Assessing the impact of e-entrepreneurship orientation key success factors on banks’ performance

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

College of Business, King Khalid University, Saudi Arabia

Assessing the impact of e-entrepreneurship orientation key success factors on banks' performance

Abderrazak Ahmed Laghouag

Department of Business Administration



Abstract

electronic banking entrepreneurial

The 2030 Vision for Saudi Arabia emphasizes an increase in SMEs' contributions to the national economy from 20% to 35%, and a reduction in unemployment from 11.6% to 7%. This requires banks to play a crucial role in supporting entrepreneurial projects, which the Kingdom relies upon. Saudi Arabia's banks took advantage of this opportunity to gain more customers and market share by being more innovative and proactive, and willing to take risks concerning e- services. The purpose of this study includes evaluating banks' performance in KSA considering entrepreneurship orientation drivers in E-banking. The methodology: For testing these hypotheses, a questionnaire has been created and filled out by banks' workers. The findings: Actually, E-banking entrepreneurial orientation is strongly supported by human capital as evidenced by the research results. On the other hand, the results show a significant positive impact of e-banking entrepreneurial orientation on three dimensions of bank performance, namely, competitiveness, financial performance, and customer services.

Key words: EO Key Success Factors, E-banking EO, Bank Performance.



Introduction

E-banking entrepreneurship orientation and related key success factors allowing achieving high performance in the banking sector have been paid an increased attention to, especially after the introduction of the ambitious Saudi vision 2030. This latest strives to increase the contribution of SMEs in the national economy from 20% to 35% and reduce the unemployment rate from 11.6% to 7%. To achieve this, the Kingdom rely on the vital role of banks to support entrepreneurial projects on the one hand, and to reinforce competitiveness, financial performance, and customer service on the other hand. In order to survive and grow today in a competitive environment that is more uncertain, banks can use entrepreneurial orientation to build three pillars on which a competitive strategy should be built, namely innovation, pro-activeness, and developing risk taking ability (Al-Omoush, 2020).

KSA banks are particularly focused on the importance of entrepreneurship-oriented products and services. For example, Rajhi banks' five-year strategy is focused on establishing thriving financial systems while ensuring a sustainable performance in changing environment. As part of its strategy, Rajhi bank seeks to become known as "The Bank of the Future" by focusing on cost-effective technological improvements. The Rajhi Banking Group is committed to being a globally leading provider of digital services, focusing on digital transformation, digitizing the customer journey, migrating the customer to self-service channels, and providing innovative payment methods for its customers based on this strategy (Rajhi Annual Report, 2019).

Entrepreneurship-oriented banks are those which are focused on innovation in digital services and products, along with proactive and risk-taking capabilities (Al-Omoush, 2020). In the same context, banks' performance relates to the banks' ability to achieve high level of competitiveness regarding the rivals, to maximize financial gains as well as satisfying customers and meet their evolving needs and reinforce their loyalty towards the bank (Farrugia, 2002, Al-Omoush et al., 2019).

As a result of the above discussion, the research question might be crystallized as follows: What factors have enhanced E-Entrepreneurship Orientation in Saudi Arabia banking systems, and how does this impact bank performance? Several theoretical frameworks have been developed to formulate research hypotheses and the model to answer this research question. Secondly, the research methodology was outlined. Thirdly, reliability and validity of data were examined, and hypotheses testing was performed. Finally, the results discussion was provided.

Several practical implications are provided by this study, among which are the following: primarily, it provides managers in Saudi Arabia with a clear understanding of the status quo of banks devoted to leveraging e-entrepreneurship orientation. Additionally, the research highlights the inherent problems in changing bank business models to embrace e-entrepreneurship, namely innovativeness, pro-activity, and risk-taking. This paper concludes by presenting the first study examining the relationship between maturity of performance and e-entrepreneurship orientation in KSA banks.



1. Theoretical framework and research model

1.1 Key success factors for e-banking entrepreneurship orientation

There is a presumption that businesses with an entrepreneurial orientation (EO) are different from other types of businesses. EO has long been recognized as a necessary component of a company's success in the dynamic and uncertain world (Niemand et al., 2017). According to Mintzberg (1973), Kreizer et al. (2002), Entrepreneurial Organizations are more likely to take risks and actively seek out new prospects than their competitors. In the same context, Miller and Friesen (1983) stress the fact that entrepreneurial-oriented organizations' product-market strategies are based on a high level of innovation. According to the findings of the literature research, the maturity of entrepreneurial orientation is determined by each firm's level of display of the three subdimensions previously discussed, namely, innovation, proactiveness, and risk-taking.

The drivers of entrepreneurial orientation, e-business, and performance continue to attract scholars and professionals, as advances in technological solutions could provide a sustainable competitive advantage to companies dealing with a rapidly changing environment and customers who value innovative products and services (Zupic, 2014, Al-Omoush, 2020). Some researchers (Al-Omoush, 2019), examined the impact of e-banking entrepreneurship on three dimensions of performance of banks operating in Jordan (competitiveness, financial performance, and customer service) through the mediating role of e-entrepreneurship orientation. Halberstadt et al. (2021) investigated the impact of social entrepreneurship orientation on start-ups and established firms, and analyzed the consequences of heterogeneity in firm characteristics using multi-group structural equation models and fsQCA as comparison methods. Other researchers (Bambang et al., 2021) demonstrated the multiple applicability of entrepreneurial orientation in various fields, such as spiritual marketing, to ensure sustainable competitive advantage. Nasution et al. (2021) investigated the dimensions of entrepreneurial orientation (EO), knowledge management process (KMP) and dynamic capability (DC) in relation to the adoption of e-commerce in SMEs.

