Antonius Rainier Haryanto
Mohammad Hamsal
Sri Bramantoro Abdinagoro
Rano Kartono Rahim- Department of Management, BINUS Business School Doctor of Research in Management, Bina Nusantara University, Jakarta, Indonesia
The introduction of electric vehicles as a solution for the Indonesian government to reach a net-zero carbon target by 2060 has led to the formation of new ventures by both established and new entrepreneurs, focusing on electric vehicle products or support services. Although these ventures align with and are supported by various government policies, they still face challenges in thriving and sustaining themselves within the Indonesian automotive market. Recognizing this challenge, this study aims to understand key variables that influence a company’s ability to survive, known as organizational resilience, in the dynamic automotive industry. The research used a qualitative method, combining a systematic literature review on electric vehicle entrepreneurship with semi-structured interviews. Based on an analysis of 40 key papers related to electric vehicle entrepreneurship published between 2021 and 2025 and semi-structured purposive interviews with ten electric vehicle industry business leaders in Indonesia conducted between July and August 2024, the study developed a theoretical research model proposing five theoretical propositions. The model comprises three independent variables that contribute to organizational resilience: entrepreneurial orientation within the organization, organizational leadership agility, and the organization’s commitment to environmental sustainability. The model also includes two perceived variables: entrepreneurial orientation as the mediating factor and government policy as the moderating factor. This research advances the Dynamic Capabilities theory by providing insights, especially on how environmental sustainability orientation and business model innovation influence organizational resilience. Given the cross-sectional qualitative approach focusing on Indonesia, this study has limitations, and future research, particularly with empirical methods, is recommended to further validate these findings.
1 Introduction
Entrepreneurs constantly aim to establish a strategic market position by disrupting existing markets, creating new value, and seeking the highest economic returns before markets decline (Paradkar et al., 2015). However, starting a new company to monetize innovative ideas is a challenging process that begins with ensuring its survival during the early years and maintaining operations to achieve success. Although technological advancements have accelerated innovation, technology alone does not provide entrepreneurs with solutions to overcome hurdles at each stage of growth (Brush et al., 2008; Soto-Simeone et al., 2020). The survival challenge is evident in the low success rates of new ventures or startups, which are defined as new business entities focused on developing a viable business model to perform commercial activities and/or develop new technologies (Bednár and Tarišková, 2017; Cockayne, 2019). Startups are widely known for a 90% failure rate in their early years; however, despite this high failure rate, success stories still emerge. By the end of 2024, 1,575 startup companies remained active as unicorns, a status signifying a valuation of USD 1 billion. In 2024 alone, the Crunchbase database reported that over one hundred startups achieved unicorn status. These survival challenges are not confined to specific industries but are widespread across all sectors, including Indonesia’s electric vehicle industry. As of the end of 2024, no startups in the Indonesian electric vehicle industry have achieved unicorn status.
The growth of Indonesia’s electric vehicle industry is being influenced by the government’s initiative to reach its Net-Zero Carbon target. This goal was announced at COP-26 in Glasgow, Scotland, in 2021, aiming for net-zero emissions by 2060 through various strategies: emission reductions, transitioning to green energy, industrial innovation, carbon pricing and trading, green investments, and adopting electric vehicles. The immediate plan is projected to reduce Indonesia’s per capita CO2 emissions by 31.89% by 2030, with 43.20% of this supported by international funding (Limanseto, 2022). Under the Electric Vehicles (EV) plan, Indonesia’s government has set specific targets. The initial objectives, outlined in the Indonesian General Plan of National Energy 2019, include reaching 2,200 battery EVs and 711,000 hybrid cars by 2025, along with 2.1 million battery EV bikes, and achieving 100% EV sales by that year. The Ministry of Industry’s plan for 2020/2021 revised these targets to 400,000 battery EVs and 1.8 million battery EV bikes by 2025, aiming for a 29.3% reduction in greenhouse gases by 2030. To meet these goals, the government of Indonesia at both national and local levels has implemented various supporting policies effective from 2022, including financial incentives, tax benefits for users and manufacturers, special privileges like exemption from odd-even road restrictions in Jakarta, preferential electricity tariffs for charging stations, and standards and certifications (AC Ventures and AEML, 2023). Additionally, Presidential Instruction No. 7 of 2022 has also mandated the use of battery electric vehicles for the government-owned fleet. Recently, a new government led by President Prabowo Subianto reaffirmed this commitment by also emphasizing a nickel downstream industry as part of its broader strategy, aiming for 8% economic growth in the roadmap toward Golden Indonesia 2045. Nickel is a key component for EV batteries, and Indonesia has the largest nickel reserves in the world (McRae, 2024).
