Arthatama

Journal of Business Management and Accounting
ISSN: 2655-786x (p), 2774-5678 (e)
Vol. 6, No. 1 (2022), pp. 26-43

Improving Marketing Performance through Business
Agility and Market Orientation in Micro, Small, and
Medium Enterprises in Semarang City
Sri Suprapti1,*, Suparmi2
1,2

Universitas 17 Agustus 1945 Semarang, Indonesia
*Corresponding author: praptiuntag@gmail.com

Abstract
Environmental conditions are very uncertain due to the Corona Virus -19 (Covid-19)
pandemic coupled with the very tight business competition; business Agility (business agility)
is a very important key for companies to maintain their performance. Understanding and
practicing business agility that leads to success is very important for business people. This
study investigates the impact of business Agility and market orientation related to
competitive advantage and marketing performance in Micro, Small, and Medium
Enterprises (MSMEs) in Semarang City. The population of this research is all MSMEs in
the city of Semarang, amounting to 17,564. The sample of this study amounted to 100
MSMEs using the Solving formula and proportional sampling technique. The data collected
from 100 MSMEs in Semarang City are categorized into five types of businesses: Food
MSMEs, Convection MSMEs, Trade MSMEs, Services MSMEs, and Animal Husbandry
MSMEs. The analysis reveals that business agility and market orientation significantly
improve competitive advantage and marketing performance. Competitive advantage can
mediate business agility and market orientation towards marketing performance. This
finding confirms that business agility creates a tendency for MSMEs owners always to have
access to market changes and learn in business development to achieve competitive
advantage and marketing performance. The implications of this finding emphasize that
external environmental factors that cause risk tendencies will encourage MSMEs owners
always to pay attention to environmental changes and always make efforts to adapt quickly,
precisely, and flexibly to the dynamics that occur in the market, therefore MSMEs need to
take advantage of the company’s knowledge and resources to maintain its business and
improve its competence excellence and company performance.

Keywords
Business agility, market orientation, competitive advantage, marketing performance

26

Sri Suprapti, Suparmi
Improving Marketing Performance through Business Agility and Market Orientation in Micro, Small, and
Medium Enterprises in Semarang City

1.

Introduction

The Covid -19 pandemic has had an impact on Indonesia’s economic growth. It
has caused the real sector, such as the processing industry, tourism, construction,
and property, especially Micro, Small, and Medium Enterprises (MSMEs) whose
businesses have been hit by the Covid-19 pandemic. Most (95 percent) of companies
in Indonesia are small and medium-sized companies. The existence of MSMEs in
Indonesia has been recognized for its role because it can become the backbone of the
national economy. MSMEs have been proven to be able to provide employment as
well as absorb unemployment. The Covid-19 pandemic has resulted in a decline in
the marketing performance of MSMEs, which is indicated by declining sales,
declining profits, and reduced customers. Data from the Kemenkop-UKM, until
April 2020, the impact felt by MSMEs actors who reported that as many as 56 percent
stated that they experienced a decline in sales.
Various changes occurred during the pandemic, such as communication modes,
work patterns, and internal team dynamics. The behavior patterns of business
consumers are also changing, many of which are new and shifting. Some of these
new changes or transformations gave birth to the term “New Normal,” namely
changes in behavior to continue carrying out normal activities but by adding health
protocols to prevent transmission of a new type of coronavirus, the cause of Covid19. This condition requires MSMEs actors to respond to changes, especially market
changes (Sparrow et al., 2020).
The pressure from unfavorable market changes encourages business actors to
maintain business continuity through business management agility. “Agility” is a new
way for organizations to develop flexibility and organizational responsiveness so that
they can face changes in the business environment that are very fast, dynamic, and
turbulent (Sharifi & Zhang, 1999; Sambamurthy et al., 2003; Lin et al., 2006;
Sambamurthy et al., 2007; Yaghoubi & Dahmardeh, 2010; Chen & Siau, 2012).
“Business agility” focuses not only on the ability to respond to change but also on
the ability to sense and respond to unexpected changes, as well as a means for
organizations to transform, reinvent, adapt, and ultimately survive in an everchanging business environment.
The agility of the organization shows that the organization can succeed in a
business environment through responsiveness, competence, flexibility, and speed,
which will ensure the company’s relevance and viability. Organizations must be able
to change quickly and drastically to adapt to circumstances. Agility in companies,
especially information technology (IT), is now very important because new normal
conditions, namely new normal conditions after the pandemic, demand many
changes in the company. It will impact decisions taken by the owner/leader of the
company. With a digitalization strategy that can help businesses adapt and survive in
the new normal era, MSMEs must be creative and agile to innovate to create new
profitable businesses. Innovation can be done from various sides, namely innovation
from sales channels, namely from offline synergizing with online, or innovating from
the product side. The ability to adapt or even change business models very quickly,
adapt to the unexpected and have a flexible plan has made a business survive and be
more resilient than others (Juminto, 2020).

27

Arthatama Journal of Business Management and Accounting
Vol. 6, No. 1 (2022), pp. 26-43