Many previous studies investigated the maturity level of corporate entrepreneurial orientation practices, especially the maturity level of innovation, proactivity and risk taking (Miller and Friesen, 1982; Scheepers et al., 2007; Reuber & Fischer, 2011; Al-swidi & Al-Hossam, 2012, Al- Omoush et al., 2019, Al-Hariri, 2020). Actually, there is agreement on these three dimensions of entrepreneurial orientation for e-business or traditional business. As for the first sub-dimension, namely innovation, Shupmeter (1934) was the first researcher to argue that innovation is the fundamental endeavor of entrepreneurial firms (Kreizer et al, 2002). Innovation refers to the ability to develop and apply new ideas for products and services, processes and markets, and business models (Kreizer et al., 2002, Scheepers et al. 2007, AlOmoush, 2019). For the banking sector, the development and provision of new electronic services, as well as the use of the advancing IT functions to manage transactions, represent the new strategic weapon to succeed in competition (Nissen and von Rennenkampff, 2017). The second sub-dimension, namely proactivity, refers to the firm's ability to behave proactively towards its competitors (Porter, 1980). For Knight (1997), Lumpkin and Dess (2001), Stevenson and Jarillo (1990), Kreizer et al, (2002), proactivity has two main characteristics: (1) aggressiveness in terms of behavior towards competitors and (2) pursuing new business opportunities. For Lumpkin and Dess (2001) proactive firms are (1) opportunity- oriented, (2) forward-looking as they introduce new products or services to competitors and are able to anticipate future demand in order to shape the environment. For the banking sector, the proactivity characteristic allows banks to devise aggressive strategies based on the forward-looking view and the discovery of new opportunities in e-business and services to stay ahead of other banks (Nissen and von Rennenkampff 2017). In the same context and similar to all other sectors, banks could be more proactive than their competitors by being more willing to introduce new e-services (Wang et al. 2015; Matejun 2016, Al-Omoush 2021). The third sub-dimension of entrepreneurial orientation, namely risk-taking, refers to the willingness of firms to engage in estimated risky ventures (Brockhaus, 1980, Scheepers et al. 2007, Kreizer et al, 2002). Risk appetite involves the allocation of resources to support new innovative projects in an uncertain environment and with ambiguous outcomes (Miller 1983; Kim et al. 2015). In the banking sector, risk appetite reflects the ability of banks to develop new electronic products and services that may involve risks and failures due to changing technological solutions and business processes (Al-Omoush 2021).

The literature review shows the importance of top management support (TPS) as the first key factor for change management to successfully implement innovative projects and improvements (Maditinos et al., 2014). Previous studies emphasized the crucial role of decision makers in the successful implementation of IT solutions by allocating the necessary resources, i.e., financial, human, and material resources, as well as delegating authority to the appropriate individuals to ensure good management of the initiatives (Al-Omoush 2020). Top management influences a firm's ability to innovate in two ways: (1) if the leaders and managers are innovators themselves, this will lead them to be exploration-oriented and continuously seek new ideas (Wang & Dass, 2017). (2) The second level of top management support could be recognizing the need for innovation as a strategic tool for competitiveness and then provide the necessary resources and appropriate environment to encourage the generation and implementation of ideas (Reuber and Fischer, 2011; Niemand et al., 2017).

The second key success factor, the technological environment, refers to a firm's internal and external technological resources and practices (Oliveira and Martins, 2011). The success of any strategy based on either cost reduction or differentiation and innovation is closely linked to the support provided by technological resources. These ensure the necessary capabilities to improve communication, process integration, flexibility, information sharing and coordination among all parties in the business network (Vankatraman, 1989, Laghouag, 2016). Technological resources include IT infrastructure, practices, IT capabilities, security issues (Hanafizadeh and Zare Ravasan, 2018). Previous studies (Ratten, 2012; Hanafizadeh and Zare Ravasan, 2018) have shown that IT has a great impact on e-banking products and services. Some studies (Martm-Rojas et al. 2011) have highlighted the importance of IT competencies in exploiting technological opportunities for the development of corporate entrepreneurship. Hanafizadeh and Zare Ravasan (2018), Sikdar et al. (2015) show that a company with successful IT experience has a better technical knowledge and a deeper understanding of the entrepreneurial opportunities of new IT. Al-Omoush et al. (2019) investigate the drivers of entrepreneurship in e-banking and the results show that technological resources play an important role in the level of entrepreneurship in e-business. The results also show a direct impact of e-banking entrepreneurship on achieving competitive advantage, financial performance, and customer performance.