The government’s electric vehicle schemes have reshaped the Indonesian economy and influenced how Indonesian companies tap into emerging opportunities, setting a growth strategy to align with future market growth. Hence, established and new entrepreneurs develop new ventures introducing EV products and services, focusing on the EV market ecosystem. As a result, by October 2024, 67 EV manufacturing firms and 34 charging station providers had been established in Indonesia (Ministry of Industry, 2023). These new ventures are set up either by local Indonesian entrepreneurs or by joint ventures between local entrepreneurs and international EV Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs). The nature of venture partnerships is driven by the manufacturing complexity and hence, joint ventures are formed mainly in the business of electric buses and four-wheeler electric vehicle manufacturers, while local entrepreneurships are developed in the business of two-wheeler electric vehicle manufacturers, EV distribution, EV sales and EV supporting infrastructure (Figure 1).
Figure 1. Summary of Indonesian electric vehicle production company by October 2024 (source: Ministry of Industry Plan and Indonesian Electric State Company–processed, 2024).
Although electric vehicle companies are facing favorable conditions, their growth in Indonesia remains limited due to the unique landscape of the Indonesian electric vehicle industry, which is mainly shaped by two key factors: the market and their business strategies. From a market perspective, electric vehicle companies are entering a well-established automotive industry. The industry’s foundation began on Indonesian Independence Day; however, the development of the Indonesian automotive industry started in 1969, when the New Order Indonesian Government implemented various policies to build a self-reliant local automotive industry. This was achieved through the deregulation of entry barriers for Completely Built-Up (CBU) and Completely Knocked Down (CKD) vehicles in 1969 (Government Regulation No. 6 Year 1969), the localization program initiated by the Ministry of Industry’s decision in 1976, and Presidential Instruction No. 2 Year 1996 on the national car program.
Unlike markets in Europe or the United States, the Indonesian automotive market has developed under an ersatz capitalist system, characterized by patronage, with the market led by the capitalist class, who were appointed by government officials and acted as agents of the country’s modernization through the nationalization of foreign companies into local ownership (Anugrah, 2018). The selection of these capitalists was based on personal connections rather than their technical skills, relevant experience, or business background. As a result, there were three groups of capitalists in the Indonesian automotive industry: military groups (such as PT Krama Yudha for Mitsubishi and PT Djakarta Motors for Peugeot and Renault), Chinese Indonesian entrepreneurs (such as Salim Group for Suzuki, Volvo, Hino and Mazda and Astra Group for Toyota, Nissan and Daihatsu), and the President’s family (such as PT Multi France for Peugeot and Renault). Between 1981 and the 1990s, a shift occurred in the Indonesian economy, following the decline in oil prices and the reshuffling of government officials resulting from the general election. Throughout the economic crisis, government policy became more open to foreign investment. As a result, Volvo, Suzuki, Daihatsu, and Toyota vertically integrated their investments and leveraged their technology in the Indonesian automotive industry. Despite these changes, there were few shifts in the groups of capitalists participating in the automotive market, and from an industry perspective, the dominance of Japanese companies was evident (Adnan, 2014). Following the Asian crisis in 1997, the Indonesian automotive market reached a new level, as Indonesia was compelled to transition toward a free-market economy, leading to the opening of its automotive industry (Tai, 2014). The automotive industry is still open to international players, although some sectors, such as automotive distribution, are closed to them. However, as a result of its historical industrial development and the ersatz capitalist policies, Japanese automakers have benefited and account for approximately 90% of it. Although the automotive market size is around 1 million four-wheeled vehicles and 6 million two-wheeled vehicles sold annually, according to the Indonesian Automotive Industries and the Association of Indonesian Motorcycle Industry in 2024, it has historically been a difficult market for new entrants to achieve significant success. In the 2000s, new market players attempted to enter the established two-wheeler market by introducing Chinese motorcycles; however, they exited the market just a few years after entering.
