Orchestrating Digital Transformation Capability and Business Model Innovation to Turn External Pressure into Firm Performance
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22441/jurnal_mix.2026.v16i3.002Keywords:
Digital Transformation Capability, Business Model Innovation, External pressure, Manufacturing Industry, Firm performanceAbstract
Objectives: In emerging economies it remains unclear how external pressure (EP) is associated with firm performance (FP), because prior studies treat pressure as a moderator and capabilities in isolation. This study examines the sequential mediation EP → digital transformation capability (DTC) → business model innovation (BMI) → FP. No moderation effects are tested.
Methodology: A higher-order PLS-SEM model grounded in the Technology–Organization–Environment framework and the Dynamic Capabilities View, with formative EP and DTC constructs, is estimated on survey data from 206 Indonesian manufacturers, controlling for firm size.
Finding: EP is strongly associated with DTC (β = 0.864), DTC with BMI (β = 0.709), and BMI with FP (β = 0.846). The indirect EP–BMI association through DTC (β = 0.612) is over three times the direct one (β = 0.192; VAF = 76.1%). The DTC–FP association is consistent with full mediation by BMI, as the direct path is not significant when estimated (β = 0.173, p = 0.363). PLSpredict and CVPAT indicate predictive relevance.
Conclusion: External pressure is associated with higher performance mainly when it is accompanied by digital capability and business model renewal. Because the data are cross-sectional, these relationships are read as associations, not causal effects.
References
Alpala, L. O., Quiroga-Parra, D. J., Hernández Arias, B. E., Mendoza Munar, L., & Valencia Ayala, H. (2026). Industry 4.0 adoption in large manufacturing companies: The readiness–adoption gap in an emerging economy. Systems, 14(7), 799. https://doi.org/10.3390/systems14070799
Bain & Company. (2024). 88% of business transformations fail to achieve their original ambitions; those that succeed avoid overloading top talent. Bain & Company. https://www.bain.com/about/media-center/press-releases/2024/
Balta, M. E., Papadopoulos, T., & Spanaki, K. (2024). Business model pivoting and digital technologies in turbulent environments. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, 30(2–3), 773–799. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEBR-02-2023-0210
Becker, J.-M., Klein, K., & Wetzels, M. (2012). Hierarchical latent variable models in PLS-SEM: guidelines for using reflective-formative type models. Long Range Planning, 45(5–6), 359–394. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2012.10.001
BenarNews. (2024). Indonesia’s textile industry struggles as thousands lose jobs. BenarNews.
Bharadwaj, A., El Sawy, O. A., Pavlou, P. A., & Venkatraman, N. (2013). Digital business strategy: toward a next generation of insights. MIS Quarterly, 37(2), 471–482. https://doi.org/10.25300/MISQ/2013/37:2.3
Chatterjee, S., Mikalef, P., Khorana, S., & Kizgin, H. (2022). Assessing the Implementation of AI Integrated CRM System for B2C Relationship Management: Integrating Contingency Theory and Dynamic Capability View Theory. Information Systems Frontiers, 26(3), 967–985. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10796-022-10261-w
Conway, J. M., & Lance, C. E. (2010). What reviewers should expect from authors regarding common method bias in organizational research. Journal of Business and Psychology, 25(3), 325–334. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-010-9181-6
Davenport, T. H., & Westerman, G. (2018). Why so many high-profile digital transformations fail. Harvard Business Review.
Detik. (2024). Sepatu Bata resmi tutup pabrik setelah 7 dekade beroperasi di Indonesia. Detik.com.
Diamantopoulos, A., & Siguaw, J. A. (2006). Formative versus reflective indicators in organizational measure development: A comparison and empirical illustration. British Journal of Management, 17(4), 263–282. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8551.2006.00500.x
DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147–160. https://doi.org/10.2307/2095101
Forth, P., Reichert, T., de Laubier, R., & Chakraborty, S. (2020). Flipping the odds of digital transformation success. Boston Consulting Group. https://www.bcg.com/publications/2020/increasing-odds-of-success-in-digital-transformation
Foss, N. J., & Saebi, T. (2017). Fifteen years of research on business model innovation: How far have we come, and where should we go? Journal of Management, 43(1), 200–227. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206316675927
Frank, A. G., Dalenogare, L. S., & Ayala, N. F. (2019). Industry 4.0 technologies: Implementation patterns in manufacturing companies. International Journal of Production Economics, 210, 15–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2019.01.004
Franke, G., & Sarstedt, M. (2019). Heuristics versus statistics in discriminant validity testing: A comparison of four procedures. Internet Research, 29(3), 430–447. https://doi.org/10.1108/IntR-12-2017-0515
Ginting, M., Zagloel, T., & Zulkarnain. (2026). Industry 4.0 readiness and maturity in Indonesia's manufacturing industries: An empirical study of key success factors. The South African Journal of Industrial Engineering, 37(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.7166/37-1-3399
Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., Sarstedt, M., Danks, N. P., & Ray, S. (2021). Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) using R: A workbook. Springer Nature.
Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2022). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) (3rd ed.). Sage.
Hanelt, A., Bohnsack, R., Marz, D., & Antunes Marante, C. (2021). A systematic review of the literature on digital transformation: Insights and implications for strategy and organizational change. Journal of Management Studies, 58(5), 1159–1197.
Helfat, C. E., & Raubitschek, R. S. (2018). Dynamic and integrative capabilities for profiting from innovation in digital platform-based ecosystems. Research Policy, 47(8), 1391–1399. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2018.01.019
Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(1), 115–135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8
Iansiti, M., & Lakhani, K. R. (2020). Competing in the age of AI: Strategy and leadership when algorithms and networks run the world. Harvard Business Review Press.
Jakarta Globe. (2024). Textile industry crisis: Factory closures and nearly 14,000 layoffs due to imported goods. Jakarta Globe.
Jarvis, C. B., MacKenzie, S. B., & Podsakoff, P. M. (2003). A critical review of construct indicators and measurement model misspecification in marketing and consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 30(2), 199–218. https://doi.org/10.1086/376806
Kock, N. (2015). Common method bias in PLS-SEM: A full collinearity assessment approach. International Journal of e-Collaboration, 11(4), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.4018/ijec.2015100101
Kock, N., & Hadaya, P. (2018). Minimum sample size estimation in PLS-SEM: The inverse square root and gamma-exponential methods. Information Systems Journal, 28(1), 227–261. https://doi.org/10.1111/isj.12131
Li, L., Su, F., Zhang, W., & Mao, J. (2018). Digital transformation by SME entrepreneurs: A capability perspective. Information Systems Journal, 28(6), 1129–1157. https://doi.org/10.1111/isj.12153
Liengaard, B. D., Sharma, P. N., Hult, G. T. M., Jensen, M. B., Sarstedt, M., Hair, J. F., & Ringle, C. M. (2021). Prediction: coveted, yet forsaken? Introducing a cross-validated predictive ability test in partial least squares path modeling. Decision Sciences, 52(2), 362–392. https://doi.org/10.1111/deci.12445
MacKenzie, S. B., & Podsakoff, P. M. (2012). Common method bias in marketing: causes, mechanisms, and procedural remedies. Journal of Retailing, 88(4), 542–555. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretai.2012.08.001
Oliver, C. (1991). Strategic responses to institutional processes. Academy of Management Review, 16(1), 145–179. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1991.4279002
Peng, Y., & Tao, C. (2022). Can digital transformation promote enterprise performance?—From the perspective of public policy and innovation. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, 7(3), 100198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jik.2022.100198
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879–903. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879
Prihandono, D., Wijaya, A. P., Wiratama, B., Prananta, W., & Widia, S. (2024). Digital transformation to enhance Indonesian SME performance: Exploring the impact of market competition and digital strategy. Problems and Perspectives in Management, 22(2), 103–113. https://doi.org/10.21511/ppm.22(2).2024.09
Queiroz, M. M., Wamba, S. F., & Branski, R. M. (2021). Supply Chain Resilience During the COVID-19: Empirical Evidence From an Emerging Economy. Benchmarking: An International Journal, 29(6), 1999–2018. https://doi.org/10.1108/bij-08-2021-0454
Sarstedt, M., Hair, J. F., Cheah, J.-H., Becker, J.-M., & Ringle, C. M. (2019). How to specify, estimate, and validate higher-order constructs in PLS-SEM. Australasian Marketing Journal, 27(3), 197–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ausmj.2019.05.003
Schilke, O. (2014). On the contingent value of dynamic capabilities for competitive advantage: The nonlinear moderating effect of environmental dynamism. Strategic Management Journal, 35(2), 179–203. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2099
Shmueli, G., Sarstedt, M., Hair, J. F., Cheah, J.-H., Ting, H., Vaithilingam, S., & Ringle, C. M. (2019). Predictive model assessment in PLS-SEM: guidelines for using PLSpredict. European Journal of Marketing, 53(11), 2322–2347. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJM-02-2019-0189
Teece, D. J. (2007). Explicating dynamic capabilities: the nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic Management Journal, 28(13), 1319–1350. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.640
Teece, D. J. (2018). Business models and dynamic capabilities. Long Range Planning, 51(1), 40–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2017.06.007
Tempo. (2024). Sritex resmi pailit: Kronologi dan penyebab kebangkrutan. Tempo.
