See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/348805041

Adaptive Capability, Social Media Agility, Ambidextrous Marketing Capability,

and Business Survival: A Mediation Analysis

Article · January 2021

DOI: 10.33844/mbr.2021.60328

CITATIONS READS

0 203

1 author:

Abiodun Babatunde Onamusi

Lead City University
14 PUBLICATIONS   14 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Strategic Management View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Abiodun Babatunde Onamusi on 27 January 2021.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Marketing and Branding Research 8(2021) 31-47

Marketing and Branding Research

WWW.CIKD.CA

Adaptive Capability, Social Media Agility,

Ambidextrous Marketing Capability, and
Business Survival: A Mediation Analysis

Onamusi Abiodun Babatunde

Department of Management and Accounting, Lead City University, Ibadan, Oyo State, Nigeria

ABSTRACT
Keywords: This study assessed the effect of adaptive capability and social media agility on survival firms
Adaptive capability Social in multiple industries in five countries. Furthermore, it established the mediating effect of
media agility, Ambidextrous ambidextrous marketing capability on the interaction between adaptive capability, social
marketing capability, Business media agility, and firm survival, and examined the interaction between social media agility
survival and adaptive capability. The study adopted a survey design and a sample of 416 firms in
Nigeria, Canada, the United States, Australia, and the United Kingdom, and conducted the
Received regression analysis to test the hypotheses formulated therein. The results showed that adaptive
28 December 2020 capability and social media agility had a positive and significant effect on business survival.
Received in revised form Further analysis showed that when ambidextrous marketing capability was incorporated into
01 January 2021 the two models respectively and forming multiple regression analysis, the coefficient of
Accepted
ambidextrous marketing capability had a significant effect on business survival; however, the
coefficient of adaptive capability and social media agility became insignificant suggesting that
02 January 2021
a full mediation effect was established. Lastly, social media agility had a positive and
significant effect on the firm’s adaptive capability. The findings suggest that adaptive
*Correspondence: capability and social media agility enhance firm survival through the mechanism of
[email protected]
ambidextrous marketing capability. The study recommends that firms strengthen their
adaptive capability infrastructure; develop a robust, agile social media interface, and commit
resources to enhance connectivity with the market, supplier, and customers (outside-in).
Likewise, enhance internal organizational knowledge, skill, and ability (inside-out) to offer
incremental and radical products to address changing market demand.

©CIKD Publishing

One new economic reality for many nations, firms, and governments worldwide is the coronavirus
pandemic's attendant consequences. The new reality is far from what humanity considered typical,
barely twelve months before the virus's first reported case in Wuhan, China, in December 2019.
Specifically, the world has seen massive economies lockdowns, economic recessions unfolding in
 32 Onamusi Abiodun Babatunde

multiple countries, production shutdowns, mobility restrictions, hundreds of thousand deaths,

millions of job losses, untold hardship for developing countries ravaged by wars, political unrest,
poverty, disease, and those that overly depend on crude oil for its national revenue and the
predictions of a famine of biblical proportions (World Health Organization (WHO), 2020). In this
period of grave uncertainty, it is imperative to begin to look for means through which humanity
and business can manage/cope with this current reality to survive. This is because the cost
attributable to this pandemic if the status quo remains and countries continue to be on systematic
lockdown, is highly likely to cause hunger and death to millions of humans and organizations
(Soludo, 2020; WHO, 2020).
In strategic management literature, scholars have considered issues ranging from different firm-
level capabilities to help firms achieve significant performance in the turbulent environment (Kaur,
Chahal, & Gupta, 2018; Mohammed, Norshahrizan, & Wan-Ahmad, 2017; Mu, Bao, Sekhon, Qi,
& Love, 2018; Mukhtar, Rosli, & Azizi, 2017; Onamusi, 2020). However, this disruption to the
global economy has not been considered in many empirical and theoretical studies. Given the issues
discussed so far, one firm-level capability that comes to mind is an adaptive capability derived from
the dynamic capability theory narratives. Since the pandemic did not offer much liberty (like many
external environmental factors), firms must develop the capability to adapt to this externality;
otherwise, they may not survive (an argument pushed forward by the external environment analyst).
To meet customers' expectations within the limit defined by this pandemic, a firm must possess
agile social media to enhance how it can quickly interface with its customers and operationalize its
adaptive capability strategy.
Despite the restrictive nature of the COVID-19 pandemic and its destructive potentials to
businesses globally, it equally offers immerse productive potential to local business firms who can
quickly take advantage of its present business opportunities. Hence, firms that possess
ambidextrous capability may survive turbulent times profitably. Conceptually having ambidextrous
capability offers businesses the rare opportunity to combine two extreme capabilities, exploitative
and explorative capabilities, and achieving a better chance of surviving turbulent times. Taking a
cue from Day (2020), an example of this dualism is explained naturally by the Ikogosi warm water
spring in Ekiti State in Nigeria, where two streams, Hot and Cold, come together to create a warm
spring enjoyed by tourist and form one of the wonders of the world. According to Day (2020), this
dualism describes how seemingly contrary forces are complementary and interrelated to produce
an unusual outcome. With the exploitative capability, a firm can extend its product options, such
as developing new products and creating a new market or creating new customers in an existing
market (tag Outside-in). On the other hand, the explorative capability allows a firm to discover and
explore new options such as diversifying into new business portfolios different from what it used
to (tag Inside-out). Hence, the alignment of these extreme capabilities creates an organization that,
via outside-in, asks and collects information from the market-agents and, via its in-side out
capability, can deliver on the value that consistently meets changing market demand (Day, 2020).
Existing empirical studies (Mu et al., 2018) have independently considered ambidextrous
capability in marketing capability; the studies have helped explain how the firm can adopt these
capabilities as a competitive strategy. Moreover, explaining the boundary conditions within which
marketing capability can enhance the achievement of significant performance. Also, Mehrabi,
Coviello, and Ranaweera (2019) substantiated the relevant role of entrepreneurial orientation in
 Marketing and Branding Research 8(2021) 33

enhancing the performance effect of ambidextrous capability in marketing. Ho, Osiyevskyy,

Agarwal, and Reza (2020) considered the moderating role of absorptive capability on the
interaction between ambidextrous marketing capability and sale growth. In a merely different
direction, Frau, Moi, and Cabiddu (2020) addressed the limitation of earlier studies (Barney, 2014;
Chong, Bian, & Zhang, 2016; Conduit, Matanda, & Mavondo, 2014; Kozlenkova, Samaha, &
Palmatier, 2014) by undertaking a qualitative longitudinal study to provide an in-depth analytical
framework to position the distinctive characteristics of the ambidextrous marketing capability.
However, since these studies (Barney, 2014; Chong et al., 2016; Conduit et al., 2014; Frau, Moi,
& Cabiddu, 2020; Ho et al., 2020; Kozlenkova et al., 2014; Mehrabi et al., 2019; Mu et al., 2018)
did not consider these capabilities within an adaptive capability and social media agility perspective
for surviving the COVID-19 pandemic, it creates a need in the literature to be explored.
Furthermore, the gap limits our empirical understanding of the relevance of ambidextrous
marketing capability for firms trying to use its adaptive capability and social media agility to
achieve their survival chances.
The present study examines the interaction between adaptive capability and business survival;
also, it evaluates the mediating effect of ambidextrous marketing capability on the interaction
between adaptive capability and business survival. Also, the functional relationship between social
media agility and business survival is evaluated. Lastly, the study establishes the mediating effect
of ambidextrous marketing capability on the link between social media agility and business
survival.