From a business perspective, these electric vehicle companies have advantages due to various Indonesian government policies and incentives that support the growth of the electric vehicle industry. As Porter (2008, p. 4) stated, government policy can overcome the market entry barrier, and electric vehicle support policies and incentives can assist new electric vehicle companies in penetrating the established Indonesian automotive market. Learning from past failures and understanding the supportive dynamic from the Government of Indonesia, newer EV companies have entered the market by launching a range of products and service innovations aimed at specific segments. The strategy is based on the understanding that business models for electric vehicles differ from those of traditional automotive and remain fragmented (Dehkordi et al., 2024; Ziegler and Abdelkafi, 2022). A study by Shalender (2018) on two successful EV companies, Tesla from the United States and Build Your Dream (BYD) from China, found that they have adopted different business models. Tesla’s business emphasizes high-end products, supported by fast-charging infrastructure. On the other hand, BYD aims at the mass market with a product-focused approach complemented by fast-charging infrastructure, which helps increase sales and encourages greater customer adoption by lowering financial and customer risks.
While the Indonesian EV industry benefits from supportive policies and incentives, growth remains relatively small and, in some cases, threatens the company’s survival. Since its inception in 2019, the Indonesian EV market has experienced rapid growth, with annual sales of four-wheel (4 W) EVs reaching 99,952 units by the end of 2024, representing a 43% increase from 2023. In the two-wheel (2 W) EV sector, total sales reached 63,146 units in 2024, a 44% year-on-year increase. However, this level of market penetration has not been considered successful compared to the total automotive sales in Indonesia. Total automotive sales for both internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles and electric vehicles (EVs) for retail purposes reached 889,680 units for 4 W vehicles and 6.33 million units for 2 W vehicles in 2024. The adoption rate of EVs has not met the targets set by the government (Veza et al., 2022). In the worst-case scenario, a recent case involving NETA, a four-wheeled electric vehicle made by Hozon Auto Manufacturing in China, highlights these survival challenges, as the company was forced to close its first dealership in Indonesia in April 2025, less than 1.5 years after beginning operations. The Indonesian automotive market continues to pose difficulties for electric vehicle companies trying to survive and stay resilient.
Given the challenge to survive, a company operating in this sector must develop a strategy that incorporates strong business capabilities focusing on improving its resilience. These capabilities, aimed at creating new market value propositions, go beyond an entrepreneur’s ability to innovate and launch new products or services (Teece et al., 1997). Entrepreneurs are expected to be agile, with the capacity to forecast, adapt, and handle challenging situations in a rapidly evolving environment (Mehta et al., 2024). Their agility is believed to be influenced by various factors, such as the environmental sustainability framework, ongoing EV technology development, and other elements, including geopolitical shifts and market barriers that either originate from competitors, consumers, or suppliers. Recognizing these challenges, this study aims to identify and emphasize the main variables that are believed to affect a company’s resilience in the electric vehicle industry. The goal is to deepen understanding of entrepreneurial strategy and dynamic organizational capabilities, especially concerning the key factors that drive a company’s resilience.
2 Materials and methods
To achieve the research objective, this study used a qualitative methodology focused on identifying, analyzing, and validating the causal relationships among various factors that influence firm resilience. The chosen method aims to explore and understand the complexities of real-world phenomena (Sekaran and Bougie, 2020). When designing the methodology, the research focused on combining a literature review with the collection of cross-sectional data from primary sources obtained through semi-structured interviews. Through this approach, two data sets are triangulated to address the study goal.
Before the interviews, a systematic literature review was conducted from January to April 2025, initially retrieving papers on the combined keywords of electric vehicle industry and business model innovation published between 2018 and 2025 from two databases: Scopus.id and Google Scholar.
The initial retrieving process identified 268 papers most relevant to the query. Using ELICIT, an Artificial Intelligence research assistant platform, a further screening process was performed based on the criteria outlined in Table 1, resulting in 61 papers being selected for a comprehensive bibliometric approach combined with the science mapping technique to examine the patterns and trends in the literature. Subsequently, the top forty papers that met the screening criteria were then chosen for analysis of business model components and future research directions.
Table 1. Systematic literature review screening criteria (source: Author’s work 2025).
