The Influence of Ambidextrous Leadership Mediated by Organizational
Agility and Digital Business Model Innovation on the Performance of
Telecommunication Companies in Indonesia during the Covid-19
Pandemic
MARINDRA BAWONO1, IDRIS GAUTAMA1, AGUSTINUS BANDUR1, FIRDAUS ALAMSJAH2
1 Management Binus Business School, Binus University Jakarta Indonesia,
Jl. K. H. Syahdan No. 9, Kemanggisan, Palmerah,Jakarta, 11480,
INDONESIA
2Industrial Engineering Department, Binus Graduate Program-Master of Industrial Engineering,
Binus University Jakarta Indonesia
Jl. K. H. Syahdan No. 9, Kemanggisan, Palmerah,Jakarta, 11480,
INDONESIA
Abstract: - Since 2019 and still progressing in 2020, the problems of the three telecommunication operators
have experienced a decline in company performance, it can be seen that TELKOM has decreased revenue from
135.567 Trillion (2019) to 135.450 Trillion (2020). The Covid-19 pandemic that occurred in Indonesia caused
telecommunications operators to decide to delay investment in infrastructure development (New Capex) for
2020 and 2021. The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of Ambidextrous leadership mediated by
organizational agility and digital business models on performance. telecommunications companies in Indonesia
during the COVID-19 Pandemic. This research will be conducted using quantitative research. The sampling
technique was done by convenience sampling. The number of samples is 100 respondents. Based on the
discussion above, it is concluded that Ambidextrous Leadership has a positive and significant effect on Digital
Business Model Innovation, Ambidextrous Leadership has a positive and significant impact on Organizational
Agility, Ambidextrous Leadership has a positive and significant impact on Company Performance, Digital
Business Innovation Model has a positive and significant impact on Company Performance, Organizational
Agility has no positive and significant effect on Company Performance, Organizational Agility is not proven to
moderate Digital Business Model Innovation on Company Performance. The study suggests the utilization of
extraordinary plans in identifying external and internal situations during and after the corona virus pandemic
(COVID-19).
Key-Words: - Ambidextrous Leadership, Digital Business Model Innovation, Organizational Agility, Firm
Performance
Received: April 7, 2021. Revised: February 22, 2022. Accepted: March 26, 2022. Published: April 20, 2022.
1 Introduction
The Information and Communication Technology
(ICT) industry or Information Communication &
Technology (ICT) as a very strategic industry, from
the telecommunications infrastructure in it which
continues to grow to digital products that are
increasingly developing with various variations [1].
The role of ICT is that technology can help achieve
new growth because technology allows innovation
that can create business and economic growth.
The telecommunication industry from the ICT
industry has become part of the Indonesian
economy and has contributed significantly to the
distribution of Indonesia's economic development,
especially outside Java[2]. Indonesia is the largest
archipelagic country in the world consisting of
17,504 islands with the characteristics of many
remote and remote areas [3].
Information technology and cloud users in
Indonesia in 2018 are the largest in Southeast Asia
and will be the center of cloud growth for the
overall market size target of 1.218 Trillion USD by
2022 [4]. Thus, Indonesia is the main market for
Telecommunication and Digital development in
Southeast Asia for Multi-National Information and
Communication Technology Companies in the
context of international expansion [4]. The COVID-
19 pandemic that occurred in Indonesia caused
telecommunications operators to decide to delay
infrastructure development investment (New Capex)
for 2020 and 2021 [5]. The performance of ICT
industry companies in Indonesia, especially
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on INFORMATION SCIENCE and APPLICATIONS
DOI: 10.37394/23209.2022.19.8
Marindra Bawono, Idris Gautama,
Agustinus Bandur, Firdaus Alamsjah
E-ISSN: 2224-3402
78
Volume 19, 2022
telecommunications, experienced a decline in legacy
revenue and an increase in data revenue, but overall
consolidation, there was a decline in the
performance of the telecommunications industry
company.
In March 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic
occurred in the world and arrived in Indonesia, had
a significant impact on behavior change (new
normal) for Telecommunication service customers,
there was a significant spike in data traffic,
impacting the performance of ICT and
Telecommunication companies. The innovation of
new digital Telecommunication products and
services cannot boost the decline in Revenue
Legacy, to increase Data Revenue, a new Digital
Business Model Innovation is needed in
collaboration between Telecommunication industry
players [5].
The coronavirus pandemic has added to small
and medium enterprises (SMEs). Ghezzi, [7] stated
that Entrepreneurs could adopt an ambidextrous
leadership style to drive the innovative performance
of their business in times of pandemic.
Ambidextrous leadership is critical in promoting
workforce creativity, continuous improvement of
business processes, and resource efficiency.
Navarro, et al. [8] improve academic understanding
of the relationship between ambidextrous leadership
(AL), psychological distance (PD), and enterprise
technological innovation performance (ETIP) and
provide insight for entrepreneurs to manage their
companies effectively.
In line with the development plan for growth,
the performance of the Telecommunication
Operators and Technology owner companies,
especially related to the business process of
organizational behavior in the face of market
turbulence dynamics, is referred to as Agility [7],
based on previous research, empirical studies on 112
Communication and IT companies in Spain in 2007-
2008 stated that there was a relationship between
positive relationship between Company Agility and
Firm Performance [8].
