Bibliometric Analysis of Strategic Agility Using Word Co-occurrence Analysis

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Assistant Prof., Department of Strategy and Business Policy, Faculty of Business Management, College of Management, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.

2 PhD Candidate, Department of Strategy and Business Policy, Faculty of Business Management, College of Management, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.

10.22059/jibm.2024.372935.4756

Abstract

Objective
Strategic agility, as one of the key concepts in strategic management, has attracted the attention of many researchers and managers. However, the concept remains controversial and is considered non-intuitive and intangible by some scholars. Therefore, a deeper understanding of strategic agility is of great interest to academics and executives, as several gaps in the existing literature are apparent. This article is to provide a structured understanding of the field of strategy agility so that researchers and managers can fill in the generalities of this field with a brief look at the designed knowledge map.
 
Methodology
In this article, we used a bibliometric method, i.e. co-occurrence analysis of words, to discover the most important subfields of strategic agility from the perspective of scientific articles published in this field. This method allowed us to identify important and effective topics and patterns in this field by analyzing the relationships between the keywords used in the articles. The obtained sub-areas were analyzed using the strategic diagram method, and the position of each is determined from the two perspectives of scientific development and applicability. Therefore, we could assess the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats, as well as the current and emerging challenges and solutions in this field.
 
Findings
In total, six different sub-areas were identified, and categorized under the headings of strategic agility dimensions, technological and managerial innovation, supply chain management, company performance evaluation, uncertain nature of strategies, and dynamic impact on organizational agility. These subareas were evaluated and compared according to different criteria such as density (criteria for measuring scientific development) and centrality (criteria for measuring applicability). The results revealed that the various subfields differ in terms of scientific development and applicability, with some offering greater advantages than others. For this reason, we offer suggestions for the improvement and development of each of the subareas. The dimensions of strategic agility are higher than other fields both from the perspective of scientific development and applicability. It can be considered that this area acts as a driving engine that pulls other areas along with it. In addition, the non-deterministic nature of the strategies in this field, as well as the evaluation of the companies' performance from the perspective of agility, despite the appropriate scientific development, have not found an acceptable application in other fields. These two areas are expected to receive more focus from the perspective of applicability. Technological and management innovations, on the other hand, should be viewed more from the perspective of internal development rather than applicability. In the meantime, supply chain management has not received much attention and is in the emerging stage, but it is expected to attract more focus from researchers in the coming years.
 
Conclusion
The field of strategic agility still offers significant potential for both scientific and practical development. To fill this gap, it is necessary to fill the existing gaps by combining the areas obtained. The conducted analyses can help researchers identify research gaps to define newer issues in the field of strategic agility and fill current research gaps.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

