Building Transformational Leadership in Efforts to Improve the
Performance of Handicraft MSMEs in Medan City
MUHAMMAD HUSNI THAMRIN1*, SUGENG WAHYUDI2, NGATNO3, WIDIARTANTO4,
YUWANTO5
1Faculty of Social and Political Sciences, Universitas Sumatera Utara, Medan, Indonesia and Doctoral
Program of Social Sciences, Faculty of Social and Political Sciences, Universitas Diponegoro,
Semarang, INDONESIA
2Faculty of Economics and Business, Universitas Diponegoro, Semarang, INDONESIA.
3,4,5Faculty of Social and Political Sciences, Universitas Diponegoro, Semarang, INDONESIA
Abstract: The main objective of this research is to develop a new concept of Transformational Leadership that
is used to improve organizational learning capabilities, organizational innovation, organizational
competitiveness and organizational environment in improving MSME Performance. This research uses a
quantitative approach with SEM-PLS analysis techniques. The research data was obtained from the
dissemination of questionnaires with the number of respondents amounting to 97 Handycraft owners in Medan
City. Some of the study findings include; 1) Transformational Leadership has no positive and significant effect
on MSME Performance. 2) Transformational Leadership has no positive and significant effect on
Organizational Learning. 3) Organizational learning has no positive and significant effect on MSME
Performance. 4) Transformational Leadership has a positive and significant influence on Organizational
Innovation. 5) Organizational Innovation has no positive and significant effect on MSME Performance. 6)
Transformational Leadership has a positive and significant effect on organizational competitiveness. 7)
Organizational Competitiveness has a positive and significant effect on the performance of MSMEs. 8)
Transformational Leadership has a positive and significant effect on the organizational environment. 9)
Organizational environment has a positive and significant effect on MSME Performance. 10) Transformational
Leadership has no indirect effect on MSME Performance by mediating by Organizational Learning. 11)
Transformational Leadership has no indirect effect on MSME Performance by mediating by Organizational
Innovation. 12) Transformational Leadership has a positive and significant effect on MSME Performance by
mediating by Organizational Competitiveness. 13) Transformational Leadership has a positive and significant
effect on MSME Performance by mediating by the Organizational Environment.
Key-Words: - Transformasional Leaderhip, Learning, Innovation, Competitiveness, Environment, MSMEs
Received: July 1, 2021. Revised: December 24, 2021. Accepted: January 19, 2022. Published: January 20, 2022.
1. Introduction
Micro, small and medium enterprises are
one of the main pillars of economic development in
developing countries. In addition, MSMEs are
important contributors to job creation and global
economic development [1]. MSMEs have played a
role in inclusive growth that has occurred since the
global financial crisis during 2008-2009 [2].
However, MSMEs have not provided significant
added value to economic development in Indonesia
[3]. This condition is influenced by the limitations
of MSMEs in mastering technology especially the
access to capital and the quality of human resources
which result in low productivity of goods and a
great deal of business failures.
MSMEs, in the midst of globalization and
high competition, must be able to face global
challenges, such as increasing product innovation,
services, human resources, technology, and
expanding the marketing area. This factor is
required to increase the selling value of MSMEs to
compete with foreign products that are the
increasingly overwhelming industrial center of
Medan City.
As a fact, the number of handicraft business
units dominates in the city of Medan with a total of
97 MSMEs, consisting of 73 micro, 22 small and 2
medium enterprises. The handicraft industry sectors
in Medan City utilize rattan bamboo crafts, ulos,
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2022.19.46
Muhammad Husni Thamrin,
Sugeng Wahyudi, Ngatno, Widiartanto, Yuwanto
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
505
Volume 19, 2022
batik, leather shoes, decorative lights, embroidery,
wood carvings, and other souvenirs. Therefore, the
handicraft industry is one of the products that have
great opportunities and its business activities have
flexibility with the socio-economic conditions of the
community [4]. By that means, the handicraft sector
in Medan City becomes the sector that absorbs the
most labor [5].
However, the contribution of MSMEs to
economic growth in Medan City (33.3%) is still
relatively low, influenced by the not yet optimal
development of the creative economy, innovation,
capital, marketing, quality of business actors,
market access, and the use of technology for
MSMEs [6]. By that means, leadership is needed in
MSME owners to be able to create collective
awareness of workers in improving the performance
of MSMEs. This condition examines the problems
faced by Handicraft MSMEs in Medan City
including human resources, product innovation, raw
materials, business management, marketing, and the
use of technology.
Referring to Arda's research, the inhibiting
factors for Batik craft MSMEs are influenced by the
far distance location from raw materials, limited
promotions that only rely on bazaars from the
government, as well as employees who do not have
adequate skills, and poor business management [7].
In line with the results of Ramadini's research on
Batik craft MSMEs, even found that MSME owners
are only brokers and did not have innovations in
improving the performance of MSMEs [8].
Meanwhile, Gultom's research revealed that
handicraft MSMEs made from waste do not master
marketing strategies, have poor financial
management, and do not take advantage of the use
of technology [9]. In addition, Meliala found that
the main problems of shoe craft MSMEs are due to
human resources, capital, facilities, and
infrastructure [10].
Furthermore, Pudyastuti's research found
that rattan craft human resources were powerless in
increasing product innovation, marketing, and
competitive performance in MSMEs [11]. The
results of similar research by Angin and Dalimunthe
realized that the limited capital in rattan handicraft
MSMEs affected the difficulty of obtaining raw
materials [12][13]. In general, Muchtar revealed that
MSMEs do not own the handicraft business network
and business owners are not able to innovate
through the transformation of local values to
produce the latest products [14]. Based on previous
research, the main purpose of this research is to
develop a new concept of Transformational
Leadership that is used to improve organizational
learning capabilities, organizational innovation,
organizational competitiveness and organizational
environment in improving handycraft MSMEs
performance in Medan City.
2. Literature Riview
The handicraft industry is one of the links in
the tourism industry activities. According to a report
by The World Tourism Organization, the increase in
foreign tourists coming will be in line with the total
spending of foreign tourists in Indonesia, where this
will directly contribute to the GDP revenue [15].
Although the Medan City does not yet have a
special craft as a souvenir, the potential for
handicrafts is quite large owing to the fact of the
ability of the community to create various types of
handicraft from ulos, batik, rattan, and other
handicraft items which are quite high and can be
seen from events. craft exhibition in Medan City
[16].
Several experts stated that the main problem
faced by MSMEs is the ineffective leadership of
MSME owners. Furthermore, owner leadership will
largely have an impact on the behavior of followers
and also on organizational performance. Therefore,
MSME organizational changes are needed, so that
businesses can survive and thrive [17]. Based on the
empirical literature, Kasraie's research found a
significant relationship between leadership behavior
and MSME growth. However, there is a positive but
not yet significant relationship between leadership
behavior and the profitability of MSMEs and
transformational leadership that contributes more
significantly to the growth of MSMEs than
transactional leadership behaviour [18].
Kasraie's research on leadership style on
Australian service sector MSMEs recommends
transformational leadership which is judged to be in
accordance with the successful performance of
MSME organizations. This research is in line with
Alejandro and Rejas's dissertation which showed
that transformational leadership has a more positive
and significant impact on the organizational
performance of MSMEs [19], [20]. Meanwhile,
Ikechukwu's dissertation found that owner-managers
of MSMEs in the manufacturing, education, and
trade sectors in Nigeria do not follow a particular
leadership style. However, it showed some
characteristics of leadership behavior, such as more
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2022.19.46
Muhammad Husni Thamrin,
Sugeng Wahyudi, Ngatno, Widiartanto, Yuwanto
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
506
Volume 19, 2022
dominantly adopting transactional leadership [21].
In addition, Syamsurizaldi's dissertation showed that
there is a significant relationship between
transactional leadership and the performance of the
small furniture industry in West Sumatra [22].
