COLLEGE OF BUSINESS AND ECONOMICS

SCHOOL OF COMMERCE

THE EFFECT OF ORGANIZATIONAL AGILITY ON ORGANIZATIONAL EFFECTIVENESS

A CASE OF GADAA BANK S.C.

BY ALAZAR ADULA YATENE

A PROJECT SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS

FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF BUSINESS LEADERSHIP

ADVISOR: DR. SEIFU MAMO (ASS. PROF.)

JUNE, 2023

ADDIS ABABA, ETHIOPIA

pg. 0
 APPROVAL OF EXAMINING COMMITTEE
As a member of the examining committee of the Master of Arts Degree in Business Leadership
Project defense examination, we testify that we have well read and evaluated the Project Work
prepared by Alazar Adula and examined the candidate. We recommend that this Project Work be
accepted as fulfilling the Project requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Business
Leadership.

________________________________ _______________
Head, Office of Graduate Studies Signature

D.r Seifu Mamo

________________________________ _______________
Advisor Signature

D.r Seifu
________________________________ _______________
External Examiner Signature

AtoFisseha_(Assistant Professor) _________________

Internal Examiner Signature

pg. i
 DECLARATION
I hereby declare that, this Project Work titled ―The Effect of Organizational Agility on
Organizational Effectiveness of Gadaa Bank S.C‖ is my own original research work. No part of
this work has been presented in any previous application for another degree at any institution. All
borrowed ideas have been duly acknowledged in the text and a list of references.

Alazar Adula____________________ __________________________

Name Signature

pg. ii
 ENDORSEMENT
This Project Work has been submitted to Addis Ababa University, College of Business and
Economics, School of Commerce, Office of Graduate Studies, Master of Arts in Business
leadership Coordination Office for examination with my approval as a candidate‘s advisor.

D.r Seifu_______________________ _______________________

Advisor Signature

pg. iii
 Acknowledgments
First and foremost, I would like to extend my heartfelt thanks to Almighty God for His unfailing
love and supports in every walk of my life.

I would like to express my gratitude to my advisor Dr. Seifu Mamo for his constructive
comments and guidance. My appreciations also go to Gadaa Bank‘s Board of Directors and the
management for their patience and consent to fill in my survey questionnaires. Continuous
encouragement and support that my friend and classmate Gadisa Gurmu Geleta gave me during
my study at the School of Commerce has made the stay so meaningful and memorable learning.

The last, but not the least, my respect and appreciation go to my beloved wife, Gospel Singer
Tadin Engda and my kids (Eeti, Beki, Bitu and Hoseity) for their patience and understanding to
accommodate all inconveniences created by me during my study.

pg. iv
 Abstract
In the present business environment of accelerated volatility, uncertainty, complexity and
ambiguity (VUCA), as experienced in Ethiopian Banking industry, the researcher found the area
of organizational agility (proactive, flexible, responsive and speedy systems), as the one less
researched. In this view, the researcher tried to measure the effect of organizational agility
components on the organizational effectiveness of Gada Bank, Ethiopia. The study was made by
employing an explanatory research design and collecting primary data from the board of
directors and the management of the bank. A structured questionnaire was distributed to 86
respondents out of which 78 were responded. The finding of both descriptive and multiple linear
regression analysis showed that organizational agility components like leadership, technological
and HR agility have positive and statistically significant effects on organizational effectiveness of
Gadaa Bank while the components like structural agility and process agility were found to be
statistically insignificant. Based on the findings, the researcher recommends the bank to institute
optimum level of agility to its systems and operations so as to gain and sustain competitive
advantages while also overcoming challenges and uncertainties that could be posed by internal
and external VUCA environments.

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

Key words: VUCA, organizational agility, organizational effectiveness, flexibility,

responsiveness

pg. v
 Table of contents
Contents page
APPROVAL OF EXAMINING COMMITTEE ............................................................................. i
DECLARATION ............................................................................................................................ ii
ENDORSEMENT .......................................................................................................................... iii
Acknowledgments.......................................................................................................................... iv
Abstract ........................................................................................................................................... v
Acronyms ..................................................................................................................................... viii
Lists of Tables ................................................................................................................................ ix
Lists of figures ............................................................................................................................... ix
Chapter-1: Introduction................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Background of the Study ...................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Gadaa Bank‘s Brief Company Profile .................................................................................. 2
1.3 Statement of the Problem ...................................................................................................... 3
1.4 Basic Research Question....................................................................................................... 4
1.5 Objectives of the Study ......................................................................................................... 5
1.6 Hypothesis of the Study ........................................................................................................ 5
1.7 Definition of terms and Concepts ......................................................................................... 6
1.8 Significance of the Study ...................................................................................................... 7
1.9 Scope of the Study ................................................................................................................ 7
1.10 Limitation of the Study ....................................................................................................... 7
1.11 Organization of Research Report ........................................................................................ 7
Chapter-2: REVIEW OF LITERATURES ..................................................................................... 9
2.1 Theoretical Framework ......................................................................................................... 9
2.2 Empirical Literature Review ............................................................................................... 14
2.3 Conceptual Framework ....................................................................................................... 19
2.3.1 Components of Organizational Agility ........................................................................ 19
2.3.2 Components of Organizational Effectiveness .............................................................. 19
Chapter-3: Research Methodology ............................................................................................... 22
3.1 Research Approach ............................................................................................................. 22
3.2 Research Design.................................................................................................................. 22

pg. vi
 3.3 Sampling Design ................................................................................................................. 22
3.3.1 Population of the Study................................................................................................ 22
3.3.2 Sampling Techniques ................................................................................................... 22
3.3.3 Sample Size .................................................................................................................. 23
3.3.4 Sources of Data Collection and Instrument ................................................................. 24
3.3.5 Method of Data Collection........................................................................................... 24
3.3.6 Method of Data Analysis ............................................................................................. 24
3.3.7 Validity and Reliability ................................................................................................ 24
Chapter-4: Data Analysis and Interpretation ................................................................................ 26
4.1 Response Rate ..................................................................................................................... 26
4.2. Demographic Characteristics of the Respondents .......................................................... 26
4.3 Descriptive Analysis ........................................................................................................... 27
4.4. Inferential analysis and presentation .............................................................................. 29
4.4.1 Correlation Statistics .................................................................................................... 29
4.4.2. Regression Analysis and Results ............................................................................ 30
4.4.3 Regression Result and Model Summary ................................................................. 34
4.4.4 Hypothesis Testing ......................................................................................................... 36
Chapter-5: Summary of Findings, Conclusion and Recommendation ......................................... 37
5.1 Summary of Findings ......................................................................................................... 37
5.2 Conclusion ......................................................................................................................... 38
5.3 Recommendation ............................................................................................................... 39
5.4 Suggestion for Future Studies ............................................................................................ 41
References ..................................................................................................................................... 42
ANNEX......................................................................................................................................... 45

pg. vii
Acronyms
ANOVA: Analysis of Variance

BSC: Balanced Score card

CBS: Core banking solution

ERP: Enterprise resource planning

KPI: Key Performance indicators

MIS: Management Information systems

VUCA: Volatile, uncertain, complex and ambiguous

pg. viii
Lists of Tables
Table 1: Matrix of features and components of organizational agility ......................................... 21
Table 2: Sample and population of the study................................................................................ 23
Table 3: Validity and Reliability Statistics ................................................................................... 25
Table 4: Demographic aspects of the respondents ........................................................................ 27
Table 5: Importance and applicability of organizational agility for Ethiopian banking ............... 28
Table 6: Descriptive statistics of variables ................................................................................... 28
Table 7: Pearson Correlation Matrix of variables of the study ..................................................... 30
Table 8: Autocorrelation testing the model Summary .................................................................. 32
Table 9: Multicollinearity test ....................................................................................................... 33
Table 10: ANOVAa ....................................................................................................................... 34
Table 11: Model Summaryb .......................................................................................................... 34
Table 12: Regression results and Coefficients .............................................................................. 35
Table 13: Hypothesis testing result ............................................................................................... 36

Lists of figures
Figure 1: The summarized organizational agility concept ............................................................ 10
Figure 2: Features of agile organization ....................................................................................... 15
Figure 3: Components of organizational agility ........................................................................... 16
Figure 4: Conceptual framework of the study .............................................................................. 20
Figure 5: Normality test of the study data .................................................................................... 31
Figure 6: Heteroescedasticity test ................................................................................................. 32

pg. ix
 Chapter-1: Introduction
1.1 Background of the Study
The present business environment of accelerated complexity, ambiguity, uncertainty and
volatility seems not to be settling down easily. Today‘s business world is usually bombarded
with turmoil and unprecedented change like increased competition, globalized markets, and
individualized customer requirements accompanied with many changes like pandemic like
Covid-19, political and economic tensions among states, and disruptions by advancement of
information technology (Roy Wendler, 2013). These make it very difficult for organizations to
accurately predict possible future opportunities and threats. To overcome these challenges,
organizations need to embrace and implement agility in their operations.

According to State of Agile Culture Report by Jcurv, Truth Sayers and Agile Business
Consortium (2020), agility is an ability of creating business environment that is underpinned by
values, behaviors and practices which enable organizations, teams and individuals to be more
adaptive, flexible, innovative and resilient when dealing with complexity, uncertainty and
changes. An agile culture enables organizations to focus on the areas of greatest value to quickly
release its benefits, learning what works while listening to their stakeholders and adapting their
products or services as demand shifts. As such, agility creates high levels of trust, supports
effective communication and increases transparency throughout the organization.

Organizational agility can be defined as being able for a company to react swiftly to inevitable
and unforeseen changes in its internal and external business environment. It refers to an
organization‘s ability to adapt and respond to changes in market conditions. This includes not
just speed but remaining in touch with the needs of customers, by understanding customer needs,
learning and then adapting to changes (Alhadid & Aburuhman, 2015).

