IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bit/bsrysr/v16y2025i1p130-151n1007.html

Optimizing Strategic Transformation with EFQM Model: A Contingency Theory Perspective

Author

Listed:
  • Çağlar Yiğit

    (Başkent University, Ankara, Türkiye)

  • Kadir Varoğlu A.

    (Başkent University, Ankara, Türkiye)

Abstract

Background The EFQM Model, launched by the European Foundation for Quality Management (EFQM), is widely adopted by transforming organizations. Conducting research with an academic perspective on these models is crucial to comprehend their potential fully. While Contingency Theory has not yet gained widespread recognition for this purpose, it can play a fundamental role in shaping organizations’ transformational domains. Objectives To evaluate the feasibility of the EFQM Model in transformation by integrating theoretical concepts with practical applications across the Environment, Size, Technology, and Strategy domains while minimizing ESG risks. Methods/Approach Quantitative analysis, employing Linear Programming (LP), is utilized to explore the interaction between 25 sub-criteria derived from EFQM and contingency theory, with data from 50 participants being analysed using operational research-based LP optimization and sensitivity analysis. Results The EFQM Model showcases feasibility in managing ESG risks and driving transformations with above-average success rates in the case study. Notably, the “Size” transformation domain plays a vital role in strategic transformations, alongside other sub-criteria, as indicated by various sensitivity analyses. Conclusions The EFQM criteria’ methodological approach closely aligns with the transformation perspective of contingency theory, holding potential to enhance future business system research.

Suggested Citation

  • Çağlar Yiğit & Kadir Varoğlu A., 2025. "Optimizing Strategic Transformation with EFQM Model: A Contingency Theory Perspective," Business Systems Research, Sciendo, vol. 16(1), pages 130-151.
    • Handle: RePEc:bit:bsrysr:v:16:y:2025:i:1:p:130-151:n:1007
    DOI: 10.2478/bsrj-2025-0007
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.2478/bsrj-2025-0007
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2478/bsrj-2025-0007?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kathleen M. Eisenhardt & Jeffrey A. Martin, 2000. "Dynamic capabilities: what are they?," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(10‐11), pages 1105-1121, October.
    2. Marc Dorval & Marie-Hélène Jobin & Nadia Benomar, 2019. "Lean culture: a comprehensive systematic literature review," International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 68(5), pages 920-937, March.
    3. Danny Miller, 1992. "Environmental Fit Versus Internal Fit," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 3(2), pages 159-178, May.
    4. Plachy, Roger J. & Smunt, Timothy L., 2022. "Rethinking managership, leadership, followership, and partnership," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 401-411.
    5. Bradford Cornell, 2021. "ESG preferences, risk and return," European Financial Management, European Financial Management Association, vol. 27(1), pages 12-19, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Galeazzo, Ambra & Furlan, Andrea & Vinelli, Andrea, 2014. "Understanding environmental-operations integration: The case of pollution prevention projects," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 149-160.
    2. Bradley C. Wheeler, 2002. "NEBIC: A Dynamic Capabilities Theory for Assessing Net-Enablement," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 13(2), pages 125-146, June.
    3. Lillis, Bob & Sweeney, Mike, 2013. "Managing the fit between the views of competitive strategy and the strategic role of service operations," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 31(6), pages 564-590.
    4. Dirk Martignoni & Anoop Menon & Nicolaj Siggelkow, 2016. "Consequences of misspecified mental models: Contrasting effects and the role of cognitive fit," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(13), pages 2545-2568, December.
    5. Kwangsoo Kim & Eun-Hwa Seo & Choo Yeon Kim, 2025. "The Relationships Between Environmental Dynamism, Absorptive Capacity, Organizational Ambidexterity, and Innovation Performance from the Dynamic Capabilities Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(2), pages 1-28, January.
    6. Jessica Birkholz & Jarina Kühn, 2021. "Entrepreneurship Perception during the first COVID-19 Shock: Mental Representations of Entrepreneurship and Preferences of Business Models during the Pandemic," Bremen Papers on Economics & Innovation 2105, University of Bremen, Faculty of Business Studies and Economics.
    7. Reypens, Lina & Bacq, Sophie & Milanov, Hana, 2021. "Beyond bricolage: Early-stage technology venture resource mobilization in resource-scarce contexts," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 36(4).
    8. Mariani, Marcello M. & Fosso Wamba, Samuel, 2020. "Exploring how consumer goods companies innovate in the digital age: The role of big data analytics companies," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 338-352.
    9. Roberta De Angelis & Robert Morgan & Luigi M. De Luca, 2023. "Open strategy and dynamic capabilities: A framework for circular economy business models research," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(7), pages 4861-4873, November.
    10. Gregor Langus & Vilen Lipatov, 2021. "Does Envelopment through Data Advantage Call for New Regulation?," CESifo Working Paper Series 8932, CESifo.
    11. Mingfeng Tang & Grace Sheila Walsh & Cuiwen Li & Angathevar Baskaran, 2021. "Exploring technology business incubators and their business incubation models: case studies from China," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 46(1), pages 90-116, February.
    12. Eleanor Doyle & Damien McGovern & Stephen McCarthy, 2013. "Compliance-Innovation: Supporting Regional Growth," ERSA conference papers ersa13p570, European Regional Science Association.
    13. Eduardo González-Fidalgo & Juan Ventura-Victoria, 2002. "How Much Do Strategic Groups Matter?," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 21(1), pages 55-71, August.
    14. Henri A. Schildt & Markku V.J. Maula & Thomas Keil, 2005. "Explorative and Exploitative Learning from External Corporate Ventures," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 29(4), pages 493-515, July.
    15. Shanaev, Savva & Ghimire, Binam, 2022. "When ESG meets AAA: The effect of ESG rating changes on stock returns," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 46(PA).
    16. Youngok Kim & Sidney J. Gray, 2008. "The impact of entry mode choice on foreign affiliate performance: The case of foreign MNEs in South Korea," Management International Review, Springer, vol. 48(2), pages 165-188, April.
    17. Tomasz Helbin & Amy Van Looy, 2021. "Is Business Process Management (BPM) Ready for Ambidexterity? Conceptualization, Implementation Guidelines and Research Agenda," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-25, February.
    18. Miguel Perez‐Valls & Jose Cespedes‐Lorente & Juan Moreno‐Garcia, 2016. "Green Practices and Organizational Design as Sources of Strategic Flexibility and Performance," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(8), pages 529-544, December.
    19. Inseong Song & Jonghoon Bae, 2016. "Politics, strong institution and competitive advantage: an examination of organizational aspiration for competition," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 22(4), pages 412-443, December.
    20. Aron Lindberg & Nicholas Berente & James Gaskin & Kalle Lyytinen, 2016. "Coordinating Interdependencies in Online Communities: A Study of an Open Source Software Project," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 27(4), pages 751-772, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • C6 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling
    • L1 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bit:bsrysr:v:16:y:2025:i:1:p:130-151:n:1007. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.sciendo.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.