Several empirical studies on
transformational and transactional leadership in the
performance of MSMEs are still incomplete and
inconsistent. In the author's opinion, it can be
proven again by referring to Yildiz's research [23],
Hashim [24], and Rehman [25] who proved that
transformational and transactional leadership both
have a significant relationship to the performance of
MSMEs. Therefore, further research is needed to
adopt the most effective leadership in improving the
performance of MSMEs. However, this research
focuses on transformational leadership, which seeks
to provide values for members to adhere to in
supporting organizational performance [26].
Through value transformation, hopefully, the
relationship between leaders and members can
influence the performance of handicraft MSMEs in
Medan City.
Organizational learning processes enable
organizations to respond to market opportunities by
helping to create innovation and an optimal business
environment [27]. Thus, having an impact on high
performance and sustainable competitive advantage
not only applies to large companies but also
MSMEs. Therefore, in meeting the challenge of
innovation, some organizations introduce the
concept of organizational learning [28]. In addition,
Baker & Sinkul proved that an organization needs to
understand organizational learning. With it, you can
successfully launch a new product or service into
the market to meet consumer needs and achieve
improved performance, as well as a sustainable
competitive advantage [29]. Many researchers argue
that there is a positive relationship between
organizational learning and innovation
[30][31][32].
Increasingly high business competition,
MSMEs must be able to create and develop
innovations, including creativity [33]. Thus,
MSMEs in global competition must be able to carry
out innovation-oriented strategies. Innovation is
very important for companies as most of the
company's profits come from the results of
innovation. Innovation is not only capable of
producing economic efficiency, but also able to
improve service or production capabilities, both in
quality and quantity. MSMEs in facing an
increasingly competitive environment need to find
something that will become a competitive
advantage. Continuous innovation in an MSME is a
fundamental need to create a competitive advantage
[34].
The business environment in this research
focused on the strategies and policies carried out by
competitors as well as the regulations issued by the
government regarding MSMEs, especially the
handicraft business in Medan City. The view of
Organizational Theory and Business Administration
stated that several factors influence a business,
logically an external environment in which every
company must be able to adapt to survive [35]. In
line with Savrul's research, it proved that
globalization affects the business environment on
logistics and distribution in MSMEs [36]. In
addition, Korcsmaros research identified factors that
the future development of MSMEs will depend
heavily on the business environment [37].
2.1.Theoritical Framework
Transformational leadership theory and
organizational performance theory in this study have
given birth to a state of art among others; the
concept of organizational collaborative synergy. The
concept combines the four theories of organizational
learning, organizational innovation, organizational
competitiveness and organizational environment.
The goal of the concept of organizational
collaborative synergy as the development of good
transformational leadership to be one of the driving
forces for the success of MSMEs handycraft Medan
City.
Fig 1: The proposed research framework
Empirical studies of transformational
leadership relationships with organizational
performance have been widely conducted by
researchers before. Research by Kasraie, Alejandro,
Rejas, Arham and Kihara proved a positive and
significant relationship between the leadership
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2022.19.46
Muhammad Husni Thamrin,
Sugeng Wahyudi, Ngatno, Widiartanto, Yuwanto
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
507
Volume 19, 2022
styles applied to MSME performance. In fact,
Transformational leadership has a positive and
significant relationship with MSME performance.
Meanwhile, Transactional leadership has a positive
but not significant relationship with MSME
performance. The hypothesis proposed in this study
is[18][20][19][38][39].
H1: Transformational Leadership has a positive and
significant effect on MSME Performance
The study of transformational leadership
relationships with organizational learning has
resulted in several theoretical models. Furthermore,
the results of the noruzy, rehman, yulianeu, morales,
Hsiao and Nazari studies have shown a positive and
significant relationship between transformational
leadership and organizational learning
[40][25][41][42][43][17]. The hypotheses proposed
in this study are:
H2: Transformational Leadership has a positive and
significant impact on organizational learning
Studies on the relationship of
Organizational Learning with MSME performance
have been widely conducted by researchers before.
The research of Anna Michna, Lai Wan Hooi,
Giancarlo Gomes proves the empirical relationship
between organizational learning and organizational
performance. In addition, organizational learning
capabilities have a positive and significant effect on
the performance of MSMEs [44][45][46]. Thus,
there is the influence of Organizational Learning on
MSME Performance. The hypotheses proposed in
this study are:
H3: Organizational learning has a positive and
significant effect on MSME performance
An understanding of the relationship
between transformational leadership and
organizational innovation at the MSME
organizational level needs to be studied empirically.
Looking at the results of Mozhdeh Mokhber's
research, Lale Gumusluoglu, Hsiao, Noruzy
revealed that transformational leadership has a
positive and significant effect on organizational
innovation. As such, transformational leadership is
an important determinant of organizational
innovation and encourages managers to engage in
transformational leadership behavior to promote
organizational innovation [47][48][43][40]. So there
is the influence of Transformational Leadership on
Organizational Innovation. The hypotheses
proposed in this study are:
H4: Transformational Leadership has a positive and
significant effect on organizational innovation
Organizational innovation is primarily
formed to improve organizational performance
capabilities. The results of jose-luis research,
Mohammed Sulaiman, Audrey prove that
organizational innovation is very important to have
organizations in the sustainability of their business.
In addition, the study of organizational innovation
positively and significantly affects the performance
of MSME organizations [49][50][51]. Thus, there is
the influence of Organizational Innovation on
MSME Performance. So the hypothesis proposed in
this study is:
H5: Organizational innovation has a positive and
significant effect on the performance of MSMEs
Organizational competitiveness is primarily
formed to improve competitive organizational
performance. The results of the asilcovschi, Vargas
and Alejandro research prove that transformational
leadership has a positive and significant influence
on the competitiveness of the Organization
[52][53][20]. Thus, there is the influence of
Transformational Leadership on organizational
competitiveness. So the hypothesis proposed in this
study is:
H6: Transformational leadership has a positive and
significant effect on organizational competitiveness
Utilizing organizational competitiveness to
be developed in connecting the characteristics of
SME business owners to organizational
performance has been done by Thomas Man. In the
first study proved that there is a positive and
significant influence on the performance of SME
organizations [54]. After that, the second study is
still consistent on the competitiveness of
organizations that have a positive and significant
influence on the performance of MSME
organizations [55]. In addition, Anton Agus's
research shows that the competitiveness of
organizations has a positive influence on the
performance of MSMEs in Indonesia [56]. Thus,
there is the influence of Organizational
Competitiveness on MSME Performance. Then the
hypothesis proposed in this study is:
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2022.19.46
Muhammad Husni Thamrin,
Sugeng Wahyudi, Ngatno, Widiartanto, Yuwanto
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
508
Volume 19, 2022
H7: Organizational competitiveness has a positive
and significant effect on the performance of
MSMEs
Furthermore, the results of constant D.
Beugré, Goran and Clarita research show that
transformational leadership styles have a positive
and significant effect on the organizational
environment of MSMEs [57][58][59]. Thus, there is
the influence of Transformational Leadership on the
organizational environment. So the hypothesis
proposed in this study is:
H8: Transformational leadership has a positive and
significant effect on the organizational environment
Zeng's research on MSMEs in China proves
that the organizational environment has a positive
and significant impact on organizational
performance [60]. In addition, gaur's research
identified between the organizational environment
of 565 MSMEs in Germany, there is a positive and
significant relationship between the two variables
[61]. Furthermore, the results of Uzkurt research
prove that the level of MSME performance tends to
increase when supported by the organizational
environment [62]. Thus, there is an influence of the
Organizational Environment on msme performance.