Previous research in an organization conducted
on 147 respondents from Albaha University in
Saudi Arabia, the behavior of Opening and Closing
Leaders as Ambidextrous Leadership greatly affects
the behavior of increasing Employee Exploration
and Exploitation in motivating the development and
improvement of innovation performance of its
employees[6]. With the application of
Ambidextrous Leadership theory to support
Innovation with Opening & Closing behavior,
leaders prove a positive relationship to Employee
Innovation Performance which will contribute to
improving Firm Performance [9]. In an earlier
source, Ambidextrous Theory for Innovation,
research on Architects and Interior design
companies on 33 team leaders and 90 employees
proved a positive relationship between Opening &
Transformational Leadership behavior on
Innovation Performance outputs which had a
positive impact on increasing Firm Performance
[10].
From various descriptions related to the
previous phenomenon, it is interesting to conduct
research to find the right and applicable strategy for
the telecommunications industry to find the right
strategy to improve Firm Performance, influenced
by Ambidextrous Leadership through Digital
Business Model Innovation and Organizational
Agility in the telecommunications industry in
Indonesia.
2 Literature Review
2.1 Resource Based Theory &
Ambidexterity Theory of Leadership for
Innovation
Resource Based Theory (RBT) is a resource-based
theory in strategic management. Resources are
exploited to be able to compete with competitors.
The principle of RBT is that resources must
simultaneously be valuable, rare, imprefectly
imitable and non-substitutable. Resources that
support this in the form of top management,
organizational structure, culture to improve
company performance [11].
The organizational ambidexterity was defined
through two forms, namely structural ambidexterity,
and contextual ambidexterity. The former obtained
through structural interventions and is based on the
idea of a trade-off, which attained by outlining
activities pertaining to exploration and exploitation
(separation of exploration and exploitation into
Alghamdi Journal of Innovation and
Entrepreneurship independent units with a
leadership-integration and coordination at the top of
an organization, while the latter requires
exploitation of a current capability and exploration
of a future opportunity[12,13].
This can be done by creating an organizational
context, allowing organizational employees to
engage in both explorative and exploitative
behaviors and to determine autonomously how
divide time and energy between both behaviors
[14,15]. The ambidexterity theory of leadership for
innovation [14] posits that ambidextrous leadership
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on INFORMATION SCIENCE and APPLICATIONS
DOI: 10.37394/23209.2022.19.8
Marindra Bawono, Idris Gautama,
Agustinus Bandur, Firdaus Alamsjah
E-ISSN: 2224-3402
79
Volume 19, 2022
includes three elements: opening leadership
behavior to encourage explorative behavior, closing
leadership behavior to encourage exploitative
behavior, and flexibility over time to switch
between both behaviors once a situation entails.
2.2 The influence of Ambidextrous
Leadership (AL) on Digital Business Model
Innovation (DBMI) in Telecommunications
Industry Companies
Previous research, on 54 employees related to
Ambidextrous Leadership behaviors and innovation
performance, Traditional leadership styles (i.e.
transformational, transactional, instrumental
leadership, leader–member exchange) were assessed
at the person level to identify the impact on
innovation performance. Instrumental leadership
includes opening and closing leader behaviors that
have a positive and significant effect on innovation
performance [16]. Based on research data from 98
SME High Technology SME's in the UK, it was
found that opening and closing leadership behaviors
predicted employee explorative and exploitative
innovation behaviors, with control variables [17].
Top Management Team companies use transactional
leadership because structural and environmental
limitations have an impact on the development of
innovation, as well as using part of the
transformational leadership style [18]. Based on this
description, it can be assumed that Ambidextrous
Leadership has a Positive and Significant effect on
Digital Business Model Innovation in the
Telecommunications industry in Indonesia. So it can
be formulated:
H1: Ambidextrous Leadership has a positive and
significant effect on Digital Business Model
Innovation in the Telecommunications industry in
Indonesia.
2.3 The influence of Ambidextrous
Leadership (AL) on Organizational Agility
(OA) in Telecommunications Industry
Companies
Leadership Style as a strategic leadership
characteristic for ambidextrous and able to be
implemented simultaneously for organizational
learning, from several researchers [19,20,21,22],
and leadership encourages organizational learning
process to achieve innovation, high performance
and competitiveness [23]. To develop organizational
agility in turbulent environmental conditions,
Boards must focus on 3 (three) areas, namely
strategic agility, operational agility (including
culture), and leadership agility [23]. Sourced from
149 employees, previous research indicates that (1)
transformational leadership and (2) organizational
agility have a positive effect on service recovery. It
was even found that the use of Organizational
Agility and Transformational Leadership
Applications would make the organization better for
service recovery [25]. Based on this description, it
can be assumed that Ambidextrous Leadership has a
Positive and Significant effect on Organizational
Agility in the Telecommunications industry in
Indonesia. So it can be formulated:
H2: Ambidextrous Leadership has a positive and
significant effect on Organizational Agility in the
Telecommunications industry in Indonesia.