Ethiopian banking industry has been in operation since 1905. As per data extracted from reports
of different banks, as at March 31, 2023, the number of commercial banks in the industry has
reached 30, of which 29 are private and 1 public. During the same reporting period, the total
assets, deposits, and paid up capital of commercial banks stood at Birr 2.7 trillion, Birr 2 trillion,
and Birr 200 billion, respectively. The market share of private commercial banks is almost 50%
of the total.

pg. 1
According to the recent report by the World Bank, the Ethiopian Banking sector development is
far beyond the neighbor countries both in number, customer service quality and technology,
where 82% of Kenyan, 50% of Rwanda, and 43% of East African adults have formal accounts,
unlike Ethiopians which is only 35%. The tendency to heavily rely on cash transactions is
excessive and big challenge, where only less than 20% is non-cash transaction, while in Kenya
channeled 43% of GDP through M-Pesa each year.

Reforms introduced by Ethiopian government since 2018 have brought new developments in the
financial sector of the country, fueling the existing challenges in the industry. The reform
introduced changes including directive on minimum capital requirements (>5 billion Birr),
opening up of the sector to entry of foreign banks, directive on introduction of capital market,
emergence of specialized financial institutions in fin-tech offering, Islamic banking, relicensing
of some microfinance institutions as bank by directive SBB/74/2020, and leasing and mortgage
loans. This will gradually broaden the product mix, financial instruments, accessibility, market-
based pricing and non-financial players on one hand while also stiffening existing competition in
the industry.

In nutshell, Ethiopian banking business seems to be characterized by considerable level of

volatility, uncertainty, complexity, and ambiguity (VUCA), an acronym coined in 1987, based
on the leadership theories of Warren Bennis and Burt Nanus to describe unpredictable and
rapidly changing situation, the situation that existing models could not deal with (Mack & Khare,
2016).

1.2 Gadaa Bank’s Brief Company Profile

Gadaa Bank S.C, one of new entrants, was established in accordance with 1960 Commercial
Code of Ethiopia, by the Monetary and Banking Proclamation No. 83/1994 and by the Licensing
and Supervision of Banking Proclamation No. 592/2008 in December 2022. As of March 31,
2023, the total number of operational branches reached 41 while the total deposits of the bank
stood at Birr 713.8 million. By the same reporting period, the total number of employees reached
384 staffs, the paid-up capital was Birr 810 million and the total asset was Birr 1.61 million. The
new entrants like Gadaa Bank are highly vulnerable to risks arising from lack of organizational
agility amidist the VUCA (volatile, uncertain, complex and ambiguous) business environment

pg. 2
and hence, the researcher tried to measure the effect of organizational agility on organizational
effectiveness of Gadaa Bank S.C.

1.3 Statement of the Problem

A recent global survey by Agile Business Consortium (2020) found that organizations that were
able to build a very strong agility-focused culture saw a performance improvement of up to
235%. According to the report, within three months of introducing agile ways of working to
Bank of Ireland UK, team engagement levels increased by 27%. On the other hand, the report
also disclosed that, organizations using more sophisticated agile operating models have a weaker
culture. However, strengthening the culture takes time and commitment, but it pays off at each
stage of growth. As agile culture matures, the importance of the individual declines, and changes
to a team focus.

Zaina M. and Uğur Yozgat (2017) conducted research on title ‗Does organizational agility affect
organizational learning capability? Evidence from commercial bank of Jordan concluded that
organizational agility has emerged as a way for managing unforeseen organizational changes and
managing risks (Khoramgah, 2012) as a key competitive imperative (Tallon and Pinsonneault,
2011) allowing organizations to survive in economic crises (Nijssen & Paauwe, 2012). Their
findings affirmed also the strategic value of agility and concluded that administrators working
within agile organizations would be able to acquire conditions that foster learning. A global
survey by Agile Business Consortium (2020) has also concluded that financial services industry
has the strongest agile culture, while the public sector is one of the weakest. In particular, the
arrival of challenger banks forced a greater focus on customer centricity and product innovation.

Appelbaum et al., (2017) concluded that there has been a very little research covering how
agility and agile capabilities can be developed and the researcher of this study has affirmed the
same in Ethiopian context. Similarly, Roy Wendler (2013) has analyzed the structure of agility
by comparing 28 available agility frameworks and concluded that there is lack of consensus on
constructs of the term, implying a need for further studies on the matter. Organizational agility is
considered as an immutable quality, where competitive firms should always maintain dynamic
capability (Teece, D., Peteraf, M., & Leih, S., 2016). Thus, taking into account the structural and
behavioral components of agility, there are several key benefits for organizations, including

pg. 3
leadership style, flexibility of managerial decisions, dexterity of communication and suitability
of organizational values and culture.

In the context of organizational agility, Ethiopian Banking industry, which has been facing
considerable challenges and uncertainties (VUCA) driven by the government reforms which
raised minimum capital requirements to above Birr 5 billion, allowed the opening up of the
sector to entry of foreign banks and introduction of capital market, emergence of specialized
financial institutions in fin-tech offering, Islamic banking and relicensing of existing major
microfinance institutions to full banking service has significantly changed the regulatory and
competitive landscape of baking industry. On top of that, to make the matter worse, the alarming
liquidity problems, stringent regulatory requirements, disruptions by digital banking and
demanding customer requirements seem to exacerbate the uncertainties and hence competitive
banks needs to institute proper agility into their strategy and operations. More specifically, the
risks arising from lack of organizational agility (responsiveness, flexibility and adaptability)
amidst VUCA environment is more pressing to new entrants like Gadaa Bank. Thus,
appreciating the essence of organizational agility to overcome VUCA business environment, this
study tried to measure the effect of organizational agility on organizational effectiveness of
Gadaa Bank.

1.4 Basic Research Question

The study has tried to address the following research questions:

i. To what extent does strategic leadership agility affect organizational effectiveness of

Gadaa Bank?
ii. To what extent does structural agility affect organizational effectiveness of Gadaa Bank?
iii. To what extent does technological agility affect organizational effectiveness of Gadaa
Bank?
iv. To what extent does HR agility affect organizational effectiveness of Gadaa Bank?
v. To what extent does process agility affect organizational effectiveness of Gadaa Bank?

pg. 4
1.5 Objectives of the Study
The main objective of the study is to examine the effect of organizational agility on the
organizational effectiveness of Gadaa Bank S.C.

The specific objectives of the study are:

i. To measure the effect of strategic leadership agility on the organizational effectiveness

of Gadaa Bank
ii. To measure the effect of structural agility on the organizational effectiveness of Gadaa
Bank
iii. To measure the effect of technological agility on organizational effectiveness of Gadaa
Bank
iv. To measure the effect of HR agility on organizational effectiveness of Gadaa Bank
v. To measure the effect of internal process agility on organizational effectiveness of
Gadaa Bank.

1.6 Hypothesis of the Study

The study will be based on following five null hypotheses:

H01: Strategic leadership agility has positive significant effect on organizational

effectiveness of Gadaa Bank.

H02: Structural agility has positive significant effect on organizational effectiveness of

Gadaa Bank.

H03: Technological agility has positive significant effect on organizational effectiveness of

Gadaa Bank.

H04: HR agility has positive significant effect on organizational effectiveness of Gadaa

Bank.

H05: Internal process agility has positive significant effect on organizational effectiveness of
Gadaa Bank.

pg. 5
1.7 Definition of terms and Concepts
Agility: Is ability of an organization to renew itself, adapt, change quickly, and succeed in a
rapidly changing, ambiguous, turbulent environment (Mckinsey & Company, 2015).

Agile Leadership: Is a supplementary tool or extension to leadership approaches that are rooted
in organizational psychology, including transformational leadership, trait-based leadership,
situational leadership and complexity leadership. It is a holistic concept that acts as guidance for
an organization to achieve outcomes that are tailored to a changing business environment
(Lipman-Blumen, 2000; Joiner, 2009).

Dynamic capability: is the ability to move fast, nimbleness, responsiveness and stable
foundation as backbone and an anchor point that serves as a springboard for the company
(Homby, 2000).

Flexibility: ability of organization to meet urgent and unplanned demand by flexibly assembling
resources, processes, knowledge and capabilities.

Organizational agility: Organizational agility can be defined as a blend of multiple leadership

styles characterized by a significant level of proactive, flexible, responsive and speedy
organizational systems. In other words, organizational agility can be described in terms of lean-
thinking people and agile teams, lean business operations, and strategic agility.

Organizational Effectiveness: According to Kushner and Poole (1996) the effectiveness of an

organization can be described using four components, namely; resource acquisitions, efficiency,
goal attainment, and customer satisfaction.

Proactivity: Anticipating potential changes in business environment and to have ability to cope
with uncertainty.

Responsiveness: ability to respond to change, opportunity and threats that occur in business
environment.

Speed: Ability of organization to quickly change according to changing circumstances. It is

ability of doing works in the shortest possible time.

pg. 6
VUCA: Is an acronym that was coined in 1987 to describe the volatility, uncertainty,
complexity, and ambiguity of changing business environment. VUCA is environments are
characterized by being unpredictable and thereby necessitating adaptive, flexible approaches and
interventions (Bennett & Lemoine, 2014).

1.8 Significance of the Study

The finding of this study, on top of its academic requirement as partial fulfilment for master‘s
degree, will inform the management and other stakeholders of Gadaa Bank to understand to what
extent does organizational agility affect its organizational effectiveness which will help the bank
to improve its financial outcome, customers‘ satisfaction, internal process and organizational
learning and innovation. It will also serve as basis for future studies in the area.

1.9 Scope of the Study

The study was made on Gadaa Bank S.C, the new entrant to Ethiopian Banking industry. The
data was collected from Board of directors and the management at Head Office and branches. In
terms of constructs, the study was made by using independent variables like strategic leadership,
structure, technology, human resource and internal process agility and dependent variable
organizational effectiveness, which was operationalized through financial outcome, customers‘
satisfaction, internal process and organizational learning and innovation, following BSC
approach.

1.10 Limitation of the Study

In terms of the scope, the study was based on Gadaa Bank, and hence least generalizable to the
broader scope. Moreover, the selected bank, Gadaa Bank S.C, is a new entrant to the industry
and hence, some respondents mentioned that it looks early to rate on some of the survey
questions. Also, variables included under independent variable (organizational agility) and
dependent variable (organizational effectiveness) might not be exhaustive.