So the hypothesis proposed in this study is:
H9: Organizational environment positively and
significantly affects the performance of MSMEs
Furthermore, this research hypothesis refers
to Rehman's research which shows that
transformational leadership variables have an
indirect effect if not mediated by organizational
learning [25]. Furthermore, previous research is in
line with the results of Eun-jee Kim, Ikhram and
Yulianeu's research that there are organizational
learning variables to mediate between
transformational leadership and MSME
performance [63][64][41]. Thus, there is the
influence of Transformational Leadership on
MSME Performance in mediation by Organizational
Learning. So the hypothesis proposed in this study
is:
H10: Transformational Leadership has an indirect
effect on MSME Performance by mediating by
Organizational Learning
Investigating the impact of transformational
leadership and organizational performance on the
role of organizational innovation mediation is
important to look at. The study of Sadia Arif,
Winasari, Widodo and Kittikunchotiwut revealed
that organizational innovation has mediated a
positive and significant impact between
transformational leadership and organizational
performance [65][66][67][68]. Thus, there is the
influence of Transformational Leadership on
MSME Performance in mediation by Organizational
Innovation. So the hypothesis proposed in this study
is:
H11: Transformational Leadership has an indirect
effect on MSME Performance by mediating by
Organizational Innovation
Furthermore, hypotheses 12 and 13 have not
been found from the results of previous research
through literature studies conducted by the authors.
However, the authors believe that hypotheses 12 and
13 will be missed in the results of the study.
Therefore, there is the influence of Transformational
Leadership on MSME Performance in mediation by
Organizational Competitiveness and there is the
influence of Transformational Leadership on
MSME Performance mediated by the
Organizational Environment. So that hypotheses 12
and 13 proposed in this study are:
H12: Transformational Leadership has no effect on
MSME Performance by mediating by
Organizational Competitiveness
H13: Transformational Leadership has no effect on
MSME Performance by mediated by organizational
environment.
3. Methodology
This research used a quantitative approach.
Hypothesis testing in this research was carried out
using the Partial Least Square (PLS) analysis
technique with the help of the Smart PLS program.
The stages in this PLS analysis included (1) the
outer model testing phase and (2) the inner model
testing phase. At the outer model testing phase, the
testing of the validity and the construct reliability of
all indicators in the model was carried out, while at
the inner model phase, the hypothesis testing will be
carried out based on the significant value and path
coefficient between exogenous and endogenous
variables. The stages in this PLS analysis included
the outer model testing phase and the inner model
testing phase. The outer model testing phase was
used to test the validity and the reliability of all
indicators in measuring their constructs, while the
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2022.19.46
Muhammad Husni Thamrin,
Sugeng Wahyudi, Ngatno, Widiartanto, Yuwanto
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
509
Volume 19, 2022
inner model testing is used to test research
hypotheses.
4. Results
The study used primary data obtained from
questionnaires shared with respondents.
Questionnaires are submitted to respondents by
leaving to be filled out by respondents and in
accordance with the predetermined time, the
questionnaire is picked up again. Looking at the
number of Handycraft in Medan City as many as 97
MSMEs, the study took a total sample and a return
rate of 100%. In addition, the characteristics of
respondents based on gender include; 75 women
and 22 men. Educational characteristics of
respondents 67 High Schools, 18 Diplomas, 12
Bachelors. Most MSME owners on average have a
workforce between 2-5 people, which is as many as
88 respondents. Furthermore, the average for the
length of effort between 2 -6 years is as many as 57
respondents.
4.1.Data Quality Test
The data in this research were obtained from
distributing questionnaires that had previously gone
through the trial phase and proved valid and reliable
in measuring each research variable. The results of
the distribution of the questionnaire provided an
overview of the data such as the highest value,
lowest value, average value, and standard deviation
of the variance of the data studied.
Based on the data collected, the description
of the research data obtained an average value of
3.619, 3,598, 3,711 SME Performance, while the
standard deviation values of SME Performance were
0.999, 0.970, and 0.963. This condition showed that
the performance of SMEs is quite good. Other than
that, the mean values of Transformational
Leadership are 4,546, 4,247, 4.155, and 3,495, while
the standard deviation values of Transformational
Leadership are 0.774, 0.704, 0.764, and 0.996. This
showed that Transformational Leadership is good.
Furthermore, the mean scores of Organizational
Learning were 3,876, 4,021, and 4,268, while the
standard deviation values of Organizational
Learning were 0.865, 0.799, and 0.739. This showed
that Organizational Learning is of good value.
Furthermore, the mean values of
Organizational Innovation are 4,134, 3.948, and
3,907, while the standard deviation values of
Organizational Innovation are 0.795, 0.866, and
0.942. This showed that Organizational Innovation
is good. In addition, the average value of
Organizational Competitiveness is 4,134, 3.948, and
3.907, while the standard deviation values of
Organizational Competitiveness are 0.795, 0.866,
and 0.942. This showed that Organizational
Competitiveness is good. Furthermore, the mean
values of the Organizational Environment were
3.753, 3.928, 3.732, and 3.928, while the standard
deviation values of the Organizational Environment
were 0.774, 0.876, 1.021, and 0.815. This showed
that the Organizational Environment is good.
4.2. Instrument Validity and Realiability
Test Results
In this research, before distributing
questionnaires to 97 respondents, the instrument
testing phase was carried out by involving 30
respondents. The data from filling out the
questionnaire at this stage was then analyzed to test
the validity and reliability of the instruments used in
this research.
Table 4.1 Research Instrument Validity Test
Results
Variabele
Item of
Questions
R
Count
Validity
Transformational
Leadership (X1)
X11
0,516
valid
X12
0,762
valid
X13
0,500
valid
X14
0,723
valid
Organizational
Learning (Z1)
X21
0,858
valid
X22
0,794
valid
X23
0,503
valid
Organizational
Innovation (Z2)
X31
0,778
valid
X32
0,906
valid
Organizational
Competitiveness
(Z3)
X41
0,748
valid
X42
0,778
valid
X43
0,875
valid
Organizational
Environment (Z4)
X51
0,777
valid
X52
0,790
valid
X53
0,682
valid
X54
0,850
valid
MSME
Y1
0,935
valid
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2022.19.46
Muhammad Husni Thamrin,
Sugeng Wahyudi, Ngatno, Widiartanto, Yuwanto
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
510
Volume 19, 2022
Performance (Y)
Y2
0,946
0.361
valid
Y3
0,954
0.361
valid
Based on the results of the validity test in Table 4.1
above, the results of the analysis showed that all the
question items in this research instrument are valid
in measuring the research variables, indicated by the
calculated R value of all questionnaire items that
have exceeded the R table value (0.361).
Meanwhile, the reliability test in this research was
measured using the Cronbachs Alpha reliability test.
In this test, the instrument is declared reliable if the
Cronbachs alpha value is> 0.7.
Table 4.2 Reliability Test Results
Variabele
Cronbachs Alpha
Cut Value
Reliability
Y
0,940
0.7
reliabel
Z3
0,727
0.7
reliabel
Z4
0,781
0.7
reliabel
Z2
0,710
0.7
reliabel
Z1
0,781
0.7
reliabel
X1
0,707
0.7
reliabel
Based on the results of the reliability test in
Table 4.2, the results of the analysis showed that all
instruments in this research are reliable, indicated by
the Cronbachs alpha value of all instruments that
have exceeded the cut value (cronbachs alpha >
0.7).
4.3. Testing Outer Model
4.3.1. Convergent Validity Test
Convergent validity test is done by
examining the loading factor value of each indicator
to the construct. For confirmatory research, the
loading factor limit used is 0.7, while for
exploratory research the loading factor limit used is
0.6 and for development research, the loading factor
limit used is 0.5. Owing to the fact that this research
is
confirmatory research, the limit of the loading factor
used is 0.7. The following is the estimation result of
the PLS model:
Fig. 2 The estimation results of the PLS model
with the algorithm technique
Based on the estimation results of the PLS
model in the picture above, it can be seen that all
indicators in each construct have a loading factor
value above 0.7 so that the PLS model is declared to
have met the requirements of convergent validity.