2.4 The Influence of Ambidextrous
Leadership (AL) on Firm Performance (FP)
in Telecommunication Industry Companies
Previous research, on organizations that develop
exploration and exploitation simultaneously to
achieve firm performance, that Ambidextrous
Leadership investigations on CEOs have a positive
effect on Ambidextrous Behavior of top
management team (TMT) members. Analysis from
various sources, it is proven that CEO
Ambidextrous Leadership is able to predict TMT-
member ambidextrous behavior in achieving Firm
Performance. TMT behavioral integration
relationships include collaborative behavior,
information exchange and joint decision-making
[26]. Previous research on 170 service-oriented
firms in Taiwan tested Ambidextrous Innovation
(exploration and exploitation innovation) and
market orientation capabilities (market-sensing and
customer-linking capabilities) that had a positive
and significant effect on Service innovation and
firm performance [27]. Evidence from previous
research, from key informants as many as 220
companies, found that simultaneous marketing
exploitation and exploration had a positive and
significant effect on Firms' Market Performance.
The collaboration of suppliers has a positive impact
on Marketing Exploration but also weakens the
influence of marketing exploitation on Market
Performance [28]. Based on this description, it can
be assumed that Ambidextrous Leadership has a
Positive and Significant effect on Firm Performance
in the Telecommunications industry in Indonesia.
So it can be formulated:
H3: Ambidextrous Leadership has a positive and
significant effect on Firm Performance in the
Telecommunications industry in Indonesia.
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on INFORMATION SCIENCE and APPLICATIONS
DOI: 10.37394/23209.2022.19.8
Marindra Bawono, Idris Gautama,
Agustinus Bandur, Firdaus Alamsjah
E-ISSN: 2224-3402
80
Volume 19, 2022
2.5 Effect of Digital Business Model
Innovation (DBMI) on Firm Performance
(FP) in Telecommunication Industry
Companies
In a previous study, it was found that Digital
Business Model Innovation has a positive and
significant relationship and influence on Product
Marketing strategy that supports the achievement of
Firm Performance, calculated from the measurement
of market capitalization [29]. Digital transformation
is something that provides a competitive advantage
for companies and from research conducted that
Digital Transformation has a positive and significant
impact on the Innovation Business, and Digital
Business Innovation has a positive and significant
impact on Firm Performance [30]. Research
obtained from other sources, that initially Apple
focused on hardware and software innovation, after
the iPod and iTunes innovation, with the
development of a new Business Model, Apple can
increase revenue, profit and stock price changes,
Digital Business Model Innovation has a positive
and significant impact on the Company's Business
Performance [31]. Previous research on the
Advanced Business Model, based on two types of
business model innovation, replication and renewal,
has a very positive effect on Firm Performance. It is
explained in the research journal that, Business
Model Innovation, replication and renewal,
positively and significantly affects Firm
Performance and Environmental Dynamism has a
very strong relationship influencing each other [32].
So it can be formulated:
H4: Digital Business Model Innovation has a
positive and significant impact on Firm Performance
in the Telecommunications industry in Indonesia.
H5: Digital Business Model Innovation moderates
Ambidextrous Leadership and Firm Performance in
the Telecommunications industry in Indonesia.
2.6 The effect of Organizational Agility (OA)
on Firm Performance (FP) in
Telecommunications Industry Companies
The rapid development of business dynamics has
brought changes in the Company's perspective in
facing the challenges of increasingly high
competition. For this reason, Organizational Agility
becomes important in determining the Company's
strategy in facing the challenges of competition
[33]. From previous research that Organization
Agility is one of the antecedents of Firm
Performance, based on researcher testing on Small
Medium Enterprise (SME) companies, small and
medium enterprises develop Internal Agility and
innovation activities to improve Firm Performance,
with research on 260 SMEs in Taiwan, it is proven
that External Network Resource (NR) and Internal
Organization Agility (OA) increase competitive
advantage and improve Company Performance, OA
has a positive and significant effect on Company
Performance [34]. Although research has shown that
business model innovation (BMI) can create a
company's competitive advantage and improve its
performance. A conceptual model was developed to
examine how organizational capability and the
implementation of profit or growth-oriented
strategies, as embodied in BMI, affect the
Company's overall performance [41]. According to
previous research on Information Systems
companies, that companies that use Information
Systems have a positive and significant effect on
Organizational Agility, and referring to the analysis
of Multigroup companies that the influence of
Information System (IS) capabilities on
Organizational Agility in High Technology
companies is increasingly significant, as one of the
one capability that has a positive and significant
impact on company performance [35]. So it can be
formulated:
H6: Organizational Agility has a positive and
significant effect on Firm Performance in the
Telecommunications industry in Indonesia.
H7: Organizational Agility moderates Digital
Business Model Innovation and Firm Performance
in the Telecommunications industry in Indonesia.
3 Methods
The research design is a master plan that defines the
methods and procedures for collecting and
analyzing the required information [36]. This study
uses a causal research design..
This research will be conducted using
quantitative research [37]. The sampling technique
is done by convenience sampling. The number of
samples is 100 respondents. Respondents in this
study amounted to 100 respondents that men occupy
the majority sample compared to women. Based on
age, the majority of respondents are 45-50 years old
(87 respondents). With an average work experience
between 30-35 years (76 respondents). Based on job
position, most of the respondents are VP (34
respondents).