Nurcholis’s (2020a) research results show that agility significantly influences
marketing performance, which can be done through developing an organizational
culture focused on understanding market needs, wants, and demands. Market
orientation is a market-oriented culture. Narver & Slater (2012) and Kumar (2017)
define market orientation as a company’s organizational culture that is customeroriented, competitor, and inter-functional coordination in creating customer value
and contributes significantly to increasing the number of organizational
competencies.
The achievement of good performance is a contribution from the dynamic of
strategy and several success factors, including commitment, support, strong team
management, ability to develop and maintain business continuity; using the right
strategic approach; able to identify and focus on the market (market-oriented); have the
vision, leadership skills and good relationships with customers or clients (marketoriented) is a company that makes customers as a reference for companies to run their
business (customer orientation) so that companies can continuously be customeroriented, at the same time the company must also be oriented to competitors
(competitor orientation). Both orientations can be carried out well if the company
performs coordination (inter-functional coordination) between functional well.
Akimova et al. (1999) prove a positive and significant relationship between
market orientation and competitive advantage. It is reinforced by Bharadwaj et al.
(1993), which states that a corporate culture that emphasizes the importance of
companies paying attention to the market (market-oriented) will strengthen the
company’s competitive advantage. Utaminingsih (2016) and Merakati et al. (2017)
find that market orientation significantly affects marketing performance. In contrast
to Hatta (2015), market orientation does not directly affect marketing performance.
Li (2005) found a positive influence between competitive advantage and marketing
performance as measured by sales volume, profit level, market share, and return on
investment.
MSMEs actors in Semarang City have made various efforts to maintain their
business due to the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic. However, the impact of this
pandemic is still being felt. Efforts to overcome the impact of the Coronavirus
pandemic through business agility and market orientation are expected to increase
competitiveness and marketing performance have been carried out by MSMEs in
Semarang City. Starting from these problems, it is interesting to research improving
marketing performance through business agility and market orientation in Micro,
Small, and Medium Enterprises in Semarang City.
Based on the description above, the problems can be formulated, namely: how
are the influence of business agility and market orientation on competitive advantage,
how is the effect of competitive advantage on marketing performance, and how is
the influence of business agility and market orientation on marketing performance
both directly and through competitive advantage. This study aimed to determine the
effect of business agility and market orientation on competitive advantage and the
effect of business agility and market orientation on marketing performance either
directly or through competitive advantage.

28

Sri Suprapti, Suparmi
Improving Marketing Performance through Business Agility and Market Orientation in Micro, Small, and
Medium Enterprises in Semarang City

2.

Literature Review

2.1. Business Agility
Maskell (2001) and Zhang & Sharifi (2007) suggest that business agility is the
ability to succeed in a constantly changing and unpredictable environment and must
see change as an opportunity to gain a competitive advantage in the market. Setia et
al. (2008) identify agility as the ability of an organization to be able to: (1) find new
opportunities for competitive advantage, (2) utilize existing knowledge, assets, and
relationships to seize opportunities, (3) adapt to sudden changes in environmental
conditions business.
Thus, business agility is defined as a business that can adapt quickly to market
dynamics and respond appropriately and flexibly to customer demands, with the
following indicators: (a) able to adapt to changes that occur, (b) able to detect
opportunities and existing threats, (c) able to utilize the company’s knowledge and
resources to make changes (innovations) faster than competitors.

2.2. Market Orientation Market
Market orientation is important for companies in line with increasing global
competition and changes in customer needs, where companies realize that they must
always be close to their markets. Market Oriented Company is a company that makes
customers a reference for companies to run their business (customer orientation).
Market orientation must be used as a business culture where the organization is
committed to continuing to be creative in creating superior value for customers.
Kohli & Jaworski (1990) suggested that market orientation is a corporate culture that
can lead to increased marketing performance. Slater & Narver (1998) define market
orientation as the most effective and efficient organizational culture to create the
behaviors needed to create superior value for buyers and produce superior performance
for the company, especially in a competitive environment. Thus, it can be said that
the important key to winning the competition lies in the company’s ability to create
a competitive advantage. Competitive advantage can be achieved if the company can
provide more value to customers than what is provided by its competitors.
Slater & Narver (1999) stated that market orientation would include three
behavioral components: customer orientation, competitor orientation, and interfunctional coordination. Companies that have made an organizational culture will
focus on external market needs, wants, and demands as the basis for strategy
formulation for each business unit in the organization and determine the company’s
success. Best (2006) states that market orientation is not solely the responsibility or
concern of the marketing function alone, but the participation of all departments in
gathering dissemination and following up on market information. In addition,
market orientation focuses on the market, including customers and the factors or
forces that influence them.
Zhou et al. (2009) examined the relationship between market orientation,
competitive advantage, and firm performance, with two dimensions on each variable.
Performance measurement uses financial and non-financial performance. The results
of this study indicate that market orientation has a significant relationship with a

29

Arthatama Journal of Business Management and Accounting
Vol. 6, No. 1 (2022), pp. 26-43

competitive advantage. Competitive advantage has a significant positive relationship
with company performance, but research conducted by Miller (1993) and Raju &
Lonial (2001) state that the relationship between competitive advantage and firm
performance is predicted to increase through the perception of environmental
uncertainty.
Referring to the statements above that, the concept of market orientation can
be defined by the company’s organizational culture that is oriented towards
customers, competitors, and inter-functional coordination in creating customer
value, while the indicators used are:
a. Customer Orientation
b. Competitor orientation
c. Market information.

2.3. The Competitive Advantage
The competitive advantage needs to be owned by the company if you want to
win the competition. Bharadwaj et al. (1993) explain that competitive advantage is
the result of implementing a strategy that utilizes various resources owned by the
company. Thatte (2007) argues that competitive advantage consists of distinctive
competencies that differentiate organizations from competitors, thereby giving them
an edge in the marketplace. Competitive advantage is the advantage gained over
competitors by offering customers greater value through lower prices or by providing
additional benefits and services that provide similar or possibly higher prices. Porter
(2016) defines competitive advantage as the ability of a company to achieve economic
benefits above the profits that competitors can achieve in the same industry,
including differentiation and price. So to realize competitive advantage, the most
basic factor is to provide buyers with superior value for an item or service at low
prices, superior service and the best value offering, and an attractive combination of
price, features, quality, service, and other attributes that buyers find attractive.
Human Resources theory explains how organizations can achieve a competitive
advantage. Katua (2014) explains that businesses that focus on business resources
and capabilities will have a competitive advantage. This theory shows that
competitiveness can be achieved innovatively by providing superior value to
customers through strategic identification, and the use of resources by business
people to develop competitive advantages in a sustainable manner (Michieka &
Ogollah, 2013)
A competitive strategy is a special approach used by business people to achieve
success in each strategic business field (Ogutu & Samuel, 2012), providing an
advantage over their competitors. The competitive strategy aims to achieve a
sustainable competitive advantage by improving company performance. It can be
achieved by implementing a value creation strategy not simultaneously but through
the conditions of potential competitors (Barney, 1991). This strategy is carried out
to attract customers and defend against competitive forces. The most fundamental
factor for realizing competitive advantage is providing buyers with superior value for
goods or services at low prices, superior service and best value offerings as well as
attractive combinations of price, features, quality, service, and other attributes that