In addition to examining the loading factor
value of each indicator, convergent validity must
also be assessed from the AVE value of each
construct; all constructs in the PLS model are
declared to have met convergent validity if the AVE
value of each construct is > 0.5. The complete AVE
value of each construct can be seen in the following
table:
Table 4.3 Loading Factor Value dan AVE Value
Variabele
Indicator
Loading
Factor
AVE
Convergent
Validity
Transformational
Leadership (X1)
X11
0,516
0.504
valid
X12
0,762
valid
X13
0,500
valid
X14
0,723
valid
Organizational
Learning (Z1)
X21
0,858
0.540
valid
X22
0,794
valid
X23
0,503
valid
Organizational
Innovation (Z2)
X31
0,778
0.713
valid
X32
0,906
valid
Organizational
Competitiveness
(Z3)
X41
0,748
0.644
valid
X42
0,778
valid
X43
0,875
valid
Organizational
Environment (Z4)
X51
0,777
0.603
valid
X52
0,790
valid
X53
0,682
valid
X54
0,850
valid
MSME
Y1
0,935
valid
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2022.19.46
Muhammad Husni Thamrin,
Sugeng Wahyudi, Ngatno, Widiartanto, Yuwanto
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
511
Volume 19, 2022
Performance (Y)
Y2
0,946
0.893
valid
Y3
0,954
valid
Based on the results of the PLS analysis in
the table above, the AVE value of all constructs in
the form of dimensions and variables has exceeded
0.5 which indicated that all indicators in each
construct have met the required convergent validity
criteria.
4.3.2. Discriminant Validity Test
Discriminant validity is done to ensure that each
concept of each latent variable is different from
other variables. The model has good
discriminant validity if the AVE square value of
each exogenous construct (the value on the
diagonal) exceeds the correlation between the
construct and other constructs (the value below
the diagonal). The results of the discriminant
validity test are obtained as follows:
Table 4.4 Fornell Larcker Method of
Descriminant Validity Test Results
(Y)
(Z3)
(Z4)
(Z2)
(Z1)
(X1)
(Y)
0,945
(Z3)
0,643
0,802
(Z4)
0,698
0,672
0,777
(Z2)
0,482
0,553
0,534
0,844
(Z1)
0,413
0,332
0,413
0,486
0,735
(X1)
0,401
0,531
0,473
0,514
0,309
0,636
The results of the discriminant validity test in
the table above showed that all indicators and
constructs in the PLS model have met the required
discriminant validity criteria, for instance, the SME
Performance variable (Y) has an AVE square root
value of 0.945, this value is greater than the
Competitiveness correlation. Organization (X2)
with other constructs 0.802 to Organizational
Environment (Z4), 0.777 to Organizational
Innovation (Z2), 0.844 to Organizational Learning
(Z1), 0.735 to Transformational Leadership (X1)
0.636 so that it can be declared to have met the
criteria for discriminant validity using the Fornell
method larcker.
In addition to using the Fornell Larcker
method, the discriminant validity can also be seen
from the HTM value between constructs. In this
method, all constructs are declared to meet the
criteria of discriminant validity if the HTMT value
between constructs did not exceed 0.9. The results
of the analysis in the table show that there is no
HTM value between constructs that exceeds 0.9,
this means that the discriminant validity criteria
have been met.
Table 4.5 HTMT value between constructs
(Y)
(Z3)
(Z4)
(Z2)
(Z1)
(X1)
(Y)
(Z3)
0,752
(Z4)
0,797
0,859
(Z2)
0,621
0,819
0,717
(Z1)
0,525
0,478
0,600
0,761
(X1)
0,531
0,795
0,693
0,799
0,500
Further, to using the Fornell Larcker method
and the HTMT method, discriminant validity can
also be seen from the cross-loading value of each
indicator to the construct, the indicator is declared to
meet the discriminant validity criteria if the cross-
loading indicator to the construct is higher than the
cross-loading indicator value to other constructs.
Table 4.6 Discriminant Validity Test Results with
the Cross Loading Indicator method
(Y)
(Z3)
(Z4)
(Z2)
(Z1)
(X1)
X11
0,279
0,343
0,376
0,360
0,248
0,816
X12
0,337
0,350
0,288
0,317
0,231
0,862
X13
0,097
0,211
0,224
0,087
0,132
0,880
X14
0,233
0,393
0,281
0,429
0,148
0,823
X21
0,341
0,257
0,330
0,407
0,858
0,336
X22
0,373
0,333
0,357
0,437
0,794
0,180
X23
0,145
0,087
0,205
0,156
0,803
0,118
X31
0,338
0,346
0,346
0,798
0,370
0,323
X32
0,462
0,558
0,531
0,906
0,445
0,518
X41
0,380
0,748
0,816
0,507
0,222
0,270
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2022.19.46
Muhammad Husni Thamrin,
Sugeng Wahyudi, Ngatno, Widiartanto, Yuwanto
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
512
Volume 19, 2022
X42
0,510
0,778
0,842
0,448
0,374
0,465
X43
0,614
0,875
0,851
0,414
0,204
0,495
X51
0,439
0,864
0,777
0,292
0,355
0,292
X52
0,517
0,850
0,790
0,414
0,223
0,365
X53
0,499
0,825
0,682
0,327
0,300
0,251
X54
0,668
0,890
0,850
0,562
0,394
0,503
X61
0,935
0,624
0,657
0,469
0,439
0,450
X62
0,946
0,642
0,661
0,479
0,380
0,373
X63
0,954
0,554
0,660
0,415
0,351
0,310
Based on the results of the discriminant
validity test in Table 4.6 above, it can be seen that
all indicators have the highest indicators in their
constructs not in other constructs so that it can be
stated that all indicators have met the requirements
of discriminant validity.
Based on the overall results of discriminant
validity testing with the 3 test methods, it can be
concluded that the outer PLS model has met the
required discriminant validity criteria.
4.4. Inner Model Test
4.4.1. The goodness of fit structural model
testing
At the structural model testing stage, before
testing the structural model, the feasibility of the
model is first tested by looking at the R square value
and the Q square model value. In this test, the value
of R square model showed the predictive power of
the model seen from the power of exogenous
variables in predicting endogenous variables. The
value of R square was categorized into 3 categories,
namely good, moderate and weak. According to
Chin, the R square value of 0.67 indicated that the
PLS model is strong, 0.33 indicated the PLS model
is in the moderate category and 0.19 indicated that
the PLS model is in the weak category [69].
Table 4.7 R Square Model
Variable
R Square
R Square Adjusted
(Y)
0,704
0,688
(Z3)
0,747
0,744
(Z4)
0,553
0,549
(Z2)
0,789
0,787
(Z1)
0,290
0,282
Based on the results of the analysis in the table
above, the R square value of all variables has
exceeded 0.33 so it can be stated that the model is in
the moderate category. At the structural model
testing stage, before testing the structural model, the
feasibility of the model was first tested by looking at
the R square value and the Q square model value. In
this test, the value of R square model showed the
predictive power of the model seen from the power
of exogenous variables in predicting endogenous
variables. The value of R square was categorized
into 3 categories, namely good, moderate and weak.
The Q square value was categorized into 3
categories, namely small, medium and large, a Q
square value of 0.02 was declared small, a Q square
value of 0.15 was moderate and a Q square value of
0.35 was declared large [70].