Furthermore, the statistical tool used to process
the data is partial least square-structural equation
modeling or abbreviated PLS-SEM with the
SmartPls program. Questionnaire items for
Ambidextrous constructs were adapted from
Oluwafemi's research, [15], Organizational Agility
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on INFORMATION SCIENCE and APPLICATIONS
DOI: 10.37394/23209.2022.19.8
Marindra Bawono, Idris Gautama,
Agustinus Bandur, Firdaus Alamsjah
E-ISSN: 2224-3402
81
Volume 19, 2022
constructs adapted from Singh's research, [33],
Enterprise Performance constructs adapted from
Hubbard and Sudiyatno's research [34], Digital
Business Model constructs adapted from Ferreira's
research [24] and combined with scale development.
Measurement of items using a 5-point Likert scale,
namely points 1 to 5 points, where 1 = strongly
disagree, 2 = disagree, 3 = neutral, 4 = agree and 5 =
strongly agree.
4 Analysis and Discussion
In addition to construct validity tests, construct
reliability tests were also carried out as measured by
composite reliability and Cronbach's Alpha (CA)
from construct measuring block indicators. The rule
of thumb that is usually used to assess construct
reliability is the Composite Reliability (CR) value of
0.70 for confirmatory assessments, where values
0.60 to 0.70 are still acceptable for exploratory
assessments. Here are the results:
Table 1. Construct Reliability and Validity
Variable &
Indicators
Outer
Loading
CA
CR
AVE
AMBIDEXTROUS
A
M
1
:
Leader allows
various efforts to
complete work
0,880
0,92
4
0,94
3
0,76
8
A
M
2
:
Allows to think
and act
independently
0,931
A
M
4
:
Making regulations
so that field
implementation
runs smoothly
0,767
A
M
6
:
Ensuring a plan is
implemented
according to plan
0,883
A
M
7
:
Give space to
express opinions
0,912
ORGANIZATIONAL AGILITY
O
A
1
:
Ability to think
concrete and
practical,
alternative and
anticipatory
0,730
0,91
6
0,93
4
0,70
5
O
A
2
:
Reaction response
to changes in
business dynamics
that occur
0,690
O
A
4
Using appropriate
technology that is
well designed and
adapted to the
environmental,
ethical, cultural,
social and political
and economic
aspects of the
community
0,908
O
A
5
Have an approach
to change
individuals, teams
and company
organizations in
the desired future
conditions
0,871
O
A
7
Quick to complete
with timely
completion of
products and
service delivery
0,860
O
A
8
Able to quickly
carry out operating
activities in
accordance with
established
business terms and
conditions
0,918
DIGITAL BUSINESS MODEL INOVATION
D
M
B
1
:
New needs that can
be met with new
digital business
model innovations
0,808
0,89
9
0,92
3
0,66
6
D
M
B
2
:
There are related
parties who carry
out digital
innovation
activities
(Companies,
0,706
D
M
B
3
The added value
provided with the
new digital
business model
0,869
D
M
B
4
Generated revenue
model with new
digital business
model towards
target
0,841
D
M
B
5
New customers
and markets with
digital business
model innovation
0,829
D
M
B
6
New channel of
digital business
model to customers
0,834
FIRM PERFORMANCE
F
P
1
:
Increased Profit
relative to
competitors
0,730
0,91
0
0,93
1
0,69
6
F
P
2
:
Annual ROE
increase and from
the previous year
relative to
competitors
0,690
F
P
3
:
Annual ROA
increase and from
the previous year
relative to
competitors
0,908
F
P
4
:
Increased Sales
relative to
competitors
0,871
F
P
5
:
Annual Share
Growth relative to
competitors
0,860
F
P
6
Growth in the
number of annual
share transactions
relative to
competitors
0,918
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on INFORMATION SCIENCE and APPLICATIONS
DOI: 10.37394/23209.2022.19.8
Marindra Bawono, Idris Gautama,
Agustinus Bandur, Firdaus Alamsjah
E-ISSN: 2224-3402
82
Volume 19, 2022
A construct is declared reliable if it has a
composite reliability (CR) value above 0.70 and
Cronbach's alpha (CA) above 0.60. From the
SmartPLS output above, all constructs have CR
values above 0.70 and CA above 0.60. So it can be
concluded that the construct has good reliability.
Table 2. Discriminant Validity : HT/MT Ratio
Variables
Ambidextrous
Digital Model Business
Firm Performance
Organizational Agility
Ambidextrous
Digital Model Business
0,944
Firm Performance
1,014
1,055
Organizational Agility
0,957
1,069
1,044
Note: The diagonal score in bold is the average
extracted variance (AVE) of each individual
construct. The off-diagonal score is the squared
correlation between them. Discriminant validity was
evaluated using the Heterotrait-Monotrait Ratio
(HTMT) criteria presented in Table 2. Discriminant
validity was measured by the square root value of
each AVE indicated in the diagonal cell and
required to be greater than the correlation
coefficient (a value other than the value in the cell
diagonal). Table 2 shows that this requirement was
also met and thus the discriminant validity proved
adequate for the factors evaluated in this study.
The following table explains the co-efficiency
determination on the Constructs endogen. The
model is fit when the value of R-square, GOF, and
Q-Square is in the strong, large, and large
categories, respectively. Table 3 shows the
evaluation of R-Square Value and GOF.