30

Sri Suprapti, Suparmi
Improving Marketing Performance through Business Agility and Market Orientation in Micro, Small, and
Medium Enterprises in Semarang City

buyers find attractive. Competitive advantage is measured by cost, differentiation,
and service (Porter, 1985).
The concept of competitive advantage used in this study is a situation in which
the company can create a good defensive position against its competitors, with the
following indicators:
a. Lower prices than competitors
b. Product innovation
c. Product differentiation

2.4. Marketing Performance
Performance is all systems related to activities and results (outcomes) obtained.
Marketing performance is a measure of achievement obtained from a company or
organization’s overall marketing process activities. In addition, marketing
performance can also be viewed as a concept used to measure the extent to which a
product produced by the company has achieved market achievements. Marketing
performance is a factor often used to measure the impact of the strategy implemented
by the company (Ferdinand & Fitriani, 2000). Furthermore, Ferdinand also stated
that good marketing performance is expressed in three main values: sales value,
growth, and market share. Moderate Voss & Voss (2000) defines marketing
performance as an effort to measure the level of performance, including sales volume,
number of customers, profits, and sales growth.
The concept of marketing performance in this study is all systems related to
activities and results (outcomes) obtained in carrying out marketing activities, which
are measured through the following indicators:
a. Sales growth,
b. Customer growth,
c. Profitability.

2.5. Business Agility and Competitive Advantage
Agility is a company’s ability to adapt to a rapidly changing environment amid
today’s complex and volatile market. The company will generate a competitive
advantage if it manages to respond to changes correctly (Setili, 2014). The most
fundamental factor for realizing competitive advantage is providing buyers with
something different from competing companies, such as the excellent value of an
item or service at low prices, excellent service, and best value offerings, as well as
attractive combinations of price, features, quality, service, and other attributes that
the buyer finds attractive. Starting from the thinking above, it can be formulated as
follows:
H1: Business agility has a positive and significant effect on competitive advantage

2.6. Market Orientation and Competitive Advantage Market
Market orientation is important for companies with increasing global
competition and changing needs of company customers to always be close to the
market. Market orientation is a business culture where the organization is committed

31

Arthatama Journal of Business Management and Accounting
Vol. 6, No. 1 (2022), pp. 26-43

to creating superior value for customers (Sugiyarti, 2016). Companies need to pay
attention to customer needs to provide superior value and customer satisfaction
levels. Market-oriented companies have advantages in customer knowledge, and
these advantages are used to create products that meet customer wants and needs
through low prices, good service, and product quality. So competitive advantage is
created if the company can provide the same product but is different from competing
companies in terms of product innovation. Based on the above considerations, the
following hypothesis can be formulated:
H2: Market orientation has a positive and significant effect on competitive advantage.

2.7. Business Agility and Marketing Performance
Business agility is the ability to identify and capture business opportunities
continuously and faster than competitors Nurcholis (2020b). Business agility allows
companies to face a changing environment and engage in new actions to control the
risks and uncertainties of the market environment (Tallon et al., 2019). Sugiyarti
(2016) states marketing performance is a measure of achievement from a company’s
overall marketing process activities.
Marketing performance can be viewed as a concept used in measuring the extent
to which market achievements can be achieved for a product the company has
produced. For this reason, the better the ability to capture business opportunities,
the better market performance, and the better the marketing performance. The
research results reinforce this by Nurcholis (2020b) that business agility significantly
affects marketing performance. It means that the better the level of agility in doing
business, the better the marketing performance, shown through sales growth;
customer growth and sales volume can increase with a fast response to changes in
demand, innovation, service, and prices. Based on the opinion above, the following
hypothesis can be formulated:
H3: Business agility has a positive and significant effect on marketing performance.

2.8. Market Orientation and Marketing Performance Market
Market orientation balances the orientation between customers and
competitors and can produce value to achieve superior business performance (Astuti
et al., 2015). It is reinforced by Tsiotsou & Vlachopoulou (2011) that companies that
carry out market orientation can achieve desired marketing performance. Marketing
performance is a benchmark to determine the extent of the work that has been
achieved by the company so that the level of success of its business in market
competition can be known. Astuti et al. (2015) research results prove that market
orientation positively and significantly impacts marketing performance. Market
orientation will focus the strategy on customers by paying attention to competitors
to increase performance. Based on the opinion above, the following hypothesis can
be formulated:
H4: Market orientation has a positive and significant effect on marketing performance

32

Sri Suprapti, Suparmi
Improving Marketing Performance through Business Agility and Market Orientation in Micro, Small, and
Medium Enterprises in Semarang City

2.9. Competitive Advantage and Marketing Performance Competitive
Competitive advantage is defined as an advantage that creates value for
customers and provides a unique position in the market, not easily imitated so that
it is superior to competitors (Wulandari & Murniawaty, 2019). Companies with
competitive advantages will become leaders in their markets and achieve aboveaverage profits (Zimmerer et al., 2008), Haji et al. (2017) suggest that the use of
competitive advantage can positively impact marketing performance.
The concept is in line with the findings of Sugiyarti (2016) and Tampi (2016),
which state competitive advantage has a positive and significant effect on marketing
performance and is reinforced by Porter (2016), who explains that competitive
advantage is the heart of marketing performance to face competition.
Based on the literature review, this research can be modeled as follows:
Business Agility
(X 1)

Market Orientation
(X2)

Competitive
Advantage
(X3)

Marketing
performance
(Y)

Figure 1. Relationship Model: Agility Business, Market Orientation, Competitive
Advantage, and Marketing Performance.

