The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
https://www.emerald.com/insight/0143-7739.htm
LODJ
43,3
370
Received 14 November 2021
Revised 3 January 2022
Accepted 20 January 2022
Leadership & Organization
Development Journal
Vol. 43 No. 3, 2022
pp. 370-385
© Emerald Publishing Limited
0143-7739
DOI 10.1108/LODJ-11-2021-0516
Exploring the predictor and
the consequence of digital
organisational culture:
a quantitative investigation using
sufficient and necessity approach
Astadi Pangarso, Alex Winarno, Pramitha Aulia and
Dinda Aulia Ritonga
Business Administration Department, Telkom University, Bandung, Indonesia
Abstract
Purpose – Digital organisational culture is essential for organisations in the digital era. However, examination
of the role of digital organisational culture in government institutions remains limited. Thus, this study aims to
investigate the influence of digital organisational culture on employee performance by considering
empowering leadership as a predictor.
Design/methodology/approach – This study analyses the research framework on the basis of a survey of 76
employees at the Indonesian Ministry of Administrative Reform and Bureaucratic Reform. The framework relating
to the influence of digital organizational culture is tested using a mix of partial least square structural equation
modeling (PLS-SEM) and an examination of the essential circumstances (necessary condition analysis/ NCA).
Findings – The findings indicate that empowering leadership is a sufficient condition for digital
organisational culture. Empowering leadership positively and significantly affects digital organisational
culture. Digital organisational culture positively and significantly affects employee performance. Empowering
leadership represents a necessary condition for digital organisational culture. A digital organisational culture
is necessary and sufficient for government employee performance.
Practical implications – Results of this study practically suggest that digital organisational culture can be
considered vital to a strategy for improving government employee performance. Empowering leadership is a
key success factor in improving digital organisational culture. This study initiated the identification of the role
of digital organisational culture in the government institution context.
Originality/value – Methodologically, this study stated a paradigm that combines the PLS-SEM and NCA
approaches in public administration research by identifying the influence on sufficient and necessary digital
organisational culture government employee performance.
Keywords Digital organisational culture, Empowering leadership, Employee performance,
Government institution
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
Technological disruption compels organisations to adapt to the digital era (Kraus et al., 2021).
In the digital era, government institutions must adapt and create a digital era of governance
(Dunleavy et al., 2006). Digital technology improves the quality and quantity of government
institution services. Changes in the digital era for organisational public governance are
radical changes, including changes related to organisational culture (Margetts and Dunleavy,
2013). Digital organisational culture is “collective values and beliefs regarding availability, uses
attitudes, and habits related to ICTs” (Navaridas-Nalda et al., 2020). Hadi and Baskaran (2021)
state a clearer definition of digital organisational culture, namely: “a set of shared values,
Indonesian Ministry of State Apparatus Utilization and Bureaucratic Reform/PANRB, which has
allowed to conduct research and LPPM Telkom University has provided support related to research
publications.
assumptions, beliefs, ways of interacting, and ways of working that contribute to a unique social Exploring
and psychological environment of an organisation in creating, delivering and capturing value by digital culture
employing digital technologies”. To realize successful digitalization in organisations, it is not
enough to have a common organisational culture. Still, it is necessary to adjust the concept to
become a digital organisational culture. For example, various digital technologies have been
widely used in organisations, such as the use of digital communication technology to
collaborate. If the organisation still uses a common organisational culture, it will result in the
unpreparedness of people in the organisation to collaborate through digital communication 371
technology (Hoffman and Klepper, 2000). Digital organisational culture is an important and
interesting part of organisational life in the digital era (Zhen et al., 2021). Organisational
culture in the digital era is related to communicating organisational values to collaborate
through digital technology (Trushkina et al., 2020). However, studies on digital organisational
culture in the government institution context remain scant.
As additional information, research on the influence of digital organisational culture is found
in the business organisation context. Zhen et al. (2021) unveiled that digital organisational culture
significantly and directly affects digital innovation for SMEs in the ICT industry in Pakistan.
Mart
ınez-Caro et al. (2020) revealed that digital organisational culture significantly and indirectly
affects organisational performance mediated by business digitization and digital technology
value development for multinational companies in France. However, contradictions exist in the
research results. Abdullahi et al. (2021), Paais and Pattiruhu (2020), Lolowang et al. (2019),
Harinoto et al. (2018) and Hakim (2012) stated that organisational culture has a significant direct
and positive effect on employee performance, whereas Sapta et al. (2021), Kustono (2020) and
Pawirosumarto et al. (2017) revealed that organisational culture does not significantly and
directly affect employee performance. Based on the limitations of research related to the research
context and the contradictions of research results, digital organisational culture research must be
explored and analysed. Furthermore, digital organisational culture warrants exploration by
considering two forms of influence based on sufficient and necessary.
This research fills the existing research gap with two contributions to research in the
government institution context. Firstly, this research initiates the role of digital organisational
culture in government institutions. Adopting organisational culture theory indicates that a
strong organisational culture is helps improve employee performance (Deal and Kennedy, 1982)
and the role of leadership in organisational culture (Schein, 1985). This study investigates how
digital organisational culture affects employee performance by considering empowering
leadership as a predictor. Second, the study examined whether a digital organizational culture is
a necessary condition for favourable employee performance outcomes using a mix of PLS-SEM
and NCA (Richter et al., 2020). As a result, our research contributes to the theoretical and
practical knowledge of digital organizational culture in government institutions.
The structure of this paper starts from the relevance of digital organisational culture in
government institutions, follows by an explanation of the theoretical foundations and the
preparation of hypotheses. Then, the application for PLS-SEM and NCA is related to data
analysis. Finally, the last section discusses the final research.

