Publication activity
Articles grouped by publication year
Hover over a year or focus the chart and use arrow keys to inspect values.
2026 is year to date. 0 undated publications excluded.
Research across participating journals · All insights follow your collection filters.
Publication activity alongside incoming citations.
Articles grouped by publication year
Hover over a year or focus the chart and use arrow keys to inspect values.
2026 is year to date. 0 undated publications excluded.
OpenAlex · year of the citing work
Hover over a year or focus the chart and use arrow keys to inspect values.
2017–2026 annual-history window. 2026 is year to date. Unknown years have gaps.
Leading affiliations and themes in this collection.
Full distributions & methodology ↓Independent sources. Clear time scales.
Crossref and OpenAlex · separate totals for the same publication cohorts
Hover over a year or focus the chart and use arrow keys to inspect values.
Latest lifetime totals, grouped by the cited article’s year. These are not citations received in that year.
OpenAlex · incoming citation links grouped by citing-work year
Hover over a year or focus the chart and use arrow keys to inspect values.
2017–2026 annual-history window. 2026 is year to date. Unknown years have gaps.
Select journals to compare the same collection filters. Source totals stay separate. These measures describe research activity, not journal quality.
Articles by publication year
Latest lifetime totals · grouped by publication year
Latest lifetime totals · grouped by publication year
By year of the citing work · 2017–2026
2026 is year to date. Crossref and OpenAlex lifetime charts share a citation scale. Unknown observations appear as gaps; known zero stays zero. Annual receipts use available OpenAlex histories and may not sum to lifetime totals. 0 undated publications excluded from publication-year charts.
Crossref citation coverage: 27 / 27 publications (100.0%). Latest observation: 21 Oct 2026, 07:22 UTC. Means and percentages use records with known counts.
DOI-matched OpenAlex observations for the same selected publications. These counts are separate from Crossref and are never added together.
Observation range: 21 Oct 2026 00:14 UTC — 21 Oct 2026 07:23 UTC. Missing matches are not zero citations. Previous observations may remain if a refresh fails or a DOI no longer matches.
OpenAlex affiliations and primary-topic classification. Each publication counts once per institution or country; multi-affiliated publications appear in multiple groups, so percentages can sum above 100%. Countries describe author affiliations, not nationality. Topics use one primary topic per publication.
27 / 27 with data · 0 missing or unmatched. Percentages use all 27 selected publications.
27 / 27 with data · 0 missing or unmatched. Percentages use all 27 selected publications.
27 / 27 with data · 0 missing or unmatched. Percentages use all 27 selected publications.
Citations are the latest recorded totals for articles published in each year, not citations received during that year. Crossref and OpenAlex remain separate and share the same citation scale. 2026 is incomplete; newer articles have had less time to receive citations.
0 undated publications excluded. Unknown citation counts are shown as —, never as zero. Partial coverage can understate totals; expand each table for known / total records.
| Publication year | Journal / scope | Publications | Publications | Crossref known | OpenAlex known |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2017 | All selected publications | 1 | 1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
| 2018 | All selected publications | 0 | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2019 | All selected publications | 0 | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2020 | All selected publications | 1 | 1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
| 2021 | All selected publications | 1 | 1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
| 2022 | All selected publications | 7 | 7 | 7/7 | 7/7 |
| 2023 | All selected publications | 6 | 6 | 6/6 | 6/6 |
| 2024 | All selected publications | 4 | 4 | 4/4 | 4/4 |
| 2025 | All selected publications | 3 | 3 | 3/3 | 3/3 |
| 2026 | All selected publications | 4 | 4 | 4/4 | 4/4 |
| Publication year | Journal / scope | Crossref citations | Publications | Crossref known | OpenAlex known |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2017 | All selected publications | 3 | 1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
| 2018 | All selected publications | — | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2019 | All selected publications | — | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2020 | All selected publications | 2 | 1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
| 2021 | All selected publications | 8 | 1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
| 2022 | All selected publications | 20 | 7 | 7/7 | 7/7 |
| 2023 | All selected publications | 21 | 6 | 6/6 | 6/6 |
| 2024 | All selected publications | 5 | 4 | 4/4 | 4/4 |
| 2025 | All selected publications | 2 | 3 | 3/3 | 3/3 |
| 2026 | All selected publications | 1 | 4 | 4/4 | 4/4 |
| Publication year | Journal / scope | OpenAlex citations | Publications | Crossref known | OpenAlex known |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2017 | All selected publications | 5 | 1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
| 2018 | All selected publications | — | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2019 | All selected publications | — | 0 | 0/0 | 0/0 |
| 2020 | All selected publications | 7 | 1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
| 2021 | All selected publications | 11 | 1 | 1/1 | 1/1 |
| 2022 | All selected publications | 28 | 7 | 7/7 | 7/7 |
| 2023 | All selected publications | 26 | 6 | 6/6 | 6/6 |
| 2024 | All selected publications | 7 | 4 | 4/4 | 4/4 |
| 2025 | All selected publications | 2 | 3 | 3/3 | 3/3 |
| 2026 | All selected publications | 1 | 4 | 4/4 | 4/4 |
Incoming citations to the selected publications, grouped by the year of the citing work. This is separate from lifetime citation totals grouped by the cited article’s publication year.