1.11 Organization of Research Report

The final research report is organized in five chapters. The first chapter is introduction which
contain background of the study, statement of the problem, basic research questions, objectives
of the study, hypothesis, definition of terms, significance of the study, scope and limitation of the
study. The second chapter deals with review of the related literature. It has theoretical review,

pg. 7
empirical review and the conceptual framework of the study. Chapter three covers Research
Methodology, which describes the type and design of the research, participant of the study; the
sources of the data; the data collection tools/instruments, the procedures of data collection and
the methods of data analysis. The fourth chapter deals with ‗Results and discussion, which
summarizes the results/findings of the study, and interpret and/or discuss the findings. The final
chapter deals with Summary, Conclusion and recommendation.

pg. 8
 Chapter-2: REVIEW OF LITERATURES
Literature review is a written dialogue with researchers in selected study area while at the same
time understanding and responding to the relevant body of knowledge underpinning the research
in question. It enables to identify theories and previous research which influenced the choice of
research topic and methodology (Ridley, 2008). The literature review, both theoretical and
empirical, helps to identify a problem to research or illustrate that there is a gap in previous
research that needs to be filled. The literature review, therefore, serves as the driving force and
the jumping off point for a research investigation. As such, this section covers theoretical
framework, empirical literature and conceptual framework of the study.

2.1 Theoretical Framework

According to Mckinsey & Company (2015), agility is the ability of an organization to renew
itself, adapt, change quickly, and succeed in a rapidly changing, ambiguous, turbulent
environment. According to Homby (2000), agility is not incompatible with stability. Quite the
contrary, agility requires two things; dynamic capability and stability. Dynamic capability is the
ability to move fast, nimbleness, responsiveness and stable foundation as backbone and an
anchor point that serves as a springboard for the company. Organizational agility results in
resilience, strengths, robust, flexible, flatter structure and adaptive capability.

According to report by Agile Business Consortium (2020), agile leaders have the ability to think
flexibly in changing business environment and hence they can uncover the strengths of their
employees, use their insights to transition the organization to right direction, and take advantage
of the opportunities in change while trying to minimize their negative impact on the
organization. Accordingly, organizations that incorporate agility into their processes through are
better able to respond quickly to change and deliver superior business value to their stakeholders.
With agile leadership, organizations will be in a better position to quickly detect developments in
the business environment and achieve agility with few resources.

In organizational settings, agility has become a tool of choice to succeed in complex and
uncertain environments, characterized by VUCA, an acronym that was coined in 1987 to
describe the volatility, uncertainty, complexity, and ambiguity of changing business environment
(Bennett & Lemoine, 2014). VUCA environments are characterized by being unpredictable and

pg. 9
 thereby necessitating adaptive, flexible and interventions approaches to overcome challenges and
cope up with changes.

In the contrary, others argued, because change is costly and achieving agility often involves
sacrificing efficiency, one cannot assert that business firms should organize continuously for
agility (Teece, D., Peteraf, M., & Leih, S., 2016). As such, knowing when and how much agility
is required and being able to overcome its costs effectively is a crucial managerial capability.
Also, agility usually encounter the challenges of doing away with organizational traditional
legacy and hierarchical structure of managing from top to down. So, these authors argued
effective organizations need to balance tradeoff agility (flexibility) and efficiency by adopting
dynamic organizational capability.

Organizational agility is not a traditional leadership approach on its own. Rather, it is a

supplementary tool or extension to leadership approaches that are rooted in organizational
psychology, including transformational leadership, trait-based leadership, situational leadership
and complexity leadership (Lipman-Blumen, 2000; Joiner, 2009). In this sense, agility is a
holistic concept that acts as guidance for a team or organization to achieve outcomes that are
tailored to the VUCA business environment.

Figure 1: The summarized organizational agility concept

Multiple Leadership Agility in VUCA Organizational

Organizational Agility
Styles environment effectiveness
 Transformational  Proactivity Organizational ability Achieving better
 Situational;  Speed to flexibly and quickly financial and non-
 Transactional;
 Behavioral;  Responsiveness sense change signals financial outcomes
 Traits-based;  Flexibility and act proactively to sustainably.
 Servant Leadership
gain competitiveness.
Source: Customized by the researcher, June 2023.

Principles of agility:
According to Wahyono (2018), principles of Agility provide a set of holistic practices that
embrace an ever-changing business environment. They are broad tools and strategies that can be
practiced by stakeholders inside and outside of the organization, providing an alternative, non-

pg. 10
hierarchical and non-traditional organizational approaches that require flexibility, adaptation and
―out-of-the-box‖ thinking to retain organizational success in VUCA business environment.
These principles are discussed as follow:

1. Agility prioritizes strong teams over dominant individuals

Agile leadership prioritizes the importance of teams to implement agile strategies and tools.
Effective teams are groups that achieve high levels of both task performance and human resource
maintenance (Parker, Holesgrove & Pathak, 2015). Researches show that teams are more
beneficial for organizational performance than individual high-performers teams, (Moravec,
1999). Teams have many benefits, ranging from heightened creativity and a safe environment for
innovation to more diverse outcomes.

2. Agility requires conducting ongoing performance feedback, planning and scenario

setting

In rapidly changing business environment, it is crucial to have an access to performance

dashboard, hold regular meetings with clear outcomes, equipped with adequate alternative
scenarios. In a VUCA world, all parameters can never be known at all times and therefore, there
can be multiple equally important solutions to a problem. In an agile practice, organizations tend
think and design regular planning sessions that enable to maintain an experimentation approach
to consistently re-align expectations and goals (Zerfuss et al., 2018).

3. Agility focus on facts and KPIs rather than opinion and intuition

Zerfass et al. (2018) point out that using KPIs may be more difficult in a non-traditional and
interconnected environment, precisely because such indicators are static and the VUCA
environment is dynamic. However, KPIs can nonetheless be useful in developing new and
innovative processes for change. KPIs that are rooted in evidence, for example evidence on
productivity, organizational output, employee satisfaction or similar, help put into perspective
and set boundaries for organizational developments by defining objectives and results. On the
one hand, this helps measure success, what works and what doesn‘t work.

pg. 11
4. Agile organizations Empower and inspire people to take self-initiatives

Zerfass et al. (2018) find that the decentralization of power and flat hierarchies of decision-
making and power speed up the agile process. In this sense, transformational leadership as a
leadership style is a concept particularly well-suited to organizations adapting to agility in the
VUCA environment. Transformational leadership prioritizes enabling and empowering
followers, which helps flatten hierarchical structures and diversify ideas, opinions and processes.

5. Agility requires communicating in an aligned cycle with the industry dynamics

Research conducted by Zerfass et al. (2018) found that a commitment to agility opens up new
opportunities for communication processes that can benefit the organization as a whole. Agile
communication is short-cycled, meaning that long communication cycles are avoided and
replaced by smaller, regular cycles among teams that allow for re-alignment and re-adjusting.
Seeing as agility became particularly popular in IT sector. It is crucial to consider the positive
role technology and enterprise resource planning (ERP) are playing in facilitating
interorganizational and interpersonal communications and helps streamlining work-flows
(Crocitto and Youssef 2003).

6. Agility presupposes Effective networking and information sharing

Companies which is characterized by healthy communication and effective information sharing

outperform others. The sharing of information is directly related to teams on one hand, and short
communication cycles on the other. Technology can ease networking efforts through knowledge
or project management platforms that encourage collaboration (Zerfass et al., 2018). At the same
time, providing open physical work places for exchange and collaboration is beneficial to
organizational outcomes.

7. Agility requires careful monitoring of external environment and operating system

For an organization to build agility, stakeholders must understand the business environment and
the changes taking place. Therefore, a constant focus towards what is happening inside an
organization and its processes is only helpful to a certain extent. Appelbaum et al. (2017) point
out that agility implies that organizations can adapt to external changes and the VUCA world. In
this sense, to ensure that internal group dynamics that skew critical thinking are avoided (like

pg. 12
groupthink or an echo chamber), an external perspective from external stakeholders should
always be considered to ensure diversity of thoughts.

8. Agility requires developing organizational vision and strategy and aligning regularly

An organization needs a strategy and a vision to determine its path and to help establish a shared
objective and intention. For people inside and outside the organization to relate to it, this vision
or strategy needs to be clearly set, carefully developed and be a red thread that goes through
every process, activity and communication. A strong culture of values helps not only employees
and internal stakeholders understand and commit, but is also helpful for external stakeholders to
clearly position an organization and to enrich it with useful feedback and input.

9. Agility requires ensuring the organization’s outside image and staying in touch

When portraying the face of your organization to the outside world, consistency and committing
to living the values the organization stands for are key. While a vision helps guide organizations
and stakeholders within and outside it, the image dictates how the organization is perceived and
what expectations are ascribed to it. Establishing and maintaining an image should always
consider what is happening in the environment surrounding the organization. While remaining in
touch with gatekeepers and outside happenings, organizations can align whilst remaining serious
and trustworthy. No matter the extent of internal adaptability, the outside image stays upright and
helps maintain realistic expectations.

10. Agility requires balancing structure and chaos for effectiveness and efficiency

Agility means creating change on the one hand, and being able to respond to it on the other.
Agile leadership principles are a great example showcasing that structure and chaos are not
mutually exclusive. Quite the contrary, chaos can give birth to strength and flexibility, and it is a
strength of organizations and stakeholders to understand, embrace, and adapt to chaos.
Complexity theory states that innovation truly takes place where structure and chaos meet - this
is particularly true in VUCA business world (Tsoukas, 1998). Therefore, in a VUCA world,
organizations that are open to constant change and re-evaluation whilst remaining true to their
vision and values will be effective and efficient.

pg. 13
2.2 Empirical Literature Review
Research supports the critical role that agility plays in individuals, teams, leaders and the
organization as a whole. A McKinsey study related higher agility to improved operating
efficiency, increased employee engagement, faster time to market and higher revenue (Mckinsey
& Company, 2015).