Literature Review
Theoretical Framework and Hypotheses Development
This study draws on the Dynamic Capability Theory (DCT) to provide a theoretical explanation to
substantiate the interactions between adaptive capability, social media agility, ambidextrous marketing
capability, and firm survival. Been an outside-in and inside-out perspective, the dynamic capability
theory creates the mechanism through which a firm can achieve superior performance under changing
and uncertain environments (Kaur & Mehta, 2017; Laaksonen & Peltoniemi, 2016; Mu, 2017).
According to dynamic capability scholars (Teece, 2014a; Teece, Pisano, & Shuen, 1997; Wu &
Vahlne, 2020), possessing the knowledge, skill, and ability to adapt, absorb and innovate critical
internal and external competences, and constantly reconfigure these competencies to accommodate
environmental changes is the critical success factor for achieving business continuity and superior
performance in a highly dynamic environment. Besides, at the heart of the dynamic capability theory
is the adaptive capability mechanism (Kaur & Mehta, 2017), which emphasizes that firms desirous of
sustaining their going-concern status within a turbulent environment must learn to adjust to the changes
prevailing in the environment quickly. Additionally, firms must learn to absorb (Hou & Chien, 2010;
Monferrer, Blesa, & Ripollés, 2015) critical information from the changing environment through
outside-in capability and the inside-out capability because they both aid the firm's ability to offer
innovative products that align with the changing environment. It is also noteworthy to stress that social
media agility also falls within the scope of dynamic capability because agility, as used here, connotes a
firm with strategic foresight, insight, information telecommunication infrastructure, internal and
external response competencies (Arokodare, Asikhia, & Makinde, 2019) regarding its social media
engagement within and outside the organization.
This study argues that considering adaptive capability and social media agility can be
consistently reconfigured to meet environmental dynamics; hence, firms that deploy these
 34 Onamusi Abiodun Babatunde

competencies would achieve superior performance. The fit-as-mediator perspective suggests that
when the indirect effect between two variables is explained by a third, then a mediation effect is
achieved. Therefore, this study proposes that: firms who can deploy the adaptive capability and
social media agility will experience a significant effect on firm survival; and that the deployment
of social media agility will enhance the firm's adaptive capability because of how it can be a critical
source of market and customer feedback which boosts the firm's capacity to adapt. Lastly, the study
proposes that the individual interaction between adaptive capability and social media agility on
business survival would be mediated by ambidextrous marketing capability.

Empirical Review
Adaptive Capability and Firm survival
The need to continue to operate successfully is usual one objective many organizations seek to
achieve during significant macro-environmental challenges. Given the level of unplanned and
unanticipated changes and their attendant consequences for firm operations, the dynamic capability
theory's proponent stressed the need for a firm to possess an adaptive capability. The implication
of possessing such capability is that it offers the organization the ability to stabilize its operation to
soothe the macro-environment changes while strategically thinking of other options to consider.
Oktemgil and Greenley (1997) stressed that adaptability is equally crucial as firms with high
adaptive capability enjoy better performance outcomes than slow adapters, which creates the basis
for market leadership, challengers, and followers. Although this sound conceptually and
theoretically appropriates, it is essential to find other empirical positions to substantiate the effect
adaptive capability has for business continuity.
Accordingly, scholars have submitted that an adaptive capability is a significant prerequisite for
firm survival (Chryssochoidis, Dousios, & Tzokas, 2016; Kelly, Kelliher, Power, & Lynch, 2020;
Zhu, Su, & Shou, 2017). On the factor that enhances adaptive capability, Eshima and Anderson
(2016) pointed out that growth in firm resources, to a large extend, exposes the organization to
changing market conditions, which consequently improves the firm's adaptability. Also, Kelly et
al. (2020) posited that firms who possess proactive operational capability are highly likely to
develop an adaptive capability. The scholar further underscores the relevance of the adaptive
capability to gain continuous business profitability streams, which guarantees business continuity.
Kelly et al.'s (2020) implication is that the adaptive capability is a derivative of a strategic thinking
process that is deliberate about reconfiguring the existing firm-resource base, which by no means
occurs accidentally. Kelly's position corroborates the submission of prior studies such as Eshima
and Anderson (2016) and Kelliher, Kearney, and Harrington (2018). Through their study, Zhu, Su,
and Shou (2017) revealed that adaptive capability and supplier opportunism act as mediators
between social ties and firm survival. They stressed that "a firm's adaptive capability and the
suppression of supplier opportunism are essential for survival and success in emerging economies.
Chryssochoidis, Dousios, and Tzokas (2016) draw relevance for small firm adaptive capability
within small business firms. According to the scholars, via a moderated and mediated analysis, the
path linking small firm competitive strategy and performance is enhanced and explained through
small firm adaptive capability. On which underlining mechanism explains how the high-
performance work system (HPWS) enhances organizational outcomes, Wei and Lau (2010)
investigated the Chinese firms' sample. Through its finding, the study suggested that the interaction
 Marketing and Branding Research 8(2021) 35

between HPWS and firm performance is partially explained within the mechanism of the adaptive
capability. Given the relevance of adaptive capability discussed so far, the study proposed that
adaptive capability deployment would significantly enhance firm survival in a turbulent
environment.