The third key success factor, namely, Human Capital, is a crucial and influential factor that explains technological innovation nowadays (Ang et al., 2011; Danquah and Amankwah-Amoah, 2017, Khan et al., 2020, Hu, 2021). Human capital is a systemic combination of knowledge application, know-how, human skills and experience, education and expertise (Hayton 2005). The quantity and quality of human capital within a firm or country largely determine its ability to develop and implement new ideas (Lucas Jr, 2009). In addition, human capital improves a firm's or a country's absorptive capacity, i.e. the ability to recognize, gather, and process new information, which increases productivity and innovation (Ali et al., 2016). Skilled, talented, capable, self- directed people with a high level of readiness are considered as golden people who are a pillar of human capital sharing their tacit and explicit knowledge with others and the organization and shaping their behavior and agility (Gowthorpe 2009). Many researchers have used the term entrepreneurial capital as a critical component or dimension of human capital. In other words, entrepreneurial capital refers to the knowledge and skills of individuals and groups related to entrepreneurial activities (Audretsch and Keilbach 2004; Albort-Morant and Rey-Marti 2015). Previous studies have confirmed the importance of HC as a determinant of EO. Hu (2021) concluded that improved and developed human capital is more likely to affect overall technological innovation. Also, Al-Omoush et al. (2019) investigated the drivers of entrepreneurship in e-banking and the results showed a significant role of human capital on the level of entrepreneurship in ebusiness. In the same vein, Batjargal (2007) emphasized the critical role of human capital in the innovative use of IT to strengthen business operations and processes. Other researchers (Charband and Navimipour 2016), explored the ways in which HC can harness the potential of IT to absorb and deploy new ideas and obtain new technological innovations. The results of Zhao & Wang's (2006) study show that highly skilled and experienced human capital at both managerial and operational levels promote entrepreneurial orientation in e-business.

Based on the above discussion, research hypotheses related to the first causal relationship could be determined as follows:

Hal: Top Management Support greatly improves E-Banking Entrepreneurship Orientation.

Ha2: Technological Environment greatly improves E-Banking Entrepreneurship Orientation.

Ha3: Human Capital support strongly enhances E-Banking Entrepreneurship Orientation for banks operating in KSA.

1.2 Impact of e-banking entrepreneurship orientation on banks' performance

Previous studies investigated the relationship between entrepreneurship orientation and organizational and firms' performance. Some researchers found a positive impact such as Ali et al. (2020), Ameer and Khan, (2020). Others didn't find a significant direct impact of EO on performance (Chow, 2006, Purnomo et al., 2019). Finally, some other researchers, such as Hughes and Morgan (2007) found a negative impact of EO and business performance. These results highlight that the contributions of EO on firm's performance are unconclusive and are still the subject of investigation. Some scholars have recognized the important role which entrepreneurial orientation (EO) plays in driving firm performance. However, this relationship has not been well- understood yet, and the studies have sought to examine various contingencies that might mediate or moderate this relationship. The Entrepreneurship Orientation and performance causal relationship is more complex than a simple main-effects-only relationship (Sok et al., 2016). Other studies (Gonzalez-Benito et al., 2009, Jeong et al., 2019, Sabahi and Parast, 2020) investigate the impact of EO - firm performance relationship. The results demonstrate that EO is positively related to firm performance. In the same line, Kreiser & Davis (2010) used a contingency theory to investigate the differential relationship that exists between the three sub-dimensions of entrepreneurial orientation, namely innovativeness, pro-activeness, risk-taking and firm performance and proposed appropriate various configurations combining organizational structure, environmental characteristics and EO dimensions to enhance performance. Kantur (2016) has given credence to Kreiser & Davis research and developed an in-depth understanding about the multi-level character of entrepreneurship impact and organizational performance. The results show strong influence of EO on both financial and non-financial performance. Liao and Zhao (2020) found that entrepreneurship orientation significantly allows companies to achieve competitive advantage through enhancing new product innovation performance and then customer satisfaction. Moreover, innovation mediates the relationship between market orientation and customer satisfaction and business performance (Mahmoud et al., 2016).

The banking industry seem to be also involved to take advantages from EO, especially with the current intense competition. According to Omoregie (2019) satisfaction, service quality and trust are the results of OE that influence positively customers loyalty. In the same context, Abosede et al. (2018) studied the effect EO on the international banks' performance. The results demonstrate that the three EO sub-dimensions have significant individual and combined impact on the international performance. Tahmasebi et al. (2019) studied the impact of internal marketing and organizational entrepreneurship on the three areas of banks performance, namely productivity, financial, and staff development. The results highlight a significant positive correlation among the dependent and independent variables. Moreover, Abdul-hameed and Al-Nemrawi (2019) recognized that the adoption of EO is one of the building blocks that help most banks to reach the excellence in the banking market and gain new and profitable customers. The results showed the positive impact of EO on banks' financial performance.

The literature review shows that E-banking entrepreneurship orientation issues require particular attention regarding the growing advancement in new technologies related to bank practices. Al-Omoush et al., (2019) discussed this issue and revealed a significant direct impact of e-banking entrepreneurship on achieving a competitive advantage, financial performance, and customer performance. After presenting all these studies' results, it seems relevant to investigate the way E-banking entrepreneurship orientation influences Saudi banks' performance by formulating the following hypotheses:

Hb1: E-Banking Entrepreneurship Orientation greatly improves banks' competitiveness.

Hb2: E-Banking Entrepreneurship Orientation greatly improves banks' financial performance.

Hb3: E-Banking Entrepreneurship Orientation greatly improves banks' customer services.

Following the above hypotheses, this study examines the relationship between the key success factors and the way they effect banks' performance as shown in Figure 1 below:



RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Questionnaire Design:

The table listing each research variable, construct, and associated study used to create the items for that variable is presented below.