Table 4.8 Q square Value
RMSE
MAE
Q²_predict
(Y)
0,949
0,773
0,134
(Z3)
0,884
0,727
0,254
(Z4)
0,917
0,737
0,192
(Z2)
0,904
0,680
0,224
(Z1)
1,004
0,801
0,037
The calculation of Q square in the table
above showed that the Q square value of SME
Performance (Y) is 0.134 which is predicted from
the Transformational Leadership variable (X1)
through Organizational Learning (Z1),
Organizational Innovation (Z2), Organizational
Competitiveness (Z3) variables, and Organizational
Environment (Z4). It can be concluded that the PLS
model has high predictive relevance. Based on the
results of the evaluation of the feasibility of the
model by looking at the values of R square and Q
square of the model, it can be concluded that the
structural model is feasible to be used to test the
research hypothesis.
4.4.2. Path Coefficient Evaluation and
Direct Effect Test
The direct effect significance test was used
to test the partial effect of exogenous variables on
endogenous variables. Owing to the fact that this
research used a one-tailed hypothesis, the
hypotheses used in this test are as follows:
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2022.19.46
Muhammad Husni Thamrin,
Sugeng Wahyudi, Ngatno, Widiartanto, Yuwanto
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
513
Volume 19, 2022
Ho: exogenous variables have no positive effect on
endogenous variables
Ha: exogenous variables have a positive effect on
endogenous variables
Owing to the fact that the research
hypothesis is a two-way hypothesis, Ho is rejected
and it is concluded that exogenous variables have a
significant effect on endogenous variables if the P
value < 0.05 and t count > 1.96, whereas if the p
value > 0.05 and t arithmetic <1.96 then Ho is not
rejected and it can be concluded that exogenous
variables have no effect on endogenous variables.
From the results of the significance test, it is
also possible to know the direction of the
relationship between the influence of exogenous
variables and endogenous variables. The direction
of the relationship can be known from the path
coefficients on each path. If the path coefficient
value is positive, then the effect of exogenous to
endogenous is unidirectional, whereas if the path
coefficient is negative, then the effect of exogenous
to endogenous is the opposite. The results of the
model estimation as a reference for testing the
hypothesis in this research can be seen in Figure 2.
Based on the estimation results of the PLS model
with the algorithm technique above, it can be seen
that all paths are significant with p value < 0.05. The
results of the significance test of this direct effect
can be seen in full in the following table:
Table 4.9 Partial Effect Test Results
Variable
Original
Sample
(O)
Sample
Mean
(M)
Standard
Deviation
(STDEV)
T Statistics
(|O/STDEV|)
P
Values
(X1)-> (Y)
-0,021
-0,032
0,090
0,232
0,816
(X1)-> (Z1)
0,309
0,334
0,125
2,473
0,014
(Z1)-> (Y)
0,124
0,131
0,071
1,736
0,083
(X1)-> (Z2)
0,514
0,536
0,065
7,945
0,000
(Z2)-> (Y)
0,032
-0,027
0,124
0,261
0,794
(X1)->(Z3)
0,531
0,541
0,079
6,717
0,000
(Z3)->(Y)
0,302
0,310
0,92
3,278
0,001
(X1)->(Z4)
0,473
0,491
0,078
6,099
0,000
(Z4)->(Y)
0,436
0,437
0,121
3,597
0,000
Based on the results of the above hypothesis testing,
the following test results are obtained:
1. Transformational Leadership (X1)-> MSME
Performance (Y) On a path that shows the
relationship of Transformational Leadership
(X1) influence on MSME Performance (Y) (X1-
>Y), the P value obtained is 0.816 with a
statistical T of 0.232 and a negative path
coefficient of -0.032. Therefore, because the
value of the path p value > 0.05, the statistical T
< 1.96 and the path coefficient marked negative
it can be concluded that Transformational
Leadership does not have a significant positive
effect on MSME Performance.
2. Transformational Leadership (X1)->
Organizational Learning (Z1) On a path that
shows the relationship of Transformational
Leadership (X1) influence on Organizational
Learning (Z1) (X1 -> Z1), the P value obtained
is 0.014 with a statistical T of 2,473 and a
positive marked path coefficient of 0.309.
Therefore, because the value of P path value >
0.05, T statistics > 1.96 and the path coefficient
marked negative it can be concluded that
Transformational Leadership has a positive and
significant effect on Organizational Learning.
3. Organizational Learning (Z1)-> MSME
Performance (Y) On the path that shows the
relationship of organizational learning (Z1)
influence on MSME Performance (Y) (Z1-> Y),
the P value obtained is 0.083 with a statistical T
of 1,736 and a positive marked path coefficient
of 0.124. Therefore, because the value of P
value of the path > 0.05, the statistical T > 1.96
and the coefficient of the path marked positive it
can be concluded that Organizational Learning
has no positive and insignificant effect on
MSME Performance, this shows that the higher
organizational learning, the no effect on MSME
Performance.
4. Transformational Leadership (X1)->
Organizational Innovation (Z2) On a path that
shows the relationship of Transformational
Leadership (X1) influence on Organizational
Innovation (Z2) (X1 -> Z2), the P value
obtained is 0.000 with a statistical T of 7,945
and a positive marked path coefficient of 0.514.
Therefore, because the value of P value of the
path < 0.05, the statistical T > 1.96 and the
coefficient of the path marked positively it can
be concluded that Transformational Leadership
has a significant positive effect on
Organizational Innovation.
5. Organizational Innovation (Z2)-> MSME
Performance (Y) On the path that shows the
relationship of Organizational Innovation (Z2)
influence on MSME Performance (Y) (Z2 ->
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2022.19.46
Muhammad Husni Thamrin,
Sugeng Wahyudi, Ngatno, Widiartanto, Yuwanto
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
514
Volume 19, 2022
Y), the P value obtained is 0.794 with a
statistical T of 0.261 and a positive marked path
coefficient of 0.032. Therefore, because the
value of P value of the path > 0.05, T statistics <
1.96 and the coefficient of the path marked
positive it can be concluded that Organizational
Innovation has no positive and insignificant
effect on MSME Performance, this shows that
the higher organizational innovation, the no
effect on MSME performance.
6. Transformational Leadership (X1)->
Organizational Competitiveness (Z3) On a path
that shows the relationship of Transformational
Leadership (X1) influence on Organizational
Competitiveness (Z3) (X1 -> Z3), the value of P
value obtained is 0.000 with a statistical T of
6,717 and a negative path coefficient of 0.531.
Therefore, because the value of P path value <
0.05, T statistics > 1.96 and the path coefficient
marked positive, it can be concluded that
Transformational Leadership has a significant
positive effect on Organizational
Competitiveness.
7. Organizational Competitiveness (Z3)-> MSME
Performance (Y) On a track that shows the
relationship of organizational competitiveness
influence on MSME performance (Z3 (Y), the P
value obtained is 0.001 with a statistical T of
3.278 and a positive track coefficient of 0.302.
Therefore, because the value of P value of the
path < 0.05, T statistics > 1.66 and the
coefficient of the path marked positively it can
be concluded that organizational
competitiveness has a positive and significant
effect on msme performance, this shows that the
higher the competitiveness of the organization,
the higher the performance of MSMEs.
8. Transformational Leadership (X1)->
Organizational Environment (Z4) On a path that
shows the relationship of Transformational
Leadership (X1) influence on Organizational
Environment (Z4) (X1 -> Z4), the P value
obtained is 0.000 with a statistical T of 6,099
and a positive path coefficient of 0.473.
Therefore, because the value of the path p value
< 0.05, the statistical T > 1.96 and the positive
marked path coefficient it can be concluded that
Transformational Leadership has a significant
positive effect on the Organizational
Environment.
9. Organizational Environment (Z4)-> MSME
Performance (Y) On the path that shows the
organizational environment (Z4) influence
relationship to MSME Performance (Y) (Z4(Y),
the P value obtained is 0.000 with a statistical T
of 3.597 and a positive marked path coefficient
of 0.436. Therefore, because the value of P
value of the path < 0.05, the statistical T > 1.96
and the coefficient of the positive marked path it
can be concluded that there is a significant
influence between organizational environment
(Z4) on MSME performance, this shows that the
higher the organizational environment, the
higher the MSME performance value.