Table 3. Evaluation of R-Square Value and GOF
Variable
R-Square
Communalit
y
Q-square
Goodness of
Fit (GoF)
Index
Ambidextrous
Leadership
0.426
0.417
Digital Business
Model Innovation
0.290
0.495
0.143
Firm Performance
0.414
0.557
0.179
To assess the significance of the predictive
model in testing the structural model, it can be seen
from the t-statistic value between the independent
variables and the dependent variable in the Path
Coefficient table at the SmartPLS output below:
Table 4. Significant and Coefficient
Hypothesis
Original Sample
(O)
Standardized
Coefficient
T-statistics
P-values
Result
DIRECT EFFECT
H
1
:
Ambidextrous
-> Digital
Model
Business
0,87
6
0,02
0
43
,0
56
0,
00
0
Hypothesis
Supported
H
2
:
Ambidextrous
->
Organizational
Agility
0,89
6
0,01
9
47
,5
55
0,
00
0
Hypothesis
Supported
H
3
:
Ambidextrous
-> Firm
Performance
0,42
2
0,04
4
9,
48
1
0,
00
0
Hypothesis
Supported
H
4
:
Digital Model
Business ->
Firm
Performance
0,39
6
0,10
5
3,
78
1
0,
00
0
Hypothesis
Supported
H
6
:
Organizational
Agility-> Firm
Performance
0,19
7
0,12
5
1,
57
8
0,
11
5
Hypothesis
Not
Supported
INDIRECT EFFECT
H
5
:
Ambidextrous
-> Digital
Model
Business ->
Firm
Performance
0,34
7
0,09
3
3,
70
9
0,
00
0
Hypothesis
Supported
H
7
:
AMBIDEXTR
OUS ->
Organizational
Agility-> Firm
Performance
0,17
6
0,11
2
1,
57
1
0,
11
7
Hypothesis
Not
Supported
IPMA results are presented in Figure 1 (firm
performance). A comprehensive understanding of
how to read and use the results plotted in these
figures can assist management in improving firm
performance.
Fig. 1: IPMA Indicator firm performance
The IPMA approach must meet two
requirements prior to any application: (a) all
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on INFORMATION SCIENCE and APPLICATIONS
DOI: 10.37394/23209.2022.19.8
Marindra Bawono, Idris Gautama,
Agustinus Bandur, Firdaus Alamsjah
E-ISSN: 2224-3402
83
Volume 19, 2022
indicators must have the same orientation, and (b)
the outer weights must not be negative [32]. This
requirement has been met. Based on Figure 1, IPMA
on firm performance explains that an important
indicator that must be improved is the response to
changes in business dynamics that occur.
Meanwhile, an important indicator that must be
maintained is the new channel of the digital business
model to customers.
Fig. 2: Result Model
5 Discussion
5.1 Ambidextrous Leadership has a Positive
and Significant Impact on Digital Business
Model Innovation
It was found that the T-statistical value (43.056) >
1.96 and the value of the original sample was 0.876
(positive sign). From these results, the hypothesis
which states that Ambidextrous Leadership has a
positive effect on Digital Business Model
Innovation is accepted. Ambidextrous Leadership
has a positive and significant impact on Digital
Business Model Innovation. This is in accordance
with the research of Gerlach et al., [16] which
examines Instrumental leadership including opening
and closing leader behaviors that have a positive and
significant effect on innovation performance. Based
on research data from 98 SME High Technology
SME's in the UK, it was found that opening and
closing leadership behaviors predicted employee
explorative and exploitative innovation behaviors,
with control variables [17]. Top Management Team
companies use transactional leadership because
structural and environmental limitations have an
impact on the development of innovation, as well as
using part of the transformational leadership style
[18].
5.2 Ambidextrous Leadership has a Positive
and Significant Effect on Organizational
Agility
It was found that the T-statistical value (47.555) >
1.96 and the original sample value was 0.422
(positive sign). From these results, the hypothesis
which states that Ambidextrous Leadership has a
positive effect on Organizational Agility is
accepted. Ambidextrous Leadership has a positive
and significant effect on Organizational Agility.
This is in accordance with the research of Zacher
and Rosing, [10] which states that exploration
includes exploring, taking risks, experimenting and
innovation in organizations, where exploitation is
related to improvement, efficiency, implementation,
and execution of a target [33]. Organizational agility
is considered a core competency, competitive
advantage and differentiator that requires strategic
thinking, innovative mindset, capitalizing on change
and the relentless need to adapt and be proactive.
The success of Ambidextrous Leaders must be able
to achieve optimal balance in exploiting and
exploring all activities within the company to
support the achievement of company performance
targets [14].
5.3 Ambidextrous Leadership has a Positive
and significant Effect on Firm Performance
It was found that the T-statistical value (9.481) >
1.96 and the value of the original sample was 0.896
(positive sign). From these results, the hypothesis
which states that Ambidextrous Leadership has a
positive effect on Firm Performance is accepted.
Ambidextrous Leadership has a positive and
significant effect on Firm Performance. This is in
accordance with the research of Luo et al., [21] that
the investigation of Ambidextrous Leadership on
CEOs has a positive effect on Ambidextrous
Behavior of top management team (TMT) members.
Analysis from various sources, it is proven that
CEO Ambidextrous Leadership is able to predict
TMT-member ambidextrous behavior in achieving
Firm Performance. TMT behavioral integration
relationships include collaborative behavior,
information exchange and joint decision-making.
Previous research on 170 service-oriented firms in
Taiwan tested Ambidextrous Innovation
(exploration and exploitation innovation) and
market orientation capabilities (market-sensing and
customer-linking capabilities) that had a positive
and significant effect on Service innovation and
firm performance [27].