Table 1. Questionnaire characteristics

Variables	Constructs	Items Scales	Related works
Key Success Factors	Top Management Support	4 items	Likert 1-5	Al-Omoush et al, (2019), Al-Omoush et al, (2018)
	Technological Environment	4 items
	Intellectual Capital	4 items
E-EO	Innovation	4 items		Al-Hariri (2020), Al- Omoush et al, (2019), Al- Omoush et al, (2018),
	Pro-activeness	4 items
	Risk-taking	4 items
Bank performance	Competitiveness	4 items		Abou-shawsaa and Chelif, (2011), Chona and Soudani (2017), Maryono et al., (2019), Al-Omoush et al, (2019)
	Financial performance	5 items
	Customer service	4 items
Total of items		37

Source: Own compilation



1.3 Sampling & data collection

According to the Saudi Central Bank report, there are up to 12 banks operating in Saudi Arabia, with official reports from each bank indicating that the total number of people employed by banks is roughly 46,184 (March 2021), which represents the study population. The researcher utilized a stratified random sample because of the high sample size, which is appropriate for situations when the number of people in banks varies. As indicated in Table 2, this method necessitates first determining the required sample from the overall population, and then determining the required size of each bank in proportion to the number of individuals in the bank. The sample size that should take part in the survey is 380 minimum according to the equation proposed by Al- Imam, (2008): There were 380 people taking part in the survey. For this research, 607 valid responses were collected, proportional to the number of people working in each bank. Based on the respondents' profile, it is observed that many respondents are working in the private sector (about 70%). They are also well educated (about 90% are graduates and post-graduates) and have relatively long work experience (5-10 years). The descriptive analysis also shows that most of the respondents are working in administration department (about 82 %).



2. Data analysis

At this point, the research hypotheses are tested using the Partial Least Square Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) approach to predict and evaluate the measurement and structural model (Henseler et al., 2015). This approach allows complex relationships between variables to be modeled. Smart-PLS software was used for this study. The validation of the research hypotheses was be conducted in two steps: (1) the validation of the measurement model (Outer Model) and (2) the validation of the structural model (Inner Model). The first one concerns the validation of the latent variables (constructs), namely top management support, intellectual capital, technological environment, e-entrepreneurship orientation, competitiveness, financial performance, and customer service. The validation of the structural model concerns the relationships between the latent variables (hypotheses).

2.1 Validity and reliability analysis

This section examines internal consistency, convergent validity, and discriminant validity. In order to purify the research questionnaire, a loading analysis was conducted. The results show that the loadings of all items for all constructs are greater than 0.50 (Figure 2), resulting in all items being retained for the next step of the analysis. Alpha Cronbach coefficient, Rho A and Composite Reliability (CR) were calculated to test the reliability of internal consistency. Table 2 below shows high reliability for all constructs as the values are above the threshold value of 0.70. To test convergent validity, the value AVE was also calculated. All the values are above 0.50 which means that the construct explains more than 50% of the variance of the items.



Table 2. Reliability and validity analysis

	Cronbach's	Rho	CR	AVE
Top Management Support	0.805	0.808	0.872	0.631
Technology	0.87	0.872	0.911	0.72
Human Capital	0.856	0.859	0.902	0.699
E-EO	0.939	0.941	0.947	0.6
Competitiveness	0.895	0.897	0.927	0.761
Financial Performance	0.88	0.881	0.912	0.675
Customer Service	0.871	0.873	0.912	0.721

Source: Own compilation

To assess discriminant validity and show that measures of the constructs are not highly correlated, cross-load comparisons were made between the constructs. The results show that the AVE of each latent variable (construct) is higher than the highest squared correlation of the construct with another latent variable. Thus, discriminant validity is ensured.

Table 3. Discriminant analysis

	Comp.	Cust. S E-	Fin. P Hum. C Tech.	TMS	EO
Comp.	0.872
Cust.S	0.747	0.849
E-EO	0.752	0.632	0.84
Fin. P	0.834	0.785	0.729	0.822
Hum.C	0.681	0.593	0.775	0.676	0.836
Tech.	0.575	0.501	0.713	0.585	0.731	0.848
TMS	0.547	0.558	0.669	0.598	0.667	0.738	0.794

Source: Own compilation

2.2 Testing hypotheses

After testing the measurement model (Outer Model), the second step is to test the structural model (Inner Model). Figure 2 and Table 4 illustrate the path coefficient between all constructs.



Table 4. Hypotheses testing results

		P	t-value	Sig	Result
Ha1	Top Management Support -> E- EO	0.131	2.819	0.005	Supported
Ha2	Technology -> E-EO	0.142	3.195	0.001	Supported
Ha3	Human Capital -> E-EO	0.649	15.718	0	Supported
Hb1	E-EO -> Competitiveness	0.752	28.952	0	Supported
Hb2	E-EO -> Financial Performance	0.729	27.405	0	Supported
Hb3	E-EO -> Customer Service	0.632	17.656	0	Supported

Source: Own compilation

Hypothesis testing is performed by analyzing two dimensions: (1) The analysis of the path coefficient (P) reflects the degree of change in the dependent variable for each individual change in the independent variable. (2) The second dimension is the t-value test. Regardless of the value of (P), this coefficient is significant only when the t-value is > 2. The above Table 4 shows that all the hypotheses are supported i.e. the results show that top management support significantly and positively influences e-entrepreneurship orientation (Ha1), technological environment significantly and positively influences e-entrepreneurship orientation (Ha2), intellectual capital significantly and positively influences e-entrepreneurship orientation (Ha1). In addition, e-banking entrepreneurship orientation significantly and positively influences the dimensions of bank performance, namely competitiveness, financial performance and customer service (Hb1-Hb3).