Social Media Agility and Firm Survival

In the event of unprecedented market dynamics, where customers exhibit erratic behavior and
competition becomes aggressive, it becomes critical for firms to gather customer-intelligence that
would enhance their ability to respond to the market need more effectively (Chuang, 2020;
Hardwick & Anderson, 2019; Koponen, Julkunen, & Asai, 2019; Mpandare & Li, 2020; Murphy
& Sashi, 2018; Quach, Thaichon, Lee, Weaven, & Palmatier, 2020). Otherwise, failure to be
responsive to this competitive market dynamics suggests a firm that is not interested in being
competitive nor wanting to survive the harsh business environment. As suggested by scholars, one
way to quickly reach out to the customer is by adopting social media platforms (Bullini-
Orlandi, Zardini, & Rossignoli, 2020; Christodoulides, Michaelidou, & Siamagka, 2019; Nunan,
Sibai, Schivinski, & Christodoulides, 2018; Ogilvie, Agnihotri, Rapp, & Trainor, 2018). As a
customer-related tool, social media can remotely enable customers to connect with the firm to
exchange information and obtain feedback that will improve the firm in terms of goods and services
on offer (Harrigan, Miles, Fang, & Roy, 2020; Wang, Zhang, Tse, & Chan, 2020). This helps foster
customer relations, improving customer equity (Carr, Drennan, & Andrews, 2016), customer trust,
and brand attachment (Kim, Kim, & Hwang, 2020; Li, Teng, & Chen, 2020). While this narrative
may be correct, employing social media and not being agile in customer feedback may not
guarantee the positive ripple effect as identified earlier. This is because a lack of agile social media
suggests that a firm that cannot identify changing market demands attributable to erratic customer
feedback quickly and proactively takes advantage of the opportunities it provides and responds
efficiently by providing a market offering that meets customer feedback (Chuang, 2020). Besides,
Nijssen and Ordanini (2020) stressed that using social media to create a new product for customers
is not an isolated activity because its success is preconditioned on how such external feedbacks are
effectively integrated within existing firm-level capabilities.
Extant literature has found relevance for social media agility in enhancing business performance.
For example, Martín-Rojas et al. (2020) used a sample of firms in the technology sector submitted
that social media enhance increase connectivity with relevant market agents and leverage
knowledge gained over time to improve organizational performance. On how social media agility
can aid internal organizational process and innovation performance, Ali, Bahadur, Wang, Luqman,
and Khan (2020), pointed out that through social media engagement at work, a firm's absorptive
capacity is influenced greatly to acquire, segregate and assimilate external knowledge. The ripple
effect allows for efficient transformation and utilization of such knowledge acquired in team
innovation performance. Similarly, using a sample of Hotels, Garrido-Moreno, García-Morales,
King, and Lockett (2020) did not find a first-order effect on social media agility interaction and
performance. Instead, their findings established a mediating relationship, which suggests that the
interaction between customer engagement capabilities and performance was explained through
social media interphase.
Several studies have found relevance for agility in different topical areas of management, such
as in supply chain management, the internet of things, customer engagement, and technology-
driven operational management (Akhtar, Khan, Tarba, & Jayawickrama, 2018; Chuang, 2020;
 36 Onamusi Abiodun Babatunde

Swafford, Ghosh, & Murthy, 2008; Tan, Tan, Wang, & Sedera, 2017) and its usage in this study
followed it inter-disciplinary relevance of the concept of agility to firm success. Given this
discussion, this study proposes that social media agility will explain significant firm survival
variations.
Also, this study argues that agile social media can strengthen an organization's adaptive
tendencies. This is because, during changing market demands attributable to erratic customer
behavior, social media agility can help firms to understand the changing market trends quickly and
subsequently collect market feedback, which firms can use to cope in the short run with the market
dynamics. The relevance of social media agility in customer co-creation, knowledge acquisition,
supply-chain management, and customer equity suggests that it can boost a firm's ability to adapt
to changing market demands. On this narrative's strength, this study proposes that the deployment
of social media agility will significantly enhance a firm's adaptive capability.

The Mediating Effect of Ambidextrous Marketing Capability

Resonating the RBV narratives, a firm's ability to succeed lies in its capability to concentrate on
allocating its resources to offer a unique value proposition (Grant, 1996); one such capability is
marketing competencies. Onamusi (2020) posited that MC is a multidimensional concept, which
incorporates firm-level resources (Knowledge, Skill, and Ability). It integrates cross-functional
activities within the organization to contend with market demands/trends through outside-in
capabilities and take advantage of the market opportunities through inside-out capabilities to create
a unique value proposition that can improve the organizational capacity to be a competitive and
profitable going concern. The desire to comprehend the principles and the ripple effects of
marketing capability led to several empirical studies in marketing strategy (Day, 2014; Kumar,
2015; Mu et al., 2018; Musarra & Morgan, 2020; Sun et al., 2019). Mu et al. (2018), conceptualized
the Outside-in marketing capability as a marketing orientation that seeks to solve marketing
problems by seeking information from the market (outside of the organization) on what it requires,
how it requires it, and when to deliver. Outside-in marketing capability is reactive because of the
firm responses to what the market dictates. Capabilities such as market-sensing, partner-linking,
market communication, pricing, selling, market planning, and implementation are the sub-
dimensions of Outside-in marketing capability (Day, 2011; Mu et al., 2018).
On the other hand, according to Day (2011), the Inside-out capability allows a firm to use its
inherent abilities and subsequently ask what the market can do. More like offering a product the
market never requested and hoping it would buy when offered to it. This was a traditional business
perspective. However, as soon as the perspective of the consumer being 'King' came up, it became
imperative for a firm to adjust to consumer demand, considering that the inside-out capabilities
restrict their ability to adapt to profoundly changing market conditions (Day, 2011; Day &
Moorman, 2010; Kaur et al., 2018). A more recent discussion in marketing studies is the alignment
of the Outside-in and the inside-out to suggest ambidextrous capability termed as a blended
marketing strategy (Frau, Moi, & Cabiddu, 2020), which helps in creating a better value proposition
given the synergy of two extreme capabilities (Day, 2020).
Although Ho and Lu 2015) found that market-oriented firms who engage in high-level
ambidextrous capability in new product development achieved better performance; however, firms
must be cautioned in the pursuance of ambidextrous marketing capability. This is because, in a
 Marketing and Branding Research 8(2021) 37

survey of Singapore, firms who pursued a high-level blended capability at once ended up achieving
lower performance compared to competing firms who did not. This submission emphasizes the
complexity and challenges of balancing the outside-in and inside-out marketing capability within
the same organizational framework. Ho and Lo (p. 2015) explained that because of the number of
resources required, if the organization decided to pursue both strategies concurrently, it may stress
both the firm's resources and management focus, weakening the firm's effectiveness and efficiency
in achieving significant market performance.
Further analysis by Ho and Lu (2015) revealed that outside-in marketing capability
(exploitation) contribute strongly, positively and significantly to firm's market performance,
however, the scholars found contrary result for inside-out marketing capability because the
capability had no significant effect on firm market performance. This insignificant effect finding is
unexpectedly giving the quantum of prior empirical studies that have underscored the relevance of
inside-out capability to enhancing firm competitiveness in a turbulent market environment (Mu,
2015; Ho, Osiyevskyy, Agarwal, & Reza, 2020).
Regarding the mediating effect of ambidextrous capability on the interaction between firm-level
capabilities and firm performance. Mu (2015) posited that exploitation and exploration respectively
mediated the association between marketing capability and NPD performance and that marketing
capability helps the firm's adaptive capability performance. Ho et al.'s (2020) submission provided
reasons to believe that market ambidexterity indirectly affects sale growth. Further analysis
suggested that firms who can achieve blended marketing capability enjoy better market
performance than those who engage only in a set of strategy (only exploitative strategy)
Mu et al. (2018), in mediation analysis, shows that outside-in marketing capability is a critical
source of superior performance as it served as the mechanism through which outside-in marketing
capability influence firm performance. Mu et al. (2018) stated that outside-in marketing capability
enhances the development of internal response marketing capability and flexible allocation of
resources to contend with erratic market demands. This interaction seems to be a precondition to
achieving high customer value, which influences superior market performance. Providing support
for Mu et al.'s (2018) submission, Mehrabi, Coviello, and Ranaweera (2019) underscored the
relevance of combined ambidexterity (as against balanced) in enhancing market performance.
However, further analysis revealed that imbalance ambidexterity in marketing capability negatively
affects market performance; an outcome shared by Wei et al. (2014) but rejected by other scholars
who, through their study, argue that such imbalance, does not always create a negative outcome
(Josephson et al., 2016; Junni et al., 2013).
Although the significance of the earlier scholars' submission helped in understanding the
performance effect of ambidextrous marketing capability nevertheless, given the contextual
difference between these prior studies and the present study, the path linking adaptive capability,
social media agility, and firm survival remained unexplained. The conceptual logic here is that
firms that possess adaptive capability should be able to withstand turbulent environmental factors,
and the interaction can be explained through the deployment of ambidextrous marketing capability.
Because the ambidextrous marketing capability helps a firm to consistently gather data from the
market characterized by varying consumer demands and its inside-out capability, it offers products
that satisfy changing market demand. Therefore, the study hypothesizes that: ambidextrous
marketing capability possesses a significant moderating effect on the interaction between adaptive
capability and business survival.
 38 Onamusi Abiodun Babatunde