Mmohamad Reza Dalvi, et.al. (2013) conducted research by investigating components of

organizational agility as culture, leadership, organizational change, and customer services and
found that there is a significant positive relationship between organization agility and
organizational performance expressed in organizational structure, Knowledge, non- human
resources, strategic position and human process.

An empirical evidence from Indian banking industry found by study conducted by Sukanya
Panda and Santanu Kumar Rath (2021) on ‗How information technology capability influences
organizational agility‘ found that IT capability enables organizational agility (studied as business
process and market responsive agility), while IT capability has more effect on market responsive
agility. The study also found that, the environmental factors (studied as environmental diversity
and hostility) possess a significant effect on the IT-agility relationship and, thereby, suggest that
a more diverse and less hostile environment is required for the firms to build up superior IT
capability for realizing enhanced agility.

Yaghobi et al. (2012) pointed out that agility requires the organizations to act in terms of
integrating employee and management technology with communicational infrastructures so
rapidly that response the customers‘ variable needs in the market with continuous and
unpredictable changes.

Annika H., and Sofia J., (2019) identified that organization is considered to be agile when it is
operating in changing and unpredictable environment and being characterized by key features
like changing and unpredictable environment (proactivity), speed, responsiveness and flexibility.
Agility as rapid, continuous and systematic evolutionary adaptation and entrepreneurial
innovation directed at gaining and/or maintaining competitive advantage, as in diagram below.

pg. 14
Figure 2: Features of agile organization

Source: Feature of Organizational Agility by Annika H., and Sofia J., 2019, Page 8)

According to Sharifi and Zhang (1999), there are 4 dimensions for organizational agility,
namely; Proactivity: Anticipating potential changes in business environment and to have ability
to cope with uncertainty.

Speed: Ability of organizational to quickly be able to change according to changing

circumstances. It is ability of doing works in the shortest possible time.

Responsiveness: ability to respond to change, opportunity and threats that occur in business
environment. It refers to the ability of recognizing changes, and quickly reflecting on them,
exploiting them rapidly and benefiting from them.

Flexibility: ability of organization to meet urgent and unplanned demand by flexibly assembling
resources, processes, knowledge and capabilities. It is the ability of flowing different processes
and achieving different goals through equal facilities and equipment. It also refers to
compatibility and ability to trigger different processes and to meet various goals using the same
equipment and facilities.

pg. 15
Also, Roy Wendler and TU Dresden (2014) introduced the Organizational Agility Maturity
Model, by describing dimensions of organizational agility as agile values, technological agility,
agile people and structural agility. Similarly, Campanelli et al., (2017) identified and described
key success factors for organizational agility as organizational commitment for change,
communicate the change and strategy intensively and positively, involvement and motivation of
employees, training and coaching, decentralization of power and decision making, management
support and leadership and cultural change.

On the other hand, Gregory et al., (2016) identified the challenges of organizational agility as
change resistance, organizational tradition and culture, lack of necessary investment, distribution
of power and hierarchical structure, misinterpretation and lack of understanding, leadership
challenges.

Understanding behaviors that are required from agile leaders and behaviors they need to instill in
others will enable us to establish a framework and foundation to understand, measure,
benchmark and develop Leadership Agility in organizations. Ahlback et al., (2017) discussed the
five components of organizational agility as strategy, process, structure, people and technology,
as in diagram below.

Figure 3: Components of organizational agility

Source: Core areas of Organizational Agility by Annika H., and Sofia J., 2019, Page 23)

pg. 16
 1) Strategic Leadership agility
Strategic leadership agility is concerned with establishment of an organizational culture following
agile values like proactivity, responsiveness, trust, support of proposals and decisions of
employees, and the handling of change as opportunity and chance. This culture is measured by the
degree to which the agile values have disseminated throughout the organization (Roy Wendler
and TU Dresden 2014).

According to Ahlbäck et al., (2017), strategic leadership agility is ability of providing frequent
feedback and coaching to enable people to work autonomously toward their team outcome,
establishing a shared vision and purpose where people feel personally and emotionally engaged in
the strategic direction, developing capabilities of sensing and seizing opportunities in business
environment and flexibly allocating resources.

2) Structural agility
The fitting agile structure should be fit for their purpose and have full end-to-end accountability
(Ahlbäck et al., 2017). The teams should be small, empowered and self-managed, enabling fast
decision making. As such, the leaders in their mandate should have the authority to make all
relevant decisions that affect their day-to-day activities. There should conducive environment for
collaboration and partnership with relevant internal and external stakeholders.

Agile organizations prefer flatter and non-hierarchical structure that facilitates faster
communication and decision making, where delegations and decentralization of power are key
elements. Agile structure describes flexibility and ability of the organization to quickly adapt
organizational structures and processes to implement changes and stay competitive (Roy
Wendler and TU Dresden, 2014).

3) Technological agility
Technology involves architecture, infrastructure, practices, and tools that should be integrated
with key internal processes. Agile technology should be able to roll out suitable systems, and
tools that support the organization‘s agile ways of operating in collaborative way among cross-
functional teams (Ahlbäck et al., 2017).

Technological agility enables efficient communication across all levels of organization; the
sharing of information; and the utilization of standardized, comparable, and integrated

pg. 17
technologies and information systems (Alhadid & Aburuhman, 2015; Roy Wendler and TU
Dresden 2014). Information technology benefits an organization by supplying it with a high
information capacity, promoting efficient and effective information system, relationship, and
flexibility.

4) Human Resource agility

Agility of people represents all necessary capabilities of the members of an organization to
translate the agile values into actions and it further distinguishes into the capabilities of the
workforce and the leadership to cope with change (Roy Wendler and TU Dresden 2014). Agile
people are characterized by ability to be calm in the face of pressure, reacting to unique
circumstances effectively, being open to innovation, and keeping teams on the ground and the
right path.

Agile organizations prioritize people over processes, focusing on customer needs, and seeing
change as adding value. HR agility includes empowering the workforce, participating in decision
making, sharing knowledge, developing skills of collaborators, and enhancing creativity of
employees (Charbonnier-Voirin, 2011).

In other words, in agile organization, people own an entrepreneurial drive, including an intrinsic
passion for the work and aim to perform beyond expectations. The leaders should inspire
employees through coaching and development, where the leaders also involve employees in
strategic decisions and encourage team-oriented behavior. Moreover, teams trust each other to
act in the best interest of the organization and its key stakeholders, where there is a mobility of
roles (Ahlbäck et al., 2017).

5) Internal Process agility

According to Ahlback et.al (2017) agile internal process describes effective and efficient way of
initiating, processing and delivering organizational activities. It is the ability of the organizations
to quickly re-engineer/re-configure the internal business processes to cope with various
environmental changes so as to attain superior performance. Agile internal process is flexible,
fast, and responsive process that could lead to satisfaction of stakeholders and better outcome.
Agile internal process provides solutions to customers rather than just selling products, by
employing creative ways throughout the process. Information transparency is crucial element of
agile internal process, meaning information is freely available to everyone in an organization.

pg. 18
2.3 Conceptual Framework
2.3.1 Components of Organizational Agility
Mckinsey & Company (2015) identified three dimensions of organizational agility on both stable
and dynamic capability, namely; structure, process, and people. Similarly, according to Ahlback
et al., (2017), five components of organizational agility as strategy, process, structure, people and
technology. The main characteristics of the agile organizations include learning culture,
innovation speed, communications in the actual time, adaptable organizations, and employees‘
participation (Yaghobi et al., 2012). Mmohamad R., (2013) also identified organizational agility
components as culture, leadership, organizational change and customer service.

Based on theoretical and empirical literatures reviewed in previous sections, the researcher
customized the components and drivers of organizational agility (dimension of responsiveness,
competence, flexibility and speed) as leadership agility, structural agility, technological agility,
HR agility and internal process agility. Agility requires to be both stable and dynamic on
structure, process, technology, strategy and people.

2.3.2 Components of Organizational Effectiveness

The organizational effectiveness is measurement that are used to evaluate the success of
organizations, as to create and deliver a worth to both internal and external shareholders.
Organizational performance can also be expressed in financial outcomes like sales, profit, market
share, return on investment and the likes (Ambec and Lanoie, 2008). According to Mmohamad
R., (2013), organizational effectiveness could be expressed in terms of its human and non-human
process, structure and Strategic position.

According to Uhl-Bein et al, (2007) an organization is effective when is able to attain its goals,
manage ambiguity, flexibility, customer-orientation, production efficiency, value-creation and
structured learning and employees‘ empowerment.

According to Balanced scorecards (BSC), there are four perspectives for measuring
organizational effectiveness, namely; financial, customer, internal process and organizational
learning and growth. BSC is broader perspective that reflects on both financial and non-financial
results of an organization. BSC is one of the performance measures which enables an
organization to translate its vision and strategy into a tangible set of performance measures that

pg. 19
provides an enterprise view of an organization‗s overall performance by integrating financial
measures with other key performance indicators around customer perspective, internal business
processes and organizational growth and learning (Becker, Huselid, &Ulrich, 2001; Kaplan and
Norton, 1992).

Based on theoretical and empirical literatures discussed in previous sections, the researcher has
developed the customized conceptual framework as follow.

Figure 4: Conceptual framework of the study

Independent Variable Dependent Variable

Organizational Agility KPIs of Organizational Effectiveness
1. Strategic Leadership agility (SLA) 1. Financial perspective
2. Structural agility (SA) 2. Customers‘ perspective
3. Technological agility (TA) 3. Internal Process perspective
4. Human Resource agility (HRA) 4. Learning and growth perspective
5. Internal Process agility (IPA)

Source: Customized by the researcher, June 2023

The researcher of this study has summarized the components of organizational agility and the
key features of agility as in matrix below so as to frame survey questions under each components
of organizational agility.

pg. 20
 Table 1: Matrix of features and components of organizational agility
Agility Proactivity Speed Responsiveness Flexibility
 Sensing and  Employee
opportunity seizing motivation,  Ongoing revision of
 Flexible allocation
Strategic capability; Engagement and strategy and plans;
of resources
leadership agility  Regular feedback empowerment;  Strategic alignment
 Flexible strategy;
 Shared vision and  Self-managed teams; and communication;
strategic directions
 Flatter structure
 Having fitting
 Nonhierarchical  Empowered & Self-
Structural agility structure with  Self-managed team
structure managed teams;
effective process.
 Decentralized power
 Effective ICT;
Technological  Effective CBS  Growing  Diversified service
 Fast information
agility  Effective ERP digitalization and ICT options
sharing
 Coaching, training
and development  Empowered teams
HR agility  Talent management  Empowered teams  Creativity and  Empowered teams
 Knowledge responsibility;
management
 Information sharing
 Flexible manuals;
 Collaborative and  Short process cycle;  Customer centric
Process agility  Flexible terms and
participatory  Effective process process
tariffs
process

Source: Organizational agility matrix developed by the researcher, June 2023

pg. 21
 Chapter-3: Research Methodology
This section, Research Methodology, describes the type and design of the research, participant of
the study; the sources of the data; the data collection tools/instruments, the procedures of data
collection and the methods of data analysis.