Figure 2. Path coefficient results

Source: Own compilation



3. Results discussions

The above findings reflect the considerable level of preparedness of banks in KSA with respect to all the factors that influence the entrepreneurial orientation of e-banking or the factors that improve sustainable performance. It is observed that all banks are striving to be leaders in digital services to keep pace with the ambitious Vision 2030. The results show that top management support has a significant impact on banks becoming more proactive, offering more innovative services and products, and accepting some risk by engaging in new projects, products, and services. The determinant coefficient in Table 5 reflects that about 73% of EO is explained by the three key success factors. These results confirm the current findings reported by many researchers such as Al-Omoush et al. (2019), Al-Omoush (2020), Martm-Rojas et al. (2011), Niemand et al. (2017). The results also demonstrate the importance attached to investing in new technological resources, which strongly supports the banks' entrepreneurial orientation towards leading e-banks. Based on the theory of the resource-based view, technological resources can provide banks with the necessary capabilities to develop outstanding electronic products and services, enabling them to develop a sustainable competitive advantage. The results regarding the influence of technological environment on e-entrepreneurship orientation are in line with the findings of Al-Omoush et al. (2019), Zhu et al. (2006), Hanafizadeh and Ravasan (2018). In addition, Human Capital in the studied banks seems to have the most positive influence on entrepreneurial orientation in e-banking, reflecting the continuous efforts of banks in Saudi Arabia to benefit from this important resource and improve their HR by implementing numerous development programs. The current findings confirm previous studies that have addressed this issue (Al-Omoush et al., 2019, Petti and Zhang, 2011; Bahrami et al., 2016), which emphasized the role of intellectual capital in promoting entrepreneurial attitude.



Table 5. Determinant coefficients

Dependent variable	R2
E-Entrepreneurship Orientation	0.734
Competitiveness	0.566
Financial Performance	0.532
Customer Service	0.4

The results of the present study indicate that entrepreneurship in e-banking is crucial source to enhance advantage and achieve high level of differentiation of products and services compared to the rivals. The findings also emphasize the importance of articulating any competitive strategy on the digital capabilities. In addition, the research outcomes reveal that these entrepreneurially oriented banks can achieve higher financial revenue associated with high level of operational excellence compared to rivals, which gives a sustainable competitive advantage. The results highlight the willingness of bank managers to e-banking entrepreneurship. The findings confirm that e-banking entrepreneurship leads to higher customer satisfaction and loyalty since the subdimensions of EO can provide customers with innovative products that facilitate customers' financial practices. These findings confirm the existing results achieved by Al-Omoush et al. (2019). Several practical implications are provided by this study, among which are the following: first, it provides managers in Saudi Arabia with a clear understanding of the status quo of banks devoted to leveraging e-entrepreneurship orientation. Additionally, the research highlights the inherent problems in changing bank business models to embrace e-entrepreneurship, namely innovativeness, pro-activity, and risk-taking. This paper concludes by presenting the first study examining the relationship between maturity of performance and e-entrepreneurship orientation in KSA banks.



Conclusion

The main objective of this study is to examine the relationship between the key success factors for e-banking entrepreneurial orientation and the way it positively affects the sustainable performance which is a challenge for all organizations including banks today. This study is the first of its kind in Saudi Arabia and aims to diagnose sustainable performance by exploring and analyzing its roots, namely the entrepreneurial orientation of e-banking, and its key success factors.

The banking system in Saudi Arabia represents the building block for the success of Saudi Vision 2030 by supporting the various sectors that KSA aims to develop, such as tourism, healthcare, global supply chains, renewable energy, petrochemicals, etc. Banks consider the vision as an unprecedented opportunity to consolidate their position in the market and ensure their sustainable survival. The objective of this study is to examine the maturity level of banks in terms of the presence of the necessary drivers to support their entrepreneurial orientation related to electronic products and services. The second objective is to measure how sustainable banks operate and how e-entrepreneurship orientation affects banks' practices and performance.

According to the research methodology, the research model and the questionnaire were developed based on an in-depth literature review. Subsequently, data were collected on a proportional basis alongside a significant sample comprising all banks operating in KSA. The analysis shows that there is a particular focus on the availability of the required factors, namely top management support, technological environment, and human capital development. The results also show that bank managers are willing to recognize the importance of the entrepreneurial orientation of e-banking and how it can improve the bank's performance dimensions, namely competitiveness, financial performance, and customer service.

As for the practical implications of this study, firstly, it provides bank managers with a clear understanding of the status quo of various measures to promote e-entrepreneurship in banks operating in KSA. Moreover, the study reflects the shortcomings in adopting e-entrepreneurship orientation in banks, namely innovativeness, proactiveness and risk-taking. Finally, the research presents an initial study on the maturity of banking performance and its relationship with e- entrepreneurship orientation in banks in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

Acknowledgment

The author extends his appreciation to the Deanship of Scientific Research at King Khalid University for funding this work through research groups program under grant number (R.G.P.2 / 176 / 42).