4.4.3. Indierect Influence
In this research, to examine the role of
mediation in mediating the indirect effect of
exogenous to endogenous, an indirect effect test was
carried out with the results of PLS analysis in the
section on the specific indirect effect test. Because
this research used a one-tailed hypothesis, the
hypothesis used in the test is
Ho: mediating variables cannot mediate the indirect
effect of exogenous variables on endogenous
variables
Ha: mediating variables can mediate the indirect
effect of exogenous variables on endogenous
variables
With a significant level of 5%, then the one-
way hypothesis testing has the criteria for rejecting
Ho if the p value obtained is < 0.05 and T statistics
> 1.96, whereas if the p value > 0.05 and T statistics
< 1.96 then Ho is not rejected which indicated that
there is no role of intervening in mediating the
effect of exogenous to endogenous.
Table 4.10 Indirect Effect Test Results
Variable
(O)
(M)
(STDEV)
T
Statis
tics
P
Values
(X1)->(Z1)
->(Y)
0,038
0,045
0,033
1,175
0,241
(X1)->(Z2)
->(Y)
0,017
0,015
0,070
2,240
0,811
(X1)->(Z3)
->(Y)
0,161
0,168
0,057
0,812
0,005
(X1)->(Z4)
->(Y)
0,206
0,215
0,070
2,927
0,005
Based on the results of the analysis in the
Table above, the following results are obtained:
1. The value of P value of indirect influence of
Transformational Leadership on MSME
Performance mediated by Organizational
Learning (X1 -> Z1 -> Y) is 0.241 with a
statistical T of 1.175 and a positive path
coefficient of 0.045. Therefore, the value of P
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2022.19.46
Muhammad Husni Thamrin,
Sugeng Wahyudi, Ngatno, Widiartanto, Yuwanto
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
515
Volume 19, 2022
value > 0.05 and T statistics < 1.96, Ho was
accepted and concluded that there was no
indirect influence of Transformational
Leadership on MSME Performance by
mediating by Organizational Learning. Thus,
transformational leadership has an indirect
impact on the performance of handycraft
MSME organizations without being mediated
by organizational learning. Even if there is no
commitment, knowledge, renewal and
adaptation, and openness to the outside world,
transformational leadership still has no direct
effect on the performance of handicraft MSME
organizations..
2. The value of P value of indirect influence of
Transformational Leadership on MSME
Performance mediated by Organizational
Innovation (X1 -> Z2 -> Y) is 0.811 with a
statistical T of 0.240 and a positive path
coefficient of 0.015. Because the value of P
value > 0.05 and T statistics < 1.96 then Ho is
accepted. Thus, transformational leadership
affects indirectly on the performance of
handycraft MSME organizations without being
mediated by organizational innovation. Even if
there are no new ideas and creative behaviors,
and the courage to take risks, transformational
leadership still has no direct effect on the
performance of handicraft MSME
organizations.
3. The value of P value of indirect influence of
Transformational Leadership on MSME
Performance mediated by Organizational
Competitiveness (X1 (Z3 (Y) is 0.005 with a
statistical T of 2,812 and a positive path
coefficient of 0.168. Therefore, because the
value of p value < 0.05 and T statistics > 1.96,
Ho was rejected and concluded that there was
an indirect influence of Transformational
Leadership on MSME Performance mediated by
Organizational Competitiveness. This means
that the higher the influence of
Transformational Leadership, the higher the
performance of MSMEs by being mediated by
organizational competitiveness. Without
adequate Organizational Competitiveness, there
will be less influence of Transformational
Leadership on MSME Performance.
4. The value of P value of indirect influence of
Transformational Leadership on MSME
Performance mediated by the Organizational
Environment (X1 (Z4 (Y) is 0.004 with a
statistical T of 2,927 and a positive path
coefficient of 0.215. Therefore, because the
value of p value < 0.05 and T statistics > 1.96,
Ho was rejected and concluded that there was
an indirect influence of Transformational
Leadership on MSME Performance by
mediating by the Organizational Environment.
This means that the higher the influence of
Transformational Leadership, the higher the
performance of MSMEs by being mediated by
the Organizational Environment. Without an
adequate organizational environment, there will
be less influence of transformational leadership
on msme performance.
5. Conclusion
Based on the results of research that has
been done, the conclusion to answer the formulation
of problems and research hypotheses as follows:
First, Transformational Leadership has no positive
and significant effect on MSME Performance.
Second, Transformational Leadership has a positive
and significant effect on organizational learning.
Third. Organizational learning has no positive and
significant effect on MSME Performance. Fourth,
Transformational Leadership has a positive and
significant effect on Organizational Innovation.
Fifth, Organizational Innovation has no positive and
significant effect on MSME Performance. Sixth,
Transformational Leadership has a positive and
significant effect on organizational competitiveness.
Seventh, Organizational Competitiveness has a
positive and significant effect on the performance of
MSMEs. Eighth, Transformational Leadership has a
positive and significant effect on the organizational
environment. Ninth, the Organizational
Environment has a positive and significant effect on
MSME Performance. Tenth, Transformational
Leadership has no indirect effect on MSME
Performance by mediating by Organizational
Learning. Eleventh, Transformational Leadership
has no indirect effect on MSME Performance by
mediating by Organizational Innovation. Twelfth,
Transformational Leadership has a positive and
significant effect on MSME Performance by
mediating by Organizational Competitiveness.
Thirteenth, Transformational Leadership has a
positive and significant effect on MSME
Performance by mediating by the Organizational
Environment.
The advice in this study is as follows; First,
so that the Transformational Leadership run by
Handycraft MSME Owners can still maintain
collaborative synergy to organizational factors that
are mediation variables in this study so that the
performance of Handicraft MSMEs can continue to
be improved. Second, in order for Organizational
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2022.19.46
Muhammad Husni Thamrin,
Sugeng Wahyudi, Ngatno, Widiartanto, Yuwanto
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
516
Volume 19, 2022
Learning to have a positive impact on the
Performance of MSME Handicraft, MSME owners
need to build relationships and cooperation with
parties such as educational and training institutions
and research and development institutions so as to
build knowledge and expertise competencies that
are in accordance with the demands and needs of
employees in improving their performance.
The limitations of this study only focus on
Handicraft MSMEs in Medan City and have not
reached MSMEs as a whole. The research methods
conducted are still surveyed with closed
questionnaires so that they cannot reflect
comprehensive results, such as the use of in-depth
interview methods and focus group discussions on
informants who are stakeholders for Handicraft
MSMEs.
Further research agenda needs to be done
using a mix methode with a larger sample number
and is varied to MSMEs in the city of Medan. In
addition, organizational cultural issues are also
important to be examined by the next researchers in
order to answer the shortcomings in this study so as
to strengthen the role and influence of
Transformational Leadership on Handicraft MSME
Owners in Medan City.
References:
[1] World Bank, “Small And Medium
Enterprises (SMES) Finance Improving
SMEs’ access to finance and finding
innovative solutions to unlock sources of
capital,” World bank, 2019. [Online].
Available:
https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/smefina
nce.
[2] OECD, Small, Medium, Strong TRENDS IN
SME PERFORMANCE AND BUSINESS
CONDITIONS. Paris: OECD, 2017.
[3] T. Tambunan, “Export-oriented small and
medium industry clusters in Indonesia,” J.
Enterprising Communities People Places
Glob. Econ., vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 25–58, 2009.
[4] Diskopumkm, “Rekapitulasi UKM Kota
Medan Tahun 2019,” Medan, 2019.