3.1 Research Approach

This study primarily relied on quantitative research approach by using predesigned survey data
to be collected by validated research question of 5- level Likert scale. The questions are
customized from validated instruments by previous researchers like Wendler (2013) and Roy
Wendler and TU Dresden (2014).

3.2 Research Design

In view of purpose of the study, this research is designed as explanatory research to examine the
effect of organizational agility (independent variables) on organizational effectiveness of Gadaa
Bank (the dependent variable) by checking causation. In some cases, descriptive statistics was
used to explain existing situation and demographic factors.

3.3 Sampling Design

3.3.1 Population of the Study
According to Shukla (2020) research population refers to all units on which the findings of
research can be applied and generalized. Thus, the target population of the study is all board of
directors and the management of Gadaa Bank which is 110. This population is chosen due to the
fact that defining organizational design and leadership is a mandate of the board and top
management of the company.

3.3.2 Sampling Techniques

The study used random sampling method to collect primary data from all board of directors and
the management members of Gadaa Bank by fully addressing the whole population (board of
directors and top management of the bank) and randomly selecting from selected branch
managers and relation managers. This is due to the fact that it is the role of the leadership to
determine the style of management that determines the organizational effectiveness and
competitive advantage.

pg. 22
3.3.3 Sample Size
The target sampling population will be Board of Directors and the management of Gadaa Bank.
This is due to the fact that it is the board of directors and the management of the bank who
determine the organizational strategy, organizational design, structure, culture, HR and internal
systems and process. The bank has total board and management members of 110 as of March 31,
2023. So, the sample size of the study could be determined based on Yamane‘s (1967), equation
by assuming 95% confidence level and 5% sampling error as follow:

managements and board member

Where n – represents the sample size the study uses.

N - represents total number of management and board

e – Designates maximum variability or margin of error 5% (0.05).

The total 86 sample is 78% of the total target population of 110 board and management
members.

Table 2: Sample and population of the study

S/N Role Number Remark

1 Board of Directors 9
2 Chief Executive Officer (CEO) 1
3 Chief Officers (VP) 2 The whole members
4 Department Directors 15
5 Division Managers 8
6 Relation Manager/Principals 6 90% of the target by
7 Branch Managers 45 lottery
Total 86 Out of 110 members

pg. 23
3.3.4 Sources of Data Collection and Instrument
The study mostly relied on primary data collected by using questionnaire designed in Standard
Likert scale of 5-levels; ranging from Strongly disagree to Strongly agree. To substantiate the
primary data, the study used Key informant interview (KII) with selected management members.
Moreover, the study reviewed secondary documents like the industry reports, plans, directives,
proclamations and relevant internal documents.

3.3.5 Method of Data Collection

A standard self-administrated survey questionnaire was distributed to the respondents in person
or through google survey form. Key informant interview was made with selected board of
directors and senior management members.

3.3.6 Method of Data Analysis

The study used both descriptive and inferential statistics. Descriptive statistics was used to
summarize demographic and other profiles by mean, range and frequency of survey data as part
of checking central tendency. Multiple regression analysis was used to estimate the effect of
organizational agility components (strategic leadership, structure, technology, HR and internal
process) on organizational effectiveness in terms of financial outcomes, customers‘ satisfaction,
internal process and organizational learning and innovation following BSC approach by using
SPSS software version-26. The regression model was based on the following customized
conceptual framework.

Based on the above conceptual framework, the mathematical model of the regression will be:

0+ β1SLA+ β2SA+ β3TA+ β4HRA+ β5IPA+

where; OE = Organizational Effectiveness βs are coefficient of the model. variable, SLA =

strategic leadership agility, SA = structural agility, TA = technological agility, HRA = human
resource agility and IPA process agility for organizational effectiveness and is error term.

3.3.7 Validity and Reliability

The questionnaire customized by the researcher based on validated instruments by previous
studies was subjected to a check and re-check process in order to establish the reliability of the
instrument. Selected professional in the field was consulted. To ensure validity and reliability of

pg. 24
data, the questionnaire was pilot-tested with 10% of total sample size of the study. Later on, the
reliability testing was made for all variables by using Cronbach Alpha coefficient as in table
below, which are above the minimum standard of 0.7 except technological agility result of 0.661
which is still closer to 0.7 and above 0.5 which is acceptable at lower level by the standard.

Table 3: Validity and Reliability Statistics

Cronbach's Cronbach's Alpha Based on

S/N Variables No of Items
Alpha Standardized Items
1 Leadership Agility .849 .853 10
2 Technological Agility .661 .679 4
3 Human Resource Agility .826 .827 6
4 Structural agility .787 .786 8
5 Internal Process agility .813 .819 4
5 Organizational Effectiveness .942 .943 16
6 Overall reliability .956 .957 40

pg. 25
 Chapter-4: Data Analysis and Interpretation
4.1 Response Rate
A total of 86 of questionnaire were administered to the target population which includes the
Board of Directors and management members of Gadaa Bank S.C via google survey out of
which 78 of the total respondents, which is 90% were successfully responded. According to
Baruch and Holtom (2008), a researcher should target 60% response rate to be considered
adequate for analysis and drawing conclusion. Therefore, this response rate can be considered
adequate for data analysis and conclusion. There was no incomplete and missing questionnaire as
the google survey was restricted to accept any missing and/or incomplete response i.e., each
question was set to be mandatory and required.

4.2. Demographic Characteristics of the Respondents

As shown in the table 4.1 below, out of the total 86 respondents who are identified as target
population, 76 respondents (97.4%) are male while only 2 respondents (2.6%) are female. 50%
of the respondents are young staffs falling between 25-35 age group, closely followed by age
category of 36-45 which accounts about 44% of the respondents. The remaining respondents of
about 6% fall in the range of 46-55 and above 56 years.

From the total participants who have engaged in the survey, majority of the respondents (65.4%)
are second degree holders while 33.3% of the respondents are first degree holders. In terms of
placement, 57.7% and 37.2 of the respondents are working at head office and branches,
respectively. Further, the job position of the respondents constituted 6% of Board of Directors,
1% Chief officer, 19% department directors, 58% branch managers, 9% division managers and
6% relation managers and principals.

pg. 26
 Table 4: Demographic aspects of the respondents

No Variables Particular Frequency %age

Male 76 97.4
1 Gender of the respondents Female 2 2.6
Total 78 100
25-35 39 50
36-45 34 43.6
2 Age of the respondents 46-55 3 3.8
Above 56 2 2.6
Total 78 100
BA/BSC 26 33.3
MA/MBA/MSC 51 65.4
3 Education of the respondents
Other 1 1.3
Total 78 100
Board of Directors 5 6.4
Chief Officers 1 1.3
Directors 15 19.2
4 Position of the respondents Division Manager 7 9
Branch Manager 45 57.7
Relation Manager/Principals 5 6.4
Total 78 100
Head Office 28 35.9
Branch 45 57.7
5 Placement of the respondents
Other like Board members 5 6.4
Total 78 100
Source: Own Survey Result and computation, 2023.

4.3 Descriptive Analysis

Descriptive statistical analysis has been conducted for checking the respondents‘ view on
importance and applicability of organizational agility to Ethiopian banking business, considering
Gadaa Bank as a representative for constructs included in independent variables (strategic
leadership agility, structural agility, technological agility, HR agility and process agility) and
dependent variable (organizational effectiveness).

pg. 27
According to the survey result, 71 out of 78 respondents which accounts 91% of the response
agreed that organizational agility is important and applicable to Ethiopian banking industry in
general and to Gadaa Bank in particular. 6 respondents (7.7%) said that it is sometimes important
and applicable to banking business while only one respondent showed indifferent position. This
implies that organizational agility is important and applicable for banking business.

Table 5: Importance and applicability of organizational agility for Ethiopian banking

S/N Particular Frequency %age

1 It‘s always important and applicable 71 91
2 It‘s sometimes important and applicable 6 7.7
3 It‘s not important and applicable
4 Another alternative 1 1.3
Total 78 100
Source: Own Survey Result and computation, 2023

The statistical description of the average mean scores of all constructs, as indicated in table
below, is found to be between 3.8429-4.1047 which can be considered as high according to the
standard. More specifically, the average mean score of process agility is M= 4.1314, strategic
leadership agility is M=4.1047, structural agility is M= 3.9776, HR agility is M = 3.9594 and
technological agility is M = 3.8429, all of which fall in high score range. More importantly, all
mean score is closer to organizational effectiveness mean of M = 3.9704, showing high level of
the respondents‘ agreement with effect of organizational agility on organizational effectiveness
of Gadaa Bank S.C.

Table 6: Descriptive statistics of variables

Particular
N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation
Leadership Agility 78 2.50 5.00 4.1047 .58794
Technological Agility 78 2.25 5.00 3.8429 .61779
Human Resource Agility 78 2.50 5.00 3.9594 .57433
Structural agility 78 3.00 5.00 3.9776 .44171
Internal Process agility 78 2.25 5.00 4.1314 .61333
Organizational Effectiveness 78 2.50 5.00 3.9704 .56405
Source: Survey Result, 2023

pg. 28
4.4. Inferential analysis and presentation
The statistical inference is the act of generalizing from a sample to a population with calculated
degree of certainty and hence the researcher has conducted inferential statistical test to confirm
that relevant assumption of the multiple linear regression model such as multicollinearity, test of
normality, model fit, outliers, linearity, auto collinearity (independence of errors) and
homoscedasticity assumption are fully addressed before going to detail presentation and analysis
is made. Coefficients of the predictor variables along at 95% confidence interval was computed.
In addition, Pearson correlation coefficients was computed to see the strength of relationship
between the dependent variable and independent variables.