References

1. Abdul-Hameed, A.A.S., & Al-Nemrawi, R.H.T. (2019). The Impact of Entrepreneurship on Enhancing Financial Performance Indicators in according with (PATROL) Model: Applied Study in the Iskan Bank. Tikrit Journal of Administration and Economics Sciences, 15(47 Part 1), available at: https://www.iasi.net/iasi/article/173023 Abosede, J.A., Fayose, J., & Eze, B.U. (2018). Corporate entrepreneurship and international performance of Nigerian banks. Journal of Economics & Management, 32, 5-17, available at: http://yadda.icm.edu.pl/yadda/element/bwmeta1.element.ceish-c3688ba3-cd6b-40f5-81e5-2271dc5dedd6.

2. Albort-Morant, G., & Rey-Marti, A. (2015, July). The development of ICTs and the introduction of entrepreneurial capital. In Annual conference of the global innovation and knowledge academy (pp. 84-92). Springer, Cham, available at: https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-22204-28.

3. Al-Hariri, B., (2020), Structural Model to measure the impact of entrepreneurship orientation on banking sustianble performance: an applied study in Egyptian banking sector, Journal of Alexandria University for Management Sciences, Vol. 57, Issue 3, pp. 55-98, available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/343425610 nmwdhj hykly lqyas athr altwjh alryady ly alada almsrfy almstdam-drast ttbyqyt ly alqta almsrfy almsry A Structural Model for Measuring the Impact of Entrepreneurial Orientation on Sustainable Bankin Ali, G.A., Hilman, H., & Gorondutse, A. H. (2020). Effect of entrepreneurial orientation, market orientation and total quality management on performance: Evidence from Saudi SMEs. Benchmarking: An International Journal, available at: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/BIJ-08-2019-0391/full/html Ali, M., Cantner, U., & Roy, I. (2017). Knowledge spillovers through FDI and trade: the moderating role of quality-adjusted human capital. In Foundations of Economic Change (pp. 357-391). Springer, Cham, available at: https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-62009-116.

4. Al-Omoush, K.S. (2020). The role of top management support and organizational capabilities in achieving e-business entrepreneurship. Kybernetes., available at:https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/K-12-2019-0851/full/html Al-Omoush, K.S., Al Attar, M.K., Saleh, I.H., & Alsmadi, A.A. (2019). The drivers of E-banking entrepreneurship: an empirical study. International Journal of Bank Marketing, available at: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/IJBM-03-2019-0113/full/html AlSudani, Ali M& Shona, Husam H. (2017): The role of the orientation of entrepreneurship in improving the performance of Gulf Commercial Bank / Applied Research. AL-Anbar University journal of Economic and Administration Sciences. 2017, Volume 9, Issue 20, Pages 159-181, available at: https://www.iasi.net/iasi/article/149781 Al-Swidi, A.K. and Al-Hosam, A. (2012), “The effect of entrepreneurial orientation on the organizational performance: a study on the islamic banks in yemen using the partial least squares approach”, Oman Chapter of Arabian Journal of Business and Management Review, Vol. 34 No. 970, pp. 1-12, available at: https://platform.almanhal.com/Files/Articles/41906 Ameer, Farah, and Naveed R. Khan. "Manager's age, sustainable entrepreneurial orientation and sustainable performance: a conceptual outlook." Sustainability 12.8 (2020): 3196, available at: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/8/3196.

5. Ang, J.B., Madsen, J.B., & Islam, M.R. (2011). The effects of human capital composition on technological convergence. Journal of Macroeconomics, 33(3), 465-476, available at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0164070411000164.

6. Audretsch, D.B., & Keilbach, M. (2004). Entrepreneurship and regional growth: an evolutionary interpretation. Journal of evolutionary economics, 14(5), 605-616, available at: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00191 -004-0228-6 Bahrami, P., Nosratabadi, S. and Illes, C.B. (2016), “Role of intellectual capital in corporate entrepreneurship”, Calitatea, Vol. 17 No. 155, pp. 111-115, available at: https://www.proquest.com/openview/8c5544c588b8dbeed3e536a3121da862/17pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=1046413.

7. Bambang, A., Kusumawati, A., Nimran, U., & Suharyono, S. (2021). The effect of spiritual marketing and entrepreneurship orientation on determining sustainable competitive advantage. The Journal of Asian Finance, Economics, and Business, 8(2), 231-241, available at: https://www.koreascience.or.kr/article/JAKO202104142185585.page Batjargal, B. (2007). Internet entrepreneurship: Social capital, human capital, and performance of Internet ventures in China. Research policy, 36(5), 605-618, available at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0048733307000686.

8. Brockhaus, R. (1980). Risk taking propensity of entrepreneurs. Academy of Management Journal, 23, 509-520, available at: https://iournals.aom.org/doi/abs/10.5465/255515.

9. Charband, Y., & Navimipour, N. J. (2016). Online knowledge sharing mechanisms: a systematic review of the state-of-the-art literature and recommendations for future research. Information Systems Frontiers, 18(6), 1131-1151, available at: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10796-016-9628-z Chow, I. H. S. (2006). The relationship between entrepreneurial orientation and firm performance in China. SAM Advanced Management Journal, 71(3), 11, available at: https://www.proquest.com/openview/881c1a82a1cb1ac966df5f61a68a457b/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=40946.