Theoretical foundation and hypotheses development

An organisation is a group of people aiming to achieve a common goal (Pangarso, 2014). To
achieve organisational goals, everyone in the organisation has an important role.
Organisational culture is one of the important elements for organisations to achieve the
goal. The popularity of organisational culture began in the 1980s with Deal and Kennedy.
According to Schein (1985, 2017) organisational culture is “a pattern of basic assumptions that
a given group has invented, discovered, or developed in learning to cope with its problems of
external adaptation and internal integration, and that has worked well enough to be considered
LODJ valid therefore, to be taught to new members as the correct way to perceive, think, and feel about
43,3 these problems”. Regarding changes in the organisational environment that are fast and
dynamic, especially those related to digital technology, they also affect the emergence of
digital organisational culture constructs. Digital organisational culture is a set of values,
beliefs and assumptions held by people in the organisation to develop a collaborative,
creative and innovative work environment to be able to adapt to the digital era.
The role of organisational culture has been stated from various perspectives, one of which
372 is leadership (Schein, 2017). Of the various types of leadership that exist, empowering
leadership is a form of leadership that is effective, useful, humane and virtuous (Cheong et al.,
2019). Empowering leadership is a process of sharing power, allocating autonomy and
responsibility to followers (or teams) collectively through a series of leader behaviours to
generate internal motivation and success in achieving goals (Cheong et al., 2019).
Empowering leadership is relevant to organisational characteristics in the digital era
(Frick et al., 2021). In the digital era, changes occur rapidly, dynamically and may be difficult
to predict; thus flexible leadership is needed. Leaders cannot constantly monitor the work of
their followers. Leaders must delegate some responsibility and authority to their followers so
that leaders can focus more on work for things that tend to be strategic, and the organisation
can be agile to keep up with changes in the digital era. Therefore, followers in organisations
must have leadership skills independently, which is highly relevant to the concept of
empowering leadership (Amundsen and Martinsen, 2015).
Therefore, research that identifies the role of digital organisational culture and its
influence on employee performance in the government institution context by considering
empowering leadership is warranted. This study predicts the effect of empowering
leadership on digital organisational culture and the effect of digital organisational culture on
employee performance. Additionally, this study combines PLS-SEM and NCA to determine
whether empowering leadership is a necessary condition for building a digital organisational
culture. This study also determines whether digital organisational culture is a necessary
factor for employee performance in government institutions.
In the digital era, government institutions also need empowering leadership so that each
member of the organisation can be entrusted with the responsibility to actively and
proportionally contribute to decision making. The active role of each member of the
organisation due to the delegation of responsibility will form values and habits, resulting in an
agile organisation following environmental changes in the digital era. Hendryadi et al. (2019)
indicated that government institutions tend to apply a bureaucratic organisational culture.
Hendryadi et al. (2019) also proved that organisations with bureaucratic cultures can play a
significant role in reducing the presence of empowering leadership. This must be anticipated so
that government institutions can remain flexible in following environmental changes in the
digital era. Parry and Proctor-thomson (2003) stated that a reciprocal influence exists between
leadership and organisational culture, increasing empowering leadership in government
institutions, which is a requirement for value creation in government institution, given that an
organisation is related to the digital world. Hadi and Baskaran (2021) asserted that leadership is
a requirement to build organisational culture. Wibisono et al. (2018), Rizki et al. (2019) and
Lolowang et al. (2019) also found a significant influence of leadership on organisational culture.
To the best of the authors’ knowledge, no research exists that has tested the effect of either
sufficient or necessary empowering leadership on digital organisational culture for the context
of government institutions. Thus, the first hypothesis is proposed as follows:
H1. Empowering leadership directly, positively and significantly affects digital
organisational culture (sufficient).
H2. Empowering leadership is a requirement that significantly influences the emergence
of digital organisational culture (necessary).
The significant influence of organisational culture on employee/job performance has been Exploring
widely studied and proven by studies, such as those by Hakim (2012), Batcha et al. (2017), digital culture
Harinoto et al. (2018), Mukhtar (2018), Lolowang et al. (2019) and dos Santos et al. (2020).
However, contradictions exist in the empirical test results with research conducted by
Pawirosumarto et al. (2017), Kustono (2020), Paais and Pattiruhu (2020) and Sapta et al. (2021),
which stated that organisational culture does not significantly affect on employee
performance. The inconsistency of empirical test results on the influence of organisational
culture on employee performance warrants retesting. 373
Lee et al. (2017) stated that hierarchical culture can reduce employee job performance. This
is also inconsistent with the results of other previous studies on the effect of organizational
culture on employee performance. The inconsistency of the results of this study also
underlines the need to examine the influence of organisational culture on employee
performance. Hierarchical culture is one form of an organisational culture characterized by a
high level of centralization of decision-making and formalization that causes less flexibility
for people in the organisation to collaborate. Hierarchical culture is less relevant for
organisations in general in the digital age. The reason is because the hierarchical culture
results in organisational members not having the values that guide them to work agilely
following changes due to digital technology. Different from the digital organisational culture,
which provides values as a guide for organisations in the digital era to collaborate using
various digital technologies. The existence of values and norms for collaboration from the
digital organisational culture within the organisation will improve employee performance.
Therefore, in government institutions in the digital era, digital organisational culture
(different from hierarchical culture) affects increasing employee performance. Digital values
for collaboration that guide organisational members to work have increased employee
performance (Elyousfi et al., 2021; Kock, 2017; Braun et al., 2012). To the best of the authors’
knowledge no study has tested the effect of either a sufficient or necessary digital
organisational culture on employee performance in the government institution context. Thus,
the third hypothesis is proposed as follows:
H3. Digital organisational culture directly, positively and significantly affects employee
performance (sufficient).
H4. Digital organisational culture is a requirement that significantly affects the
emergence of employee performance (necessary).
Kim et al. (2018) concluded that job performance is an outcome of empowering leadership.
Vecchio et al. (2010) have examined various constructs that mediate the influence of
empowering leadership on performance. Limakrisna et al. (2016), Ali et al. (2018), Wibisono
et al. (2018) and Kustono (2020) also found the indirect effect of leadership constructs on
employee performance. Empowering leadership provides responsibility and trust for
followers to participate and contribute more through autonomy at work. This will form habits
and values that are relevant in the digital era, which can increase the existence of digital
organisational culture. Values in the digital organisational culture include collaboration,
creativity, innovation and continuous improvement (Hadi and Baskaran, 2021). The existence
of responsibility, trust and autonomy will ease collaboration in organisations using digital
technology. The digital organisational culture will affect increasing employee performance
because it already has guidelines for working in the digital era. As far as the authors know, no
research has examined the effect of empowering leadership on employee performance with
digital organisational culture as a mediator for the context of government institutions. Thus,
the fifth hypothesis if proposed as follows:
H5. Digital organisational culture significantly mediates the effect of empowering
leadership on employee performance.
LODJ On the basis of the hypothesis that has been formed, a theoretical framework was created to
43,3 explore the influence of empowering leadership on digital organisational culture and its effect
on employee performance in Figure 1.