The publication filters above define which articles receive the citations. The citation-year range below only controls this chart and the incoming-citation comparison. Removing publication-year filters includes older articles’ incoming citations too.
Annual history available for 27 / 27 selected publications. Supported display window: 2017–2026; 2026 is incomplete. Within a successfully fetched ten-year window, omitted years mean zero. Missing histories and years beyond a saved observation’s window remain unknown (—); partial coverage can understate totals.
Annual-history observations (UTC): 2026-10-21T00:14:28.514821+00:00 — 2026-10-21T07:23:09.595139+00:00. Older observations may be retained after failed or incomplete refreshes.
| Citation year | Journal / scope | OpenAlex · Citations received by year | Publications | Annual history known |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2017 | All selected publications | 0 | 27 | 27/27 |
| 2018 | All selected publications | 0 | 27 | 27/27 |
| 2019 | All selected publications | 0 | 27 | 27/27 |
| 2020 | All selected publications | 2 | 27 | 27/27 |
| 2021 | All selected publications | 3 | 27 | 27/27 |
| 2022 | All selected publications | 6 | 27 | 27/27 |
| 2023 | All selected publications | 11 | 27 | 27/27 |
| 2024 | All selected publications | 23 | 27 | 27/27 |
| 2025 | All selected publications | 20 | 27 | 27/27 |
| 2026 | All selected publications | 22 | 27 | 27/27 |
Counts represent citation links, not unique citing papers across a journal: one paper citing two selected articles contributes two links. Older citations outside this window are excluded, so annual sums need not equal lifetime totals. OpenAlex methodology ↗
Publications by publication year. 2026 is an incomplete year.
| Period | Publications |
|---|---|
| 2017 | 1 |
| 2020 | 1 |
| 2021 | 1 |
| 2022 | 7 |
| 2023 | 6 |
| 2024 | 4 |
| 2025 | 3 |
| 2026 | 4 |
Latest Crossref totals for the selected publications; not citations received in the selected years.
Unknown counts are excluded from the mean, median and cited-publication rate.
Same filters, source and counting rules across journals. Descriptive statistics, not a quality ranking.
| Journal / publisher | Publications | Crossref citations | OpenAlex citations | OpenAlex coverage | Crossref mean | Crossref median | Crossref cited %* | Crossref coverage |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| International Journal of Business Ecosystem & Strategy Bussecon International Academy | 3 | 7 | 7 | 3/3 | 2.33 | 1 | 66.7 | 3/3 · 100.0% |
| International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science SSBFNET | 24 | 55 | 80 | 24/24 | 2.29 | 2.0 | 70.8 | 24/24 · 100.0% |
* Percentage among publications with a known citation count.
The objective of this paper was to present a dynamic resource orchestration framework as a source of organizational resilience through blended orchestration of the firm's dynamic and static resources to generate sustained value during disruptive shocks. We adopted an integrative literature review methodology and proposed a dynamic resource orchestration framework as a managerial option to create and sustain firm value. Conceptually, a dynamic resource orchestration framework was presented as the integration of firm resources and managerial capability. We proposed dynamic resource orchestration as a model input impacting organizational resilience through the combined effects of resource accumulation, resource orchestration, and managerial capabilities. Through a thorough examination of the literature production anchored on dynamic capabilities framework and organizational resilience, we advanced a perspective that the ultimate source of combined firm resilience and sustainable competitive advantage does not necessarily accrue from the resources at a firm's disposal but by how management dynamically blends and orchestrates the existing resources, thereby creating an optimal source of capability. Our proposed conceptualization was based on the assumption that dynamic capabilities are part of firm resources and, therefore, strategic orchestration of dynamic capabilities leads to superior firm resourcefulness and consequential sustained resilience. We identified gaps and proposed directions for future research.