10. Danquah, M., & Amankwah-Amoah, J. (2017). Assessing the relationships between human capital, innovation, and technology adoption: Evidence from sub-Saharan Africa. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 122, 24-33, available at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0040162517305486 Farrugia, N. (2002). Constructing an index of international competitiveness for Malta. Bank of Valletta Review, 26, 20-37, available at: https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.561.5210&rep=rep1&type=pdf.

11. Gonzalez- Benito, O., Gonzalez- Benito, J., & Munoz- Gallego, P. A. (2009). Role of entrepreneurship and market orientation in firms' success. European Journal of Marketing, available at: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/03090560910935550/full/html Gowthorpe, C. (2009). Wider still and wider? A critical discussion of intellectual capital recognition, measurement, and control in a boundary theoretical context. Critical perspectives on accounting, 20(7), 823-834, available at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1045235408001184.

12. Halberstadt, J., Niemand, T., Kraus, S., Rexhepi, G., Jones, P., & Kailer, N. (2021). Social entrepreneurship orientation: drivers of success for start-ups and established industrial firms. Industrial Marketing Management, 94, 137-149, available at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0019850119310995.

13. Hanafizadeh, P., & Ravasan, A. Z. (2018). An empirical analysis on outsourcing decision: the case of e-banking services. Journal of enterprise information management, available at: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/JEIM-11-2016-0182/full/html.

14. Hayton, J.C. (2005), “Competing in the new economy: the effect of intellectual capital on corporate entrepreneurship in high-technology new ventures”, R&D Management, Vol. 35 No. 2, pp. 137-155, available at: https://onlinelibrary.wilev.com/doi/abs/10.1111/i.1467-9310.2005.00379.x.

15. Henseler, J., Ringle, C.M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the academy of marketing science, 43(1), 115-135, available at: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%252Fs11747-014-0403-8.

16. Hu, G.G. (2021). Is knowledge spillover from human capital investment a catalyst for technological innovation? The curious case of fourth industrial revolution in BRICS economies. Technological forecasting and social change, 162, 120327, available at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0040162520311537.

17. Hughes, M., & Morgan, R.E. (2007). Deconstructing the relationship between entrepreneurial orientation and business performance at the embryonic stage of firm growth. Industrial marketing management, 36(5), 651-661, available at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0019850106000666.

18. Imam Wafaqi 2008, Scientific Research - Preparing the Research Project and Writing the Final Report, Al-Asriyya Library for Publishing and Distribution, Mansoura, first edition.

19. Jeong, Y.M., Ali, M., Zacca, R., & Park, K. (2019). The effect of entrepreneurship orientation on firm performance: A multiple mediation model. Journal of east-west business, 25(2), 166-193, available at: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10669868.2018.1536013.

20. Kantur, D. (2016). Strategic entrepreneurship: mediating the entrepreneurial orientation- performance link. Management Decision, available at: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/MD-11-2014-0660/full/html Khan, Z., Ali, S., Umar, M., Kirikkaleli, D., & Jiao, Z. (2020). Consumption-based carbon emissions and international trade in G7 countries: the role of environmental innovation and renewable energy. Science of the Total Environment, 730, 138945, available at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0048969720324621 Kim, M., Song, J., & Triche, J. (2015). Toward an integrated framework for innovation in service: A resource-based view and dynamic capabilities approach. Information Systems Frontiers, 17(3), 533-546, available at: https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10796-014-9505-6.pdf.

21. Knight, G.A. (1997). Cross-cultural reliability and validity of a scale to measure firm entrepreneurial orientation. Journal of Business Venturing, 12, 213-225, available at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0883902696000651.

22. Kreiser, P.M., & Davis, J. (2010). Entrepreneurial orientation and firm performance: The unique impact of innovativeness, proactiveness, and risk-taking. Journal of small business & entrepreneurship, 23(1), 39-51, available at: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/08276331.2010.10593472.

23. Kreiser, P.M., Marino, L.D., & Weaver, K.M. (2002). Assessing the psychometric properties of the entrepreneurial orientation scale: A multi-country analysis. Entrepreneurship theory and practice, 26(4), 71-93, available at: https://iournals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/104225870202600405.

24. Laghouag, A., (2016), The impact of aligning Information Systems with Supply Chain Management on Business Performance, PhD thesis, Algiers University.

25. Liao, Y.C., & Zhao, H. (2020). The Moderating Effect of Entrepreneurship Orientation on New Product Innovation Performance. International Journal of Business, 25(2), 195-213, available at: https://iib.cyut.edu.tw/var/file/10/1010/img/866/V25N2-6.pdf Lucas Jr, R.E. (2009). Ideas and growth. Economica, 76(301), 1-19, available at: https://onlinelibrarv.wilev.com/doi/full/10.1111/i.1468-0335.2008.00748.x.

26. Lumpkin, G.T., & Dess, G.G. (2001). Linking two dimensions of entrepreneurial orientation to firm performance: The moderating role of environment and industry life cycle. Journal of Business Venturing, 16, 429-451, available at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0883902600000483.

27. Maditinos, D., Chatzoudes, D. and Sarigiannidis, L. (2014), “Factors affecting e-business successful implementation”, International Journal of Commerce and Management, Vol. 24 No. 4, pp. 300320, available at: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/IJCoMA-07-2012-0043/full/html.