This study also argues that the boundary condition through with social media agility influences
firm survival can be explained through ambidextrous marketing capability. In other words, the
deployment of the outside-in and inside-out marketing capability will explain and enhance how
social media agility enhances business survival. This is because social media agility goes beyond
being a platform for voluntary customer feedback to become the marketplace. As such, how agile
a firm's social media is a function of how knowledgeable the organization is about what the market
needs (this is achieved through outside-in capability) and on how well the organization can muster
internal competency (this is achieved through inside-out capability) to create a market offering with
a unique value proposition. Based on this premise, the study hypothesizes that ambidextrous
marketing capability has a significant indirect effect on the interaction between social media agility
and business survival.

Figure 1. Conceptual model

The conceptual model in Figure 1 provides a pictorial explanation for the research questions asked
and the concomitant hypotheses developed in this study. The research questions include:

1. What is the effect of adaptive capability on business survival?

2. How does ambidextrous marketing capability mediate the interaction between adaptive
capability and business survival?
3. What is the effect of social media agility on business survival?
4. What is the mediating effect of ambidextrous marketing capability on the relationship
between social media agility and business survival?
5. How does social media agility influence adaptive capability?

Following the research questions, the hypotheses tested are as follows:

H1: Adaptive capability has a significant influence on business survival.
H2: Ambidextrous marketing capability significantly mediates the interaction between adaptive
capability and business survival.
H3: Social media agility has a significant effect on business survival.
H4: Ambidextrous marketing capability significantly mediates the relationship between social
media agility and business survival.
H5: Social media agility significantly influences the firm’s adaptive capability.
 Marketing and Branding Research 8(2021) 39

Methods
The Study Context, Sampling, and Data collection
This study adopted a quantitative method using the cross-sectional survey research design and this
helps the collection of data at a point in time to substantiate the interaction between adaptive
capability, social media agility, ambidextrous capability, and business survival.
This study's population comprises an infinite number of organizations in Nigeria, Canada, the
United Kingdom, the United States, and Australia. The organizations include manufacturing
companies in FMCGs, packaging, pharmaceutical and agro-allied, quick service restaurant,
insurance, banking, logistics, Online/Offline stores, telecommunication, small and medium
enterprises, and the oil and gas companies. Cochran (1963) provided an optimum sample size in an
infinite population of the study, 384. 10% of this sample size (38) was calculated and added to the
scientifically determine sample size (384 + 38= 422) to ensure that response obtained did not fall
below the optimum sample size. Four hundred twenty-two companies took part in this study;
however, respondents who indicated a weak level of confidence in the responses provided in this
study were excluded. In all, 398, which represented a 94.3% response rate was achieved.
The research instrument for data collection was a structured questionnaire considered relevant
in collecting feedback based on the respondents' opinion, and it is suitable for collecting data within
a short time on current issues. The adapted questionnaire had thirty-two (32) items. Adaptive
capability had seven (7) items, social media agility had six (6) items, ambidextrous marketing
capability had six (6) items for Outside-in capability and seven (7) items for Inside-out capability
making a total of thirteen (13) items, and business survival had six (6) items. The adapted
questionnaire (see measurement of variables) was a standardized scale that has been used by authors
on the subject matter of this research in another research context. The response options provided in
this study's questionnaire followed the Likert-type scale which ranges from strongly disagree to
strongly agree. With the aid of the Google form and electronic mail system, the questionnaire's
administration and retrieval took eight weeks of consistent reminders to the respondents. The
Google form application offered immense analytical opportunity given how the filled
questionnaires were quickly transformed to excel spreadsheet data and subsequently into SPSS data
set where the analysis was conducted.

Measurement of Variables
Drawing from this study's research framework, the following independent (adaptive capability and
social media agility), mediating (ambidextrous marketing capability), and dependent (business
survival) variables were discussed, taking into consideration their measurement in extant literature. This
study in concomitant with previous scholars (Mu et al., 2018) employed the use of a multi-item
scale to measure each construct in this study. However, the established multi-item scale was
adapted from prior studies to suit the context of this study.
The adaptive capability reflects how flexible a firm is in acclimatizing to significant changing
market demands, comes from scholars such as Lu, Zhou, Bruton, and Li (2010) and Zhu, Su, and
Shou, (2017). Social media agility was also measured based on Chuang's (2020) conceptualization,
which incorporated internal and external social media agility dimensions. Ambidextrous marketing
capability involved multidimensional tasks and was measure by incorporating exploitative and
exploratory marketing activities (Mu, 2015; Mu et al., 2018). Business survival refers to the
organization's ability to consistently achieve significant performance on a going-concern basis. Firm
survival was measured by integrating financial and non-financial dimensions on a multi-item scale
 40 Onamusi Abiodun Babatunde

(Anning-Dorson, 2018; Najafi-Tavani et al., 2018). Overall, this study's variables identified were
measured in concomitant with the measures discussed above, and they were collected through the use
of questionnaires as achieved by earlier authors.