[5] S. E. Rahayu, “Analisis Pengaruh Ekonomi
Kreatif Dalam Penyerapan Tenaga Kerja di
Kota Medan,” in Strategi Membangun
Penelitian Terapan yang Bersinergi dengan
Dunia Industri, Pertanian dan Pendidikan
dalam Meningkatkan Daya Saing Global,
2019, pp. 174–184.
[6] BPS Kota Medan, BPS Kota Medan Dalam
Angka 2018. Medan: Badan Pusat Statistik
Kota Medan, 2018.
[7] M. Arda, “Position Analysis of Small-
Medium Business Strategy on Medan Batik,”
Inf. Knowl. Manag., vol. 8, no. 6, pp. 1–7,
2018.
[8] F. Ramadini, “The Development Model of
Small and Medium Enterprises in Textile
Sector (Batik, Weaving and Embroidery)
with Triple Helix in Medan,” Acad. J. Econ.
Stud., vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 125–140, 2016.
[9] D. K. Gultom, “Penggunaan Internet
Marketing Guna Peningkatan Daya Saing
Pada Usaha Mikro Handycraft Di Kota
Medan,” J. Pemberdaya. Masy., vol. 4, no. 1,
pp. 339–347, 2019.
[10] A. S. Meliala, “Strategi Peningkatan Daya
Saing Usaha Kecil dan Menengah (UKM)
Berbasis Kaizen,” J. Optimasi Sist. Ind., vol.
13, no. 2, pp. 641–664, 2014.
[11] E. Pudyastuti, “Strengthening Product
Innovation, Quality Strategy and Excellence
Competing in Improving Marketing
Performance (Case Study in SMEs Rattan
Handicrafts in Medan City),” in The 1st
Unimed International Conference on
Economics and Business, 2017, pp. 35–47.
[12] A. P. Angin, “Analisis Strategi
Pengembangan Industri Kerajinan Rotan
Dengan Metode SWOT (Studi Kasus:
Industri Kerajinan Rotan Kelurahan Sei
Sikambing Medan),” Universitas Medan
Area, 2017.
[13] F. R. Dalimunthe, “Model Pengembangan
dan Peningkatan Daya Saing Produk Rotan
(Studi Kasus Pengrajin Rotan Kota Medan),”
Medan, 2014.
[14] Y. C. Muchtar, “Internationalization
Preparation of Small Medium Enterprises
(SMEs) in Medan,” J. Manag. Res., vol. 9,
no. 4, pp. 1–20, 2017.
[15] BPS, “Pemanfaatan Big Data dalam Survei
Wisatawan Nusantara,” Jakarta, 2018.
[16] Pemkomedan, “Wali Kota Medan Buka
Pameran Medan Inovasi Smesco Vest Expo
2019,” Medan, 2019.
[17] S. Nazari, “Small to Medium Enterprise
Business Leaders Managing Change,”
Walden University, 2017.
[18] S. Kasraie, “Leadership and Performance:
The Case of Australian SMEs in The
Services Sector,” in 9th International
Conference on Operations and Supply Chain
Management, Vietnam 2019, 2019, pp. 1–7.
[19] L. P. Rejas, “Transformational and
Transactional Leadership : A Study of Their
Influence in Small Companies,” Ingeniare-
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2022.19.46
Muhammad Husni Thamrin,
Sugeng Wahyudi, Ngatno, Widiartanto, Yuwanto
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
517
Volume 19, 2022
Revista Ing., vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 159–166,
2006.
[20] R. V. Alejandro, “Leadership Style,
Entrepreurial Orientation and Innovation:
The Impact on Busoness Performance and
Competitiveness in Puerto Rico,”
Universidad Del Turabo School of Business
and Entrepreneurship, 2015.
[21] O. V. Ikechukwu, “Leadership Style and
SMEs Sustainability in Nigeria: A Multiple
Case Study,” Walden University, 2019.
[22] Syamsurizaldi, “Pengaruh Lingkungan
Makro, Lingkungan Industri, Sumberdaya
dan Kepemimpinan Transaksional Terhadap
Strategi Keunggulan Bersaing dan kinerja
Industri Kecil (Studi pada Industri Kecil
Furniture Kayu di Provinsi Sumatera
Barat),” Universitas Brawijaya, 2011.
[23] S. Yildiz, “The Effect of Leadership and
Innovativeness on Business Performance,” in
International Strategic Management
Conference, 2014, pp. 785 – 793.
[24] A. Hashim, “Leadership Behaviour,
Entrepreneurial Orientation and
Organisational Performance in Malaysian
Small and Medium Enterprises,” Int. Bus.
Res., vol. 11, no. 9, pp. 37–50, 2018.
[25] S. U. Rehman, “Mediating effect of
innovative culture and organizational
learning between leadership styles at third-
order and organizational performance in
Malaysian SMEs,” J. Glob. Entrep. Res., vol.
9, no. 36, pp. 1–24, 2019.
[26] B. M. & R. E. R. Bass, Transformational
Leadership Second Edition, 2nd ed. United
States of America: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates, 2006.
[27] D. A. Garvin, Learning in Action: A Guide to
Putting the Learning Organization to Work.
Boston: Harvard Business School Press,
2000.
[28] S.-H. Liao, “An integrated model for
learning organization with strategic view:
Benchmarking in the knowledge-intensive
industry.,” Expert Syst. Appl., vol. 37, no. 5,
pp. 3792–3798, 2010.
[29] A. Mardiyono, “Pengaruh Orientasi Pasar,
Pembelajaran Organisasi Terhadap
Keunggulan Bersaing Dalam Meningkatkan
Kinerja Pemasaran (Tinjauan Teoritis).,”
Serat Acitya, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 48–58, 2015.
[30] M. Sony, “Six sigma, organizational learning
and innovation,” Int. J. Qual. Reliab.
Manag., vol. 29, no. 8, pp. 915–936, 2012.
[31] K. T. Beyene, “The impact of innovation
strategy on organizational learning and
innovation performance: Do firm size and
ownership type make a difference?,” South
African J. Ind. Eng., vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 125–
136, 2016.
[32] M. Farzaneh, “Contributory role of dynamic
capabilities in the relationship between
organizational learning and innovation
performance,” Eur. J. Innov. Manag., vol.
ahead-of-p, no. ahead-of-print, pp. 1460–
1060, 2020.
[33] A. Iqbal, ShujaIqbal, S., Moleiro Martins, J.,
Nuno Mata, M., Naz, S., Akhtar, S., &
Abreu, “Linking Entrepreneurial Orientation
with Innovation Performance in SMEs; the
Role of Organizational Commitment and
Transformational Leadership Using Smart
PLS-SEM,” Sustainability, vol. 13, no. 8, p.
4361, 2021.
[34] E. S. Pudjiarti, “Interactive control
capability, effective organizational learning
and firm performance: An empirical study of
milling and metal industry in Tegal.,”
Manag. Sci. Lett., vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 575–
584, 2020.
[35] M. Gregory, G. D., Ngo, L. V., & Karavdic,
“Developing e-commerce marketing
capabilities and efficiencies for enhanced
performance in business-to-business export
ventures,” Ind. Mark. Manag., vol. 78, pp.
146–157, 2019.
[36] S. Savrul, M., Incekara, A., & Sener, “The
potential of e-commerce for SMEs in a
globalizing business environment.,
Procedia-Social Behav. Sci., vol. 150, pp.
35–45, 2014.
[37] M. Korcsmáros, E., & Šimova, “Factors
affecting the business environment of SMEs
in Nitra region in Slovakia,” Oeconomia
Copernicana, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 309–331,
2018.
[38] A. F. Arham, “Leadership and Performance :
the Case of Malaysian SMEs In the Services
Sector,” Int. J. Asian Soc. Sci., vol. 4, no. 3,
pp. 343–355, 2014.
[39] P. Kihara, “Relationship between Leadership
Styles in Strategy Implementation and
Performance of Small and Medium
Manufacturing Firms in Thika Sub-County,
Kenya,” Int. J. Humanit. Soc. Sci., vol. 6, no.