28. Mahmoud, M.A., Blankson, C., Owusu-Frimpong, N., Nwankwo, S., & Trang, T.P. (2016). Market orientation, learning orientation and business performance: The mediating role of innovation. International Journal of Bank Marketing, available at: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/IJBM-04-2015-0057/full/html.

29. Martm-Rojas, R., Garda-Morales, V.J. and Garda-Sanchez, E. (2011), “The influence on corporate entrepreneurship of technological variables”, Industrial Management & Data Systems, Vol. 111 No. 7, pp. 984-1005, available at: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/02635571111161253/full/html.

30. Maryono, M., Ghozali, I., Kusumawardhani, A., Prabantarikso, R.M., & Basbeth, F. (2020). Entrepreneurial Orientation in Government-Owned Bank: Do They Improve Competitive Advantage?, available at: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/02635571111161253/full/html.

31. Matejun, M. (2016). Role of technology entrepreneurship in the development of innovativeness of small and medium-sized enterprises. Management, 20(1), 167-183, available at: https://www.proquest.com/openview/9fa7950b4df4bb79faf76bdafac8b710/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=2026595.

32. Miller, D. (1983). The correlates of entrepreneurship in three types of firms. Management Science, 29(7). 770-791, available at: https://pubsonline.informs.org/doi/abs/10.1287/mnsc.29.7.770 Miller, D., & Friesen, P.H. (1982). Innovation in conservative and entrepreneurial firms: Two models of strategic momentum. Strategic management journal, 3(1), 1-25, available at: https://onlinelibrary.wilev.com/doi/abs/10.1002/smi.4250030102.

33. Miller, D., & Friesen, P. H. (1983). Strategy- making and environment: the third link. Strategic management journal, 4(3), 221-235, available at: https://onlinelibrary.wilev.com/doi/abs/10.1002/smi.4250040304.

34. Mintzberg, H. (1973). Strategy-making in three modes. California management review, 16(2), 4453, available at: https://iournals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.2307/41164491?iournalCode=cmra.

35. Nasution, M.D. T.P., Rafiki, A., Lubis, A., & Rossanty, Y. (2021). Entrepreneurial orientation, knowledge management, dynamic capabilities towards e-commerce adoption of SMEs in Indonesia. Journal of Science and Technology Policy Management, available at: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/JSTPM-03-2020-0060/full/html.

36. Niemand, T., Rigtering, C., Kallmunzer, A., Kraus, S. and Matijas, S. (2017), “Entrepreneurial orientation and digitalization in the financial service industry: a contingency approach”, in Proceedings of the 25th European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS), Guimaraes, Portugal, pp. 1081-1096, available at: https://aisel.aisnet.org/ecis2017rp/70/.

37. Nissen, V., & von Rennenkampff, A. (2017). Measuring the agility of the IT application systems landscape, available at: https://aisel.aisnet.org/wi2017/track05/paper/1/.

38. Omoregie, O.K., Addae, J.A., Coffie, S., Ampong, G.O.A., & Ofori, K.S. (2019). Factors influencing consumer loyalty: evidence from the Ghanaian retail banking industry. International Journal of Bank Marketing, available at: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/IJBM-04-2018-0099/full/html.

39. Petti, C. and Zhang, S. (2011), “Factors influencing technological entrepreneurship capabilities: towards an integrated research framework for Chinese enterprises”, Journal of Technology Management in China, Vol. 6 No. 1, pp. 7-25, available at: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/17468771111105631/full/html.

40. Porter, M. (1980). Competitive strategy. New York: Free Press, available at: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/eb025476/full/html.

41. Purnomo, M., Permana, E., Qosasi, A., Febrian, A.F., & Miftahuddin, A. (2019). Entrepreneurial Orientation in Micro and Small Enterprises of Traditional Food Centers in Bandung, West Java. Binus Business Review, 10(3), 167-174, available at: https://iournal.binus.ac.id/index.php/BBR/article/view/5611.

42. Rajhi Annual Report, (2019),” Bank of the future”, available at: ARB_Annual_Report_2019_En.pdf (https://alraihibank.com.sa/).

43. Ratten, V. (2012), “Entrepreneurship, e-finance and mobile banking”, International Journal of Electronic Finance, Vol. 6 No. 1, pp. 1-12, available at: https://www.inderscienceonline.com/doi/abs/10.1504/IJEF.2012.046590.

44. Reuber, A.R., & Fischer, E. (2011). International entrepreneurship in internet-enabled markets. Journal of Business Venturing, 26(6), 660-679, available at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0883902611000541.

45. Sabahi, S., & Parast, M. M. (2020). The impact of entrepreneurship orientation on proiect performance: A machine learning approach. International Journal of Production Economics, 226, 107621, available at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0925527320300098.

46. Scheepers, M.J., Hough, J. and Bloom, J.Z. (2007), “Entrepreneurial intensity: a comparative analysis of established companies in South Africa”, South African Journal of Economic and Management Sciences, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 238-255, available at: https://iournals.co.za/doi/abs/10.10520/EJC21809.

47. Schumpeter, J.A. (1934). The theory of economic development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, available at: https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/0-306-48082-43.pdf.

48. Sikdar, P., Kumar, A. and Makkad, M. (2015), “Online banking adoption: a factor validation and satisfaction causation study in the context of Indian banking customers”, International Journal of Bank Marketing, Vol. 33 No. 6, pp. 760-785, available at: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/IJBM-11-2014-0161/full/html.