Effect of Environmental Sensing on Organizational Performance of Non-Commercial State Agencies in Kenya

This study is grounded in the Strategic Agility Framework and examined the effect of environmental sensing on organizational performance in non-commercial state agencies in Kenya, as well as the moderating role of the institutional framework. Drawing on Organizational Information Processing Theory, Institutional Theory, and Public Value Theory, the study investigated how policy shift tracking, stakeholder feedback systems, and real-time crisis sensing influence service delivery effectiveness, operational and cost efficiency, and public value creation. The study adopted a pragmatism philosophy and a mixed methods explanatory design with a predominantly quantitative approach, undertaking a census of 131 non-commercial state agencies. The respondents comprised Chief Executive Officers, Directors, Heads of Departments, and senior managers responsible for strategic planning, operations, and organizational performance. Data were collected through semi-structured questionnaires and secondary sources, while a pilot study involving 14 agencies established instrument validity and reliability. Common Method Variance was assessed using Harman’s single-factor test, which confirmed that common method bias was not a significant concern. The findings revealed that environmental sensing significantly improves organizational performance, with policy shift tracking emerging as the strongest sensing capability, while stakeholder feedback systems and real-time crisis sensing remained only moderately developed due to fragmented information systems and limited digital integration. The study further established that the institutional framework significantly strengthens the relationship between environmental sensing and organizational performance, with supportive governance structures, policy alignment, and accountability mechanisms enhancing performance outcomes. The study concludes that environmental sensing is a critical driver of organizational performance in non-commercial state agencies, but its effectiveness depends on enabling institutional conditions that facilitate information utilization, coordination, and responsiveness. The study recommends strengthening digital sensing systems, improving feedback-to-action mechanisms, enhancing inter-agency coordination, and undertaking institutional reforms that promote flexibility and evidence-based decision-making in the public sector.

Keywords

Environmental Sensing, Organizational Performance, Institutional Framework, Strategic Agility, Non-commercial state agencies, Kenya.

Downloads

PDF JATS XML

References

1. Alon-Barkat, S., & Busuioc, M. (2021). Human–algorithm interaction in public sector decision making: Automation bias and information processing in public organizations. Public Administration Review. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Ansell, C., Sørensen, E., & Torfing, J. (2023). Public administration and crisis management: Governance capacity in turbulent times. Public Administration Review, 83(2), 245–260. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Ayee, J. R., & Crook, R. C. (2023). Governance and public sector performance in Sub Saharan Africa: Institutional constraints and reform challenges. Journal of African Public Administration, 15(1), 33–52. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Bovaird, T., Loeffler, E., & Parrado, S. (2024). Co production and citizen feedback systems in public service delivery. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 90(1), 1–18. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Bryson, J. M., Crosby, B. C., & Bloomberg, L. (2021). Public value governance: Moving beyond traditional public administration. Public Administration Review, 81(1), 1–13. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Caldarulo, M., & Welch, E. W. (2024). Organizational risk perception in public agencies: The role of contracting and scientific and professional information. Public Management Review, 26(8), 2280–2305. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Castelo, S. L., & Gomes, C. F. (2024). The role of performance measurement and management systems in changing public organizations: An exploratory study. Public Money & Management, 44(5), 399–406. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Cepiku, D., & Mastrodascio, M. (2024). Public sector reform and performance management in complex governance systems. Public Management Review, 26(1), 1-20. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Chepkirui, J. (2024). Performance contracting and service delivery in Kenyan public institutions. Kenyatta University Institutional Repository. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Christensen, T., & Lægreid, P. (2024). Crisis management and public administration performance in digital governance environments. Governance, 37(1), 89–108. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5 ed.). Sage Publications. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. 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. doi:10.2307/2095101 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Doz, Y. L., & Kosonen, M. (2008). Fast strategy: How strategic agility will help you stay ahead of the game. Wharton School Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Fourie, D. (2024). Citizen participation and feedback integration in African public administration systems. Public Administration and Development, 44(2), 112–130. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Galbraith, J. R. (1973). Designing complex organizations. Addison-Wesley. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Government of Kenya. (2024). Economic survey 2024. Kenya National Bureau of Statistics. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Hair , J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2022). Multivariate data analysis (9 ed.). Cengage Learning. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Howlett, M., & Mukherjee, I. (2024). Policy capacity and implementation performance in comparative governance systems. Policy Sciences, 57(1), 1–25. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Jeong, S., Back, H., & Lee, J. (2024). Policy shift tracking and smart city policy diffusion across local governments in South Korea: A longitudinal panel analysis. Public Policy and Administration Review, 39(2), 201–225. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Kenya News Agency. (2024). Government digital transformation and service delivery updates. Kenya News Agency. Retrieved from https://www.kenyanews.go.ke [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Knox, S., Marin-Cadavid, C., & Oziri, V. (2025). Stakeholder engagement-as-practice in public sector innovation. International Public Management Journal, 28(1), 153–168. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Liu, Y., Wei, J., & Wang, L. (2022). Information processing capability, environmental uncertainty and firm performance: Evidence from digital transformation contexts. Journal of Business Research, 145, 123–134. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Margetts, H., & Dunleavy, P. (2024). Digital era governance and public sector transformation. Oxford Handbook of Public Administration. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Mazzucato, M., & Ryan-Collins, J. (2024). Fiscal policy, uncertainty, and public value in modern economies. Working Paper Series, UCL Institute for Innovation and Public Purpose. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Ministry of Information, Communications and the Digital Economy. (2025). Digital government and transformation policy updates. Government of Kenya. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Moore, M. H. (1995). Creating public value: Strategic management in government. Harvard University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Mugenda, O. M., & Mugenda, A. G. (2012). Research methods: Quantitative and qualitative approaches. ACTS Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Muthoka, P., & Otenyo, E. E. (2024). Social processes of public sector collaborations in Kenya: Unpacking challenges of realising joint actions in public administration. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 15(4), 8141–8171. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Mwangi, P., Waweru, F., & Njogu, K. (2023). Fiscal constraints and performance of public sector agencies in Kenya. Kenya Journal of Public Finance, 9(3), 55–78. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. National Treasury & Economic Planning. (2024). Annual public performance contracting report FY 2023/24. Government of Kenya, National Treasury and Economic Planning . Government Printers. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. Neumann, O., Guirguis, K., & Steiner, R. (2022). Digital transformation and public sector performance: The mediating role of organizational agility. Government Information Quarterly, 39(4). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