Methodology
This study employed the PLS-SEM approach to assess and analyse the influence of
374 components on the theoretical framework. This methodology enables examining the
framework’s causal–predictive relationship and generating and testing hypotheses
(Benitez et al., 2020; Chin et al., 2020). PLS-SEM performs a series of ordinary least squares
regressions on the indicator composite scores (Carri
on et al., 2017; Rigdon et al., 2017).
PLS-SEM analyses the indicator composite scores through a series of ordinary least
squares regression (Hair et al., 2016, 2019a, b). Along with having greater statistical
power than covariant-based SEM (Sarstedt et al., 2017), it enables researchers to
connect explanatory and predictive concepts (Sarstedt et al., 2016; Hair et al., 2021).
PLS-SEM with NCA enables a logical evaluation of framework needs (Dul, 2016; Richter
et al., 2020). NCA establishes the necessity of a predictor construct for the existence of a
subsequent construct. The PLS-SEM (sufficient) analysis was performed using the
SmartPLS 3 software (Ringle et al., 2015) and the requisite NCA was carried out using R
(Dul, 2021).
Self-administrated questionnaire items for surveys were adopted from previous studies in
Table 1. The measurement scale of research constructs uses a Likert scale ranging from 1
(strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree) (Carifio and Perla, 2007; Wu and Leung, 2017). The
adopted questionnaire items were translated into the Indonesian language. Then a pilot test
was carried out to check the validity and reliability of the instrument for 40 employees of the
Indonesian Ministry of State Apparatus Utilization and Bureaucratic Reform using SPSS.
The results of the pilot test showed that all questionnaire items were valid and reliable. In
addition, the questionnaire items were re-translated from language into English to minimise
meaning bias due to language translation (Brislin, 1970). Finally, a survey to collect
questionnaire data was carried out in April to August 2021. The minimum number of
respondents to qualify for PLS-SEM processing using G*Power software (effect size
f2 5 0.15; err prob 5 0.05; power (1-βerr prob) 5 0.80; number of predictors 5 2) is 68 people
(Memon et al., 2020). Technical surveys through enumerators and questionnaires were
distributed online using an online Google form via e-mail and/or private network (email and
or WhatsApp). A total of 80 voluntary basis questionnaires were collected, and outliers were
checked using SPSS (Schamberger et al., 2020). The number of questionnaires collected and

Figure 1.
Theoretical framework
feasible to be processed (free from outliers) were 76 respondents (response rate 95%). The Exploring
summary of the demographic profile of the respondents is provided in Table 2. digital culture
Bernerth and Aguinis (2016) noted that gender, age, and work experience are all common
predictors of job performance. Additionally, this study evaluates the effect of gender, age, and
job experience as control factors to eliminate the possibility of “contamination” between
spurious variables/potential antecedents-outcomes (Aguinis et al., 2021).
375
Result
This study refers to the PLS-SEM guidelines according to Hair et al. (2016, 2019a, b) to examine
the measurement models. Common method variance was tested on the basis of Kock (2015) and
Podsakoff and Organ (1986). First, this research comprises contextual information, opening
sentences and detailed explanations so that respondents can understand the questionnaire also
there is an agreement to become a respondent (information consent). All answers to questions
and statements in the questionnaire are anonymous; related to the perception of the research
constructs stated that there were no right or wrong answers; no relationship exists between
questionnaire items and questionnaire items per questionnaire construct distributed at
different times (Podsakoff et al., 2012). Secondly, a collinearity test was conducted. Based on the
AFVIF (full collinearity) value in the diagonal position in Table 3, all of which are below 3.3, it
can be concluded that this research framework is free from common method bias (Kock, 2015).
To minimise non-response bias, the questionnaire was distributed through enumerators
(authors use an official license to research and enumerators are permanent employees who
oversee the human resource department and have the authority to collect data) and on the
questionnaire, it is stated that by becoming a respondent and filling out this questionnaire, the
respondent contributes to the improvement of employee performance (Fuchs et al., 2013).
A bootstrap procedure of 5,000 samples and a two-tail test were used on the basis of a 95%
confidence level to check the significance. The reflective measurement model was examined
by analysing item reliability, internal consistency of construct reliability, construct
convergent validity and discriminant validity between constructs. All the outer loading
values for the questionnaire items in Table 1 shows the value according to the cut off value,
which is more or equal to 0.708. Moreover, several items exist whose outer loading value does
not meet the cut off value so that the outer loading value is not written and is not included in
the next process. Likewise, for the internal consistency value of construct reliability and
convergent validity, it has met the cut-off, which is between 0.700 – less than 0.950 and
greater than 0.500. The discriminant validity of this study in Table 4 uses the HTMT measure
and all have met the cut-off value, which is less than 0.900 (Henseler et al., 2015; Henseler,
2017). In addition to using HTMT, it is measured by the latest measure, namely, HTMT 2
according to Roemer et al. (2021). The HTMT online calculator (Henseler, 2021) was used with
the results, and all of them have met the cut off value, which is less than 0.900.
Table 5 presents that all hypotheses for the sufficient approach show significant results,
direct and indirect (mediation). Empowering leadership improves digital organisational
culture, which in turn positively and significantly affect employee performance. All adequate
hypotheses path coefficients are significant at the p-value of 0.05, as illustrated in Figure 2.
For specific indirect effects, it was found that digital organisational culture acts as a
complementary mediator for the influence of empowering leadership on employee
performance (Kim et al., 2018; Memon et al., 2018; Rasoolimanesh et al., 2021; Danks, 2021).
For complementary mediation, it is strengthened by the path coefficient sign (β), which is all
hyphoteses uniformly positive in Table 5. Furthermore, the VAF value must be calculated,
which helps determine the percentage of the total effect associated with the indirect effect
(Carri
on et al., 2017). The formula and calculation of the VAF value are:
 43,3

376
LODJ

Table 1.

adj R2 and Q2
measurement of
Operationalization,

research constructs,
Outer Adj
Research construct Questionnaire items Symbol loading rho_A AVE R2 Q2