From various reviews about innovation, this article will discuss technology orientation and innovation capabilities through digital transformation 4.0 in small businesses. There is a need to examine the relationship between the two from a useful perspective about see toward using various studies related to technology orientation and innovation capabilities in the industrial era 4.0. This study aims to increase understanding of technology orientation and innovation capabilities in the context of small businesses through Digital Transformation 4.0 by reviewing the empirical literature. The articles presented can guide further studies related to technology orientation with innovation capabilities so that it can be easily understood by researchers and entrepreneurs among small businesses.
Studies on organizational ambidexterity have mostly ignored social and environmental performance in favour of focusing on financial performance. This study investigated the relationship between organizational ambidexterity and the sustainable performance of SMEs. Financial, social, and environmental indicators were used to measure sustainable performance. The study used the quantitative research method, and the cross-sectional survey method to collect data from 145 respondents. A self-administered questionnaire was utilized throughout the data-collection phase of the study. Descriptive statistics, Pearson correlation, and regression analysis were used for data analysis. The results indicated significant positive relationships between organizational ambidexterity and SMEs' financial, social, and environmental performance. The study recommends that agencies that support small businesses should organize seminars to train and educate SME owners on organizational ambidexterity and sustainable performance. The results of this study can assist small business owners in continuing to educate themselves and their staff about organizational ambidexterity. The study recommends that agencies that support small businesses should organize seminars to train and educate SME owners on organizational ambidexterity and sustainable performance.
This study analyzes the relationship between knowledge sharing, absorptive capacity, and innovation ability to competitive advantage in Cafe and Modern Restaurant in Yogyakarta, Indonesia. This study is designed as a quantitative study with primary data obtained through the distribution of questionnaires. The population in this study was 1056 modern cafes and restaurants in Yogyakarta. Purposive sampling was conducted, and a sample of 213 respondents was selected from 89 modern cafes and restaurants in Yogyakarta that have adopted digital and have more than 500 Instagram followers. This study limits the sample to three positions: owner, manager, and supervisor. The data collected were analyzed using the structural equation model method using AMOS 24 software. This study indicates that knowledge sharing is an essential factor in increasing innovation ability and has been shown to significantly affect absorptive capacity and competitive advantage. This research also shows that innovation and absorptive capacity positively affect competitive advantage. The study results may help managers or owners of café and modern restaurants in Yogyakarta improve and develop innovation and competitive advantage in café and modern restaurants through knowledge sharing and absorptive capacity.
This research was conducted to identify the determinants of SME's performance as well as look at the underlying conditional factors. Researchers examine the direct effect of product innovation on SME's performance and consider the moderating role of market orientation and organizational learning. Using the quantitative method, the researchers conducted a survey of 170 SME owners in DKI Jakarta Province who were selected using a purposive sampling method. This survey was conducted online by distributing questionnaires through an online platform. The data is then analyzed using Structural Equation Model with AMOS and Process by Hayes. The results of hypothesis testing show that product innovation has a positive effect on the performance of SMEs, and this effect will be stronger when SMEs have high market orientation and high organizational learning. This research can be used as a reference by owners or managers of SME to advance their businesses. SME need to innovate products and form a conducive climate in market-oriented organizations, as well as a climate that allows them to carry out organizational learning.
This paper examines the Resource-Based View (RBV) and the Theory of Firm Heterogeneity to clarify their theoretical boundaries and enhance their explanatory power. It addresses key limitations of RBV, including endogeneity, tautological reasoning, and limited attention to contextual influences, and examines how digital technologies and artificial intelligence (AI) reshape strategic resources and firm heterogeneity. The study employs a systematic review of the strategic management literature. It synthesises the core assumptions of RBV with insights from firm heterogeneity, evolutionary theory, and capability-based perspectives to assess how internal resources, contextual factors, and technological capabilities shape competitive advantage. The review indicates that RBV and the Theory of Firm Heterogeneity provide complementary explanations of persistent performance differences among firms. Competitive advantage depends not only on heterogeneous resources but also on firms' ability to adapt, integrate, and deploy these resources in response to changing environmental and institutional conditions. Digital transformation and AI further amplify firm heterogeneity by creating differences in technological capabilities and innovation capacity. The paper advances the strategic management literature by integrating RBV with the Theory of Firm Heterogeneity, offering a more comprehensive explanation of sustained competitive advantage. It demonstrates how digital technologies and AI reshape strategic resources and identifies future research opportunities in contextual influences, capability development, and technology-driven competitive advantage.