 
Abshire, D. M. (1996). U.S. global policy: Toward an agile strategy. The Washington Quarterly, 19(2), 38–61. https://doi.org/10.1080/01636609609550196
Abu-Rumman, A., Al Shraah, A., Al-Madi, F. & Alfalah, T. (2021). Entrepreneurial networks, entrepreneurial orientation, and performance of small and medium enterprises: are dynamic capabilities the missing link? Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 10(1), 29. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13731-021-00170-8
Adomako, S., Amankwah-Amoah, J., Donbesuur, F., Ahsan, M., Danso, A. & Uddin, M. (2022). Strategic agility of SMEs in emerging economies: Antecedents, consequences and boundary conditions. International Business Review, 31(6), 102032. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibusrev.2022.102032
Agenda, D. (2022). 5 ways the COVID-19 pandemic has changed the supply chain. https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2022/01/5-ways-the-covid-19-pandemic-has-changed-the-supply-chain/
Ahammad, M. F., Glaister, K. W. & Gomes, E. (2020). Strategic agility and human resource management. Human Resource Management Review, 30(1), 100700. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2019.100700
Ahmadzadeh, M. A., Moradi, M. & Mostaghimi, M. R. (2022). A model for the role of strategic agility in customers’ behavioral intentions in the insurance industry. Transformation Management Journal, 14(1), 57–84. (in Persian)
Akkaya, B. & Qaisar, I. (2021). Linking dynamic capabilities and market performance of SMEs: The moderating role of organizational agility. Istanbul Business Research, 50(2), 197–214.
Arokodare, M. A. & Falana, B. R. (2021). Strategic Agility and the Global Pandemic: The Agile Organizational Structure, A Theoretical Review. Information Management and Business Review, 13(1), 16–27. https://doi.org/10.22610/imbr.v13i1(I).3145
Bauin, S., Michelet, B., Schweighoffer, M. & Vermeulin, P. (1991). Using bibliometrics in strategic analysis:“understanding chemical reactions” at the CNRS. Scientometrics, 22(1), 113–137.
Bergh, D. D., Aguinis, H., Heavey, C., Ketchen, D. J., Boyd, B. K., Su, P., Lau, C. L. L. & Joo, H. (2016). Using Meta-Analytic Structural Equation Modeling to Advance Strategic Management Research: Guidelines and An Empirical Illustration Via the Strategic Leadership-Performance Relationship. Strategic Management Journal, 37(3), 477–497. http://www.jstor.org/stable/43897955
Braunscheidel, M. J. & Suresh, N. C. (2009). The organizational antecedents of a firm’s supply chain agility for risk mitigation and response. Journal of Operations Management, 27(2), 119–140. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2008.09.006
Callon, M., Courtial, J. P. & Laville, F. (1991). Co-word analysis as a tool for describing the network of interactions between basic and technological research: The case of polymer chemsitry. Scientometrics, 22(1), 155–205. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02019280
Cobo, M. J., López-Herrera, A. G., Herrera-Viedma, E. & Herrera, F. (2011). Science mapping software tools: Review, analysis, and cooperative study among tools. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(7), 1382–1402. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.21525
Cui, L., Wu, H., Wu, L., Kumar, A. & Tan, K. H. (2023). Investigating the relationship between digital technologies, supply chain integration and firm resilience in the context of COVID-19. Annals of Operations Research, 327(2), 825–853. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-022-04735-y
de Diego, E. & Almodóvar, P. (2022). Mapping research trends on strategic agility over the past 25 years: insights from a bibliometric approach. European Journal of Management and Business Economics, 31(2), 219–238. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJMBE-05-2021-0160
Doz, Y. (2020). Fostering strategic agility: How individual executives and human resource practices contribute. Human Resource Management Review, 30(1), 100693. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2019.100693
Doz, Y. L. & Kosonen, M. (2008). Fast strategy: How strategic agility will help you stay ahead of the game. Pearson Education.
Fabrizio, C. M., Kaczam, F., de Moura, G. L., da Silva, L. S. C. V., da Silva, W. V. & da Veiga, C. P. (2022). Competitive advantage and dynamic capability in small and medium-sized enterprises: a systematic literature review and future research directions. Review of Managerial Science, 16(3), 617–648. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11846-021-00459-8
Feng, J., Zhang, Y. Q. & Zhang, H. (2017). Improving the co-word analysis method based on semantic distance. Scientometrics, 111(3), 1521–1531. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2286-1
Giannakos, M., Papamitsiou, Z., Markopoulos, P., Read, J. & Hourcade, J. P. (2020). Mapping child–computer interaction research through co-word analysis. International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction, 23–24, 100165. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcci.2020.100165
He, Q. (1999). Knowledge discovery through co-word analysis. Libr. Trends, 48.
Henrich, J., Li, J., Mazuera, C. & Perez, F. (2022). Future-proofing the supply chain. https://www.mckinsey.com/capabilities/operations/our-insights/future-proofing-the-supply-chain