3.

Methods

This research is explanatory, with a population of all MSMEs in Semarang City
amounting to 17,564. The sample taken in this study amounted to 100 MSMEs using
the Solving formula. The sampling technique is proportional sampling, namely, taking
samples by considering the elements or categories in the research population.
Table 1. Sampling
No
1
2
3
4
5

Type of MSMEs
Calculation
MSMEs of Food
6.147 /17.564 *100= 35
MSMEs of Convection
2.635 /17.564 * 100= 15
MSMEs of Trading
5.270 / 17.564 * 100= 30
MSMEs of Services
2.535 /17.564 * 100= 15
MSMEs of Livestock
877 / 17,564 * 100=5
TOTAL
17,564
Source: primary data processed in 2021

Data collection methods used in this study were questionnaires and a literature
study. Questionnaires were distributed to 100 MSMEs via Google Forms. The
questionnaire is a multiple-choice questionnaire in which each item is provided with
5 (five) answer choices. In this study, the answers given by the respondents were then
scored using a Likert scale in the form of a checklist. The results of the validity test
can be seen in table 2 as follows:
33

Arthatama Journal of Business Management and Accounting
Vol. 6, No. 1 (2022), pp. 26-43

Table 2. Validity Assessment
Variables
Business
Agility (X1)
Market
Orientation
(X2)
Competitive
Advantage (Z)
Marketing
Performance
(Y)

Indicator
r count >/< r table
Indicator 1
0,672
>
0,361
Indicator 2
0,424
>
0,361
Indicator 3
0,514
>
0,361
Indicator 1
0,699
>
0,361
Indicator 2
0,439
>
0,361
Indicator 3
0,442
>
0,361
Indicator 1
0,603
>
0,361
Indicator 2
0,603
>
0,361
Indicator 3
0,761
>
0,361
Indicator 1
0,891
>
0,361
Indicator 2
0,782
>
0,361
Indicator 3
0,649
>
0,361
Processed primary data, 2021.

Description
Valid
Valid
Valid
Valid
Valid
Valid
Valid
Valid
Valid
Valid
Valid
Valid

Validity test conducted on research questions to improve marketing
performance through business agility and market orientation in Micro and Small
Enterprises in Semarang City, obtained r count > r table (0.361), which means that
all question items are valid. The reliability test shows that each variable has a
Cronbachs alpha greater than 0.70, so it can be said that all measuring concepts of
each variable are reliable, which means that the questionnaire used is reliable,
meaning that the answers given are consistent, and are expected to be used for further
research. A literature study is carried out to complete the data with books or journals
and theories related to the research to be carried out.
The results showed that the majority (56 percent) of MSMEs entrepreneurs in
Semarang City were male, 51 percent had a high school education, 30 percent were
aged between 42-45 years, and 35 percent were engaged in the food sector, and 32
percent had a business period of 1-5 years.
Respondents’ responses to the variable business agility were found: 25 percent of
respondents agree that MSMEs can adapt to cope with unexpected changes, 48
percent agree that they can detect opportunities and threats, and 33 percent agree
that they can implement changes faster than competitors, 44 percent agree that they
can utilize the company’s knowledge and resources to create innovation.
Respondents’ responses to market orientation variables found that 60 percent
of respondents agreed that MSMEs were always customer-oriented, 63 percent agreed
that they were always competitor-oriented, and 60 percent agreed to seek market
information to market their products, create a competitive advantage and improve
business performance.
Respondents’ responses to the variable of competitive advantage found that 72
percent of respondents agreed that MSMEs always provide lower prices than
competitors, 69 percent agreed always to innovate their products, and 66 percent
agreed to differentiate their products so that they became the main choice for
consumers.
Respondents’ responses to marketing performance variables found that 69
percent of respondents agreed that daily sales growth was quite large, 65 respondents

34

Sri Suprapti, Suparmi
Improving Marketing Performance through Business Agility and Market Orientation in Micro, Small, and
Medium Enterprises in Semarang City

agreed that customer growth had increased every month, and 70 percent agreed that
profitability was improving marketing performance and can survive until now.

4.