6, pp. 216–227, 2016.
[40] A. Noruzy, “Relations between
transformational leadership, organizational
learning, knowledge management,
organizational innovation, and organizational
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2022.19.46
Muhammad Husni Thamrin,
Sugeng Wahyudi, Ngatno, Widiartanto, Yuwanto
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
518
Volume 19, 2022
performance: an empirical investigation of
manufacturing firms,” Int. J. Adv. Manuf.
Technol., vol. 64, no. 5–8, pp. 1073–1085,
2012.
[41] A. et. al. Yulianeu, “The Analysis of
Transformational Leadership Models in
Improving the MSME’s Performance in the
East Priangan-West Java Indonesia,” Talent
Dev. Excell., vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 3268–3288,
2020.
[42] G. et. al. Morales, “Influence of
transformational leadership on organizational
innovation and performance depending on
the level of organizational learning in the
pharmaceutical sector,” J. Organ. Chang.
Manag., vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 188–212, 2008.
[43] H.-C. Hsiao, “The role of organizational
learning in transformational leadership and
organizational innovation,” Asia Pacific
Educ. Rev., vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 621–631,
2011.
[44] A. Michna, “The relationship between
organizational learning and SME
performance in Poland,” J. Eur. Ind. Train.,
vol. 33, no. 4, pp. 356–370, 2009.
[45] L. W. Hooi, “Enhancing organizational
performance of Malaysian SMEs The role of
HRM and organizational learning
capability,” Int. J. Manpow., vol. 35, no. 7,
pp. 973–995, 2014.
[46] G. Gomes, “Organizational learning
capability, innovation and performance:
study in small and medium-sized enterprises
(SMES),” Rev. Adm. (São Paulo), vol. 52,
no. 2, pp. 163–175, 2017.
[47] M. Mokhber, “Effect of Transformational
Leadership and its Components on
Organizational Innovation,” Iran. J. Manag.
Stud., vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 221–241, 2015.
[48] L. Gumusluoğlu, “Transformational
Leadership and Organizational Innovation:
The Roles of Internal and External Support
for Innovation,” J. Prod. Innov. Manag., vol.
26, no. 3, pp. 264–277, 2009.
[49] J.-L. Hervas-Oliver, “Process innovation
strategy in SMEs, organizational innovation
and performance: A misleading debate?,”
Small Bus. Econ., vol. 43, no. 4, pp. 873
886, 2014.
[50] M. M. Al Saud, Flood Control Management
for the City and Surroundings of Jeddah,
Saudi Arabia. Riyadh: King Abdulaziz City
for Science and Technology, 2015.
[51] A. P. Ndesaulwa, “The Impact of Innovation
on Performance of Small and Medium
Enterprises (SMEs) in Tanzania: A Review
of Empirical Evidence,” J. Bus. Manag. Sci.,
vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 1–6, 2016.
[52] N. Asilcovschi, TRANSFORMATIONAL
LEADERSHIP AND THE ECONOMIC
COMPETITIVENESS IN SHIPPING
INDUSTRY TODAY,” Analele Univ. Marit.
Constanta, vol. 13, no. 17, pp. 307–310,
2012.
[53] M. I. Rivera Vargas, “Determinant Factors
for Small Business to Achieve Innovation,
High Performance and Competitiveness:
Organizational Learning and Leadership
Style,” in Procedia-Social and Behavioral
Sciences 169, 2015, pp. 43–52.
[54] T. W. . Man, “The competitiveness of small
and medium enterprises: A conceptualization
with focus on entrepreneurial competencies,
J. Bus. Ventur., vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 123–142,
2002.
[55] T. W. Y. Man, “Entrepreneurial
Competencies and the Performance of Small
and Medium Enterprises: An Investigation
through a Framework of Competitiveness,”
J. Small Bus. Entrep., vol. 21, no. 3, pp.
257–276, 2012.
[56] A. A. Agus, “An assessment of SME
competitiveness in Indonesia.,” J. Compet.,
vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 60–74, 2015.
[57] C. D. Beugré, “Transformational leadership
in organizations: an environmentinduced
model,” Int. J. Manpow., vol. 27, no. 1, pp.
52–62, 2006.
[58] G. Gundersen, “Leading International Project
Teams: The Effectiveness of
Transformational Leadership in Dynamic
Work Environments,” J. Leadersh. Organ.
Stud., vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 46–57, 2012.
[59] M. Clarita, “Pengaruh Gaya Kepemimpinan
Transformasional dan Lingkungan Kerja
Fisik terhadap Motivasi Kerja Karyawan
UMKM Sektor Makanan di Surabaya,”
Agora, vol. 7, no. 1, 2019.
[60] S. X. Zeng, “How environmental
management driving forces affect
environmental and economic performance of
SMEs: a study in the Northern China
district,” J. Clean. Prod., vol. 19, no. 13, pp.
1426–1437, 2011.
[61] A. S. Gaur, “Environmental and Firm Level
Influences on Inter-Organizational Trust and
SME Performance,” J. Manag. Stud., vol. 48,
no. 8, pp. 1752–1781, 2011.
[62] C. Uzkurt, “The impact of environmental
uncertainty dimensions on organisational
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2022.19.46
Muhammad Husni Thamrin,
Sugeng Wahyudi, Ngatno, Widiartanto, Yuwanto
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
519
Volume 19, 2022
innovativeness: An empirical study on
SMEs,” in In Promoting Innovation in New
Ventures and Small-and Medium-Sized
Enterprises, 2018, pp. 151–175.
[63] E.-J. Kim, “Transformational leadership,
knowledge sharing, organizational climate
and learning: an empirical study,” Leadersh.
Organ. Dev. J., vol. 41, no. 6, pp. 761–775,
2020.
[64] A. D. Ikhram, “The impact of
Transformational leadership styles and
Organizational Culture on the Performance
of MSME Employees through mediation of
Organizational Learning,” Int. J. Econ. Bus.
Account. Res., vol. 5, no. 3, 2021.
[65] S. Arif, “Transformational Leadership and
Organizational Performance The Mediating
Role of Organizational Innovation,”
SEISENSE J. Manag., vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 59
75, 2018.
[66] N. M. P. Winasari, “The Influence of
Transformational Leadership and
Organizational Learning on Employee
Performance Through Organizational
Innovations of MSMEs Guided by Bank
Indonesia Representative Office in Bali
Province (Case Study in Putri Mas Weaving
Group MSME),” IOSR J. Bus. Manag., vol.
22, no. 1, pp. 08–14, 2020.
[67] W. Widodo, “Investigating the role of
innovative behavior in mediating the effect
of transformational leadership and talent
management on performance,” Manag. Sci.
Lett., vol. 10, no. 10, pp. 2175–2182, 2020.
[68] P. KITTIKUNCHOTIWUT,
“Transformational leadership and financial
performance: The mediating roles of learning
orientation and firm innovativeness., J.
Asian Financ. Econ. Bus., vol. 7, no. 10, pp.
769–781, 2020.
[69] W. W. Chin, “The partial least squares
approach to structural equation modeling,”
Mod. methods Bus. Res., vol. 295, no. 2, pp.
295–336, 1998.
[70] I. Ghozali, Structural Equation Modeling,
Alternative Methods. Partial Least Square
(PLS), 4th ed. Semarang: University
Publishing Agency, 2014.
Creative Commons Attribution
License 4.0 (Attribution 4.0
International , CC BY 4.0)
This article is published under the terms of the
Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.en
_US
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on BUSINESS and ECONOMICS
DOI: 10.37394/23207.2022.19.46
Muhammad Husni Thamrin,
Sugeng Wahyudi, Ngatno, Widiartanto, Yuwanto
E-ISSN: 2224-2899
520
Volume 19, 2022