Data Analysis and Model Specification

The study employed multiple regression analysis to establish the indirect effect of ambidextrous
marketing capability on the individual effect of adaptive capability and social media agility on business
survival.
Y = f(X)
Y = Dependent variable: Business Survival (BS)
X = Independent variables: Adaptive capability (AC) and Social media agility (SMA)
Z = Mediating variable: Ambidextrous marketing capability (AMC)

This study followed Baron and Kenny's (1986) three steps identified below.
One: Adaptive capability, ambidextrous marketing capability, and business survival:
BS = βo + β1ACi + μi…………………………………Step 1
AC= βo+ β1AMCi + μi……………………………….Step 2
BS = βo + β1ACi + β2AMCi + μi………………...Step 3

Two: Social media agility, ambidextrous marketing capability, and business survival:
BS = βo + β1SMAi + μi…………………………………Step 1
SMA= βo+ β1AMCi + μi………………………………Step 2
BS = βo + β1SMAi + β2AMCi + μi………………..Step 3

To analyze the effect of social media agility on adaptive capability:

Y = f(X)
Y = Dependent variable: Adaptive capability (AC)
X = Independent variables: Social media agility (SMA)
AC = βo + β1SMAi + μi………………………………… Equation

Result
Validity and Reliability Test
To ensure that the instrument is valid and reliable, factor analysis and internal consistency analysis
was conducted. The process leading to validity suggests that Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin which measures
the suitability of the study’s data and the sampling adequacy for each variable in the model and
Bartlett test of sphericity statistics must be within acceptable thresholds. In this study, the Kaiser-
Meyer-Olkin statistic ranges between .79 and .81 for variables measured, and since the values were
greater than .70 threshold and the Bartlett test probability value was less than .05 for all the
variables, suggests that the data is suitable for factor analysis. Factor loadings of items measuring
a variable are considered key to determining the Average Variance Explained (AVE) and the
Composite Reliability (CR). Through the varimax extraction method, factor loadings extracted for
each item measuring the study’s variables were above the .70 threshold. In all, Table 1 presents a
summary of the validity and reliability statistics of the study variables. The results showed that the
 Marketing and Branding Research 8(2021) 41

adaptive capability, social media agility, ambidextrous marketing capability, and business survival
AVE, CR, and Cronbach’s Alpha (CA) values above the threshold of .5, .7, and .7 respectively
which suggest that the instrument is valid and reliable for this study.
Table 1
Validity and Reliability Test for Measurement Items
Latent Variables CA CR AVE
Adaptive capability .87 .88 .68
Social media agility .96 .95 .76
Ambidextrous marketing capability .94 .92 .59
Business survival .93 .91 .65

Table 2 presents the descriptive statistics and the correlation analysis for all the variables in this
study. For the descriptive statistics, the mean values, which range from 4.41 to 4.90, showed that,
on average, respondents agreed to the items measuring adaptive capability, social media agility,
ambidextrous marketing capability, and firm survival. The resulting standard deviation equally
shows that, on average, respondents' opinions were not far apart. The Pearson Product Moment
Correlation coefficient shows a linear relationship between predictor variables and the outcome
variable in this study.
Table 2
Mean, Standard Deviation and Correlation for all Variables
Adaptive Social media agility Ambidextrous Firm survival
Variable Name SD
capability (r) marketing capability (r)
(r) (r)
Adaptive capability 4.90 .77 1 .57**(.001) .73**(.001) .52**(.001)
Social media agility 4.70 1.09 1 .65(.26) .50**(.001)
Ambidextrous
4.83 .76 1 .66*(.001)
marketing capability
Firm survival 4.41 1.02 1
Note: Correlation is significant at the .01 level (2-tailed).

Hypotheses Testing
Table 3 presents the model summary of regression analysis for the mediating effect of ambidextrous
capability in marketing on the respective functional relationship between adaptive capability and
social media agility on business survival, and the effect of social media agility on adaptive
capability. In the first step (Model 1), the effect of adaptive capability on business survival was
examined. In the Second step (Model 2), the effect of ambidextrous capability on adaptive capability
was examined, and in the third step (Model 3), the relative effect of adaptive capability and
ambidextrous capability on business survival was examined. Also, model 4 evaluated how social media
agility influenced business survival. Model 5 assessed the influence of ambidextrous capability on
social media agility. Model 6 determined the relative effect of social media agility and ambidextrous
capability on business survival and discussed in three paragraphs below. Lastly, in model 7, the effect
of social media agility on adaptive capability was analyzed.
In the first step (Model 1 and 4), a simple regression analysis was conducted, and the R2 was used
as the determinant of the effective relationship. From the analysis, in model 1, it was discovered that
adaptive capability accounted for 27.3% of the variance recorded in business survival (R2 = .27,
F(1,215) = 43.10, p = .001), while the remaining 72.7% is explained by extraneous variables not
considered in this study. The βeta coefficient of determination showed that a unit change in adaptive
capability increased business survival by .69, and the corresponding t-value and probability values
showed the influence was statistically significant (β = .69, t = 6.56, p = .001). Similarly, in model 4, it
was discovered that social media agility explained 25.2% of the variance recorded in business survival
 42 Onamusi Abiodun Babatunde

(R2 = .25, F(1,215) = 38.67, p = .001), while the remaining 74.8% is explained by other variables not
included in this study. The βeta coefficient of determination showed that a unit change in social media
agility increased business survival by .46, and the corresponding t-value and probability values showed
the influence was statistically significant (β = .46, t = 6.21, p = .001). The first precondition to conduct
a mediation analysis suggested that the initial functional relationship between a predictor variable and
an outcome variable must present a significant effect, this study fulfilled this first precondition. In the
second step (Model 2 and 5), a simple regression analysis was conducted. From the analysis, it was
discovered that in model 2, ambidextrous capability accounted for 53.9% of the changes recorded in
adaptive capability (R2 = .53, F(1,216)= 135.58, p = .001), while the remaining 46.1% is explained by
extraneous variables not considered in this study. The βeta coefficient of determination showed that a
unit change in ambidextrous capability resulted in a .74 increase in adaptive capability, and the
corresponding t-test and probability values showed the influence was statistically significant (β = .74, t
= 11.64, p =.00). Also, model 5 shows that ambidextrous capability accounted for 42.4% of the changes
recorded in social media agility (R2 = .42, F(1,216) = 85.47, p = .001), while the remaining 57.6% was
explained by extraneous variables not considered in this study. The βeta coefficient of determination
showed that a unit change in ambidextrous capability resulted in a .93 increase in social media agility,
and the corresponding t-value and probability values showed the influence was statistically significant
(β = .93, t = 9.24, p = .001). The second precondition in the process of conducting a mediation analysis
suggests that ambidextrous capability must have a statistically significant effect on adaptive capability
and social media agility, respectively. This study fulfilled this second precondition.
In the third step (Model 3 and 6), multiple regression analysis was conducted, and the Adjusted R2
was employed as the determinant of the effect relationship given the presence of multiple predictor
variables. Model 3 result revealed that adaptive capability and ambidextrous capability explained
43.6% variation experienced in business survival (Adj. R2 = .43, F(2,214) = 45.76, p = .001), while
the remaining 56.4% was explained by variables not included in the regression model. The βeta
coefficient of determination showed that a unit change in adaptive capability increased business
survival by .07, and the corresponding t-value and probability values showed the influence was
insignificant (β = .07, t = .54, p = .58). However, the relative effect of ambidextrous capability shows
that based on the βeta coefficient of determination, a unit change increased business survival by .83,
and the corresponding t-value and probability values showed the influence was significant (β =.83, t =
5.95, p = .001).
Further analysis in Model 6 revealed that social media agility and ambidextrous capability explained
44.1% variation experienced in business survival (Adj. R2 = .44, F(2,214) = 46.79, p = .001), while the
remaining 55.9% was explained by variables not included in the regression model. The βeta coefficient
of determination shows that a unit change in social media agility increased business survival by.10, and
the corresponding t-value and probability values showed the effect was insignificant (β = .10, t = 1.19,
p = .23). However, the relative effect of ambidextrous capability based on the βeta coefficient of
determination showed that a unit change increased business survival by .79, and the corresponding t-
value and probability values showed the effect was statistically significant (β =.79, t = 6.43, p = .001).
The third mediation precondition, according to Baron and Kenny (1986), suggested that where a
new predictor variable (ambidextrous capability) is introduced into the regression in model 1 and 3
changing it into a multiple regression model, the initial significant β coefficient effect in model 1 and 3
becomes insignificant or disappears. If this assumption holds, then a full mediation (indirect effect)
 Marketing and Branding Research 8(2021) 43

effect is achieved. Hence, from model 1 and model 6, the study achieved the three preconditions for a
mediate analysis. Thus, it establishes that ambidextrous capability fully mediates the interaction
between adaptive and business survival. On the one hand, likewise, ambidextrous capability fully
mediates the interaction between social media agility and business survival. In both cases, the indirect
effect is positive and statistically significant.
Lastly, model 7 established that social media agility explained 33.2% variation in adaptive capability
2
(R = .33, F(1,216)= 57.77, p = .001), while the remaining 66.8% was explained by extraneous
variables not included in the regression model of this study. The βeta coefficient of determination
showed that a unit change in social media agility increased adaptive capability by .40, and the
corresponding t-value and probability values showed the effect was positive and significant (β = .40, t
= 7.60, p = .001).
Table 3
Summary of Regression Analysis for the Mediating Effect of Ambidextrous Capability in Marketing on the Respective
Functional Relationship Between Adaptive Capability1,2,3 and Social Media Agility4,5,6 on Business Survival, and the
Effect of Social Media Agility on Adaptive Capability7
Model 1-3, 4-6, 7 β t p R R2 Adj. R2 F(df) ANOVA

1
(Constant) 1.03 1.98 .05 .52a .27 .26 43.10 (1,215) .001
Adaptive capability 0.69 6.56 .00
2
(Constant) 1.31 4.19 .001 .73a .53 .53 135.58 (1,216) .001
Ambidextrous capability 0.74 11.64 .001
3
(Constant) 0.005 0.01 .99 .66a .44 .43 45.76 (2,214) .001c
Adaptive capability 0.07 0.54 .58
Ambidextrous capability 0.83 5.95 .001
4
(Constant) 2.21 6.11 .001 .50a .25 .24 38.67 (1,215) .001
Social media agility 0.46 6.21 .001
5
(Constant) 0.19 0.38 .001 .65a .42 .41 85.47 (1,216) .001
Ambidextrous capability 0.93 9.24 .001
6
(Constant) 0.08 0.18 .85 .67a .45 .44 46.79 (2,214) .001c
Social media agility 0.10 1.19 .23
Ambidextrous capability 0.79 6.43 .001
7
(Constant) 2.98 11.54 .001 .57a .33 .32 57.77 (1,216) .001c
Social media agility 0.40 7.60 .00
a
Predictors: (Constant)1, Adaptive capability, bPredictors: (Constant)2, Ambidextrous capability, cPredictors: (Constant)3, Adaptive capability, Ambidextrous capability,
d
Predictors: (Constant)4, Social media agility, ePredictors: (Constant)5, Ambidextrous capability, fPredictors: (Constant)6, Social media agility, Ambidextrous capability;
g
Predictor: (Constant)7, Social media agility; hDependent Variables: Business survival, Adaptive capability; In Model 2 & 5 Adaptive capability and Social media agility are
the respective dependent variables in line with Baron and Kenny (1986).

Discussion, Conclusion, Recommendation, and Suggestion for Further Studies

The study assessed the individual effect of adaptive capability and social media agility on business
survival. Moreover, the study examined the mediating effect of ambidextrous marketing capability on
the individual effect of adaptive capability and social media agility on business survival. Lastly, this
study investigated how social media agility affects a firm's adaptive capability. The findings align with
the hypotheses formulated in this study hence providing important implications for theory and practice.
The result of the first hypotheses (1 and 3) suggested that individually, adaptive capability and social
media agility positively and significantly affect business survival. These findings corroborate prior
empirical studies (Chryssochoidis et al., 2016; Kelly et al., 2020; Martín-Rojas et al., 2020; Mehrabi
et al., 2019; Zhu et al., 2017). The mediation hypothesis's result suggested that ambidextrous capability
mediates the individual effect of adaptive capability and social media agility on business survival,
respectively. By this result, the assumptions of the interactionist perspective of fit-as-mediator are
upheld.
The dynamic capability promotes the ideology that firms desirous of achieving superior performance
must develop and deploy unique internal and external competencies adaptable to a changing
 44 Onamusi Abiodun Babatunde

environment. All the predictor variables, adaptive capability, social media agility, and ambidextrous
marketing capability in this study are developed by firms and possess dynamism attributes that can
survive a dynamic environment. Also, by this study's results, the contingency theory of fit-as-mediator
is strengthened because the effect-relationship between two variables is explained by introducing a third
variable (ambidextrous marketing capability). This study strongly affirms this position with its results.
The contribution of this study to knowledge is in many ways. The study addressed the literature's
identified gap, hence providing the body of knowledge with evidence of the boundary mechanism
through which AC and SMA influence firm survival, how SMA enhanced AC, and how AMC mediates
AC's individual relationship SMA on firm survival, respectively. Management seeking to channel
resources to survive the post-COVID-19 pandemic will need to commit significant resources to reinvent
AC, SMA, AMC. Also, this study, through its findings, draws relevance for the dynamic capability
theory and consequently provided additional support for the significance of the framework through
which firms faced with the turbulent environment can achieve business continuity. The contingency
perspective explains the theoretical means through which a mediation effect can occur was tested in
this study, and the results corroborated the contingency perspective of fit-as-mediator. This study's
relevance in strategic management is equally noteworthy as it contributes to current literature in this
field, pushing forward the frontier of knowledge. Consequent to these findings, the study recommends
that firms should strengthen their adaptive capability infrastructure, develop a robust, agile social media
interface, and continue to commit resources that will enhance connectivity with the market, supplier,
and the customers (outside-in) as well as enhance internal organizational knowledge, skill, and ability
(inside-out) to offer incremental and radical products and services to address changing market demand.
Like many studies, this study has limitations that must be acknowledged to provide opportunities
for future studies. First of all, the study is a multiple industry analysis covering five countries, and
while this may enhance the generalization of its findings, nevertheless, countries in the Middle East,
Europe, Latin America, and many countries in Africa were not considered. This suggests that the
generalizing of its findings should be with caution. Hence, future studies may consider a different
context to see if the findings can be generalized. Furthermore, a comparative analysis of country
by country, given this study's objectives, may present an exciting area of research. The adoption of
a cross-sectional survey design equally suggests that the study cannot explain the causality in the
dependent variable attributable to the independent and mediating variable over a long period. Future
studies may consider a longitudinal study to explain causality with this study's variables over time.
Although the factors investigated in this study are context-specific, other factors can influence a
firm to survive. Hence, future studies may consider these other factors that can influence firm
survival. Despite these limitations, this study provides vital empirical, theoretical, and practical
implications for businesses regarding the deployment of ambidextrous marketing capability as the
mechanism through which adaptive capability and social media agility can respectively influence
firm survival.
 Marketing and Branding Research 8(2021) 45