Results and Discussion

The first normality test results in a significance value of 0.237> 0.05, so the data
distribution in the first regression model is normally distributed, thus fulfilling the
normality assumption. The second normality test has a significance value of 0.112 >
0.05, then the data distribution in the second regression model is normally
distributed, thus fulfilling the normality assumption.
The classical multicollinearity assumption test of the first regression model has
a tolerance of 0.789 > 0.10 and a VIF value of 1.27 < 10, so there is no correlation
between independent variables, so there is no symptom of multicollinearity. The
classical multicollinearity assumption test of the second regression model has a
tolerance of 0.538, 0.475, 0.326 > 0.10 and a VIF value of 1.858, 2.106, 3.070 < 10,
so there is no correlation between independent variables, then there is no symptom
of multicollinearity. The heteroscedasticity test shows the significant value of each
variable is 0.882 and 0.338, > 0.05, so the first regression model does not occur
heteroscedasticity. The heteroscedasticity shows the significant value of each variable
0.571, 0.438, and 0.529 > 0.05, so the second regression model does not occur
heteroscedasticity.
The test Goodness of fit: the coefficient of determination of the first regression
model in the Adjusted R Squared is 0.668, meaning that business agility and market
orientation can explain the variation of the competitive advantage variable of 66.8%
obtained from 0.668 x 100%, while the rest is 33, 2% (100% - 66.8%) variation in
competitive advantage is explained by other variables not examined. The coefficient
of determination of the second regression model in the Adjusted R Squared is 0.735,
meaning that business agility, market orientation, and competitive advantage can
explain the variation of marketing performance variables of 73.5% obtained from
0.735 x 100%, the remaining 26.5% (100% - 73.5%) variation in marketing
performance is explained by other variables not examined.
The F test of the first regression model has a significance value of 0.000 <0.05,
then the regression model is fit and significant, meaning that the first regression
model regarding the effect of business agility and market orientation on competitive
advantage is feasible. The second regression model F test is 0.000 < 0.05, then the
regression model is fit and significant, meaning that the second regression model
regarding the effect of business agility, market orientation, and competitive
advantage on marketing performance is feasible. Test the hypothesis (t-test) of the
first regression model, the t value of the business agility (6.700) and market
orientation (7.989) > from t table (1.661) and a significance value of 0.000 <0.05,
meaning that business agility and market orientation have a positive and significant
effect on competitive advantage. Test the hypothesis of the second regression model,
the t value of business agility (3.073), market orientation (2.981), competitive
advantage (5.087) > from t table (1.661), and a significance value of 0.003, 0.004,
0.00 < 0.005 meaning business agility, market orientation, competitive advantage and
significant positive effect on marketing performance.
35

Arthatama Journal of Business Management and Accounting
Vol. 6, No. 1 (2022), pp. 26-43

Business agility (X1)
0,376

0,1966
Competitive
Advantage (Z)

Market Orientation
(X2)

0,475

0,556

Marketing
Performance
(Y)

0,215

Source: processed primary data, 2021
Figure 2. Results of Pathway Analysis of the Effect of Market Orientation and Market
Orientation on Marketing Performance through Competitive Advantage

The intervening test shows that the indirect effect of business agility on marketing
performance through competitive advantage obtained a value of 0.209 = 0.376 x
0.556. This value is greater when compared to the direct effect of business agility on
the competitive advantage of 0.196, which can be written as follows: 0.209 > 0.196,
meaning that competitive advantage can strengthen or mediate the influence of
business agility on marketing performance so that competitive advantage variable
intervening between the influence of business agility on marketing performance.
The intervening test shows that the indirect effect of market orientation on
marketing performance through competitive advantage is obtained by a value of
0.264 = 0.475 x 0.556, and this value is greater than the direct effect of market
orientation on the competitive advantage of 0.215, which can be written as follows:
0.264 > 0.215. It means that competitive advantage can strengthen or mediate the
effect of market orientation on marketing performance. Then the competitive
advantage variable intervenes between the effect of market orientation on marketing
performance.

4.1. The Influence of Business Agility on Competitive Advantage of MSMEs in
Semarang City.
Based on the analysis results, hypothesis one is accepted, meaning that business
agility has a positive and significant effect on competitive advantage. It can be seen
from the t arithmetic value, which is greater than the t table. The significance value
is less than 0.05, meaning that if every MSME can adapt to changes that occur and
the ability to detect existing opportunities and threats as well as the ability to utilize
knowledge and company resources to make changes (innovations) faster than
competitors, then the competitive advantage possessed by each MSMEs in Semarang
City is increasing.
These results indicate that business agility that every business owner applies will
directly be able to create a competitive advantage over MSMEs in Semarang City,
and if it is used as a culture, it will be able to face the competition that occurs. Business
agility focuses not only on the ability to respond to change but also on sensing and
responding to unexpected changes. Therefore, MSMEs owners in Semarang City
must realize that in managing a business, agility is needed to adapt to environmental

36

Sri Suprapti, Suparmi
Improving Marketing Performance through Business Agility and Market Orientation in Micro, Small, and
Medium Enterprises in Semarang City

changes to increase their competitive advantage. Companies can achieve agility if
they can respond dynamically to market changes and have high flexibility to adapt to
an unstable environment, so business agility is the key to gaining a competitive
advantage.
The results of the descriptive analysis showed that most of the respondents
agreed with the questions asked, meaning that they had applied agility in managing
their business. It shows that MSMEs owners in Semarang City are trying to continue
to implement agility to the maximum to increase their competitive advantage. These
results support the results of research by Gaddis (2000), Roberts & Grover (2012),
Wang & Ahmed (2007), and Yaghoobi et al. 2014, which states that business agility
is critical to increasing competitive advantage. The ability of a company or
organization to sense and quickly respond to environmental changes will impact the
company’s operations management by engaging and reconfiguring enterprise
resources (Roberts & Grover, 2012).

4.2. The Effect of Market Orientation on Competitive Advantage on MSMEs in
Semarang City
Based on the analysis results, the second hypothesis is accepted, meaning that
market orientation has a positive and significant effect on competitive advantage.
This can be seen from the t-count value, which is greater than the t-table, and the
significance value is less than 0.05. This means that if each MSMEs has a customer
orientation, competitor orientation, and market information that is getting better
and higher, the competitive advantage possessed by each MSMEs in Semarang City
will increase. These results indicate that the market orientation applied by each
business owner will directly create a competitive advantage for MSMEs in Semarang
City. This indicates that market orientation must be owned by MSMEs owners, such
as focusing on customers and providing services that follow consumer expectations,
which will lead to strengthening the competitive advantage of MSMEs in Semarang
City so that they can survive in the midst of existing competition because with
increased market orientation can increase their competitive advantage.
The results of the descriptive analysis showed that most of the respondents
agreed with the questions asked, meaning that they had implemented customer
orientation and competitor orientation and applied market information well. This
also shows that MSMEs owners in Semarang City strive to continue applying market
orientation to the maximum to increase their competitive advantage. These results
have supported the results of the study. Irina Akimova et al. (1999) proved that
market orientation positively influences competitive advantage. The results of this
study support the opinion of Bharadwaj et al. (1993), which states that a culture that
emphasizes the importance of companies paying attention to the market (marketoriented) will strengthen the company’s competitive advantage.