4.4.1 Correlation Statistics

Basically, the study sought to establish the strength of relationship between organizational agility
(the independent variable) and organizational effectiveness (the dependent variable) of the study.
Accordingly, Pearson correlation coefficient was computed at 99% confidence interval and the
result is presented in the below table as follows.

The Pearson correlation matrix computed showed that there was strong relationship between
organizational agility variables (leadership, structure, technology, HR and process) and
organizational effectiveness, with significance level of P=0.001 in all cases. This implies that
proper adaptation of organizational agility to its practice significantly improves organizational
effectiveness of Gadaa Bank S.C.

pg. 29
Table 7: Pearson Correlation Matrix of variables of the study

Particulars Org_ Effectiveness Independent variable

Org_ Effectiveness Pearson Correlation 1 .799**
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
HR_ Agility Pearson Correlation .799** 1
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
Org_ Effectiveness Pearson Correlation 1 .505**
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
Structural_ Agility Pearson Correlation .505** 1
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
Org_ Effectiveness Pearson Correlation 1 .603**
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
Process_ Agility Pearson Correlation .603** 1
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
Org_ Effectiveness Pearson Correlation 1 .663**
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
Leadership_ Agility Pearson Correlation .663** 1
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
Org_ Effectiveness Pearson Correlation 1 .618**
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
Technological_ Agility Pearson Correlation .618** 1
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
N 78 78
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Source: SPSS V.26 computation Result, 2023

4.4.2. Regression Analysis and Results

Regression analysis is a statistical tool that is used to indicate the relationship between two or
more variables. In this study, the objective of the study was to examine the effect of
organizational agility as measured by five independent variables, namely; strategic leadership
agility, structural agility, technological agility, HR agility and internal process agility.
Accordingly, based on the conceptual framework, the model of the study was defined using
multiple linear regression as follows;

pg. 30
 0+ β1SLA+ β2SA+ β3TA+ β4HRA+ β5IPA+
where; OE = Organizational Effectiveness βs are coefficient of the model. variable, SLA =
strategic leadership agility, SA = structural agility, TA = technological agility, HRA = human
resource agility and IPA process agility for organizational effectiveness and is error term.

This is linear regression analysis which presupposes basic assumptions and tests such as
normality test, autocorrelation, heteroscedasticity, multicollinearity and analysis of variance
(ANOVA).

a) Normality Test

The data are plotted against a theoretical normal distribution in such a way that the points should
form an approximate straight line to confirm the validity of the research model with the use of
residual plots.

Figure 5: Normality test of the study data

Source: SPSS (V. 26) Result, 2023

Therefore, as it is depicted in the above figure as long as there is no significant departure from
the straight line, it can be concluded that the variables involved in this study follow normal
distribution, hence, the residual value is normally distributed fulfilling the regression analysis
procedures.

pg. 31
 b) Auto autocorrelation test

In order to assure that there is no relationship between the residual variable and the independent
variable, the Durbin Watson Test was computed. Naturally, the Durbin Watson Test value ranges
from 0 to 4. The Durbin Watson value of 2.276 fall between 1.5 and 2.5 and thus can confirm
that there is no autocorrelation detected in the sample and statistically fit for presentation.

Table 8: Autocorrelation testing the model Summary

Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Sig. F Change Durbin-Watson

1 .840a .705 .685 .000 2.276

a. Predictors: (Constant), Structural_A, Technological_A, Process_A, Leadership_A,
HR_A
b. Dependent Variable: Org_ Effectiveness

c) Heteroescedasticity test

By simply looking at the scatterplot output given below, it appears that the spots are diffused and
don‘t form a clear specific pattern, therefore, it can be concluded that the regression model does
not have a heteroscedasticity problem. Based on this point; we accept the null hypothesis which
says there is no heteroscedasticity.

Figure 6: Heteroescedasticity test

pg. 32
 d) Multicollinearity test

If there is a high degree of correlation between independent variables, we have a problem of

what is commonly described as the problem of multicollinearity. A variance inflation factor
(VIF) is the most commonly used measure of the amount of multicollinearity in regression
analysis. A rule of thumb for interpreting the variance inflation factor, in general, a VIF above 10
indicates high correlation between the independent variables and attracts attention as to what to
do with it. In this study, VIF for all variables are less than 10 and hence there is no
multicollinearity problem.

Table 9: Multicollinearity test

Standardized
Unstandardized Coefficients T Sig. Collinearity Statistics
Model Coefficients
B Std. Error Beta Tolerance VIF
(Constant) .197 .351 .561 .576
Leadership .213 .090 .222 2.370 .020 .466 2.147
Technological .153 .075 .168 2.050 .044 .610 1.640
1
HR_A .533 .098 .542 5.412 .000 .408 2.452
Process .003 .088 .003 .035 .972 .444 2.253
Structural .047 .103 .037 .457 .649 .630 1.586
a. Dependent Variable: Org_Effectiveness
Source: SPSS (V.26) Result, 2023

e) Analysis of variance (ANOVA)

ANOVA helps to determine whether the difference between group means are statistically
significant, determine how well the model fits the data to determine whether the model meets the
assumptions of the analysis or not. In our finding, the results depicted in table below indicated
that the regression model influences the study positively, as evidenced by the significance value
(p = .001) was less than 0.05. Thus, we conclude that organizational agility significantly
influences organizational effectiveness of Gadaa Bank.

pg. 33
Table 10: ANOVAa

Model Sum of Squares Df Mean Square F Sig.

Regression 17.273 5 3.455 34.429 .000b
1 Residual 7.225 72 .100
Total 24.498 77
a. Dependent Variable: Org_Effectiveness
b. Predictors: (Constant), Structural_A, Technological_A, Process_A, Leadership_A, HR_A

4.4.3 Regression Result and Model Summary

In view of the study‘s main objective of examining the effect of organizational agility on
organizational effectiveness, the researcher employed multiple linear regression to establish the
relationship between the study variables.

This regression analysis was made to measure how much each independent variable
organizational agility through its constructs like strategic leadership, structural agility,
technological agility, HR agility and internal process agility explains the dependent variable
(organizational effectiveness) of Gadaa Bank S.C.

The results presented in Table below shows that the coefficient of determination (r 2 = .705),
indicating 70.5% of the variation in organizational effectiveness is explained by organizational
agility components like strategic leadership, structural agility, technological agility, HR agility
and internal process agility.

The adjusted R square used to compare the explanatory power of the model that
contains different predictors. Therefore, 68.5% of changes in the organizational effectiveness
could be explained by components of organizational agility. In other words, 31.5% of the
variance is explained by other factors not included in the study and was predicted by other
extraneous variables.

Table 11: Model Summaryb

Mode
R R Square Adjusted R Square Sig. F Change Durbin-Watson
l
1 .840a .705 .685 .000 2.276
a. Predictors: (Constant), Structural_A, Technological_A, Process_A, Leadership_A, HR_A
b. Dependent Variable: Org_Effectiveness

pg. 34
According to regression result shown in table below, there is a positive correlation and causation
between organizational effectiveness and all components of organizational agility (strategic
leadership agility
= 0.003). Moreover, having P-
value of less than 0.05, HR agility, strategic leadership agility and technological agility
statistically significant effect on the organizational effectiveness of Gadaa Bank with p-value of
P = 00, P = 0.020 and P=0.044 respectively. On the other hand, the bank‘s internal process
agility and structural agility have statistically insignificant effects on organizational effectiveness
although they have positive relationship.
+ 0.222SLA+ 0.037SA+ 0.168TA+ 0.542HRA+ 0.003IPA+
Table 12: Regression results and Coefficients

Standardized
Unstandardized Coefficients
Model Coefficients t Sig.
B Std. Error Beta
Constant .197 .351 .561 .576
Leadership Agility .213 .090 .222 2.370 .020
Technological Agility .153 .075 .168 2.050 .044
1
HR Agility .533 .098 .542 5.412 .000
Process Agility .003 .088 .003 .035 .972
Structural Agility .047 .103 .037 .457 .649
a. Dependent Variable: Organizational Effectiveness

pg. 35
 4.4.4 Hypothesis Testing
The study used multiple linear regression models to test the combined effect of organizational
agility (strategic leadership agility, structural agility, technological agility, HR agility and
internal process agility) on organizational effectiveness in terms of financial outcome, customer
satisfaction, process and organizational learning and innovation. Accordingly, as indicated in
table- 13 next, the level of significance for independent variable like strategic leadership agility
(0.020), HR agility (0.000) and technological agility (0.044) are less than 0.05 (P<0.05).
Therefore, the hypotheses that positively related the corresponding organizational agility with
organizational effectiveness have been supported and hence accepted. On the other hand, the
level of significance of structural agility (0.649) and internal process agility (0.972) are greater
than 0.05(P>0.05) and hence the hypothesis is not supported.