Empowering leadership (EL): the 1. The leader where I work said that he would take responsibility for the upper work EL1 – 0.945 0.634 – –
process of influencing subordinates 2. The leaders where I work give me authority over the resolution of problems that exist in my department/scope of work EL2 0.833
through power-sharing, motivational 3. The leaders where I work encourage me to take the initiative regarding the job I do EL3 0.814
support, and developmental support 4. The leaders where I work express a positive attitude regarding my initiative for the job I do EL4 0.864
to promote their experience of 5. The leader where I work expresses his belief in being able to achieve his work related to the goals EL5 0.827
independence, motivation and ability 6. The leaders where I work, make me work to be able to achieve work-related goals EL6 –
to work autonomously within the 7. The leaders where I work listen to my opinion about work EL7 0.809
boundaries of overall organisational 8. The leaders where I work recognize my strengths and weaknesses when it comes to working EL8 0.721
goals and strategies (Amundsen and 9. The leaders where I work encourage me to use my strengths when it comes to working EL9 –
Martinsen, 2014) 10. The leaders where I work is very enthusiastic about what we can achieve in terms of work EL10 0.724
11. The leaders where I work convey a bright view of the future of the organization/relative where we work EL11 –
12. The leaders where I work coordinates his goals with my work-related goals EL12 –
13. The leaders where I work discusses the compatibility between his goals and my goals related to work EL13 –
14. The leaders where I work discusses various matters, especially those related to work with me EL14 0.817
15. I see how the leaders at my workplace manage their work EL15 0.727
16. I gain insight into how the leaders at my workplace organize their work EL16 –
17. The leaders where I work show me how to improve the quality of the way I work EL17 –
18. The leaders where I work guide me on how to do my job in the best way EL18 0.807
Digital organisational culture (DOC): 1. There are values about team collaboration to initiate the digital transformation at the institution where I work DOC1 0.893 0.902 0.770 0.600 0.457
a set of relative values, assumptions, 2. There are values related to a clear orientation to changes in digital technology at the institution where I work DOC2 0.892
beliefs, ways of interacting and ways 3. There are values that digital innovation is important for improving organisational/relative performance at the DOC3 0.898
of working that contribute to the institution where I work
unique social and psychological 4. There are values about sharing digital transformation strategies for workers with considers their opinion at the DOC4 0.826
environment of an organisation in institution where I work
creating, delivering and capturing 5. Values at the institution where I work are stating that the leaders support digital technology training to DOC5
value using digital technologies improve employee performance
(Hadi and Baskaran, 2021)
Employee performance (individual 1. I plan my work to finish on time ID1 – 0.935 0.673 0.314 0.210
work performance/ID): the skills of 2. My planning regarding the work has been optimal ID2 –
individuals who perform core or 3. I remember the result that I need to be achieve related to work ID3 –
technical substantive tasks that are 4. I can separate work-related issues by priority ID4 –
the centre of their work; behaviours 5. I can do my job well in a relatively short time ID5 0.709
that support the organisational, 6. I take on extra responsibilities regarding my work ID6 –
social and psychological 7. I do the work one by one ID7 0.734
environment in which the technical 8. I am willing to take on challenging work related to my job ID8 0.856
core must function (Koopmans et al., 9. I always update my knowledge regarding my work ID9 0.805
2014) 10. I always update my work-related skills ID10 0.876
11. I find creative solutions to new problems related to my work ID11 0.879
12. I am constantly looking for new challenges related to my work ID12 0.835
13. I actively participate in meetings related to my work ID13 0.851
Profile Frequency (%)
Exploring
digital culture
Gender Male 33 43
Female 43 57
Age (years old) Less than 21 1 1
21–less than 30 42 55
30–less than 40 27 36
40–less than 50 3 4 377
50–less than 60 3 4
Educational level Diploma 6 8
Undergraduate 54 71
Master 16 21
Working experience (years) Less than 1 7 9
1–less than 5 37 49
5–less than 10 27 36
10–less than 15 1 1
15–less than 20 1 1
20–less than 25 1 1 Table 2.
Equal and more than 25 2 3 Respondent profile

DOC EL ID

DOC 2.756 1.841 0.579 Table 3.

EL 1.841 2.606 0.333 AFVIF (full
ID 0.579 0.333 1.498 collinearity)

Relationship between construct HTMT HTMT2

EL <-> DOC 0.842 0.853 Table 4.

ID <-> DOC 0.609 0.609 Discriminant validity

a3b 0:088 3 1:532 0:134816

VAF ¼ ¼ ¼ ¼ 0:823
ða 3 bÞ þ c0 ð0:088 3 1:532Þ þ 0:029 0:163816

Ultimately, the value of VAF is 0,823. This value means that there exists 82.3% part of the
total effect caused by the specific indirect effect of empowering leadership on employee
performance, which is mediated complementary by digital organisational culture.
Furthermore, testing the effect of all control variables (gender, age and working
experience) did not show any signs on employee performance. Testing the effect of the
control variable shows that employee performance is not “contaminated” by the control
variables. Table 6 shows that the theoretical framework is a fit model with the SRMR, d_ULS
and d_G values already at the 95% confidence interval (Henseler et al., 2016).
This research adopted Shmueli et al. (2019) to test the sample predictive power. The
interpretation of the statistical Q2 predictions indicates the relevance of the predictions. To
evaluate the relevance of this research prediction, the PLSpredict method was used. The
RMSE for four items from the digital organisational culture for the PLS model is all less than
the RMSE for the PLS linear model, as shown in Table 7. Table 8 shows that all values for
LODJ skewness prediction are less than 1, and the RMSE value of all items for the PLS model is
43,3 smaller. Thus, it is assumed that digital organisational culture has medium to high predictive
relevance.
For more comprehensive results, the NCA was carried out. NCA examines whether
empowering leadership is a necessary condition for digital organisational culture
(Hypothesis 2). Table 9 shows the NCA effect size, the accuracy of which will describe the
portion of the total effect attributable (CE-FDH) to the indirect effect 100%. The table’s NCA
378 calculations reveal that empowering leadership is both meaningful (necessary condition
effect size d ≥ 0.1) and statistically significant (p < 0.05), implying that it is a required/

Path Relationship between construct β p-value Confidence interval f2

Direct EL → DOC (H1) 0.778 0.020 [0.671; 0.867] 0.088 (a)

DOC → ID (H3) 0.387 0.000 [0.052; 0.700] 1.532 (b)
EL → ID 0.238 0.116 [0.079; 0.548] 0.029 (c0 )
Specific indirect EL → DOC → ID (H5) 0.301 0.026 [0.041; 0.568] –
Table 5. Control variables Gender → ID 0.071 0.455 [0.275; 0.119] 0.079
Hypothesis test results Age → ID 0.036 0.778 [–0.380; 0.315] 0.037
(sufficient) Working experience → ID 0.008 0.942 [–0.358; 0.407] 0.008

Figure 2.
Hypothesis test results
(sufficient)

Original sample (estimated value) Confidence interval

SRMR 0.700 [0.076; 0.083]

Table 6. d_ULS 1.361 [1.579; 1.894]
Model fit d_G 1.131 [1.629; 1.922]

DOC1 DOC2 DOC3 DOC4

Table 7.
Skewness prediction PLS prediction error 0.887 0.660 0.669 0.845
for items from DOC PLS predictions 0.101 0.081 0.038 0.028