4.3. The Influence of Business Agility on Marketing Performance on MSMEs in
Semarang City
Based on the analysis results, the third hypothesis is accepted, meaning that
business agility positively and significantly affects marketing performance. This can
37

Arthatama Journal of Business Management and Accounting
Vol. 6, No. 1 (2022), pp. 26-43

be seen from the t-count value, which is greater than the t-table, and the significance
value is less than 0.05. It means that if every MSME can adapt to changes that occur
and the ability to detect existing opportunities and threats as well as the ability to
utilize the company’s knowledge and resources to make changes (innovations) faster
than competitors, then the marketing performance of each MSMEs in Semarang City
is increasing.
These results indicate the importance of business agility carried out by MSMEs
owners to improve the marketing performance of MSMEs in Semarang City. This
indicates that an increase in business agility will impact the marketing performance of
MSMEs in Semarang City. These results show that the increasing business agility as
measured by indicators of having the ability to adapt to changes that occur and the
ability to detect existing opportunities and threats, as well as the ability to utilize the
company’s knowledge and resources to make changes (innovations) faster than
competitors, becomes a consideration for MSMEs owners to improve marketing
performance.
The results of the descriptive analysis showed that most of the respondents
agreed with the questions asked. It means that MSMEs owners in Semarang City
have tried to improve their agility business to improve their marketing performance.
These results support the research results of Tallon & Pinsonneault (2011) and
Ravichandran (2018), which state that business agility has a positive and significant
effect on company performance.

4.4. The Effect of Market Orientation on Marketing Performance on MSMEs in
Semarang City
Based on the analysis results, the fourth hypothesis is accepted, meaning market
orientation positively and significantly affects marketing performance. It can be seen
from the t-count value, which is greater than the t-table, and the significance value is
less than 0.05, meaning that if each MSME has a high customer orientation, high
competitor orientation, and better coordination between functions, the marketing
performance will be better owned by each MSMEs in Semarang City is increasing.
The market orientation of MSMEs owners in Semarang City appears in the form of
a business strategy, which is always directed to produce good market performance,
such as the development of the number of sales and business profits. To increase
sales volume and profit, it is necessary to understand intensive market orientation.
These results show that a better market orientation as measured by indicators
such as customer orientation, competitor orientation, and market information will
be able to be an assessment of whether or not market orientation is carried out by
MSMEs owners in Semarang City so that they will be able to improve their marketing
performance. The results of the descriptive analysis showed that most of the
respondents agreed with the questions asked. It means that MSMEs owners in
Semarang City have implemented market orientation to improve their marketing
performance. These results have supported Merakati et al.’s (2017) research, which
found that market orientation significantly affected marketing performance.

38

Sri Suprapti, Suparmi
Improving Marketing Performance through Business Agility and Market Orientation in Micro, Small, and
Medium Enterprises in Semarang City

4.5. The Effect of Competitive Advantage on Marketing Performance
Based on the analysis results, hypothesis five is accepted, meaning that
competitive advantage positively and significantly affects marketing performance. It
can be seen that the t-count value is greater than the t-table, and the significance
value is less than 0.05. It means that if each MSME has a lower price than
competitors, product innovation, and product differentiation, then the marketing
performance of each MSME in Semarang City will increase. It indicates that to
improve the performance of their business, the MSMEs owners in Semarang City
must create their competitive advantage first so that they can obtain a higher average
profit than their competitors, can further emphasize the position of MSMEs in
market share and their competitiveness within MSMEs and able to survive in
competition among MSMEs.
The results of the descriptive analysis show that most of the respondents have
responded agreeably to the statement submitted, which means that the competitive
advantage possessed by MSMEs in Semarang City is good so that it can improve the
marketing performance of these MSMEs. These results support previous research,
which shows a positive influence between competitive advantage and marketing
performance (Li et al., 2006; Barney, 1991; Majeed, 2011; Nguyen et al., 2007; Agha
et al., 2012; Chantika, 2013.

5.

Conclusion

MSMEs in Semarang City can increase their competitive advantage and
marketing performance if they have business agility, which includes the ability to adapt
to changes, detect opportunities and threats, and utilize the company’s knowledge
and resources to make changes (innovations) faster than competitors. The
competitive advantage and marketing performance of MSMEs in the city of
Semarang will increase if they have a broad market orientation which includes
customer orientation, competitor orientation, and better and higher market
information. MSMEs in Semarang City can improve their marketing performance if
they can create a competitive advantage, namely having a lower price than
competitors, being able to innovate, and product differentiation.

Acknowledgment
On this occasion, the author would like to express the deepest gratitude to Mrs.
Dra. Endang Swastuti, MM, Mrs. Dr. H. Ratnawati Dwi Putranti, MM, and Mrs. Dr.
Dra. Nurchayati, SE, MSi. Ak who has helped review this article and all those who
have helped the author either directly or indirectly.

