,861 0,000 -0,11 Esmaeilpour & Kamyab, 2016 0,266 0,102 0,010 0,066 0,466 2,607 0,009 -0,74 Razei et al, 2016 1,045 0,183 0,033 0,688 1,403 5,726 0,000 1,29 Türkoðlu & Çizel, 2016 0,576 0,054 0,003 0,471 0,682 10,736 0,000 0,11 Yaseen et al, 2016 0,151 0,071 0,005 0,011 0,291 2,116 0,034 -1,08 Kaya, 2017 1,045 0,061 0,004 0,925 1,166 17,017 0,000 1,44 Anggraini et al, 2017 0,299 0,076 0,006 0,150 0,447 3,938 0,000 -0,67 Sadalia et al, 2017 0,266 0,114 0,013 0,043 0,489 2,335 0,020 -0,74 Almasi & Pirzad, 2017 0,604 0,099 0,010 0,411 0,797 6,132 0,000 0,19 Alserhan, 2017 0,424 0,117 0,014 0,194 0,653 3,620 0,000 -0,31 Altarawneh, 2017 0,245 0,070 0,005 0,107 0,383 3,479 0,001 -0,82 0,887 0,067 0,005 0,755 1,019 13,189 0,000 0,99 Elda et al, 2020 0,141 0,097 0,009 -0,049 0,331 1,451 0,147 -1,09 Ali et al, 2020 0,182 0,059 0,003 0,067 0,297 3,099 0,002 -1,00 Assaf, 2020 1,188 0,064 0,004 1,062 1,314 18,483 0,000 1,84 Damar & Ýraz, 2020 0,709 0,089 0,008 0,535 0,883 7,989 0,000 0,48 Ginting, 2020 0,388 0,071 0,005 0,249 0,527 5,479 0,000 -0,42 Hermawan et al, 2020 1,188 0,378 0,143 0,447 1,929 3,144 0,002 1,27 Ibarra-Cisneros et al, 20200,172 0,057 0,003 0,060 0,284 3,003 0,003 -1,03 Kanaan et al, 2020 0,224 0,055 0,003 0,116 0,331 4,075 0,000 -0,89 Khattak & Shah, 2020 0,365 0,076 0,006 0,217 0,514 4,834 0,000 -0,48 Liu, 2020 0,829 0,036 0,001 0,759 0,899 23,200 0,000 0,84 Sadiq & Nosheen, 2020 0,266 0,066 0,004 0,136 0,396 4,018 0,000 -0,76 Srikalimah et al, 2020 0,365 0,091 0,008 0,187 0,544 4,003 0,000 -0,47 Xiao & Yu, 2020 0,436 0,052 0,003 0,334 0,537 8,424 0,000 -0,29 Astuti & Datrini, 2021 0,224 0,065 0,004 0,096 0,352 3,421 0,001 -0,88 Anik & Sulistyo, 2021 0,277 0,102 0,010 0,078 0,476 2,727 0,006 -0,71 Rahmawati et al, 2021 -0,172 0,091 0,008 -0,350 0,007 -1,888 0,059 -1,96 Merida, 2021 0,100 0,048 0,002 0,007 0,194 2,107 0,035 -1,24 Obeidat et al, 2021 0,224 0,054 0,003 0,117 0,330 4,118 0,000 -0,89 Pan et al, 2021 0,365 0,054 0,003 0,259 0,472 6,719 0,000 -0,48 Qassas & Areýqat, 2021 0,618 0,040 0,002 0,540 0,697 15,484 0,000 0,23 Rehman et al, 2021 0,354 0,051 0,003 0,254 0,454 6,939 0,000 -0,52 Sadiq & Nosheen, 2021 0,203 0,243 0,059 -0,273 0,678 0,836 0,403 -0,79 Shafiee,2021 0,310 0,031 0,001 0,249 0,370 9,996 0,000 -0,65 Suharman & Hidayah, 2021 0,299 0,082 0,007 0,137 0,460 3,632 0,000 -0,66 Mubarik & Bontis, 2021 0,497 0,074 0,006 0,352 0,643 6,691 0,000 -0,11 0,536 0,043 0,002 0,451 0,621 12,378 0,000 -1,00 -0,50 0,00 0,50 1,00…”

Strategic orientation, business model innovation and corporate performance—Evidence from construction industry

“…The impact of strategic orientation on corporate performance has been widely concerned by scholars, but the mechanism of strategic orientation on corporate performance is controversial ( Grimmer et al, 2017 ; Shih, 2018 ; Ali et al, 2020 ; Gotteland et al, 2020 ). Many scholars believe that strategic orientation can promote corporate performance ( Atuahene-gima et al, 2006 ; Zhao et al, 2013 ; Tang et al, 2015 ; Oyewobi et al, 2016 ), especially entrepreneurial orientation and market orientation positively affect firm performance ( Li et al, 2009 ; Aloulou, 2019 ).…”