Table 13: Hypothesis testing result

Hyp. Hypothesis Research findings Decision

Strategic leadership has positive Coefficient is positive
Accepted the null
H01 significant effect on organizational and statistically
hypothesis H01
effectiveness of Gadaa Bank significant
Structural agility has positive significant Coefficient is positive Fail to accept the
H02 effect on organizational effectiveness of and statistically null hypothesis
Gadaa Bank insignificant H02
Technological agility has positive Coefficient is positive
Accepted the null
H03 significant effect on organizational and statistically
hypothesis H03
effectiveness of Gadaa Bank significant
HR agility has positive significant effect Coefficient is positive
Accepted the null
H04 on organizational effectiveness of Gadaa and statistically
hypothesis H04
Bank significant
Internal process agility has positive Coefficient is positive Fail to accept the
H05 significant effect on organizational and statistically null hypothesis
effectiveness of Gadaa Bank insignificant H05

Source: SPSS (V.26) Result, 2023

pg. 36
 Chapter-5: Summary of Findings, Conclusion and Recommendation

5.1 . Summary of Findings

This study was conducted to examine the effect of organizational agility on organizational
effectiveness of Gadaa Bank. The primary data was collected through google survey
questionnaire distributed to 86 management members of Gadaa Bank, out of which 78 were
responded on time. The analysis was made by using descriptive statistics and linear regression
model by using SPSS version 26. Data collected by using Likert scale was used for measurement
of constructs of organizational agility (leadership agility, structural agility, technological, HR
agility and internal process). The finding is summarized as follows:

 According to the survey result, 71 out of 78 respondents which accounts 91% of the
response agreed that organizational agility is important and applicable to Ethiopian
banking industry in general and to Gadaa Bank in particular.
 The statistical description of the average mean scores of all constructs was found to be
between 3.8429-4.1314 which can be considered as high according to the standard. More
specifically, the average mean score of process agility is M= 4.1314, strategic leadership
agility is M=4.1047, structural agility is M= 3.9776, HR agility is M = 3.9594 and
technological agility is M = 3.8429, all of which fall in high score range. More
importantly, all mean score is closer to organizational effectiveness mean of M = 3.9704,
showing high level of the respondents‘ agreement with effect of organizational agility on
organizational effectiveness of Gadaa Bank S.C
 The regression result shows that the coefficient of determination (r2 = .705), indicating
70.5% of the variation in organizational effectiveness is explained by organizational
agility components like strategic leadership, structural agility, technological agility, HR
agility and internal process agility. There is a positive correlation and causation between
organizational effectiveness and all components of organizational agility (strategic
leadership agility β1=0.222, structural agility β2= 0.037, technological agility β3=0.168,
HR agility β4=0.542, and internal process agility β = 0.003). Moreover, having P-value
of less than 0.05, HR agility, strategic leadership agility and technological agility
statistically significant effect on the organizational effectiveness of Gadaa Bank with p-

pg. 37
 value of P = 00, P = 0.020 and P=0.044 respectively. Having p-value of less than 0.05
(P<0.05), we accept the null hypothesis.
 On the other hand, the bank‘s internal process agility and structural agility have
statistically insignificant effects on organizational effectiveness although they have
positive relationship. Having P-value of greater than 0.05(P>0.05), we fail to accept the
null hypothesis.

5.2 Conclusion
The results of both descriptive statistic and regression analysis have shown that there is
considerable relationship between constructs of organizational agility and organizational
effectiveness. Accordingly, the mean scores of all independent variables like strategic leadership
agility, structural agility, technological agility, HR agility and internal process agility are closely
related to the mean score of the dependent variable of organizational effectiveness, all falling in
the range of 3.8429 (technological agility) to 4.1314 (process agility). Similarly, the coefficients
of all independent variables are positively associated with dependent variable. Moreover,
statistically, strategic leadership agility, HR agility and technological has significant effects on
the dependent variable. Thus, corresponding hypothesis are accepted. On the other hand, the
regression results showed that, having positive coefficients, structural agility and process agility
are not statistically significant effect on organizational effectiveness and thus we fail to accept
the corresponding hypothesis as we don‘t have sufficient evidence to support the null hypothesis.
This findings were attributed to nature of banking business in which structures and internal
process tend to be centralized due to high risks and regulatory requirements.

In nutshell, the finding that 70.5% of the variation in the performance of the bank is explained by
the components of organizational agility (leadership agility, structural agility, technological
agility, HR agility and process agility) implies that Gadaa Bank need to nurture optimum level of
organizational agility that could gradually lead to sustainable competitive advantage. In other
words, the findings show that the Bank‘s effort to institute organizational agility in terms of
proactivity, responsiveness and flexibility to its operational and functional practice will bring
about organizational effectiveness in terms of financial and non-financial outcomes.

pg. 38
 5.3 . Recommendation
The study found the existence of strong correlation and causation between organizational agility
and organizational effectiveness of Gadaa Bank S.C. Accordingly, the bank needs to institute
optimum level of organizational agility (proactivity, responsiveness, flexibility and speed) in
terms of its strategic leadership, technology, HR, process and structure so as to gain and sustain
competitive advantage and also overcome the industry challenges and uncertainties posed by the
government reforms (directive on minimum capital requirements, opening up of the sector to
entry of foreign banks, directive on introduction of capital market, emergence of specialized
financial institutions in fin-tech offering, Islamic banking, upgrading of existing major
microfinance institutions to full banking service, and leasing and mortgage loans) and growing
challenges of liquidity problems, regulatory requirements, disruptions in digital banking and
demanding customer requirements. More specifically, the researcher recommends the bank to
take following actions:

1) To improve its Strategic Leadership Agility:

 The Bank should adequately translate its vision and strategic objectives into key
performance indicators (KPIs) and communicate to relevant organs; put alternative
scenarios for plans, strategies and management action points and create inter units‘
alignments and synergy.
 In a VUCA world, all parameters can never be known at all times and therefore, the bank
should proactively design dynamic and multiple scenarios and solutions to a problem. In
an agile practice, the management should maintain continuous access to performance
dashboard, hold regular sessions with internal and external stakeholders on sensing of
changes in the industry and seizing of opportunities (Zerfuss et al., 2018).

2) To improve Structural Agility:

 Agile organizations are supposed to have a flatter and less hierarchical structure coupled
with decentralization of power and decision making; prioritizing the importance of
empowered and self-managed teams over indispensable individuals‘ roles. In the context
of Ethiopian banking industry where stringent risks and regulatory requirements demand
centralization of power and decisions, the management should empower teams like

pg. 39
 customer relation managers (CRM) to effectively bridge communications and decisions
between the managements and functional units.
 The leadership at different levels should be encouraged to courageously make speedy
and critical decisions or recommendations with great sense of responsibility and
ownership.

3) To improve Technological Agility:

 Agility presupposes existence of effective information sharing and communication. As
such the Bank should streamline its core operations by effective core banking solution
(CBS) and automate its support process through effective enterprise resource planning
(ERP). As such, all relevant modules and functions should be automated.
 Digital banking should be one of the bank‘s core strategies so as to bring about
operational and service excellence on one hand and overcoming the challenges and
uncertainties that could be posed by entry of foreign banks, introduction of capital
market, emergence of specialized financial institutions in fin-tech offering.
 The bank should put in place effective management information systems (MIS) and a
digital platform to collect strategic feedback and inputs from its internal and external
stakeholders, which should be evaluated at regular schedules.
4) To improve HR Agility:
 In principle, agile organizations and leaders prioritize people over processes and material
resources, and hence should inspire and empower employees to participate in important
decision making, train and develop skills of collaborators, and innovations (Charbonnier-
Voirin, 2011). As such, the bank should create environment of mutual trust for teams to
act and contribute in the best interest of the bank.
 The bank should create conducive environment for people to own an entrepreneurial
drive, including an intrinsic passion for the work and courage to experience challenges
without a fear of failure and punishment.
 The Bank should put in place proper performance management and reward systems.
5) To improve Internal Process Agility:
 The process agility is an ability of the organizations to proactively, quickly and flexibly
re-configure the business processes to cope with dynamic and demanding customer and
business requirements, leading to stakeholders‘ satisfaction and superior performance

pg. 40
 (Ahlback et.al, 2017). As such, the bank should create dynamic capability to enable
providing creative solutions to customers rather than just selling products.
 The bank should put in place flexible and responsive strategies, plans, procedures, terms
and tariffs to dynamically tailor its operations to the business requirements.

5.4 Suggestion for Future Studies

On top of addressing its objectives, the study identified some points need to be considered by
future researches as follows:

 Organizational agility is a new concept which is less researched and future research
need to make deeper study in the area. Also, variables included in this research might
not be exhaustive and this open up a room for future researchers.
 The study population was the board of directors and management of single bank,
Gadaa Bank S.C, and hence the finding is not generalizable to the whole industry.
Moreover, the fact Gadaa Bank is a new entrant of one year old, and hence it looks
early to institute necessary agility to the bank‘s systems and practice. So future
studies need to consider broader scope that could address the whole industry and
generalizability.
 Organizational agility is less practicable in industry like Ethiopian banking which is
under stringent regulation and less market competitiveness. Hence, future studies
need to incorporate the internal and external determinant factors of organizational
agility.
 This study was conducted based on the Likert scale rating, based on perception of the
respondents. The future studies need to relate organizational agility with actual
organizational performance of the bank in major key performance indicators.

pg. 41
References
Ahlback, A., Fahrbach, C., Murarka, M., Salo, O., (2017): How to create Agile Organization.
Mckinsey Quarterly, (1),58-69

Alhadid (2016) ―The Effect of Organization Agility on Organization Performance: International

Review of Management and Business Research. 5(1) 273-278

Alhadid, A & Abu-ruhman A. (2015) ―Effective Determinations on Organization Agility

Practices: Analytical Study on Information Technology organization in Jordan‖
International Review of Management and Business Research. 4(1) 34-39.

Annika Hersle and Sofia Johansson (2019): From Traditional to Agile: An exploratory study on
how large companies achieve organizational agility. Available at
https://gupea.ub.gu.se/bitstream/handle/2077/61092/gupea_2077_61092_1.pdf?sequence
=1

Appelbaum, D., Kogan, A., & Vasarhelyi, M. A. (2017). Big Data and Analytics in the Modern
Audit Engagement: Research Needs. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 36, 1-27

Campanelli, A.S., Parreiras, F., and Bassi, D. (2017): Lecture Notes in Computer Science,
10253, 364-379

Baruch, Y., & Holtom, B. C. (2008). Survey response rate levels and trends in organizational
research. Human relations, 61(8), 1139-1160.

Becker, H. & Ulrich, N. (2001) Management Accounting and Financial Control, Sultan Chand
and Sons, New Delhi.

Bennett, N., Lemoine, G.(2014). What VUCA really means for you? Harvard business review.
V-92
Denning, S. (2019): Succeeding in increasingly agile world. Strategy and Leadership, 47(1), 3-
10.