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on INFORMATION SCIENCE and APPLICATIONS
DOI: 10.37394/23209.2022.19.8
Marindra Bawono, Idris Gautama,
Agustinus Bandur, Firdaus Alamsjah
E-ISSN: 2224-3402
84
Volume 19, 2022
5.4 Digital Business Model Innovation has a
positive and Significant Impact on Firm
Performance
It was found that the T-statistical value (3.781) >
1.96 and the original sample value was 0.396
(positive sign). From these results, the hypothesis
which states that Digital Business Model Innovation
has a positive effect on Firm Performance is
accepted. Digital Business Model Innovation has a
positive and significant effect on Firm Performance.
This is in accordance with research by Zott and
Amit, [29] that Digital Business Model Innovation
has a positive and significant relationship and
influence on Product Marketing strategy that
supports the achievement of Firm Performance,
calculated from the measurement of market
capitalization. Digital transformation is something
that provides a competitive advantage for companies
and from research conducted that Digital
Transformation has a positive and significant impact
on the Innovation Business, and Digital Business
Innovation has a positive and significant impact on
Firm Performance [30].
5.5 Organizational Agility has a Positive and
Significant Effect on Firm Performance
It was found that the T-statistical value (0.115) <
1.96 and the original sample value was 0.197
(positive sign). From these results, the hypothesis
which states that Organizational Agility has a
positive effect on Organizational Agility is rejected.
Organizational Agility has no positive and
significant effect on Firm Performance. This is
contrary to the research of Saha et al., [38] which
states that Organizational Agility is important in
determining the company's strategy in facing the
challenges of competition. From previous research,
that Organizational Agility is one of the antecedents
of Firm Performance, based on researcher testing on
Small Medium Enterprise (SME) companies, small
and medium enterprises develop Internal Agility and
innovation activities improve Firm Performance.
Nason and Wiklund, [39] Firm Performance (FP)
based on previous research is used as an increase in
company performance measures from one point in
time to another. The weight of individual variables
for the dimensions of business success according to
[46]. Penrose identified two types of resources -
physical and human. These resources are themselves
a collection of potential services.
5.6 Organizational Agility moderates Digital
Business Model Innovation and Firm
Performance
It was found that the T-statistical value (0.117) <
1.96 and the original sample value was 0.176
(positive sign). From these results, the hypothesis
states that Organizational Agility is not proven to
moderate Digital Business Model Innovation on
Firm Performance. This is contrary to the research
results of Liu and Yang, [28] that External Network
Resource (NR) and Internal Organization Agility
(OA) increase competitive advantage and increase
Firm Performance, OA has a positive and significant
effect on Firm Performance. Organizational Agility
is the capacity to change organizational and
business rules which when operating makes them
more effective and efficient when dealing with
various types of things that organizations must do
[8]. According to previous research on Information
Systems companies, that companies that use
Information Systems have a positive and significant
impact on Organization Agility, and referring to the
Multigroup company analysis that the impact of
Information System (IS) capabilities on
Organizational Agility in High Technology
companies is increasingly having a significant
effect, as one of the capabilities which has a positive
and significant impact on Firm Performance [35].
6 Conclusion
In conclusion, this study examined the effect of
ambidextrous leadership and digital business model
innovation on the performance of
telecommunication companies in Indonesia
Based on the discussion above, it is concluded
that Ambidextrous Leadership has a positive and
significant effect on Digital Business Model
Innovation, Ambidextrous Leadership has a positive
and significant effect on Organizational Agility,
Ambidextrous Leadership has a positive and
significant effect on Firm Performance, Digital
Business Model Innovation has a positive and
significant impact on Firm Performance,
Organizational Agility has no positive and
significant effect on Firm Performance,
Organizational Agility is not proven to moderate
Digital Business Model Innovation on Firm
Performance.
This article has three main theoretical
contributions. First, our research provides a starting
point to examine the phenomenon of the company's
Firm Performance in the situation of the COVID-19
pandemic in the telecommunications industry.
Second, our research provides evidence that
Ambidextrous Leadership in a scientific exploration
organization of flexible Leader Opening and
Closing behavior is implemented situationally.
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on INFORMATION SCIENCE and APPLICATIONS
DOI: 10.37394/23209.2022.19.8
Marindra Bawono, Idris Gautama,
Agustinus Bandur, Firdaus Alamsjah
E-ISSN: 2224-3402
85
Volume 19, 2022
Third, with the application of Ambidextrous
Leadership theory to support Innovation with
Opening & Closing behavior, the leader proves a
positive relationship to Employee Innovation
Performance which will contribute to improving
Firm Performance.
The limitation of the sample in this study is
because the sample in this study was the managers
so it was difficult to get a large number of samples.
The sample (respondents) in this study was very
limited because the number and scope of the
company's employees were not so large that it
relatively could not be generalized to the population.
wider. Future research is expected to use a larger
and wider sample in order to obtain better research
results, more generalizable, and can provide a more
real picture of employee performance.