PLS LM
Construct Item RMSE Q2predict RMSE Q2predict

DOC DOC1 0.705 0.492 0.801 0.343

Table 8. DOC2 0.565 0.505 0.620 0.405
Examination DOC3 0.684 0.441 0.722 0.289
PLSpredict DOC4 0.783 0.359 0.805 0.161
necessary condition for digital organisational culture. Therefore, Hypotheses 2–4 are Exploring
accepted. Empowering leadership is a significant necessary condition for a sustainable digital culture
digital organisational culture and a significant necessary condition for employee
performance. Table 10 shows the bottlenecks for the necessary conditions. These findings
indicate that the critical level necessary for a digital organisational culture to achieve the
relevant level for 60% of employee performance is 13.4%. Furthermore, to achieve a 30%
relevant rate for digital organisational culture, the critically necessary level for empowering
leadership is 11.1%. 379

Discussion
This study succeeded in identifying the cause of digital organisational culture, namely,
empowering leadership. The results of this study indicate that digital organisational culture
increases when a person can led by empowering his/her followers. Digital organisational
culture positively and significantly affects employee performance.
On the basis of the NCA, this study finds that empowering leadership is a relevant cause
for the conditions necessary for digital organisational culture. This study also shows that
empowering leadership is a sufficient and necessary condition for digital organisational
culture. Digital organisational culture also acts as a sufficient and necessary condition for
employee performance.
This study holds several contributions. Firstly and theoretically, this study investigates the
role of digital organisational culture in government institutions on its effect on employee
performance. Previous research stated that employee performance is an outcome of digital
organisational culture. Although previous studies stated a significant effect, Sapta et al. (2021),
Kustono (2020) and Pawirosumarto et al. (2017) revealed that organisational culture does not
significantly and direct effect employee performance. This study confirms that a significant
increase in digital organisational culture will increase employee performance in government
institutions.
Secondly, this study identifies and analyses the effect of empowering leadership on digital
organisational culture by the theory that states the role of leadership on organisational culture
(Schein, 1985). To the author’s knowledge, research that identifies the role of empowering

DOC ID
Construct CE-FDH p-value Construct CE-FDH p-value
Table 9.
EL 0.364 0.000 DOC 0.206 0.002 NCA effect sizes

Bottleneck DOC Bottleneck ID

Percentage EL ID

00 NN NN
10 NN NN
20 NN NN
30 11.1 NN
40 22.6 NN
50 34.1 NN
60 45.5 13.4
70 57.0 26.3
80 68.4 26.3
90 79.9 66.8 Table 10.
100 91.4 66.8 Bottleneck table
LODJ leadership in the government institution context remains scant. A key argument of this research
43,3 is that empowering leadership significantly affects digital organisational culture in government
institutions.
The third theoretical contribution is methodological. This study combines PLS-SEM and
NCA in the government institution context by identifying the effect of sufficient and necessary
digital organisational culture on employee performance. This research contributes to the lack of
empirical research that examines the effect of digital organisational culture on employee
380 performance. The research findings indicate that there exists a sufficient or necessary significant
influence related to digital organisational culture. This shows that there exist should haves and
must haves for employee outcomes in government institutions. In addition, empowering
leadership is a necessary condition for digital organisational culture. This finding together with
the bottleneck analysis clarify the understanding of digital organisational culture in research
related to the context of governance in institutions.
Practically, the contribution of this research is based on predictions (Hair and Sarstedt, 2021;
Sarstedt and Danks, 2021). PLS predict results show that digital organisational culture has
medium-high power to predict employee performance. Digital organisational culture is closely
related to the mission of the Indonesian Ministry of State Apparatus Utilization and Bureaucratic
Reform/PANRB to create a digital bureaucracy or an institution with a digital bureaucracy. To
realise a digital bureaucracy is related to digital organisational culture (the existence of
organisational values related to organisational digitization) PANRB’s mission point 1 is
“Creating lean, agile, integrated and electronic-based bureaucracy institutions and governance–
digital bureaucracy” and point number 3 is “Developing a transparent and accountable
government agency performance management system” (Birokrasi, 2021). The PANRB must focus
on paying attention to the things contained in the digital organisational culture questionnaire
items which comprise: values about team collaboration to initiate the emergence of digital
transformation; values related to a clear orientation to changes in digital technology; digital
innovation values are important for improving organisational/institutional performance and
values about sharing digital transformation strategies with employees taking their suggestions
into account.

Conclusion
This study concludes that empowering leadership is a sufficient and necessary condition for
digital organisational culture, which is also a sufficient and necessary condition for employee
performance. Digital organisational culture plays a complementary role in mediating the
influence of empowering leadership on employee performance. This study has a certain
limitation as follows. Firstly, this study only investigates the role of digital organisational culture
for a government institution in Indonesia. However, digital organisational culture will vary by
institution and organisation. Therefore, future research can examine respondents at government
institutions in different countries. Secondly, empowering leadership in this study is the first-
order construct, therefore based on the work of Amundsen and Martinsen (2014), future research
can use the second-order construct type.