References
Agha, S., Alrubaiee, L., & Jamhour, M. (2012). Effect of core competence on
competitive advantage and organizational performance. International Journal of
Business and management, 7(1), 192-204.
39

Arthatama Journal of Business Management and Accounting
Vol. 6, No. 1 (2022), pp. 26-43

Akimova, I. V, Eliseev, P. G., Osin’ski, M., & Li, H. (1999). Recombination balance
in green-light-emitting GaN/InGaN/AlGaN quantum wells. Applied Physics
Letters, 75(24), 3838–3840.
Astuti, S. I., Arso, S. P., & Wigati, P. A. (2015). Analisis standar pelayanan minimal
pada instalasi rawat jalan di RSUD Kota Semarang. Jurnal Kesehatan Masyarakat
(Undip), 3(1), 103-111.
Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of
management, 17(1), 99-120.
Best, K. (2006). Design management: managing design strategy, process and implementation.
AVA publishing.
Bharadwaj, S. G., Varadarajan, P. R., & Fahy, J. (1993). Sustainable competitive
advantage in service industries: a conceptual model and research propositions.
Journal of Marketing, 57(4), 83–99.
Bharadwaj, S. G., Varadarajan, P. R., & Fahy, J. (1993). Sustainable competitive
advantage in service industries: a conceptual model and research
propositions. Journal of marketing, 57(4), 83-99.
Chantika, O. D. (2013). Kinerja Organisasi UPTD Pengujian Kendaraan Bermotor
Wiyung Kota Surabaya. Jurnal: Kebijakan dan Manajemen Publik, 1(1), 6-11.
Chen, X., & Siau, K. L. (2012). Effect of business intelligence and IT infrastructure
flexibility on organizational agility. International Conference on Information Systems,
ICIS 2012, 4, 3361–3379.
Ferdinand, Augusty Tae, and Lili Fitriani. “Acculturative iconic product
attractiveness and marketing performance.” Journal of Global Strategic
Management 9.2 (2015).
Gaddis, P. O. 2000. Adaptive enterprise —Creating and leading sense-and-respond
organizations.
Long
Range
Planning,
33(2),
268–271.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0024-6301(00)00018-2.
Haji, S., Arifin, R., & ABS, M. K. (2017). Pengaruh Orientasi Kewirausahaan,
Inovasi Produk, Keunggulan Bersaing Terhadap Kinerja Pemasaran Usaha
cengkeh Di Bawean. Jurnal Ilmiah Riset Manajemen, 6(02).
Hatta, I. H., (2015). Orientasi Pasar, Orientasi Kewirausahaan, Kapabilitas
Pemasaran dan Kinerja Pemasaran. Jurnal Aplikasi Manajemen (JAM), 13(4),
654–660.
Juminto, M. S. (2020). Adaptasi UMKM saat New Normal. JawaPos, Juni 24, 2020.
https://www.jawapos.com/opini/24/06/2020/adaptasi-umkm-saat-newnormal/.
Katua, F. S. (2014). Information security management strategy implementation
challenges at Kenya electricity generating company. Erepository.Uonbi, 1–57.
Kohli, A. K., & Jaworski, B. J. (1990). Market Orientation: The construct, reseach
propositions, and managerial implications. Journal of Marketing, 54(April), 1–18.
Kumar, S. (2017). Does “Participation” in common pool resource management help
the poor? A social cost-benefit analysis of joint forest management in Jharkhand,
India. Development: Critical Essays in Human Geography, 295–314.
https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315258027-16.

40

Sri Suprapti, Suparmi
Improving Marketing Performance through Business Agility and Market Orientation in Micro, Small, and
Medium Enterprises in Semarang City

Li, L. (2005). Assessing intermediate infrastructural manufacturing decisions that
affect a firm’s market performance. International Journal of Production
Research, 43(12), 2537-2551.
Li, S., Ragu-Nathan, B., Ragu-Nathan, T. S. & Rao, S. S. (2006). The Impact of
Supply Chain Management Practices on Competitive Advantage and
Organizational Performance. Omega, 34, 107-124.
Lin, L., FuAltiparmak, L., Gen, M., & Paksoy, T. (2006). A genetic algorithm
approach for multi-objective optimization of supply chain networks. Computers
and
Industrial
Engineering,
51(1),
196–215.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2006.07.011.
Majeed, S. (2011). The impact of competitive advantage on organizational
performance. European Journal of Business and Management, 3(4), 191-196.
Merakati, I., Rusdarti, R., & Wahyono, W. (2017). Pengaruh orientasi pasar, inovasi,
orientansi kewirausahaan melalui keunggulan bersaing terhadap kinerja
pemasaran. Journal of Economic Education, 6(2), 114-123.
Michael, P. E. (1985). Competitive advantage: creating and sustaining superior performance.
New York: FreePress.
Michieka, F. A., & Ogollah, K. (2013). Role of organizational design on the
performance of commercial banks: A case of National Bank of
Kenya. International Journal of Social Sciences and Entrepreneurship, 1(7), 477-489.
Miller, D. (1993). The Architecture of Simplicity. Academy of Management Review,
18(1), 116–138. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1993.3997509.
Narver, J. C., & Slater, S. F. (2012). The Effect of Market Orientation on Business
Profitability.
Developing
a
Market
Orientation,
45–78.
https://doi.org/10.4135/9781452231426.n3.
Nguyen, T. U. H., Sherif, J. S. & Newby, M. (2007). Strategies for Successful CRM
Implementation. Information Management & Computer Security, 15(2), 102115.
Nurcholis, L. (2020a). How to improve internationalization strategy based on market
characteristics, culture understanding, and knowledge management: the
mediating effect of management behavior. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 1–
24.
Nurcholis, L. (2020b). The mediating effect of agility at relationship between market
orientation and marketing performance. Jurnal Manajemen Dan Pemasaran Jasa,
13(1), 65–78.
Ogutu, M., & Samuel, C. M. (2012). Strategies Adopted By Multinational
Corporations to Cope With Competition in Kenya. Strategies, 2(3), 69-82.
Porter, M. E. (2016). Conipetitiv e Advantag e, Agglom era t io it Ecortonzies, and
Regional Policy. Internation Regional Science Review, 94(1996), 85–90.
Raju, P. S., & Lonial, S. C. (2001). The Impact of Quality Context and Market
Orientation on Organizational Performance in a Service Environment. Journal
of Service Research, 4(2), 140–154. https://doi.org/10.1177/109467050142006.
Ravichandran, T. (2018). Exploring the relationships between IT competence,
innovation capacity and organizational agility. The Journal of Strategic Information
Systems, 27(1), 22-42.