Charbonnier-Voirin, A. (2011). The development and partial testing of the psychometric

properties of a measurement scale of organizational agility. M@ n@ gement, 14(2),
119-156

pg. 42
Horn by, A.S.(2000). oxford Advanced Learner, s Dictionary of current English, sixth Edition,
oxford university press.

Jcurv, Truth Sayers and Agile Business Consortium (2020): State of Agile Culture 2020 Report

Kaplan,R.S and Norton, D.P.(1992). Translating Strategy into Action: The balanced Scorecard,
Harvard Business Press, Boston MA

Khoramgah, S. S. (2012). Analysis Relationship between Entrepreneurship & Organizational

Agility (Case study: Tehran Selected Entrepreneurs). Interdisciplinary Journal of
Contemporary Research in Business, 3(11), 860-868.

Kushner, R.J., and Poole, P.P. (1996), ‗Exploring Structure-Effectiveness Relationships in

Nonprofit Arts Organizations,‘ Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 7 (2), 119-136

Lipman-Blumen, J. (2000). Guide to Agile leadership. Industrial Management, Vol. 51 No. 2, pp

10-15.

Mack, O., & Khare, A. (2016). Perspectives on a VUCA World. In Managing in a VUCA World
(pp. 3-19). Springer.

Mckinsey & Company (2015): The 5 Trademarks of Agile Organizations.

Mckinsey & Company (2015): The keys to organizational agility. Available at

https://www.mckinsey.com/capabilities/people-and-organizational-performance/our-
insights/the-keys-to-organizational-agility

Mmohamad Reza Dalvi, et.al., G. J. P&A Sc and Tech., (2013). Investigating Organizational
Agility Components. Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran 15 – 29

Nijssen, M., & Paauwe, J. (2012). HRM in turbulent times: how to achieve organizational
agility? The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 23(16), 3315-3335.

Ridley Diana, (2008); The literature reviews a step-by-step guide for students: Published by
SAGE, London.

pg. 43
Roy Wendler and TU Dresden (2014): Development of the Organizational Agility Maturity
Model. Computer Science and Information Systems. 28(2), 1197–1206

Roy Wendler (2013): The Structure of Agility from Different Perspectives. Computer Science
and Information Systems pp. 1165–1172

Sukanya P., and Santanu K.R.,(2021): How information technology capability influences
organizational agility: empirical evidences from Indian banking industry. National
Institute of Technology, Rourkela, India 564-585.

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, 35(2), 463-486.

Teece, D., Peteraf, M., & Leih, S. (2016). Dynamic capabilities and organizational agility: Risk,
uncertainty, and strategy in the innovation economy. California Management Review,
58(4), 13-35.

Uhl-Bien, M., Marion, R., & McKelvey, B. (2007). Complexity leadership theory: Shifting
leadership from the industrial age to the knowledge age. Leadership Quarterly, 18, 298-
318.

Wendler, R. (2013a). The structure and components of agility—a multiperspective view.

Business Informatics, 2(28), 148-169.

Yamane, T. (1967) Statistics: An Introductory Analysis. 2nd Edition, Harper and Row, New
York

Yaghobi, Normohmad, Shokri, Ali, Rahat Dehmardeh, Mahbobe, (2012), Studying the Structural
Empowerments of Organizational Agility in the banking System, Thought of Strategic
Management, Vol. 11, pp. 133-158

Zaina M. and Uğur Yozgat (2017): Does organizational agility affect organizational learning
capability? Evidence from commercial banking. Management Science Letters 7 (2017)
407–422

pg. 44
ANNEX

ADDIS ABABA UNIVERSITY

COLLEGE OF BUSINESS AND ECONOMICS
SCHOOL OF COMMERCE
DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS LEADERSHIP

Survey Instrument for primary data gathering

Dear Madam/Sir,

My name is Alazar Adula Yatene (0912015533/[email protected]), currently conducting

study on Effect of Organizational Agility on Organizational Effectiveness of Gadaa Bank S.C,
Ethiopia. The aim of the study is for academic purpose as Partial Fulfilments of the
Requirements for the Degree of Masters in Business Leadership. It will take only about 10
minutes to complete this questionnaire, with your kind consent and full attention. Your response
will be kept confidential and will be used only for the intended academic purpose. Questions and
concerns are warmly welcomed. You need not write your name on the questionnaire.

I thank you in advance for your cooperation and the valuable time.

Section-I: General Information: Put ‗√‘ mark in the box

1) Sex: Male □ Female □

2) Age: 25-35 □ 36-45 □ 46-55 □ >56 □

3) Highest Educational Level: BA/BSc □ MA/MBA/MSc □ Other □

4) Your Current Position: Board of Director □ CEO □ Chief Officer □ Department

Director □ Division Manager □ Branch Manager □ Relation Manager/Principals □

pg. 45
 5) Your Current placement (place of work): Head Office □ Branch □ Other □
6) Organizational agility can be defined as a blend of multiple leadership styles
characterized by a significant level of proactive, flexible, responsive and speedy
organizational systems. So, how do you think organizational agility is important and
applicable to Ethiopian banking business? 1= It‘s always important and applicable 2= It‘s
sometimes important and applicable 3= It‘s not important and applicable 4= Other

Section-II: Questionnaire on Effect of Organizational Agility on Organizational

Effectiveness

For the following Likert Scale put sign ‗√‘ for your level of agreement as:
1 = Strongly Disagree; 2 = Disagree, 3 = Neutral; 4 = Agree and 5 = Strongly Agree
2.1 Strategic Leadership agility

Likert scale
Strongly
No Items Disagree Strongly
Neutral Agree
disagree agree
1 2 3 4 5
The Bank has clearly spelt out its vision, mission
7
and strategic direction and roadmap
The Bank‘s strategic objectives are properly
8 translated into key performance indicators (KPIs)
and communicated to relevant organs
The bank has a proactive mechanism of sensing
9 and responding to signals in general environment
and banking industry
The Bank has a flexible and responsive
10 mechanisms to continuously align its strategies and
plans with changes.

11 The Bank provides necessary resources and

strategic alignment to support its change initiatives;
The bank continuously receives the feedback of its
12 stakeholders (shareholders, employees, customers
and public) for constructive actions

pg. 46
 2.2 Structural Agility

Likert scale
Strongly Strongly
No Items Disagree Neutral Agree
disagree agree
1 2 3 4 5
The bank has flatter and less hierarchical
13
organizational structure.
The bank promotes decentralization of power &
14
decision making
The bank prioritizes the importance of self-
15
managed teams over individuals
The leadership at different levels is encouraged to
16
courageously make speedy and critical decisions;
2.3 Technological Agility

Likert scale
Strongly Strongly
No Items Disagree Neutral Agree
disagree agree
1 2 3 4 5
The bank competes by its digital banking as one of
17
its core strategies.
The bank‘s core operations are adequately
18
supported by ICT
The bank‘s support processes are adequately
19
supported by ICT.
There is effective information flow and sharing in
20
the bank

pg. 47
 2.4 Human Resource Agility

Likert scale
Strongly
Strongly
No Items disagree
Disagree Neutral Agree
agree

1 2 3 4 5
Employees of the bank are equipped with clearly
21 defined roles, responsibilities, facilities and
strategic directions
22 Employees are encouraged to experience
challenges without a fear of failure and punishment
23 Employees are usually engaged and consulted for
their suggestion and inputs.
24 Employees are usually recognized for their best
contribution
25 There is adequate training, development and
coaching practices in the bank.
26 Employees are empowered and self-motivated to
take an initiative in the best interest of the bank.

2.5 Internal Process Agility

Likert scale
Strongly Strongly
No Items Disagree Neutral Agree
disagree agree
1 2 3 4 5
The bank promotes collaborative and participatory
27
process
The bank promotes high level of trust and
28
transparency
The bank promotes a flexible and responsive
29 process tailored to operations and customers‘
requirements;
The bank considers changing customer needs as an
30
opportunity.

pg. 48
 2.6 Organizational Effectiveness

Likert scale
No Strongly Strongly
Items Disagree Neutral Agree
disagree agree
1 2 3 4 5
2.6.1 Financial Perspective
The bank‘s organizational agility has created a
31 dynamic capability to meet its financial
objectives (profitability, market share and return
on investment)
The bank could financially outperform its peer
32 competitors through its agile (proactive, flexible,
responsive and fast) strategies;
The bank‘s organizational agility has created a
33 capability to financially remain competitive and
resilient
2.6.2 Customers’ perspective
The bank‘s organizational agility has created
34 capability to meet its customers‘ dynamic and
demanding requirements
The bank‘s organizational agility has laid
35 foundation for becoming the robust and reputable
bank in Ethiopian Banking industry.
36 The bank‘s organizational agility has created
significant customer centricity (orientation).
The bank‘s agile systems and practices have
37 ensured a loyalty and commitment of its
employees and customers.
2.6.3 Internal Process Perspective
The bank‘s process agility has created flexible
38 operational policy and procedure to attract and
retain high value customers
The bank‘s process agility has provided the
39 management with special discretion to provide a
need-based treatment for high value customers
The bank‘s process agility has enabled the bank
40 to attract, engage and retain valuable talents and
human capital.

pg. 49
 Likert scale
No Strongly Strongly
Items disagree
Disagree Neutral Agree
agree
1 2 3 4 5

41 The bank‘s process agility does allow the bank to

have flexible terms and tariffs
2.6.4 Organizational Learning and innovation
perspective
The bank‘s organizational agility has created a
42 climate that supports continuous organizational
learning and innovation.
The bank‘s organizational agility has created a
43 capability to dynamically meet regulatory and
competitive requirements
The bank‘s organizational agility has created
44 dynamic capability to continuously create value
for its customers
45 The bank has created the fitting ICT capability to
continuously streamline its internal processes
The bank‘s organizational agility has created a
46 conducive environment for employee learning
and innovation.

Section-III: Open Ended Questions

47. Finally, if you have any comments and suggestions regarding the study, you are warmly
welcomed.

………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………

Thank you so much!

pg. 50