References
Abdullahi, M.S., Raman, K. and Solarin, S.A. (2021), “Effect of organizational culture on employee
performance: a mediating role of employee engagement in Malaysia educational sector”,
International Journal of Supply and Operations Management, Vol. 8 No. 3, pp. 232-246, doi: 10.
22034/IJSOM.2021.3.1.
Aguinis, H., Hill, N.S. and Bailey, J.R. (2021), “Best practices in data collection and preparation:
recommendations for reviewers, editors, and author”, Organizational Research Methods, Vol. 24
No. 4, pp. 678-693, doi: 10.1177/1094428119836485.
Ali, M., Lei, S., SHi-Jie, Z. and Rahman, M.A. (2018), “Empowering leadership and employee Exploring
performance: a mediating role of thriving at work”, International Journal of Asian Business and
Information Management, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 1-14, doi: 10.4018/IJABIM.2018040101. digital culture
Amundsen, S. and Martinsen, Ø.L. (2014), “Empowering leadership: construct clarification,
conceptualization, and validation of a new scale”, Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 25 No. 3,
pp. 487-511, doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2013.11.009.
Amundsen, S. and Martinsen, Ø.L. (2015), “Linking empowering leadership to job satisfaction, work
effort, and creativity: the role of self-leadership and psychological empowerment”, Journal of 381
Leadership and Organizational Studies, Vol. 22 No. 3, pp. 304-323, doi: 10.1177/
1548051814565819.
Batcha, H.M., Jan, N.A., Subramani, A.K. and Julie, R.L. (2017), “Exploring the impact of organizational
culture on employees’ work performance using structural equation modeling (SEM) approach”,
International Journal of Applied Business and Economic Research, Vol. 15 No. 16, pp. 483-493.
Benitez, J., Henseler, J., Castillo, A. and Schuberth, F. (2020), “How to perform and report an impactful
analysis using partial least squares: guidelines for confirmatory and explanatory IS research”,
Information and Management, Vol. 57 No. 2, p. 103168, doi: 10.1016/j.im.2019.05.003.
Bernerth, J.B. and Aguinis, H. (2016), “A critical review and best-practice recommendations for control
variable usage”, Personnel Psychology, Vol. 69 No. 1, pp. 229-283, doi: 10.1111/peps.12103.
Birokrasi, Kementerian Pendayagunaan Aparatur Negara dan Reformasi (2021), “Tugas, fungsi, visi
dan misi”, available at: https://www.menpan.go.id/site/tentang-kami/tentang-kami/visi-
dan-misi.
Braun, F.C., Avital, M. and Martz, B. (2012), “Action-centered team leadership influences more than
performance”, Team Performance Management, Vol. 18 No. 3, pp. 176-195, doi: 10.1108/
13527591211241015.
Brislin, R.W. (1970), “Back-translation for cross-cultural research”, Journal of Cross-Cultural
Psychology, Vol. 1 No. 3, pp. 185-216, doi: 10.1177/135910457000100301.
Carifio, J. and Perla, R.J. (2007), “Ten common misunderstandings, misconceptions, persistent myths
and urban legends about Likert scales and Likert response formats and their antidotes”, Journal
of Social Sciences, Vol. 3 No. 3, pp. 106-116, doi: 10.3844/jssp.2007.106.116.
Carri
on, G.C., Nitzl, C. and Rold
an, J.L. (2017), “Mediation analyses in partial least squares structural
equation modeling: guidelines and empirical examples”, Partial Least Squares Path Modeling:
Basic Concepts, Methodological Issues, and Applications, doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-64069-3_8.
Cheong, M., Yammarino, F.J., Dionne, S.D., Spain, S.M. and Tsai, C.Y. (2019), “A review of the
effectiveness of empowering leadership”, Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 34-58, doi: 10.
1016/j.leaqua.2018.08.005.
Chin, W., Cheah, J.H., Liu, Y., Ting, H., Lim, X.J. and Cham, T.H. (2020), “Demystifying the role of
causal-predictive modeling using partial least squares structural equation modeling in
information systems research”, Industrial Management and Data Systems, Vol. 120 No. 12,
pp. 2161-2209, doi: 10.1108/IMDS-10-2019-0529.
Danks, N.P. (2021), “The piggy in the middle: the role of mediators in PLS-SEM-based prediction: a
research note”, ACM SIGMIS Database: the DATABASE for Advances in Information Systems,
Vol. 52 No. SI, pp. 24-42.
Deal, T.E. and Kennedy, A.A. (1982), “Corporate cultures: the rites and rituals of organizational life”,
Reading/T. Deal, A. Kennedy–Mass: Addison-Wesley, Vol. 2, pp. 98-103.
dos Santos, A., Armanu., Setiawan, M. and Rofiq, A. (2020), “Effect of recruitment, selection, and
culture of organizations on state personnel performance”, Management Science Letters, Vol. 10
No. 6, pp. 1179-1186, doi: 10.5267/j.msl.2019.11.042.
Dul, J. (2016), “Necessary condition analysis (NCA): logic and methodology of “necessary but not
sufficient” causality”, Organizational Research Methods, Vol. 19 No. 1, pp. 10-52, doi: 10.1177/
1094428115584005.
LODJ Dul, J. (2021), Necessary Condition Analysis (NCA) with R (Version 3.1.0): A Quick Start Guide.
43,3 Dunleavy, P., Margetts, H., Bastow, S. and Tinkler, J. (2006), “New public management is dead - long
live digital-era governance”, Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, Vol. 16
No. 3, pp. 467-494, doi: 10.1093/jopart/mui057.
Elyousfi, F., Anand, A. and Dalmasso, A. (2021), “Impact of e-leadership and team dynamics on virtual
team performance in a public organization”, International Journal of Public Sector Management,
Vol. 34 No. 5, pp. 508-528, doi: 10.1108/IJPSM-08-2020-0218.
382
Frick, N.R.J., Mirbabaie, M., Stieglitz, S. and Salomon, J. (2021), “Maneuvering through the stormy seas
of digital transformation: the impact of empowering leadership on the AI readiness of
enterprises”, Journal of Decision Systems, Vol. 30 Nos 2-3, pp. 235-258, doi: 10.1080/12460125.
2020.1870065.
Fuchs, M., Bossert, D. and Stukowski, S. (2013), “Response rate and nonresponse bias - impact of the
number of contact attempts on data quality in the European social survey”, BMS Bulletin of
Sociological Methodology/Bulletin de Methodologie Sociologique, Vol. 117 No. 1, pp. 26-45, doi: 10.
1177/0759106312465547.
Hadi, S. and Baskaran, S. (2021), “Examining sustainable business performance determinants in
Malaysia upstream petroleum industry”, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 294, doi: 10.1016/j.
jclepro.2021.126231.
Hair, J.F. and Sarstedt, M. (2021), “Explanation plus prediction—the logical focus of project
management research”, Project Management Journal, Vol. 52 No. 4, pp. 319-322, doi: 10.1177/
8756972821999945.
Hair, J.F., Astrachan, C.B., Moisescu, O.I., Radomir, L., Sarstedt, M., Vaithilingam, S. and Ringle, C.M.
(2021), “Executing and interpreting applications of PLS-SEM: updates for family business
