Effect of Strategic Behavior on Strategic Typology of the Owners of the Ayurveda Firms in Sri Lanka

This study examines the role of strategic behavior in shaping strategic typologies among owners of Ayurveda firms in Sri Lanka, a context where these concepts remain relatively underexplored. Strategic behavior promotes strategic thinking and supports firms’ adaptation to environmental uncertainty by balancing internal and external factors. Acknowledging the influence of culturally specific conditions, the study investigates the validity of the relationship between strategic behavior and strategic typology within the traditional Sri Lankan framework. Data was collected from a large sample of small and medium-sized Ayurveda firms, and analyzed using reliability analysis, One Way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA), and Tukey HSD tests. Findings indicate that all three dimensions of strategic behavior—entrepreneurial, technological, and administrative—significantly influence strategic typologies. For the Defender typology, significant differences were found between entrepreneurial and technological behaviors, and between administrative and technological behaviors. In contrast, the Prospector typology showed significant differences between entrepreneurial and administrative behaviors, and between entrepreneurial and technological behaviors. Descriptive results reveal that Prospector firms exhibit the highest levels of strategic behavior, while Defenders show the lowest. The study recommends transforming traditional mindsets to enhance the competitiveness of Ayurveda firms against Western medical products.

Strategic Behavior; Strategic Typology; Ayurveda Firms, Sri Lanka

1. Aloulou, W., & Fayolle, A. (2005). A conceptual approach to entrepreneurial orientation in a small business context. Journal of Enterprising Culture, 13(1), 21–45. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0218495809000254 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Anwar, J., & Hasnu, S. A. F. (2016). Business strategy and firm performance: A multi-industry analysis. Journal of Strategy and Management, 9(3), 361–382. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Aryee, S. & Tan, K. (1992). Antecedents and outcomes of career commitment. Journal of Vocational Behaviour,4, 288-305. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Atuahene-Gima, K. (2005). Resolving the capability–rigidity paradox in new product innovation. Journal of Marketing, 69(4), 61–83. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Atuahene-Gima, K., & Ko, A. (2001). An empirical investigation of the effect of market orientation and entrepreneurial orientation alignment on product innovation. Organization Science, 12(1), 54–74. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Baker, W. E., & Sinkula, J. M. (2005). Market orientation and the new product paradox. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 22(6), 483–502. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Balodi, C. K. (2014). Strategic orientation and organizational forms: An integrative framework. European Business Review, 26(2), 188–203. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Blumentritt, T., & Danis, W. (2006). Business strategy types and innovative practices. Journal of Managerial Issues, 18(2), 274–291. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Chaffee, E. E. (1985). Three models of strategy. Academy of Management Review, 10(1), 89–98.Day, G. S. (1994). The capabilities of market-driven organizations. Journal of Marketing, 58(4), 37–52. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Embassy of the Kingdom of the Netherlands, (2014). The Health Sector of Sri Lanka.www.pwc.com/lk [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Estévez, V. Y., Pérez A.M. G. & Rodríguez, J.R.O. (2018). The Strategic Behaviour of SMEs. Journal of Administrative Science, Vol. 2018, 8, 61; doi:10.3390/admsci8040061. www.mdpi.com/journal/admsci. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Frambach, R. T., Fiss, P. C., & Morgan, P. T. (2016). How important is customer orientation for firm performance? A fuzzy set analysis of orientations, strategies, and environments. Journal of Business Research, 69(4), 1428–1436. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Fritz, W. (1996). Market orientation and corporate success: Findings from Germany. European Journal of Marketing, 30(8), 59–74. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Gatignon, H., & Xuereb, J. M. (1997). Strategic orientation of the firm and new product performance. Journal of Marketing Research, 34(1), 77–90. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Grinstein, A. (2008). The relationships between market orientation and alternative strategic orientations: A meta-analysis. European Journal of Marketing, 42(1/2), 115–134. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Hambrick, D.C. (1983). Some Tests of the Effectiveness and Functional Attributes of Miles and Snow's Strategic Types. The Academy of Management Journal, 26, (1) pp. 5-26. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Hambrick, D. C., & Mason, P. A. (1984). Upper echelons: The organization as a reflection of its top managers. Academy of Management Review, 9(2), 193–206. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Hughes, M., & Morgan, R. E. (2007). Deconstructing the relationship between entrepreneurial orientation and business performance at the embryonic stage of firm growth. Industrial Marketing Management, 36(5), 651–661. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Hult, G. T. M., Hurley, R. F., & Knight, G. A. (2004). Innovativeness: Its antecedents and impact on business performance. Industrial Marketing Management, 33(5), 429–438. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Im, S., & Workman, J. P., Jr. (2004). Market orientation, creativity, and new product performance in high-technology firms. Journal of Marketing, 68(2), 114–132. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Ingram, T. Teresa, K. Wronka-Pospiech, M. Grzegorz, G. & Wojciech, G. (2016). Relationships between Miles and Snow strategic types and organizational performance in Polish production firms. Journal of Management and Business Administration. Central Europe 24: 17–45. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Kaya, N., & Seyrek, I. H. (2005). Performance impacts of strategic orientations: Evidence from Turkish manufacturing firms. Journal of the American Academy of Business, 6(2), 68–71. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Kess, P., & Isoherranen, V. (2014). Business strategies analysis by strategy typology and orientation framework. In Proceedings of the International Conference (pp. 1–10). Portorož, Slovenia. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Kothari, C.R. (2011). Research Methodology: Methods and Techniques. New Age International, New Delhi. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Kumar, K., Boesso, G., Favotto, F., & Menini, A. (2012). Strategic orientation, innovation patterns, and performances of SMEs and large companies. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 19(1), 132–145. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Li, Y., Zhao, Y., Tan, J., & Liu, Y. (2008). Moderating effects of entrepreneurial orientation on market orientation–performance linkage: Evidence from Chinese small firms. Journal of Small Business Management, 46(1), 113–133. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Manu, F. A., & Sriram, V. (1996). Innovation, marketing strategy, environment, and performance. Journal of Business Research, 35(1), 79–91. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. McKee, D. O., Varadarajan, P. R., & Pride, W. M. (1989). Strategic adaptability and firm performance: A market-contingent perspective. Journal of Marketing, 53(3), 21–35. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224298905300305 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. Miles, R. E., & Snow, C. C. (1978). Organizational strategy, structure, and process. McGraw-Hill. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. Morgan, R. E., & Strong, C. A. (1997). Market orientation and dimensions of strategic orientation. European Journal of Marketing, 31(11/12), 1051–1073. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