The research aims to explore the impact of digital platform integration and reconstruction capabilities on organizational agility (mediator) and ESG performance of small and medium size enterprises of Pakistan. The study also examines the moderating role of technology uncertainty between digital platform capabilities and organizational agility that further leads to ESG performance. Data is collected from 300 firms while industries include; IT, Manufacturing, Textiles, Electronics, and Automobile in eight big cities of Pakistan and the respondents are middle and senior managers. Data was analyzed using the software; SPSS (reliability analysis) and R Studio (version 4.5.2), Structural Equation modeling (SEM) and regression Analysis. The study used Resource-Based View and Dynamic Capability Theory to see the role of digital platform capabilities, organization agility and uncertain technology conditions’ on ESG. The findings of this research are that such organizations with agility perform better on the ESG dimensions. First, this study takes a capability perspective to explore the impact of digital platform integration and reconstruction capability on Organizational agility, which extends the related studies taking digital perspective. Second, the inner mechanism between organizational agility and firm ESG performance is revealed where organizational agility works as a bridge for ESG performance. Third, the relationship between digital platform capabilities and organizational agility is exposed by the moderation of technology uncertainty. Where technology uncertainty positively moderates the relationship between digital platform capabilities and organizational agility.
The study focused on assessing how the level of adoption of four Absorptive Capacity(AC) dimensions as a driver of strategic technological change has contributed to sustainable performance of firms operating in the insurance sector in Kenya. The conceptualization of the study was informed by the postulates of three theoretical frameworks; the Model of Absorptive capacity, Resource Based View( RBV) and Knowledge Based view (KBV) with four hypotheses testing the effect of each of the four dimensions of AC on sustainable performance of the insurance firms. A descriptive survey design was adopted to obtain data from a target sample of 224 respondents representing heads of units actively involved in roles associated with AC in 56 Insurance firms. The study registered a response rate of 83% with the respondents demonstrating demographic characteristics indicating adequate industry work experience and education levels. The dimensions of Absorptive Capacity aligning to strategy implementation and strategic choice were adopted to a higher extent compared to those aligning to strategic thinking aspects touching on strategy formulation. Though all the four dimensions had a significant positive effect on sustainable performance, those aligning towards strategic choice and implementation had a higher effect on sustainable performance than those aligning towards strategic thinking. The study concluded that the four dimensions of AC are suitable drivers of strategic technological change in the manner in which their attributes speak to the three strategic management processes of strategic planning(formulation), choice and implementation. The study calls on future research to extend the implications of the findings reported by providing more plausible explanations to the dilemmas revolving around the low adoption of the AC dimensions aligning towards strategic thinking and its subsequent effect on sustainable performance using objective data on the dimensions of AC.
The globalized and technologically advanced business environment presents significant challenges to small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), which play a critical role in national economic growth and innovation. These challenges include strategic orientation, effective resource allocation, and adapting to changing markets, often resulting in premature business failure. Therefore, the paper reviews recent literature on how tangible resources such as financial capital, physical assets, and technology influence SME growth, focusing on studies from the past decade that apply frameworks like the Resource-Based View. A systematic literature review was conducted, involving a comprehensive search of academic databases. Thematic analysis was applied to synthesize the findings on resource impact and management in SMEs. The review revealed that financial capital, physical assets, and technological infrastructure significantly influence SME growth. However, the extent of impact varies across contexts, depending on managerial capabilities, access to finance, and market conditions. Addressing this gap, the article aims to inform both theory and practice on SME sustainability and development and suggests avenues for future research.
This study investigates the impact of knowledge management on innovation in Tunisia's banking sector through a survey of salaried executives. The results indicate a strong positive relationship, emphasizing that key components—knowledge acquisition, application, and sharing—drive both administrative and technical innovation. Effective knowledge management allows organizations to adapt to market trends and enhance business processes. Knowledge sharing fosters an innovative environment for idea creation. Therefore, organizations, especially banks aiming to boost innovation, should prioritize sustainable knowledge management to gain a competitive edge and become more agile in a fluctuating economy.
Source coverage refers to this result set; a publication may occur in several sources. Sync times refer to contributing journals.
Missing abstracts: 0 · Missing authors: 0 · Missing publication dates: 0 · Dates without day precision: 0
| Source | Most recent successful journal sync | Latest attempt |
|---|---|---|
| crossref | 21 Oct 2026 07:22 UTC · ijrbs | complete · ijrbs · 21 Oct 2026 07:22 UTC |
| ojs-rest | 21 Oct 2026 07:22 UTC · ijrbs | complete · ijrbs · 21 Oct 2026 06:46 UTC |
| oai-pmh | 20 Oct 2026 19:55 UTC · ijrbs | complete · ijrbs · 20 Oct 2026 19:50 UTC |
| openalex-enrichment | 21 Oct 2026 07:23 UTC · ijrbs | complete · ijrbs · 21 Oct 2026 07:22 UTC |