researchers”, Journal of Family Business Strategy, Vol. 12 No. 3, Supp. 100392.
Hair, J.F., Hult, G.T.M., Ringle, C.M. and Sarstedt, M. (2016), A Primer on Partial Least Squares
Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM), SAGE Publications.
Hair, J.F., Risher, J.J., Sarstedt, M. and Ringle, C.M. (2019a), “When to use and how to report the results
of PLS-SEM”, European Business Review, Vol. 31 No. 1, pp. 2-24, doi: 10.1108/EBR-11-2018-0203.
Hair, J.F., Sarstedt, M. and Ringle, C.M. (2019b), “Rethinking some of the rethinkings of partial least
squares”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 53 No. 4, pp. 566-584, doi: 10.1108/EJM-10-2018-0665.
Hakim, A. (2012), “The implementation of Islamic leadership and Islamic organizational culture and its
influence on Islamic working motivation and Islamic performance PT Bank Mu’amalat
Indonesia Tbk. employee in the Central Java”, Asia Pacific Management Review, Vol. 17 No. 1,
pp. 77-90, doi: 10.6126/APMR.2012.17.1.05.
Harinoto, Sanusi, A. and Bogetriatmanto (2018), “Organizational culture and work commitment
mediate the Islamic work ethos on employee performance”, Academy of Strategic Management
Journal, Vol. 17 No. 5, pp. 1-8.
Hendryadi, Suratna, Suryani and Purwanto, B. (2019), “Bureaucratic culture, empowering leadership,
affective commitment, and knowledge sharing behavior in Indonesian government public
services”, Cogent Business and Management, Vol. 6 No. 1, doi: 10.1080/23311975.2019.1680099.
Henseler, J. (2017), “Bridging design and behavioral research with variance-based structural equation
modeling”, Journal of Advertising, Vol. 46 No. 1, pp. 178-192, doi: 10.1080/00913367.2017.1281780.
Henseler, J. (2021), “Henseler’s HTMT calculator”, available at: http://www.henseler.com/htmt.html
(accessed 13 October 2021).
Henseler, J., Hubona, G. and Ray, P.A. (2016), “Using PLS path modeling in new technology research:
updated guidelines”, Industrial Management and Data Systems, Vol. 116 No. 1, pp. 2-20, doi: 10.
1108/IMDS-09-2015-0382.
Henseler, J., Ringle, C.M. and Sarstedt, M. (2015), “A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity
in variance-based structural equation modeling”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science,
Vol. 43, pp. 115-135, doi: 10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8.
Hoffman, N. and Klepper, R. (2000), “Assimilating new technologies: the role of organizational Exploring
culture”, Information Systems Management, Vol. 17 No. 3, pp. 36-42, doi: 10.1201/1078/43192.17.
3.20000601/31239.6. digital culture
Kim, J., Hwang, E., Phillips, M., Jang, S., Kim, J.E., Spence, M.T. and Park, J. (2018), “Mediation analysis
revisited: practical suggestions for addressing common deficiencies”, Australasian Marketing
Journal, Vol. 26 No. 1, pp. 59-64, doi: 10.1016/j.ausmj.2018.03.002.
Kim, M., Beehr, T.A. and Prewett, M.S. (2018), “Employee responses to empowering leadership: a
meta-analysis”, Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, Vol. 25 No. 3, pp. 257-276, 383
doi: 10.1177/1548051817750538.
Kock, N. (2015), “Common method bias in PLS-SEM: a full collinearity assessment approach”,
International Journal of E-Collaboration, Vol. 11 No. 4, pp. 1-10, doi: 10.4018/ijec.2015100101.
Kock, N. (2017), “Which is the best way to measure job performance”, International Journal of E-
Collaboration, Vol. 13 No. 2, pp. 1-9, doi: 10.4018/ijec.2017040101.
Koopmans, L., Bernaards, C.M., Hildebrandt, V.H., De Vet, H.C.W. and Van Der Beek, A.J. (2014),
“Construct validity of the individual work performance questionnaire”, Journal of
Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Vol. 56 No. 3, pp. 331-337, doi: 10.1097/JOM.
0000000000000113.
Kraus, S., Jones, P., Kailer, N., Weinmann, A., Chaparro-Banegas, N. and Roig-Tierno, N. (2021), “An
overview of the current state of research on digital transformation”, SAGE Open, Vol. 11 No.
3, pp. 1-15, doi: 10.1177/21582440211047576.
Kustono, A.S. (2020), “How total quality management mediates antecedent variables of employee
performance?”, Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business, Vol. 7 No. 12, pp. 523-534,
doi: 10.13106/JAFEB.2020.VOL7.NO12.523.
Lee, M.C.C., Idris, M.A. and Delfabbro, P.H. (2017), “The linkages between hierarchical culture and
empowering leadership and their effects on employees’ work engagement: work
meaningfulness as a mediator”, International Journal of Stress Management, Vol. 24 No. 4,
pp. 392-415, doi: 10.1037/str0000043.
Limakrisna, N., Noor, Z.Z. and Ali, H. (2016), “Model of employee performance: the empirical study at
civil servants in government of west java province”, International Journal of Economic
Research, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 707-719.
Lolowang, N.L., Troena, E.A., Djazuli, A. and Aisjah, S. (2019), “The effect of leadership and
organizational culture on employee performance that is educated by motivation (study on the
implementation empowerment programs in Jayapura city)”, Problems and Perspectives in
Management, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 268-277, doi: 10.21511/ppm.17(1).2019.23.
Margetts, H. and Dunleavy, P. (2013), “The second wave of digital-era governance: a quasi-paradigm
for government on the Web”, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical,
Physical and Engineering Sciences, Vol. 371 No. 1987, doi: 10.1098/rsta.2012.0382.
Mart
ınez-Caro, E., Cegarra-Navarro, J.G. and Alfonso-Ruiz, F.J. (2020), “Digital technologies and firm
performance: the role of digital organisational culture”, Technological Forecasting and Social
Change, Vol. 154, June 2019, 119962, doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2020.119962.
Memon, M.A., Hwa, C.J., Ramayah, T. and Ting, H. (2018), “Mediation analysis: issues and
recommendations”, Journal of Applied Structural Equation Modeling, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. i-ix,
doi: 10.47263/JASEM.2(1)01.
Memon, M.A., Ting, H., Cheah, J.-H., Thurasamy, R., Chuah, F. and Cham, T.H. (2020), “Sample size for
survey research: review and recommendations”, Journal of Applied Structural
Equation Modeling, Vol. 4 No. 2, pp. i-xx, doi: 10.47263/jasem.4(2)01.
Mukhtar, A. (2018), “The effect of competence and organization culture to work satisfaction and
employee performance of Sharia banks in Makassar city”, International Journal of Scientific and
Technology Research, Vol. 7 No. 10, pp. 1-6.
LODJ Navaridas-Nalda, F., Clavel-San Emeterio, M., Fern
andez-Ortiz, R. and Arias-Oliva, M. (2020), “The
strategic influence of school principal leadership in the digital transformation of schools”,
43,3 Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 112, December 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2020.106481.
Paais, M. and Pattiruhu, J.R. (2020), “Effect of motivation, leadership, and organizational culture on
satisfaction and employee performance”, Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business,
Vol. 7 No. 8, pp. 577-588, doi: 10.13106/JAFEB.2020.VOL7.NO8.577.
Pangarso, A. (2014), “Organization’s structure based on competing value approach and merger strategy”,
384 Proceedings of 2014 2nd International Conference on Technology, Informatics, Management,
Engineering and Environment, TIME-E 2014, doi: 10.1109/TIME-E.2014.7011616.
Parry, K.W. and Proctor-thomson, S.B. (2003), “Leadership, culture and performance: the case of the
New Zealand public sector”, Journal of Change Management, Vol. 3 No. 4, pp. 376-399.
Pawirosumarto, S., Sarjana, P.K. and Gunawan, R. (2017), “The effect of work environment, leadership
style, and organizational culture towards job satisfaction and its implication towards employee
performance in Parador hotels and resorts, Indonesia”, International Journal of Law and
Management, Vol. 59 No. 6, pp. 1337-1358, doi: 10.1108/IJLMA-10-2016-0085.
Podsakoff, P.M. and Organ, D.W. (1986), “Self-reports in organizational research: problems and
prospects”, Journal of Management, Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 531-544, doi: 10.1177/
014920638601200408.
Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B. and Podsakoff, N.P. (2012), “Sources of method bias in social science
research and recommendations on how to control it”, Annual Review of Psychology, Vol. 63
No. 1, pp. 539-569, doi: 10.1146/annurev-psych-120710-100452.
Rasoolimanesh, S.M., Wang, M., Rold
an, J.L. and Kunasekaran, P. (2021), “Are we in right path for
mediation analysis? Reviewing the literature and proposing robust guidelines”, Journal of
Hospitality and Tourism Management, Vol. 48, July, pp. 395-405, doi: 10.1016/j.jhtm.2021.07.013.
Richter, N.F., Schubring, S., Hauff, S., Ringle, C.M. and Sarstedt, M. (2020), “When predictors of
outcomes are necessary: guidelines for the combined use of PLS-SEM and NCA”, Industrial
Management and Data Systems, Vol. 120 No. 12, pp. 2243-2267, doi: 10.1108/IMDS-11-2019-0638.
Rigdon, E.E., Sarstedt, M. and Ringle, C.M. (2017), “On comparing results from CB-SEM and PLS-
SEM: five perspectives and five recommendations”, Marketing ZFP, Vol. 39 No. 3, pp. 4-16,
doi: 10.15358/0344-1369-2017-3-4.
Ringle, C.M., Wende, S. and Becker, J.-M. (2015), SmartPLS 3, SmartPLS, B€onningstedt, available at:
https://www.smartpls.com/faq/documentation/how-to-cite-smartpls.
Rizki, M., Parashakti, R.D. and Saragih, L. (2019), “The effect of transformational leadership and
organizational culture towards employees’ innovative behaviour and performance”,
International Journal of Economics and Business Administration, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 227-239,
doi: 10.35808/ijeba/208.
Roemer, E., Schuberth, F. and Henseler, J. (2021), “HTMT2 – an improved criterion for assessing
discriminant validity in structural equation modeling”, Industrial Management and Data
Systems, Vol. 121 No. 12, pp. 2367-2650, doi: 10.1108/IMDS-02-2021-0082.
Sapta, I.K.S., Muafi, M. and Setini, N.M. (2021), “The role of technology , organizational culture , and job
satisfaction in improving employee performance during the covid-19 pandemic”, Journal of Asian
Finance, Economics and Business, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 495-505, doi: 10.13106/jafeb.2021.vol8.no1.495.
Sarstedt, M. and Danks, N.P. (2021), “Prediction in HRM research–A gap between rhetoric and
reality”, Human Resource Management Journal, May, doi: 10.1111/1748-8583.12400.
Sarstedt, M., Hair, J.F., Ringle, C.M., Thiele, K.O. and Gudergan, S.P. (2016), “Estimation issues with
PLS and CBSEM: where the bias lies”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 69 No. 10,
pp. 3998-4010, doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.06.007.
Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C.M. and Hair, J.F. (2017), “Partial least squares structural equation modeling”, in
Homburg, C., Klarmann, M. and Vomberg, A. (Eds), Handbook of Market Research, Springer,
Cham. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-05542-8_15-1.
Schamberger, T., Schuberth, F., Henseler, J. and Dijkstra, T.K. (2020), “Robust partial least squares Exploring
path modeling”, Behaviormetrika, Vol. 47 No. 1, pp. 307-334, doi: 10.1007/s41237-019-00088-2.
digital culture
Schein, E.H. (1985), Organizational Culture and Leadership, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.
Schein, E.H. (2017), “Organizational culture and leadership”, The Jossey-Bass Business and
Management Series, Vol. 4, available at: https://www.amazon.com/Organizational-Leadership-
Jossey-Bass-Business-Management/dp/1119212049/ref5dp_ob_title_bk.
Shmueli, G., Sarstedt, M., Hair, J.F., Cheah, J.H., Ting, H., Vaithilingam, S. and Ringle, C.M. (2019), 385
“Predictive model assessment in PLS-SEM: guidelines for using PLSpredict”, European Journal
of Marketing, Vol. 53 No. 11, pp. 2322-2347, doi: 10.1108/EJM-02-2019-0189.
Trushkina, N., Abazov, R., Rynkevych, N. and Bakhautdinova, G. (2020), “Digital transformation of
organizational culture under conditions of the information economy”, Virtual Economics, Vol. 3
No. 1, doi: 10.34021/ve.2020.03.011.
Vecchio, R.P., Justin, J.E. and Pearce, C.L. (2010), “Empowering leadership: an examination of
mediating mechanisms within a hierarchical structure”, Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 21 No. 3,
pp. 530-542, doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2010.03.014.
Wibisono, C., Nurhatisyah and Gustiawan, F. (2018), “Work motivation and leadership on the
performance of employees as predictors of organizational culture in broadcasting commission
of Riau Islands province, Indonesia”, Management Science Letters, Vol. 8 No. 5, pp. 247-258,
doi: 10.5267/j.msl.2018.4.026.
Wu, H. and Leung, S.O. (2017), “Can Likert scales be treated as interval scales?—a simulation study”,
Journal of Social Service Research, Vol. 43 No. 4, pp. 527-532, doi: 10.1080/01488376.2017.
1329775.
Zhen, Z., Yousaf, Z., Radulescu, M. and Yasir, M. (2021), “Nexus of digital organizational culture,
capabilities, organizational readiness, and innovation: investigation of smes operating in the
digital economy”, Sustainability (Switzerland), Vol. 13 No. 2, pp. 1-15, doi: 10.3390/su13020720.

Corresponding author
Astadi Pangarso can be contacted at: astadipangarso@telkomuniversity.ac.id

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com