Tetteh, F. K., Gyamerah, K. K., Nyamekye, B., Atiki, G., & Ashia, R. (2025). Digital transformation and business model innovation: the relevance of strategic orientations under varying conditions of competitive intensity. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 36(3), 621–650. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMTM-07-2024-0394
Tornatzky, L. G., Fleischer, M., & Chakrabarti, A. K. (1990). The processes of technological innovation. Lexington Books.
Venkatraman, N., & Ramanujam, V. (1986). Measurement of business performance in strategy research: A comparison of approaches. Academy of Management Review, 11(4), 801–814. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1986.4283976
Verhoef, P. C., Broekhuizen, T., Bart, Y., Bhattacharya, A., Dong, J. Q., Fabian, N., & Haenlein, M. (2021). Digital transformation: A multidisciplinary reflection and research agenda. Journal of Business Research, 122, 889–901. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.09.022
Vial, G. (2019). Understanding digital transformation: A review and a research agenda. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 28(2), 118–144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsis.2019.01.003
Wang, Y., Chen, Y., Wang, N., Nevo, S., Kou, G., & Alsaadi, F. E. (2020). Impact of the strategic role of IT on explorative and exploitative innovation activities: The role of environmental uncertainty. Decision Sciences, 51(3), 542–574. https://doi.org/10.1111/deci.12377
Warner, K. S. R., & Wäger, M. (2019). Building dynamic capabilities for digital transformation: An ongoing process of strategic renewal. Long Range Planning, 52(3), 326–349.
World Bank. (2023). Manufacturing, value added (% of GDP) – Indonesia [Data set]. World Bank Open Data. https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NV.IND.MANF.ZS?locations=ID
Zhang, Y., Ma, X., Pang, J., Xing, H., & Wang, J. (2023). The impact of digital transformation of manufacturing on corporate performance—The mediating effect of business model innovation and the moderating effect of innovation capability. Research in International Business and Finance, 64, 101890. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ribaf.2023.101890
Zhang, Z., Ye, B., Hu, A., & Zhang, H. (2024). Unlocking the potential of digital transformation: A dual-chain mediation model for product innovation performance in manufacturing. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537325.2024.2320824
Zhao, X., Lynch, J. G., & Chen, Q. (2010). Reconsidering Baron and Kenny: Myths and truths about mediation analysis. Journal of Consumer Research, 37(2), 197–206. https://doi.org/10.1086/651257
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 MIX: JURNAL ILMIAH MANAJEMEN
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
The copyright to this article is transferred to Universitas Mercu Buana (UMB) if and when the article is accepted for publication. The undersigned hereby transfers any and all rights in and to the paper including without limitation all copyrights to UMB. The undersigned hereby represents and warrants that the paper is original and that he/she is the author of the paper, except for material that is clearly identified as to its original source, with permission notices from the copyright owners where required. The undersigned represents that he/she has the power and authority to make and execute this assignment.
We declare that this paper has not been published in the same form elsewhere.
Furthermore, I/We hereby transfer the unlimited rights of publication of the above mentioned paper in whole to UMB. The copyright transfer covers the right to reproduce and distribute the article, including reprints, translations, photographic reproductions, microform, electronic form (offline, online) or any other reproductions of similar nature.
The corresponding author signs for and accepts responsibility for releasing this material on behalf of any and all co-authors. This agreement is to be signed by at least one of the authors who have obtained the assent of the co-author(s) where applicable. After submission of this agreement signed by the corresponding author, changes of authorship or in the order of the authors listed will not be accepted.
Retained Rights/Terms and Conditions
Although authors are permitted to re-use all or portions of the Work in other works, this does not include granting third-party requests for reprinting, republishing, or other types of re-use.
