IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-05480065.html

Effect of entrepreneurial leadership on exploratory innovation – The role of intrinsic motivation and environment dynamism as moderators in the IT sector of Sri Lanka

Author

Listed:
  • A.Y. de Costa

    (University of Moratuwa)

  • Vathsala Wickramasinghe

    (University of Moratuwa)

Abstract

The confluence of innovative activities and leadership styles significantly influences the trajectory of organizational performance in Sri Lanka's information technology (IT) sector. Understanding the complex interactions between leadership behaviors and innovation is crucial for sustaining development and competitiveness in the face of the sector's rapid technical improvements, globalization, and changing consumer needs. This quantitative research delves into the intricate interplay between entrepreneurial leadership style, which has shown its potential to stimulate innovative thinking and risk-taking behaviors among employees, and exploratory innovation with a moderating effect of intrinsic motivation and environmental dynamism. Utilizing a sample size of 157 participants from the IT sector of Sri Lanka, the findings reveal that entrepreneurial leadership style has a significant positive relationship with explorative innovation. Furthermore, intrinsic motivation is found to be a significant negative moderator between entrepreneurial leadership and exploratory innovation. Environmental dynamism is found to positively moderate the relationship between entrepreneurial leadership and exploratory innovation. These results shed light on the nuanced influences of entrepreneurial leadership style, intrinsic motivation, and environmental dynamism on innovation activities in the IT sector, offering valuable insights for organizational leaders and policymakers seeking to foster a culture of innovation in dynamic environments.

Suggested Citation

  • A.Y. de Costa & Vathsala Wickramasinghe, 2024. "Effect of entrepreneurial leadership on exploratory innovation – The role of intrinsic motivation and environment dynamism as moderators in the IT sector of Sri Lanka," Post-Print hal-05480065, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-05480065
    DOI: 10.31705/icbr.2024.1
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.science/hal-05480065v1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hal.science/hal-05480065v1/document
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31705/icbr.2024.1?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. Constantine Andriopoulos & Marianne W. Lewis, 2009. "Exploitation-Exploration Tensions and Organizational Ambidexterity: Managing Paradoxes of Innovation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(4), pages 696-717, August.
    2. Zhao, Bo & Ziedonis, Rosemarie, 2020. "State governments as financiers of technology startups: Evidence from Michigan's R&D loan program," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(4).
    3. Shalley, Christina E. & Perry-Smith, Jill E., 2001. "Effects of Social-Psychological Factors on Creative Performance: The Role of Informational and Controlling Expected Evaluation and Modeling Experience," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 84(1), pages 1-22, 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. Arman Avadikyan & Gilles Lambert & Christophe Lerch, 2016. "A Multi-Level Perspective on Ambidexterity: The Case of a Synchrotron Research Facility," Working Papers of BETA 2016-44, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    2. 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.
    3. Delin Zeng & Jingbo Hu & Taohua Ouyang, 2017. "Managing Innovation Paradox in the Sustainable Innovation Ecosystem: A Case Study of Ambidextrous Capability in a Focal Firm," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(11), pages 1-15, November.
    4. Carolina Rojas-Córdova & Amanda J. Williamson & Julio A. Pertuze & Gustavo Calvo, 2023. "Why one strategy does not fit all: a systematic review on exploration–exploitation in different organizational archetypes," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 17(7), pages 2251-2295, October.
    5. Anna Adamik & Michał Nowicki, 2019. "Pathologies and Paradoxes of Co-Creation: A Contribution to the Discussion about Corporate Social Responsibility in Building a Competitive Advantage in the Age of Industry 4.0," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-38, September.
    6. Mammassis, Constantinos S. & Kostopoulos, Konstantinos C., 2019. "CEO goal orientations, environmental dynamism and organizational ambidexterity: An investigation in SMEs," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 577-588.
    7. Hu, Jing & Wang, Yilin & Liu, Shengnan & Song, Mingshun, 2023. "Mechanism of latecomer enterprises’ technological catch-up in technical standards alliances – An ambidextrous innovation perspective," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    8. Cannavale, Chiara & Esempio, Anna & Ferretti, Marco, 2021. "Up- and down- alliances: A systematic literature review," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 30(5).
    9. Qiong Liu & Junhua Guo, 2025. "The Effects of Government R&D Investment and Policy Ambiguity on Regional Innovation: Evidence from China," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 16(2), pages 8060-8084, June.
    10. Ferrigno, Giulio & Barabuffi, Saverio & Marcazzan, Enrico & Piccaluga, Andrea, 2025. "What “V” of the big data support firms’ radical and incremental innovation?," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 146(C).
    11. Ali, Abdul & Mancha, Ruben & Pachamanova, Dessislava, 2018. "Correcting analytics maturity myopia," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 61(2), pages 211-219.
    12. Simone Carmine & Valentina De Marchi, 2023. "Reviewing Paradox Theory in Corporate Sustainability Toward a Systems Perspective," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 184(1), pages 139-158, April.
    13. Kirsti Iivonen, 2018. "Defensive Responses to Strategic Sustainability Paradoxes: Have Your Coke and Drink It Too!," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 148(2), pages 309-327, March.
    14. Ye Jin Lee & Kwangsoo Shin & Eungdo Kim, 2019. "The Influence of a Firm’s Capability and Dyadic Relationship of the Knowledge Base on Ambidextrous Innovation in Biopharmaceutical M&As," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-17, September.
    15. Rebecca Bednarek & Stephen Blumenfeld & Sally Riad, 2012. "Union-division: on the paradoxes of purpose and membership scope in union mergers," Industrial Relations Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(6), pages 548-571, November.
    16. Hua, Xiuping & Wang, Yong & Xia, Junjie & Zhang, Haochen, 2025. "Industrial policy, congruence, and innovation: Evidence from “Chinese NASDAQ”," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(8).
    17. Fini, Riccardo & Perkmann, Markus & Kenney, Martin & Maki, Kanetaka M., 2023. "Are public subsidies effective for university spinoffs? Evidence from SBIR awards in the University of California system," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(1).
    18. Fragkandreas, Thanos, 2025. "Case study research on innovation systems: Paradox, dialectical analysis and resolution," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(1).
    19. Jan Ossenbrink & Joern Hoppmann & Volker H. Hoffmann, 2019. "Hybrid Ambidexterity: How the Environment Shapes Incumbents’ Use of Structural and Contextual Approaches," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(6), pages 1319-1348, November.
    20. Jin Li & Lulu Zhou & Xufan Zhang & Zhihong Chen & Feng Tian, 2018. "Technological Configuration Capability, Strategic Flexibility, and Organizational Performance in Chinese High-Tech Organizations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-17, May.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:hal:journl:hal-05480065. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.