For further research based on social aspects,
further research is expected to include cultural
variables. Hofstede [40] examines that culture is a
variety of interactions of habitual characteristics that
affect community groups in their environment, there
are 5 (five) cultural dimensions, namely:
Individualism, Collectivism, Power Distance,
Uncertainty Avoidance and Masculinity
References:
[1] Apulu, Idisemi, and Ann Latham. "Drivers for
information and communication technology
adoption: A case study of Nigerian small and
medium sized enterprises." International Journal of
Business and Management 6, no. 5 (2011): 51.
[2] Fahlevi, Mochammad, et al. "Cybercrime Business
Digital in Indonesia." E3S Web of Conferences.
Vol. 125. EDP Sciences, 2019.
[3] Sujarwoto, Sujarwoto, and Gindo Tampubolon.
"Spatial inequality and the Internet divide in
Indonesia 2010–2012." Telecommunications
Policy 40, no. 7 (2016): 602-616.
[4] Frost, S. "Sustainable and Innovative Personal
Transport Solutions—Strategic Analysis of
Carsharing Market in Europe. United Kingdom.
Frost & Sullivan." (2018).
[5] Surizki Febrianto, Suparto. "The State Of Indonesia
Needs Investment To Accelerate Infrastructure
Development After New Normal Policies Due To
Covid-19." (2020).
[6] Alghamdi, Faris. "Ambidextrous leadership,
ambidextrous employee, and the interaction
between ambidextrous leadership and employee
innovative performance." Journal of Innovation and
Entrepreneurship 7.1 (2018): 1-14.
[7] Ghezzi, Antonio, Marcelo Nogueira Cortimiglia,
and Alejandro Germán Frank. "Strategy and
business model design in dynamic
telecommunications industries: A study on Italian
mobile network operators." Technological
Forecasting and Social Change 90 (2015): 346-354.
[8] Navarro, Juan Gabriel Cegarra, Pedro Soto-Acosta,
and K. Anthony. "Structured knowledge processes
and firm performance: The role of organizational
agility." Journal of Business Research (2015).
[9] Alghamdi, Faris. "Ambidextrous leadership,
ambidextrous employee, and the interaction
between ambidextrous leadership and employee
innovative performance." Journal of Innovation and
Entrepreneurship 7, no. 1 (2018): 1-14.
[10] Zacher, Hannes, and Kathrin Rosing.
"Ambidextrous leadership and team
innovation." Leadership & Organization
Development Journal (2015).
[11] Ketkar, Sumita, and Roma Puri. "Ambidextrous
human resource practices and employee
performance." In International Conference on
Strategies in Volatile and Uncertain Environment
for Emerging Markets, pp. 170-178. 2017.
[12] Taródy, Dávid. "Organizational ambidexterity as a
new research paradigm in strategic
management." Vezetéstudomány-Budapest
Management Review 47, no. 5 (2016): 39-52.
[13] Rosing, Kathrin, Michael Frese, and Andreas
Bausch. "Explaining the heterogeneity of the
leadership-innovation relationship: Ambidextrous
leadership." The leadership quarterly 22, no. 5
(2011): 956-974.
[14] Gerlach, Friederike, Maike Hundeling, and Kathrin
Rosing. "Ambidextrous leadership and innovation
performance: a longitudinal study." Leadership &
Organization Development Journal (2020).
[15] Oluwafemi, Tolulope Busola, Siwan Mitchelmore,
and Konstantinos Nikolopoulos. "Leading
innovation: Empirical evidence for ambidextrous
leadership from UK high-tech SMEs." Journal of
Business Research 119 (2020): 195-208.
[16] Kassotaki, Olga. "Explaining ambidextrous
leadership in the aerospace and defense
organizations." European Management Journal 37,
no. 5 (2019): 552-563.
[17] Denison, Daniel R., Robert Hooijberg, and Robert
E. Quinn. "Paradox and performance: Toward a
theory of behavioral complexity in managerial
leadership." Organization science 6, no. 5 (1995):
524-540.
[18] Vargas, María Isabel Rivera. "Determinant factors
for small business to achieve innovation, high
performance and competitiveness: organizational
learning and leadership style." Procedia-Social and
Behavioral Sciences 169 (2015): 43-52.
[19] Joiner, Bill. "Leadership agility for organizational
agility." Journal of Creating Value 5, no. 2 (2019):
139-149.
[20] Khoshlahn, Maryam, and Farzad Sattari Ardabili.
"The role of organizational agility and
transformational leadership in service recovery
prediction." Procedia-Social and Behavioral
Sciences 230 (2016): 142-149.
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on INFORMATION SCIENCE and APPLICATIONS
DOI: 10.37394/23209.2022.19.8
Marindra Bawono, Idris Gautama,
Agustinus Bandur, Firdaus Alamsjah
E-ISSN: 2224-3402
86
Volume 19, 2022
[21] Luo, Biao, Shanshan Zheng, Hongmei Ji, and Liang
Liang. "Ambidextrous leadership and TMT-member
ambidextrous behavior: the role of TMT behavioral
integration and TMT risk propensity." The
International Journal of Human Resource
Management 29, no. 2 (2018): 338-359.
[22] Tsai, Markus Chiahan, and Chunhsien Wang.
"Linking service innovation to firm performance:
The roles of ambidextrous innovation and market
orientation capability." Chinese Management
Studies (2017).
[23] Ho, Hillbun Dixon, and Ruichang Lu. "Performance
implications of marketing exploitation and
exploration: Moderating role of supplier
collaboration." Journal of Business Research 68,
no. 5 (2015): 1026-1034.