Hosseini, S., Baziyad, H., Norouzi, R., Jabbedari Khiabani, S., Gidófalvi, G., Albadvi, A., Alimohammadi, A. & Seyedabrishami, S. (2021). Mapping the intellectual structure of GIS-T field (2008–2019): a dynamic co-word analysis. Scientometrics, 126(4), 2667–2688. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03840-8
Ivanov, D. (2022). Viable supply chain model: integrating agility, resilience and sustainability perspectives—lessons from and thinking beyond the COVID-19 pandemic. Annals of Operations Research, 319(1), 1411–1431. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-020-03640-6
Junni, P., Sarala, R. M., Tarba, S. Y. & Weber, Y. (2015). The Role of Strategic Agility in Acquisitions. British Journal of Management, 26(4), 596–616. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.12115
Khasseh, A. A., Soheili, F., Moghaddam, H. S. & Chelak, A. M. (2017). Intellectual structure of knowledge in iMetrics: A co-word analysis. Information Processing & Management, 53(3), 705–720. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ipm.2017.02.001
Kumkale, I. (2016). Organization’s tool for creating competitive advantage: strategic agility. Balkan and Near Eastern Journal of Social Sciences, 2(3), 118–124.
Liu, Y., Goncalves, J., Ferreira, D., Hosio, S. & Kostakos, V. (2014). Identity crisis of ubicomp? Mapping 15 years of the field’s development and paradigm change. Proceedings of the 2014 ACM International joint conference on pervasive and ubiquitous computing, 75–86.
Liu, Y., Goncalves, J., Ferreira, D., Xiao, B., Hosio, S. & Kostakos, V. (2014). CHI 1994-2013: Mapping two decades of intellectual progress through co-word analysis. Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems, 3553–3562.
Munir, M., Jajja, M. S. S. & Chatha, K. A. (2022). Capabilities for enhancing supply chain resilience and responsiveness in the COVID-19 pandemic: exploring the role of improvisation, anticipation, and data analytics capabilities. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 42(10), 1576–1604. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOPM-11-2021-0677
Muñoz-Leiva, F., Viedma-del-Jesús, M. I., Sánchez-Fernández, J. & López-Herrera, A. G. (2012). An application of co-word analysis and bibliometric maps for detecting the most highlighting themes in the consumer behaviour research from a longitudinal perspective. Quality & Quantity, 46(4), 1077–1095. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-011-9565-3
Orafaye Jamshidi, S., Hasangholipor Yasory, T., Aghayee Daghlian, M. & Esgandari, K. (2023). Designing an Agile Value Creation Model in Small and Medium Sized Enterprises in Iran. Journal of Business Management Perspective, 22(53), 72-112. doi: 10.48308/jbmp.2023.103511 (in Persian)
Pinho, C. R. A., Pinho, M. L. C. A., Deligonul, S. Z. & Tamer Cavusgil, S. (2022). The agility construct in the literature: Conceptualization and bibliometric assessment. Journal of Business Research, 153, 517–532.
Ravikumar, S., Agrahari, A. & Singh, S. N. (2015). Mapping the intellectual structure of scientometrics: a co-word analysis of the journal Scientometrics (2005–2010). Scientometrics, 102(1), 929–955. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-014-1402-8
Schreuder, R. & Noorman, S. (2019). Strategic talent management: creating strategic value by placing top talents in key positions. Development and Learning in Organizations, 33(1), 1-4. https://doi.org/10.1108/DLO-09-2018-0120
Shams, R., Vrontis, D., Belyaeva, Z., Ferraris, A. & Czinkota, M. R. (2021). Strategic agility in international business: A conceptual framework for “agile” multinationals. Journal of International Management, 27(1), 100737.
Sherehiy, B., Karwowski, W. & Layer, J. K. (2007). A review of enterprise agility: Concepts, frameworks, and attributes. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 37(5), 445–460. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ergon.2007.01.007
Shin, H., Lee, J.-N., Kim, D. & Rhim, H. (2015). Strategic agility of Korean small and medium enterprises and its influence on operational and firm performance. International Journal of Production Economics, 168, 181–196.
Uyar, A., Kılıç, M. & Koseoglu, M. A. (2020). Exploring the conceptual structure of the auditing discipline through co-word analysis: An international perspective. International Journal of Auditing, 24(1), 53–72. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/ijau.12178
Vrontis, D., Belas, J., Thrassou, A., Santoro, G. & Christofi, M. (2023). Strategic agility, openness and performance: a mixed method comparative analysis of firms operating in developed and emerging markets. Review of Managerial Science, 17(4), 1365–1398. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11846-022-00562-4
Weber, Y. & Tarba, S. Y. (2014). Strategic Agility: A State of the Art Introduction to the Special Section on Strategic Agility. California Management Review, 56(3), 5–12. https://doi.org/10.1525/cmr.2014.56.3.5
Xing, Y., Liu, Y., Boojihawon, D. K. & Tarba, S. (2020). Entrepreneurial team and strategic agility: A conceptual framework and research agenda. Human Resource Management Review, 30(1), 100696. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2019.100696
Zhou, S. S., Zhou, A. J., Feng, J. & Jiang, S. (2019). Dynamic capabilities and organizational performance: The mediating role of innovation. Journal of Management & Organization, 25(5), 731–747. https://doi.org/DOI: 10.1017/jmo.2017.20
Journal of Business Management
Volume 17, Issue 1
2025
Pages 1-22

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics