Renovation and the advantage characterized by the

competition: Leadership in the Service Firm’s in the

developing markets.

Reported By: Sanaullah Bhatti “71”

Abdul Fatah Phul “02”

Irfan Ali Channa “47”

In addition to:
https://doi.org10.1108IMR-11-2015-0262
Reference:
https://doi.org10.1108IMR-11-2015-0262
https://doi.org/10.1108/JSTP-3-2018-0053
 1. Introduction:
Strategic and implementation both are quite hard to set in the
markets which are not having the ability to be the developed, they are trying to be the developed
not being matched with their standards. The cultural traditions have made it more complex, which
created much more challenges for the markets to face at every situation almost with full
consideration. This is quite same with the international marketing environmental results, about the
expenditures, sales and strategic ways they are applying in their own environment. They are
supposed to watch expansion in growth (Cavusgil et al, 2002) and to avail the opportunities as well
as the threats to face the competitive environment slightly (Sheth, 2011). It produces the
opportunities for the scholars to watch out the environmental peculiarity and performance.

Scholars are quite away towards their job to create the

wealth, they are not focusing the markets that’s why the developed markets failed in their
maintenance of the standards and came in emerging level (Brutan et al, 2013). It will be much
more difficult to understand in future because of the gap in gaining knowledge. In the competitive
environment now, their focus is on the productivity and the other advantageous ways towards the
development.

It is an existing question to see whether the innovation

exploitation in leadership is possible to be the best choice to face the present with the required
results.

Strategic leadership is quite a well-defined aspect of the firm

to go through with the strategy development, existence and being succeeded (Boal and Hooijberg,
2001; Finkeleistein and Hambrick, 1990). The echelon theory demonstrated the end-result of
organization, strategic prime alternatives and the firm’s presentation is too handled by the top
managerial authorities (Hambrick and Mason, 1984). Schneider et al, (2005) has called the testing
of innovation in leadership to develop the strategic fit for enhancing the performance.
Organizational leadership is called the most important factor by Jung et al, (2008) Mumford et al
(2002).

Leadership upheaval is described in many areas like as in

creativity research by (Mumford et al 2002; Redmond et al 1993), renovated studies (Van De Ven
and Chu, 1989) and enterprise studies Gupta et al (2004); McGrath and Mac Millan, (2000); these
studies conducted in the most developed markets and known as environmental change from old to
new (Harvas-Oliver et al 2011); Vaccaro et al 2012; Damanpour 2014). It became clear with the
call of Schnieder et al, (2005) that the leader creates the culture to develop an internal (Porter
1996), and an external strategic fit (Miles and Snow 1994) which will be supporting in redesigning
the surroundings by Siggelkow (2002).

Leaders provide the needed fit to the firm. It is shown in this

paper that leadership is an important aspect to be innovated for turning the strategic fitness in the
environment. The turning of leadership is predicting that the choice will be enormous in the
developing markets, where power distance, a key foundational variable is recorded as at the peak
point (Hofstede 1984, 1991) and as such recognition of the hierarchy in organizations is too high
almost.

This Study is used to enhance the knowledge about the

leadership role in relating competitive advantages and the revolutionary activities which is
collectively focused on internal and external conditions of the firm.

It is important for the leaders to fulfill the internal

requirements to the achievement of the firm’s external opportunities (Morgan 2007).

Leadership role as the intermediary between the competitive

and emerging side did not get that much success enough (Carmeli et al, 2010). The current study
described that the innovation alone cannot handle the competitive side that’s why it is important
to be supported by the top management.

It is too important to know that it does not mean to do the

things which will be applicable for universal situations but sometimes the beneficial effects of
strategic orientation are too applicable (e.g Boso, et, al (2013), Li & Zohos (2010).)

It is noted that the research is based on the developed

economies mostly USA while the Zho et al, (2005) noted the benefits to the markets but such as
the emerging markets which is quite unknown in the process of research. Drazin and Schoonhoven
argued about the generalizability to the other economies while it was too argued that to focus on
emerging economies propose the new advanced theoretical concepts.
 2. Literature Review:
Innovation and Competitive Advantage:

It is quite available information that the market orientation

as per the culture and leadership would too be having the industry specific market orientation,
where there is the interaction between service provider and customer because the difference is
created on the basis of personal interaction, relationships and service quality (Fomburn 1984,
Hofstede 1991)

Leadership style suggestions going on now a days.

Transformational influences sales people, for market orientation, to perform above and beyond the
call of duty but also that stronger direct and indirect relationships with sales performance and
organizational citizenship behavior, transformational leader behaviors have than the transactional
leader behavior (MacKenzie at al 2001,p 115).

Oldham Cummings, 1996 suggested that Leadership is a

very critical aspect of the work environment for employees. The seminal work introduction on
TFL, sometimes called as charismatic leadership. (Burns, 1978 and House, 1977)

It is observed that in the competition the moves taken by the

firms are quite strengthened and very quick in the process the firms have needed the research to
look for the other advantage to be created to face the surroundings (Dess and Picken 2000).
Creativity makes the firm’s position strong and keeping it quite flexible and being capable to face
the environmental conditions (Atuahene-Gima 2005). Creativity in service firms has been linked
with the competitiveness from the recent times and it is quite necessary for the firms to be in the
competition or willing to be having the existence (Darroch and Mc Naughton, 2002; Grawe et al,
2009). Creativity is also an important tool for competitiveness in the modern business-world today
and is also known as the hyper-competition (Otero-Neira et al, 2009).

A firm’s ability to create an unusual way of money

generation from the uncopied resources will offer such firms the important assets (Amit and
Shoemaker, 1993). However, it doesn’t mean that the assets called because of the endowment but
also from the ways where the resource are combined or utilized (Penrose, 1959). Competitive
advantage is quite concerned with the creation of Endowment and utilization of the resources that
in which way that’s going on (Penrose 1959). Companies are in search about the competitive
advantage to be implementing the strategies through which they will be able to increase an exciting
internal strength and external opportunities (Chen and Tsou, 2012). Creativity changes the basic
natural focus (McGrath et al 1996) and the result will be positive in future with the today’s
investments by the industrialized firm’s which is quite invisible to the other investors about the
investments. The willingness in the outcome is to generate new combination of the resources for
having the new value with the new markets for the new customer needs. A firm can reduce the
uncertainty from its own side while the uncertainty has the existence from its competitors’ side
(Amit & Shoemaker 1993). It shows that the firm has the competitive advantage in the shape of
innovation which is unclear to the competitors. Innovation may enhance the service sectoral
development if it will be considered by its strategies, in the implementation.

Berry et al (2006), Anning-Dorsan et al (2015) says; to show

the innovative services in the product offerings will be new to the markets and customers which is
important for increasing the core values to make different from the competitor offerings.
Damanpour, (1991) suggested the innovative process would be the change in the inputs, bringing
new elements like as task-oriented specifications, flow equipment of information etc to the process
of a firm’s production, (Galligo et al 2013; Anning-Dorsan 2016). Service means the value
production in the delivery. The market innovation is to make the opportunities and threats more
beneficiary for the firm in the competition. The firm explores the external capabilities through the
market innovations which is to create the new markets and new customer needs, to target the
customers and to identify their needs and to react the change in the market.

Hypothesis:

Innovation’s process, Product innovation and Market

Innovation are having the positive relation with the competitive advantage.

Leadership as the intermediary in the renovation and competitive advantage:

Innovation leadership is known the dependent variable in the

studies of developed economies (Hervas Oliver et al 2011; Vaccaro et al 2012; Damanpour 2014).
This sight is apparent in creativity research (Mumford et al 2002; Redmond et al 1993) renovation
studies (Van the Ven and Chu 1989) and enterprise research (Gupta et al 2004; McGrath and Mc
Millan 2000). Leaders create the relation between the strategies and performances (Barling et al
2000, Schneider 2005, Crossland and Hambrick 2007, Anning-Dorson 2017). Leader keeps in
mind the adaptation of change with the setup in the strategies which influences the performance
of the firm. It is showed through the studies that the role of giving the description about the
performance of the firm would be efficiently played by the leader which is necessary to adapt the
change in the environment later (Jung et al 2008, Mumford et al 2002). Organizational leadership
is the factor which may influence the success of innovation (Roberts and Amit 2003, Prajogo and
Ahmed 2006). It is understood sometimes that at every level in an organization leader is the
superior than others to balance the momentum until the results (Grossan and Apaydin 2010).
Modernity is always influenced by the organizational leadership. To create needed competitive
advantage, the strategic-fit is made by the leader of a firm. An internal firm’s condition is the
organizational leadership during innovation implementation which enables innovation as a
strategy towards success. Leader creates the fit to relate the environment with the strategic-fit.

With the emerging markets, the leadership is very important

for the strategy implementation in the marketing too (Burgess and Steenkamp 2006). Culture is
too important for the emerging markets (Schwartz 2004). The culture maintains the current
situation and avoid the behaviors which creates disturbance in group team-spirit. The unequal
distribution to the specific personnel in society is validate according to the hierarchal systems of
the powers, resources and roles. The companies are having the centralized structure, which has the
distinct roles in the hierarchy structure and the observation about the demand in the service of
goals set from the top (Burgess and Steenkamp 2006). It should be known to institutions too that
in which way the firm can be right towards the success in the implementation.

In the areas where the power distance is quite high, it means

there is the environment where the people (employees) are dependent on the power holder or the
boss at the top. At these situations, a firm’s leader is expected to be the intermediary between the
innovation and the competitive advantage due to having the power distance at the much more
extent (Hofstede et al 1997). To have the competitive advantage, the innovation execution is shown
by the leader in describing the functions to the employees clearly.
Hypothesis:

Organizational leadership is the intermediary in creating the

positive effect on the process of innovations, product innovations and the market innovation for
being have the competitive advantage.

3. Methodology:
(a) Figures Setting and Assembling:

It is the areas which are rural rather than urban, it is quite

visible to the people after this study that how much the contribution people (employee) think that
their boss or leader does in the top management.

These areas are too likely as much traditional, cultural and

the participation in the social activities in groups and showcasing their group identities and
distributing the specific tasks in the group members (Hofstede et al 1997; Schwartz 2004). These
area’s economical position is quite weak and so much poverty (Adu et al, 2013).

This study is received from the operating service sector.

There was the much more difference between the results of every areas collected data. Through
managers, their information and the difference in their information was measured with the three
areas (Morgan et al 2009); which were question apprehension, the information correctness, and
the certainty in the answers. The Likert 5-point scale is used to appraise the measure in which
1=Strongly Disagree and 5=Strongly Agree.

The database is belonging to the firms in banking, advisory

service, insurance, reselling, communication setting, information and technology and well-
disposed sub-sectors. Within the assembled cases of each category, every third was selected to be
the part of study. The Questionnaires were filled by the managers who have the knowledge about
the innovations, or Development sides of business. The responses were received from the service
firms collectively. The categories of business side were; From the Banking institutions 48.3%,
from the insurance institutions 17.4%, from the consulting firms 13.4%, from the communication
and IT side 6.5%, from the hospitality 0.5%, and from the reselling side 13.9% were assembled in
the questionnaire.

To discover the service sector, it was difficult that’s why an

alternative approach is used. Through an institute of Management Sciences, almost 150 people
were approached from which 93 people responded positively. The completed questionnaires were
150 and 10 were uncompleted and rejected.

(b) Variable and Measures:

(Akimova 2000); the customer’s needs and wants fulfilling

would be the competitive advantage for the producer companies. Pricing competency, product or
service quality, and the effectiveness in fulfilling the needs and wants of the customers (Hooley
1993).

Independent Variables:

Product innovation, process innovation and market

innovation are the three different types of innovation that are widely been used in the service
research (Sirilli and Evangilista, 1998; Sundbo 2003; Sundbo et al 2007). Product innovation is to
produce goods with new offerings with the core benefits. Process innovation is the extent to
enhance the alteration in the services. Process innovation is improving the task specifications,
adopting new elements example input material, information flow and equipment (Damanpour and
Gopalakrishnan 1999, to the firm’s production process Gallego et al, 2013). Marketing Process is
the creating new markets or identifying the change in markets or needs, this was scaled by the
works of Martinich 2005; Alam 2011; Ko and Lu 2010; and Alegre et al 2006. The innovation in
markets is scaled by analyzing the potential markets frequently, to be having the advantage of
selling from the first times (first-mover advantage) in product and market development with the
enhancement in market trends or to enter in the new market with the new product. To measure the
market innovation, 5-point Likert scale is used.

Mediating Variable:

To provide the needed aid for developing and implementing

in the changing environment, organizational leadership is quite visible to be under consideration.
To represent a successful innovative implemented firm, the management provides the satisfactory
resources and motivation in the High-level organizations. The study relying on the works of
(Jaworski and Kohli 1993, Ko and Lu 2010, Souitaris 2002, and West et al 2003).

Control Variables:

It is not impossible with developing the misery models, not

to be influenced by the other factors. Control variables are existing to be sure about the results that
the other factors are not unjustifiably influence it. The investment in innovation is quite important
in old and expanded firms. To measure the size the number of employees is used and the number
of firm’s spent years in the business is quite well to measure the firm age. It was also to control in
the private or public firms, the number of owners and the form of business ownership.

Analysis:

(Anderson and Gerbing 1988), the relationship in the

innovation, leadership and competitive advantage, the commonly established two-stage procedure
is used to test the hypothesis. To assess the validity of the measurement model and discriminant
validity of individual constructs, in the first step, a CFA was conducted on both samples. In
assessing construct validity and reliability of subjective measurement instruments, the CFA was
used to test the psychometric properties of measurement scales as was recommended (Montoya-
Weiss and Calantone, 1994). For further relationship testing CFA also improves congeneric
measurement properties of scales (Arnold and Reynolds 2003; Lin and Hsieh 2006). In the second
step with robust estimation regression analysis were performed.

To examine all the scales in a CFA, the maximum likelihood

estimation procedures explored in the study. The loadings of the items and the internal consistency
values are assessed the reliability in individual items by the inspecting in the study (Fornell and
Larcker 1981; Lu et al 2010).

Common Method Bias:

For the current study, the common method bias was

not a problem. In our mind as we got that the customer’s preference is changed a bit based on time.
A bias factor is too mostly explaining the changes in the measures.
 4. Result:

The standard deviation, the correlation between the variables, are given below in the tables;

Correlation Matrix:
Correlation Matrix:
Total Variance Explained:
Inverse of Correlation:
Inverse of Correlation:
Significant 1-tailed:
Significant 1-tailed:
FACTOR ANALYSIS
Communalities
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis
Component Matrixa

Component

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

FSE#2 .657 .074 -.135 -.039 -.284 -.095 .160

ER#4 .601 -.066 -.194 .033 -.085 -.386 -.073
SR#1 .592 -.548 -.073 .046 .141 .188 .024
TC#1 .523 .099 .211 -.275 -.134 .261 -.288
FSE#6 .515 -.051 .165 .326 -.239 -.314 -.003
ER#3 .514 .027 .187 .132 -.223 -.331 -.090
SR#3 .511 -.192 .176 .450 .168 .284 .111
FSE#4 .503 .137 -.075 -.405 .301 -.214 -.075
TC#3 .500 -.096 -.340 -.188 -.117 .214 .169
TC#2 .465 .088 -.309 -.301 -.097 .332 .247
FSE#3 .455 .243 .015 .220 -.130 -.172 .008
SR#5 .450 .396 .439 -.019 .091 .347 -.362
ER#2 .424 .421 -.086 -.369 -.011 -.035 .124
SR#2 .411 -.740 .112 -.132 .104 .054 -.053
SR#4 .386 -.024 .524 -.143 .272 -.078 -.139
ER#1 .307 .373 .081 .485 .061 .284 .385
ER#5 .444 .120 -.315 .134 .534 -.255 -.051
FSE#1 .398 -.065 -.239 .135 -.515 .158 -.323
ER#6 .370 .101 -.291 .182 .454 .056 -.049
FSE#5 .234 -.090 .515 -.255 -.063 -.142 .592
Rotated Component Matrixa

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.

a. 7 components extracted.

Component

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

FSE#6 .707 -.038 .157 .059 .015 .160 .044

ER#3 .662 .017 .083 .185 .034 .003 .072
ER#4 .612 .219 .173 -.013 .308 -.130 -.032
FSE#2 .540 .505 .090 .059 .068 .088 .042
FSE#3 .508 .120 -.096 .123 .147 .205 -.016
TC#2 -.008 .746 .097 .078 .081 .108 -.001
TC#3 .118 .634 .252 -.014 .102 .055 -.073
ER#2 .168 .519 -.258 .259 .218 -.058 .190
SR#2 .099 .072 .840 .077 .021 -.157 .108
SR#1 .154 .248 .759 .065 .185 .119 -.025
SR#5 .100 .053 -.054 .852 .069 .246 -.056
TC#1 .174 .328 .152 .634 -.052 -.050 -.065
SR#4 .161 -.134 .227 .544 .164 -.029 .353
ER#5 .194 .065 .068 -.007 .794 .066 -.015
ER#6 .020 .119 .115 .054 .613 .227 -.136
FSE#4 .167 .316 .043 .293 .499 -.271 .215
ER#1 .139 .140 -.140 .058 .105 .793 .076
SR#3 .198 .005 .469 .173 .141 .586 .001
FSE#5 .172 .156 .129 .058 -.222 .090 .797
FSE#1 .413 .306 .156 .120 -.196 .012 -.539
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.
Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization.
Component Transformation Matrix
Component 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

1 .590 .480 .363 .375 .334 .186 .058

2 .052 .149 -.889 .310 .186 .231 -.007
3 .088 -.459 .076 .563 -.383 .139 .540
4 .309 -.487 .043 -.254 .063 .694 -.340
5 -.449 -.266 .155 .111 .789 .093 .246
6 -.583 .337 .209 .331 -.267 .478 -.305
7 -.067 .340 -.042 -.510 -.099 .417 .660

Initial and Extraction:

 5. Conclusion and Implications:

In the changing economies what’s going on through the

firm’s prominent environment specially for the operating service firms would be created by the
innovation. It is for the maintenance in the competitive advantage innovation because of today’s
growing side of the changing environmental markets. It would be the best if the innovation will be
at the finest strategic position in a firm for being getting the growing market share in the changing
world. Innovation is not usually used for the market share, it is used for the weak performance or
at the dull measures (Porter, 1996). It will be interesting to listen that the innovation’s effect
wouldn’t be seen at the dull or weak positions, but it is special treatment for increasing the market
share with highly efficiency and effectiveness through the research for having the competitive
advantage. The implementation of the innovation strategies is quite taking path with the approval
of a leader who is inside the firm. Innovation market strategies would be followed by the firms in
this changing world, to be having the competitive advantage and to participate in the growing
market needs. Innovational studies don’t make fool by sharing the firm’s which will not be the
part in wealth creating. Past study says that in the high-power distance cultures, the innovation was
being supported through the organizational leadership Effective capabilities. In the studies we
think the market innovation would be the under focusing determinant for the competitive
advantage creating in the changing world. In this emerging world, the innovation would be creating
the needed fit in the strategic activities and its environment in creating the competitive advantage.

Managerial possible future effects:

The firms operating in the changing world are supposed to

invest their amount in the innovation side continuously, if they are willing to maintain competitive
advantage. In the changing world, market innovations provide the effective side in creating
competitive advantage for the firms in the changing world. There is the growth in the changing
world day to day, their needs would be filled properly by the innovation which can be proved as
the competitive advantage for the firms. For the service firms, the implementation of the strategies
for the innovation will too be proved competitive advantage. Managers may move for a longer
period towards the innovation in search of the potential markets, (Martinich 2005), which have the
existence like as the advantage of first-mover in the product and the developing markets (Alam
2011) and being on top at market changes (Ko and Lu 2010). As it is supported by the (Gu et al,
2008) through market development or market innovation the change in markets offer the different
developing opportunities for firms and full notable of the advantage would too be possible.
Through being with a new core benefit offered in the product, service firms would too be able to
increase their highly rated positions (Bery et al, 2006) and to be the same one with the same product
for the innovation in product (Sundbo et al, 2007). Service firms must move on towards process
developing through the resetting of their service side to create new value streams to be with the
growing value for being competitive. In the changing markets, leadership perspective plays the
role of an intermediary between strategy innovation and the developing (competitive) advantage.
For creativity (Mumford et al 2002) leadership as a changing dependent variable, innovating
(Crossan and Apaydin, 2010) and entrepreneurship orientation (Gupta et al 2004). Leadership is a
player, through which strategies can be the part of strategic happenings almost in the areas where
culture exists. Leadership must play an important role in the existence. The cultural side forces
unequal distribution of rank, positions, and the availing capital according to the cultural specialties,
alike same the strategic activities will be implemented by the authorized individual. To achieve
the objectives, the firms are focusing on the central structure for creating the hierarchal structure
(Burgess and Steenkamp 2006). It is supposed that the leadership would be focusing on the
implementation of innovation in the product, if there is the movement towards the creation of
competitive advantage. To create a competitive advantage, the top managers are supposed to be
implementing the innovation while it wouldn’t be right only to develop the process innovation
just. Leadership is to deliver employees behavior in creating competitive advantage. (Hofstede et
al) suggested that centralization and the hierarchal structure would be helpful. It is approved by
the study that what the Hofstede et al study was about the culture and hierarchy structure towards
the management of organization. To create the correct structure as well as the structure side of
institutions, for having the successful implementation which would be delivered in a proper
manner.

Theoretical move on for future:

It is quite clear from the research that the culture wouldn’t be beneficial for the strategic
activities while the major authorized one wouldn’t be able to maintain the schedules properly. The
surroundings create itself change like as the institutions are creating difference between both
developed and institutional sectors. Schwartz said that the change in markets forces the team work
which will be having the in dependency in the sharing of their feelings, their norms etc. The
managers are supposed to be active in this sense to be successful in the changes of markets. The
current result is quite based on the Echelon theory which says that the leadership side of a firm
must be effective to get the development in the strategies, in implementing the planned activities
and to be successful (Finkelstein and Hambrick, 1990). Top managerial personnel would be the
important side which will be mostly influencing the strategic and implementation side (Hambrick
and Mason 1984).

It is directly said that the main key player is the leader in service firms who come to change
the employees psyche and lead them towards the creation of competitive advantage. The maximum
beneficial effect would be if the leader one would be moving on with the innovation process
research as well as the implementation development. As it was the research by the Hofstede
cultural values, this research is too having the results in its favor like as to say that the cultural
aspect would too be influencing in creating competitive strategies with their implementation
through a proper capable one’s leading. The research must be done in the other institutional
attributes to create strategies to gain the competitive advantage.

Reference:

(Avlonities, GJ and Gonaris SP 1997), stated about “the company performance and orientation of
the market”.

(Fomburn 1984, Hofstede 1991), about “the different aspects on the industrial specific cultures
and norms”.

(Cavusgil et al, 2002), “Expansion in growth through the research”

(Sheth, 2011), “To be facing the competitive environment easily, it is to avail the opportunities
and facing the threats”

(Brutan et al, 2013), “it would be to be focusing on the changing markets while the earning of
wealth is going on these days”
(Boal and Hooijberg, 2001), “strategic leadership would be under considered”

(Finkeleistein and Hambrick, 1990), “it would be easier tobe focusing on the development in the
strategies.

(Mason, 1984), “top managerial authorities must be having the ways to demonstrate the strategic
objectives”.

(Schneider et al, 2005), “to enhance the performance, the innovation must be under the one’s eye.”

(Jung et al, 2008), “leadership is the main factor in the firm”

(Mumford et al 2002), “Organizational leadership must be considered for the development”.

(Redmnd et al, 1993 and Mumford, 2002), “Leadership has the one attribute of creativity”

(Van De Ven and Chu, 1989), “renovating the environment”

(Gupta et al, 2004), “firm’s different sides studies”

(McGrath and Mac Millan, 2000), “Enterprise studies”

(Harvas-Oliver et al 2011), “started to do research in the developed markets for analyzing their
change from the old to new one”.

(Vaccaro et al, 2012; Damanpour, 2014), “stated that the developed markets did their leadership
best to be having the competitiveness”

(Porter, 1996), “the leader must have to create culture for developing an internal environment”

(Miles and Snow, 1994), “there is an addition of external strategic fit is too be supporting one in
this regard”

(Sigglekow, 2002), “the internal and external strategic fit will be to redesigning the surroundings”

(Hofstede, 1984), “hierarchy of organizations would be at the great extent in the developing areas”

(Morgan, 2007), “leader must achieve the internal and external opportunities”

(Carmeli et al, 2010), “leadership is the specific one like the intermediary between the competitive
and renovating sides”
(Boso et al, 2013), “sometimes beneficial effects of strategic orientation are too applicable”

(Drazin and Schoonhovan), “to be focusing on the entire aspects of the changing markets would
be a new one topic today”

(MacKenzie et al 2001, p 115), “stronger relationship between the sales performance and
organizational citizenship behavior”

(Oldhamcummings, 1996), “leadership is very critical aspect of the work environment for
employees.

(Burns, 1978 and House, 1977), “charismatic-leadership”

(Dess and Picken 2000), “firms must invest money on the research aspect to create the other
advantage”

(Atuahene-Gima, 2005), “creativity makes the firm’s position strong and keeping it quite flexible”

(Darroch and Mc Naughton, 2002; Grawe et al, 2009), “creativity in service firms would be
competitive from day to day activities”

(Otero-Neira et al, 2009), “creativity is also an important tool for the competitiveness in the
modern business world today”

(Amit and Shoemaker, 1993), “a firm must decrease the uncertainty”

(Bery et al, 2006 and Aning-Dorsan et al2015), “innovative services would be the beneficial side
to be the unique or different from the competitor’s offerings.

(Damanpour, 1991), “bringing new elements like as the innovative process, flow equipment of
information”

(Galligo et al 2013; Anning Dorsan 2016), “service means the value production in delivery.

(Hervas Oliver et al, 2011, Vaccaro et al, 2012, Damanpour 2014), “in the studies of developed
economies innovation leadership is the dependent variable”

(Roberts and Amit 2003, Prajogo and Ahmed 2006), “organizational leadership is the factor which
may influence the success of innovation”
(Grossan and Apaydin, 2010), “until the results leader is the only one in the firm who may have
the access to balance the momentum”

(Burgess and Steenkamp, 2006), “in the marketing side, the strategy implementation through the
leader is very important”

(Schwartz, 2004), “culture is important for the firm”

(Morgan et al, 2009), “the question apprehension, the information correctness and certainty in the
answers were three areas through which the information is measured.

(Akimova, 2000), “to know the customer’s needs and wants as soon as possible and fulfilling
before the other one’s offerings of same nature”

(Sirilli and Evangilista, 1998; Sundbo 2003, Sundbo et al 2007), “product innovation, process
innovation and market innovation are three different types of innovations that are widely used in
the service research”.

(Fornell and Larcker 1981; Lu et al 2010), “the loadings of the items and the internal consistency
values are assessed the reliability in individual items by the inspection in the study”

(Martinich, 2005), “managers would have to move on towards for a longer period of time in search
of potential markets”

(Ko and Lu, 2010), “being on top at market changes would be the highly competitive one”