32. Ngari, J., & Njoroge, M. (2024). Digital governance and service delivery efficiency in Kenyan public agencies. Journal of African Governance Studies, 6(2), 101–120. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

33. Ngari, J., Okeyo, P., & Wanjala, R. (2025). Environmental sensing and public sector responsiveness in Kenya. East African Journal of Public Administration, 11(1), 22–40. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

34. Nyagaki, B. K., Munga, J., & Nzioki, S. (2021). Effect of environmental sensing on organizational performance: A survey of commercial based parastatals in Nairobi County, Kenya. The Strategic Journal of Business and Change Management, 8(3), 618–629. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

35. Nyrud, H., Støle, K., Mikalef, P., Johannessen, T., & Rapp, B. (2024). Towards a common data-driven culture: A longitudinal study of the tensions and emerging solutions involved in becoming data-driven in a large public sector organization. Journal of Systems and Software. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

36. O’Flynn, J., & Wanna, J. (2023). Public value theory and practice: An integrated approach. Routledge. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

37. OECD. (2023). G20/OECD Principles of Corporate Governance. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. OECD. doi:https://doi.org/10.1787/ed750b30-en [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

38. OECD. (2024). Government at a glance: Latin America and the Caribbean 2024. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. OECD Publishing. doi:10.1787/4abdba16-en [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

39. Office of the Auditor General Kenya. (2023). Report of the Auditor General on the financial statements of national government entities for the year ended 30 June 2023. Office of the Auditor General. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

40. Office of the Head of Public Service. (2024). State corporation governance guidelines and reforms. Government of Kenya. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

41. Okeyo, P., Ngari, J., & Wanjala, R. (2025). Digital transformation and public service delivery in Kenya: Institutional constraints and outcomes. African Journal of Governance and Development, 7(1), 15–36. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

42. Østergaard-Nielsen, M. R. (2025). How does performance feedback shape public managers’ inclination to involve frontline professionals? Evidence from a conjoint experiment. International Public Management Journal, 28(2), 297–313. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

43. 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. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

44. Pollitt, C., & Bouckaert, G. (2023). Public management reform: A comparative analysis. Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

45. Saunders, M. N., Lewis , P., & Thornhill, A. (2023). Research methods for business students (9 ed.). Pearson Education. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

46. SCAC. (2023). State corporations in Kenya. Government Printer. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

47. Scott, W. R. (2022). Institutions and organizations: Ideas, interests, and identities (5th ed.). Sage Publications. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

48. Thai, K. V. (2023). International public procurement: Concepts and practices (3rd ed.). Routledge. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

49. The Star. (2025). Kenya government merges state corporations to improve efficiency. Retrieved from https://www.the-star.co.ke [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

50. Thornton, P. H., Ocasio, W., & Lounsbury, M. (2023). The institutional logics perspective: A new approach to culture, structure, and process. Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

51. Tushman, M. L., & Nadler, D. A. (1978). Information processing as an integrating concept in organizational design. Academy of Management Review, 3(3), 613–624. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

52. Verhoest, K., Ongaro, E., & Van Thiel, S. (2023). Governance and public management: An international perspective. Routledge. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

53. Wang, J., Wong, K. L., Olubodun, T., Ameh, C. A., Meara, J. G., & Lilford, R. J. (2024). Developing policy-ready digital dashboards of geospatial access to emergency obstetric care: A survey of policymakers and researchers in Sub-Saharan Africa. Health and Technology, 14(1), 69–80. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

54. Wegrich, K., & Lodge, M. (2022). Governance capacity and regulatory systems in public administration. Regulation and Governance, 16(4), 789–805. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

55. Weißmüller, K. S., Ritz, A., & Yerramsetti, S. (2023). Collaborating and co-creating the digital transformation: Empirical evidence on the crucial role of stakeholder demand from Swiss municipalities. Public Policy and Administration, 38(4), 458–482. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

56. World Bank. (2022). World development report 2022: Finance for an equitable recovery. World Bank. Retrieved from https://www.worldbank.org [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

Effect of Environmental Sensing on Organizational Performance of Non-Commercial State Agencies in Kenya

Authors

Article Information

Publication Timeline

Abstract

Keywords

Downloads

References

Metrics

Views & Downloads

Similar Articles