41

Arthatama Journal of Business Management and Accounting
Vol. 6, No. 1 (2022), pp. 26-43

Roberts, N., and V. Grover. 2012. Leveraging information technology infrastructure
to facilitate a firm’s customer agility and competitive activity: An empirical
investigation. Journal of Management Information Systems, 28(4), 231–270.
https://doi.org/10.2753/MIS0742-1222280409.
Sambamurthy, V., Bharadwaj, A., & Grover, V. (2003). Shaping agility through
digital options: Reconceptualizing the role of information technology in
contemporary firms. MIS Quarterly, 237–263.
Sambamurthy, V., Lee, O. K. D., Lim, K. H., & Wei, K. K. (2007). IT-enabled
organizational agility and firms’ sustainable competitive advantage. ICIS 2007
Proceedings - Twenty Eighth International Conference on Information Systems.
https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1249301
Setia, P., Sambamurthy, V., & Closs, D. J. (2008). Realizing business value of agile
IT applications: antecedents in the supply chain networks. Information
Technology and Management, 9(1), 5-19.
Setili, A. (2014). The agility advantage: How to identify and act on opportunities in a fastchanging world. John Wiley & Sons.
Sharifi, H., & Zhang, Z. (1999). A methodology for achieving agility in
manufacturing organisations: An introduction. International Journal of Production
Economics, 62(1–2), 7–22.
Slater, S. F., & Narver, J. C. (1998). Customer-led and market-oriented: Let’s not
confuse the two. Strategic Management Journal, 19(10), 1001–1006.
https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199810)19:10<1001::AIDSMJ996>3.0.CO;2-4.
Slater, S. F., & Narver, J. C. (1999). Market‐oriented is more than being customer‐
led. Strategic Management Journal, 20(12), 1165–1168.
Sparrow, R., Dartanto, T., & Hartwig, R. (2020). Indonesia under the new normal:
Challenges and the way ahead. Bulletin of Indonesian Economic Studies, 56(3), 269299.
Sugiyarti, G. (2016). Analisis Kinerja Pemasaran Usaha Kecil Menengah Batik di
Provinsi Jawa Tengah. Unisbank Semarang, 1945(024), 643–650.
Tallon, P. P., & Pinsonneault, A. (2011). Competing perspectives on the link
between strategic information technology alignment and organizational agility:
insights from a mediation model. MIS quarterly, 463-486.
Tallon, P. P., Queiroz, M., Coltman, T., & Sharma, R. (2019). Information
technology and the search for organizational agility: A systematic review with
future research possibilities. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 28(2),
218–237.
Tampi, N. H. R. (2016). Analisis Strategi Diferensiasi Produk, Diferensiasi Layanan
Dan Diferensiasi Citra Terhadap Keunggulan Bersaing Dan Kinerja Pemasaran
(Studi Pada PT. Telkomsel Grapari Manado). Jurnal EMBA: Jurnal Riset Ekonomi,
Manajemen, Bisnis Dan Akuntansi, 3(4).
Thatte, A. (2007). Competitive advantage of firm through supply chain responsiveness and
SCM Practices. PhD. Dissertation, The University of Toledo.
Tsiotsou, R. H., & Vlachopoulou, M. (2011). Understanding the effects of market
orientation and e-marketing on service performance. Marketing Intelligence &
Planning, 29(2), 141-155.

42

Sri Suprapti, Suparmi
Improving Marketing Performance through Business Agility and Market Orientation in Micro, Small, and
Medium Enterprises in Semarang City

Utaminingsih, A. (2016). Pengaruh orientasi pasar, inovasi, dan kreativitas strategi
pemasaran terhadap kinerja pemasaran pada UKM kerajinan rotan di Desa
Teluk Wetan, Welahan, Jepara. Media Ekonomi Dan Manajemen, 31(2), 77–87.
Voss, G. B., & Voss, Z. G. (2000). Strategic orientation and firm performance in an
artistic environment. Journal of marketing, 64(1), 67-83.
Wang, C. L., and P. K. Ahmed. 2007. Dynamic capabilities: A review and research
agenda.
International
Journal
of
Management
Reviews.
https://doi.org/10.1111/J.1468-2370.2007.00201.X.
Wulandari, E., & Murniawaty, I. (2019). Peningkatan Keunggulan Bersaing Melalui
Diferensiasi Produk Dan Diferensiasi Citra Serta Pengaruhnya Terhadap
Kinerja Pemasaran Ikm Kopi Di Kabupaten Temanggung. Jurnal Manajemen
Pemasaran, 13(2), 69–77. https://doi.org/10.9744/pemasaran.13.2.69-77
Yaghoobi, N. M., M. Bakhshimazdeh, and M. Alikhasi. 2014. Analysing key concepts
of organisation: knowledge management, competitive intelligence and
competitive advantage. International Journal of Services and Operations
Management, 18(3), 321. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJSOM.2014.062234.
Yaghoubi, N. M., & Dahmardeh, M. R. (2010). Analytical approach to effective
factors on organizational agility. Journal of Basic and Applied Scientific Research,
1(1), 76–87.
Zhang, Z. D., & Sharifi, H. (2007). Towards theory building in agile manufacturing
strategy - A taxonomical approach. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management,
54(2), 351–370. https://doi.org/10.1109/TEM.2007.893989
Zhou, K. Z., Brown, J. R., & Dev, C. S. (2009). Market orientation, competitive
advantage, and performance: A demand-based perspective. Journal of business
research, 62(11), 1063-1070.
Zimmerer, T. W., Scarborough, N. M., & Wilson, D. (2008). Kewirausahaan dan
manajemen usaha kecil. Jakarta: Salemba Empat.

43