References
Akhtar, P., Khan, Z., Tarba, S., & Jayawickrama, U. (2018). The Internet of Things, dynamic data and information processing
capabilities, and operational agility. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 136, 307–316.
Ali, A., Bahadur, W., Wang, N., Luqman, A., & Khan, A. N. (2020). Improving team innovation performance: Role of social
media and team knowledge management capabilities. Technology in Society, 61, 1–12.
Anning-Dorson, T. (2018). Customer involvement capability and service firm performance: The mediating role of
innovation. Journal of Business Research, 86(4), 269–280.
Arokodare, M. A., Asikhia, O. U., & Makinde, G. O. (2019). Strategic agility and firm performance: The moderating role of
organisational culture. Business Management Dynamics, 9(3), 01–12.
Barney, J. B. (2014). How marketing scholars might help address issues in resource-based theory. Journal of the Academy of
Marketing Science, 42(1), 24–26.
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator–mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual,
strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173–1182.
Bullini-Orlandi, L., Zardini, A., & Rossignoli, C. (2020). Organizational technological opportunism and social media: The
deployment of social media analytics to sense and respond to technological discontinuities. Journal of Business Research, 112,
385–395. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.10.070
Carr, A., Drennan, J., & Andrews, L. (2016). Measuring customer equity and managing the customer asset: An explanatory study
in the Australian hotels. Journal of Marketing Management, 32(17-18), 1670–
1700. https://doi.org/10.1080/0267257x.2016.1260043
Chong, W. K., Bian, D., & Zhang, N. (2016). E-marketing services and e-marketing performance: the roles of innovation,
knowledge complexity and environmental turbulence in influencing the relationship. Journal of Marketing Management, 32(1–
2), 149–178.
Christodoulides, G., Michaelidou, N., & Siamagka, N. (2019). Social media, content marketing and engagement strategies in
B2B. Industrial Marketing Management, 81, 87–88.
Chryssochoidis, G., Dousios, D., & Tzokas, N. (2016). Small firm adaptive capability, competitive strategy, and performance
outcomes: Competing mediation vs. moderation perspectives. Strategic Change, 25(4), 441–
466. https://doi.org/10.1002/jsc.2073
Chuang, S. (2020). Co-creating social media agility to build strong customer-firm relationships. Industrial Marketing
Management, 84, 202–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2019.06.012
Cochran, W. G. (1963). Sampling techniques. 2nd edition. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.
Conduit, J., Matanda, M. J., & Mavondo, F. T. (2014). Balancing the act: the implications of jointly pursuing internal customer
orientation and external customer orientation. Journal of Marketing Management, 30(13–14), 1320–1352.
Day, G. S. (2011). Closing the marketing capabilities gap. Journal of Marketing, 75(4), 183–195.
Day, G. S. (2014). An outside-in approach to resource-based theories. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 42(1), 27–
28.
Day, G. (2020). The Yin and Yang of outside-in thinking. Industrial Marketing Management, 88, 84–
86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2020.04.025
Day, G. S., & Moorman, C. (2010). Strategy from the outside-in: Profiting from customer value. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Eshima, Y., & Anderson, B. S. (2016). Firm growth, adaptive capability, and entrepreneurial orientation. Strategic Management
Journal, 38(3), 770–779. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2532
Frau, M., Moi, L., & Cabiddu, F. (2020). Outside-in, inside-out, and blended marketing strategy approach: A longitudinal case
study. International Journal of Marketing Studies, 12(3), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.5539/ijms.v12n3p1
Garrido-Moreno, A., García-Morales, V., King, S., & Lockett, N. (2020). Social media use and value creation in the digital
landscape: A dynamic-capabilities perspective. Journal of Service Management, ahead-of-print (ahead-of-
print). https://doi.org/10.1108/josm-09-2018-0286
Grant, A. (1996). Marketing: The need to contribute to overall business effectiveness. Journal of Marketing Practice: Applied
Marketing Science, 2(3), 7–11.
Hardwick, J., & Anderson, A. R. (2019). Supplier-customer engagement for collaborative innovation using video conferencing:
A study of SMEs. Industrial Marketing Management, 80, 43–57.
Harrigan, P., Miles, M. P., Fang, Y., & Roy, S. K. (2020). The role of social media in the engagement and information processes
of social CRM. International Journal of Information Management, 54,
102151. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2020.102151
Ho, H., & Lu, R. (2015). Performance implications of marketing exploitation and exploration: Moderating role of supplier
collaboration. Journal of Business Research, 68(5), 1026–1034. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2014.10.004
 46 Onamusi Abiodun Babatunde

Ho, H., Osiyevskyy, O., Agarwal, J., & Reza, S. (2020). Does ambidexterity in marketing pay off? The role of absorptive
capacity. Journal of Business Research, 110, 65–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.12.050
Hou, J., & Chien, Y. (2010). The effect of market knowledge management competence on business performance: A dynamic
capabilities perspective. International Journal of Electronic Business Management, 8(2), 96–109.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.12.050
Josephson, B. W., Johnson, J. L., & Mariadoss, B. J. (2016). Strategic marketing ambidexterity: Antecedents and financial
consequences. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 44(4), 539–554.
Junni, P., Sarala, R., Taras, V., & Tarba, S. (2013). Organizational ambidexterity and performance: A meta-analysis. Academy of
Management Perspectives, 27(4), 299–312.
Kaur, V., & Mehta, V. (2017). Dynamic capabilities for competitive advantage: A comparative study of IT multinationals in India.
Paradigm, 21(1) 31–51.
Kaur, J., Chahal, H., & Gupta, M. (2018). Re-investigating market orientation and environmental turbulence in marketing
capability and business performance linkage: A structural approach. Business Analytics, 8(5), 145–168.
Kelly, N., Kelliher, F., Power, J., & Lynch, P. (2020). Unlocking the niche potential of senior tourism through micro-firm owner-
manager adaptive capability development. Tourism Management, 79, 104081. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2020.104081
Kelliher, F., Kearney, A., & Harrington, D. (2018). Managing innovation in the hospitality micro firm: A framework for sensing,
seizing and reconfiguring dynamic capabilities. Hospitality and Society, 8(2), 159–178.
Kim, W., Kim, H., & Hwang, J. (2020). Sustainable growth for the self-employed in the retail industry based on customer equity,
customer satisfaction, and loyalty. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 53,
101963. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2019.101963
Koponen, J., Julkunen, S., & Asai, A. (2019). Sales communication competence in international B2B solution selling. Industrial
Marketing Management, 82, 238–252.
Kozlenkova, I. V., Samaha, S. A., & Palmatier, R. W. (2014). Resource-based theory in marketing. Journal of the Academy of
Marketing Science, 42(1), 1–21.
Kumar, V. (2015). Evolution of marketing as a discipline: What has happened and what to look out for. Journal of
Marketing, 79(1), 1–9.
Laaksonen, O., & Peltoniemi, M. (2016). The essence of dynamic capabilities and their measurement. International Journal of
Management Reviews, 20(2), 184–205.
Li, M., Teng, H., & Chen, C. (2020). Unlocking the customer engagement-brand loyalty relationship in tourism social media: The
roles of brand attachment and customer trust. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 44, 184–
192. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhtm.2020.06.015
Lu, Y., Zhou, L., Bruton, G., & Li, W. (2010). Capabilities as a mediator linking resources and the international performance of
entrepreneurial firms in an emerging economy. Journal of International Business Studies, 41, 419–436.
Martín-Rojas, R., García-Morales, V. J., Garrido-Moreno, A., & Salmador-Sánchez, M. P. (2020). Social media use and the
challenge of complexity: Evidence from the technology sector. Journal of Business
Research. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.12.026
Mehrabi, H., Coviello, N., & Ranaweera, C. (2019). Ambidextrous marketing capabilities and performance: How and when
entrepreneurial orientation makes a difference. Industrial Marketing Management, 77, 129–
142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2018.11.014
Mohammed, N. I., Norshahrizan, B. N., & Wan-Ahmad, B. W. (2017). Innovation capability and firm performance relationship:
A study of partial least square-structural equation modelling. International Journal of Organisation and Business
Excellence, 2(1), 1–12.
Monferrer, D., Blesa, A., & Ripollés, M. (2015). Born globals trough knowledge-based dynamic capabilities and network market
orientation. Business Research Quarterly, 18(1), 18–36.
Mpandare, M., & Li, G. (2020). Utilising enterprise social media for product innovation: The role of market
orientation. Sustainability, 12(9), 3913. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12093913
Mu, J. (2015). Marketing capability, organisational adaptation and new product development performance. Industrial Marketing
Management, 49(7), 151–166.
Mu, J. (2017). Dynamic capability and firm performance: The role of marketing capability and operations capability. IEEE
Transactions on Engineering Management, 64(4), 554–565.
Mu, J., Bao, Y., Sekhon, T., Qi, J., & Love, E. (2018). Outside-in marketing capability and firm performance. Industrial
Marketing Management, 75, 37–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2018.03.010
 Marketing and Branding Research 8(2021) 47

Mukhtar, B., Rosli, M., & Azizi, H. (2017). The moderating role of environmental turbulence on the relationship between
organisational learning and firm innovativeness. Journal of Management Research and Review, 7(2), 148–159.
Murphy, M., & Sashi, C. M. (2018). Communication, interactivity, and satisfaction in B2B relationships. Industrial Marketing
Management, 68, 1–12.
Musarra, G., & Morgan, N. A. (2020). Outside-in marketing: Renaissance and future. Industrial Marketing Management, 89, 98–
101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2020.01.001
Najafi-Tavani, S., Najafi-Tavani, Z., Naudé, P., Oghazi, P., & Zeynaloo, E. (2018). How collaborative innovation networks affect
new product performance: Product innovation capability, process innovation capability, and absorptive capacity. Industrial
Marketing Management, 73(4), 193–205.
Nijssen, E. J., & Ordanini, A. (2020). How important is alignment of social media use and R&D–marketing cooperation for
innovation success? Journal of Business Research, 116, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.04.056
Nunan, D., Sibai, O., Schivinski, B., & Christodoulides, G. (2018). Reflections on “social media: Influencing customer satisfaction
in B2B sales” and a research agenda. Industrial Marketing Management, 75, 31–36.
Ogilvie, J., Agnihotri, R., Rapp, A., & Trainor, K. (2018). Social media technology use and salesperson performance: A two study
examination of the role of salesperson behaviors, characteristics, and training. Industrial Marketing Management, 75, 55–65
Oktemgil, M., & Greenley, G. (1997). Consequences of high and low adaptive capability in UK companies. European Journal of
Marketing, 31(7), 445–466. https://doi.org/10.1108/03090569710176619
Onamusi, A. B. (2020). Knowledge acquisition capability, strategic response capability, and organisational performance: A mediated
analysis. Business Excellence and Management, 10(3), 47–60.
Quach, S., Thaichon, P., Lee, J., Weaven, S., & Palmatier, R. W. (2020). Toward a theory of outside-in marketing: Past, present,
and future. Industrial Marketing Management, 89, 107–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2019.10.016
Soludo, C. C. (2020). Can Africa afford COVID-19 lockdowns? Retrieved from Proshare website.
https://www.proshareng.com/news/NIGERIA%20ECONOMY/
Sun, W., Price, J., & Ding, Y. (2019). The longitudinal effects of internationalisation on firm performance: The moderating role
of marketing capability. Journal of Business Research, 95(10), 326–337.
Swafford, P. M., Ghosh, S., & Murthy, N. (2008). Achieving supply chain agility through IT integration and flexibility.
International Journal of Production Economics, 116(2), 288–297.
Tan, F. T. C., Tan, B., Wang, W., & Sedera, D. (2017). IT-enabled operational agility: An interdependencies perspective.
Information and Management, 54(3), 292–303.
Teece, D. J. (2014a). A dynamic capabilities-based entrepreneurial theory of the multinational enterprise. Journal of International
Business Studies, 45(1), 8–37.
Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal,
18(7), 509–533.
Wang, Y., Zhang, M., Tse, Y. K., & Chan, H. K. (2020). Unpacking the impact of social media analytics on customer satisfaction:
Do external stakeholder characteristics matter? International Journal of Operations and Production Management, ahead-of-
print(ahead-of-print). https://doi.org/10.1108/ijopm-04-2019-0331
Wei, L., & Lau, C. (2010). High performance work systems and performance: The role of adaptive capability. Human
Relations, 63(10), 1487–1511. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726709359720
Wei, Z., Yi, Y., & Guo, H. (2014). Organisational learning ambidexterity, strategic flexibility, and new product
development. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 31(4), 832–847.
World Health Organization. (2020). World could face multiple famines of biblical proportions due to COVID-19. Retrieved from
The Economist Times website. https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/international/world-news/world
Wu, J., & Vahlne, J. (2020). Dynamic capabilities of emerging market multinational enterprises and the Uppsala model. Asian
Business and Management, 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41291-020-00111-5
Zhu, W., Su, S., & Shou, Z. (2017). Social ties and firm performance: The mediating effect of adaptive capability and supplier
opportunism. Journal of Business Research, 78, 226–232.

View publication stats