[24] Ferreira, João JM, Cristina I. Fernandes, and
Fernando AF Ferreira. "To be or not to be digital,
that is the question: Firm innovation and
performance." Journal of Business Research 101
(2019): 583-590.
[25] Amit, Raphael, and Christoph Zott. Business model
innovation strategy: Transformational concepts and
tools for entrepreneurial leaders. John Wiley &
Sons, 2020.
[26] Heij, Cornelis Vincent, Henk W. Volberda, and
Frans AJ Van den Bosch. "How does business
model innovation influence firm performance: the
effect of environmental dynamism." In Academy of
Management Proceedings, vol. 2014, no. 1, p.
16500. Briarcliff Manor, NY 10510: Academy of
Management, 2014.
[27] Harraf, Abe, Isaac Wanasika, Kaylynn Tate, and
Kaitlyn Talbott. "Organizational agility." Journal of
Applied Business Research (JABR) 31, no. 2 (2015):
675-686.
[28] Liu, Hsian-Ming, and Hsin-Feng Yang. "Network
resource meets organizational agility: creating an
idiosyncratic competitive advantage for
SMEs." Management Decision (2020).
[29] Felipe, Carmen M., Dorothy E. Leidner, José L.
Roldán, and Antonio L. Leal‐Rodríguez. "Impact
of IS capabilities on firm performance: the roles of
organizational agility and industry technology
intensity." Decision Sciences 51, no. 3 (2020): 575-
619.
[30] Chun Tie, Ylona, Melanie Birks, and Karen Francis.
"Grounded theory research: A design framework for
novice researchers." SAGE open medicine 7 (2019):
2050312118822927.
[31] Schäfer, Thomas, and Marcus A. Schwarz. "The
meaningfulness of effect sizes in psychological
research: Differences between sub-disciplines and
the impact of potential biases." Frontiers in
Psychology 10 (2019): 813.
[32] Oluwafemi, T. B., Mitchelmore, S., &
Nikolopoulos, K. (2020). Leading innovation:
Empirical evidence for ambidextrous leadership
from UK high-tech SMEs. Journal of Business
Research, 119, 195-208.
[33] Singh, Jagdip, Garima Sharma, James Hill, and
Andrew Schnackenberg. "Organizational agility:
What it is, what it is not, and why it matters."
In Academy of management proceedings, vol. 1, no.
1, pp. 1-40. Briarcliff Manor, NY 10510: Academy
of Management, 2013.
[34] Hubbard, Graham, and Paul Beamish. "Strategic
Management: Thinking." Analysis, Action 4 (2011).
[35] Sudiyatno, Bambang, Elen Puspitasari, and Andi
Kartika. "The company's policy, firm performance,
and firm Value: An empirical research on Indonesia
Stock Exchange." American International Journal
of Contemporary Research 2, no. 12 (2012): 30-40.
[36] Hair, Joe, Carole L. Hollingsworth, Adriane B.
Randolph, and Alain Yee Loong Chong. "An
updated and expanded assessment of PLS-SEM in
information systems research." Industrial
Management & Data Systems (2017).
[37] Röder, Nina, Michael Schermann, and Helmut
Krcmar. "IT enabled agility in organizational
ambidexterity." (2014).
[38] Saha, Nibedita, Aleš Gregar, and Petr Sáha.
"Organizational agility and HRM strategy: Do they
really enhance firms’
competitiveness?." International Journal of
Organizational Leadership 6 (2017): 323-334.
[39] Nason, Robert S., and Johan Wiklund. "An
assessment of resource-based theorizing on firm
growth and suggestions for the future." Journal of
management 44, no. 1 (2018): 32-60.
[40] Hofstede, Geert. "Dimensionalizing cultures: The
Hofstede model in context." Online readings in
psychology and culture 2.1 (2011): 2307-0919.
[41] Latifi, Mohammad-Ali, Shahrokh Nikou, and Harry
Bouwman. "Business model innovation and firm
performance: Exploring causal mechanisms in
SMEs." Technovation 107 (2021): 102274.
Contribution of Individual Authors to the
Creation of a Scientific Article (Ghostwriting
Policy)
Marindra Bawono is the main author of this article
and also plays a role in analyzing the statistical data
generated in this study.
Idris Gautama is an expert in the field of research
management, he is very helpful in providing input
and input in this research so that it can produce
quality research.
Agustinus Bandur is an expert in the field of
economics and research management, she is also an
expert in the field of economics so she is very
instrumental in providing input on the use of
theories in this research in order to produce quality
research.
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on INFORMATION SCIENCE and APPLICATIONS
DOI: 10.37394/23209.2022.19.8
Marindra Bawono, Idris Gautama,
Agustinus Bandur, Firdaus Alamsjah
E-ISSN: 2224-3402
87
Volume 19, 2022
Firdaus Alamsjah is an expert in input research
methodology; he plays a role in providing input and
in this research so that it can produce quality
research.
Sources of Funding for Research Presented in a
Scientific Article or Scientific Article Itself
All funding in this study came from private
funding.
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 INFORMATION SCIENCE and APPLICATIONS
DOI: 10.37394/23209.2022.19.8
Marindra Bawono, Idris Gautama,
Agustinus Bandur, Firdaus Alamsjah
E-ISSN: 2224-3402
88
Volume 19, 2022