32. Narver, J. C., & Slater, S. F. (1990). The effect of a market orientation on business profitability. Journal of Marketing, 54(4), 20–35. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

33. Noble, C. H., Sinha, R. K., & Kumar, A. (2002). Market orientation and alternative strategic orientations: A longitudinal assessment of performance implications. Journal of Marketing, 66(4), 25–39. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

34. Pearson, G. J. (1993). Business orientation: Cliché or substance? Journal of Marketing Management, 9(3), 233–243. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

35. Polit, D.F. and Beck, C.T. (2009) International Differences in Nursing Research, 2005-2006. Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 41, 44-53. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

36. Porter, M. E. (1990). The competitive advantage of nations. Free Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

37. Román-Cervantes, C., García-Pérez, A. M., González-Dávila, E., & Yanes-Estévez, V. (2018). Strategic behaviour of agribusiness cooperatives in the Canary Islands and its adaptive cycle. Paper presented at the International Co-operative Alliance Research Conference, Wageningen, The Netherlands. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

38. Salavou, H. (2005). Do customer and technology orientations influence product innovativeness in SMEs? Evidence from Greece. Journal of Marketing Management, 21(3–4), 307–338. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

39. Saunders, M., Lewis, P. & Thornhill, A. (2009). Research Methods for Business Students. Pearson, New York. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

40. Veliyath, R. & Shortell, S. M. (1993). Strategic Orientation, Strategic Planning System Characteristics and Performance. Journal of Management Studies, 30 (3), pp. 359-381. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

41. Zahra, S. A., & Pearce, J. A. (1990). Research evidence on the Miles–Snow typology. Journal of Management, 16(4), 751–768. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• The Indirect Effect of Liquidity and Activity on Company Value with Profitability as an Intervening Variable
• Effect of Financial Skills, Knowledge, and Attitude on The Financial Behaviour of Clergy
• A Decade of Review: Trends in Budget Execution and Financial Performance of Development Projects in Tanzania (2014/15-2023/24)
• The Influence of Pre-Project Planning on the Budget Absorption Rate of Public Funded Infrastructure Projects in Kenya a Comparative Case Study of Narok, Migori, and Kisii County Government Projects
• Assessment of Factors Influencing Digital Transformation in Hotels’ Facility Management in Abuja Metropolis, Nigeria