For the primary data collection, interviews were conducted with business leaders of the Indonesian electric vehicle industry, and a purposive non-probability sampling was adopted because the aim was not to make statistical inferences. Interview participants were selected based on their expertise, proven track record in industry development, and in-depth knowledge of the Indonesian ecosystem, gained through their roles in either company management or leadership within the electric vehicle ecosystem association in Indonesia. Furthermore, to ensure the reliability of the information, additional requirements were set for company management leaders, who were required to develop and implement a corporate strategy. Their companies must have offered electric vehicle-related products or services in the market for at least the past 3 months. As a result, these individuals were either part of the board of the Indonesian electric vehicle ecosystem association or at the Board of Directors (BOD) level within local Indonesian electric vehicle companies.
For the interview, the researcher conducted face-to-face sessions with qualified individuals. Friendly and flexible, this approach allowed the interviewer to tailor the conversation to the participant’s pace and topics. It also enabled participants to share unexpected insights spontaneously (Berg et al., 2020; Sekaran and Bougie, 2020). To prepare for the interview, guiding questions were created to ensure all necessary data was collected, focusing on the individual’s background (such as educational, professional, and role), company details (including product, service, and funding), the company’s performance management (like benchmarks of success), and the strategy and sustainable framework selected by the company. Before each interview, the researcher performed desktop research on the participants’ educational and business backgrounds, drawing from publicly available information on company websites, LinkedIn profiles, and other online sources. Interviews continued until a saturation point was reached, at which point most participants consistently provided similar responses on the topics and issues.
During the research, ten interviews were conducted between July and August 2024. The number of interviews was performed beyond the saturation point, which was reached within the first five interviews. These interviews involved committee members of two electric vehicle (EV) associations, members of the Board of Directors from seven local Indonesian EV companies, and the Managing Director of a ride-hailing firm promoting the adoption of EVs. In the qualitative research, Sekaran and Bougie (2020, p. 266) describe the saturation point as when “you are no longer gaining new insights or are not getting any new information.” However, an additional five interviews were further performed to enrich the research.
As Sekaran and Bougie (2020) emphasize, data collected from interviews often generate extensive information that requires careful analysis. Therefore, all interviews were recorded, transcribed, and translated into English. Using WordArt, a word cloud tool, the coding process was performed to analyze trending keywords. The most prominent keywords from the interviews were then selected for further analysis by extracting each interview transcript. The analysis aims to understand the causal relationships of these keywords to identify variables linked to organizational resilience. Subsequently, the findings were cross-referenced with the literature to develop a theoretical research model (Table 2).
Table 2. Profile of interviewees (Source: Author’s work, 2024).
3 Result - literature review and interview findings
3.1 Electric vehicle business strategy
Analyzing the concept of “electric vehicle business model,” Figure 2 shows the number of indexed academic papers published between 2021 and July 2025 on this subject, and the topic has become a key focus only in recent years, with 24 papers published in 2024 and 14 papers in 2025.
Figure 2. Total published papers on electric vehicle business model based on publishing year (source: Author’s work, 2025).
Further analysis was performed by adopting the VOS Viewer platform to analyze the bibliometric clustering mapping on the subject. Figure 3 presents the keyword co-occurrence mapping on the literature published between 2018 and July 2025. The network reveals seven clear, color-coded clusters representing major research themes while showing the fragmented connections between themes. The red cluster focuses on the electric car as a product and a suitable business model that can meet users’ needs and generate profitability. The green cluster highlights business model design and innovation in electric vehicles, factoring technology, and the automotive industry. The blue cluster emphasizes the adoption of electric vehicles through viewing its benefits towards customers, the environment, and industrial players. The yellow cluster focuses on the electric vehicle infrastructure networks, including the novelty of the business model. The purple cluster centers on the circular economy adaptation in the industry, and this covers scenarios, processes, and products. The light blue cluster concentrates on the electric vehicle industry, including its business model canvasing. Lastly, the orange cluster discussed the change of the EV business model.
Figure 3. Keyword co-occurrence map of electric vehicle business model literature between 2018 and 2024 (source: Author’s work, 2025).
Analysis was also performed on the trend topic keyword over the years, and Figure 4 illustrates the network map showing that various concepts have been equally discussed between 2018 and July 2025. Analysing the evolution of the “electric vehicle business model” focus, the literature before 2019 was reviewed with an emphasis on the “electric vehicle industry” and electric vehicle products, highlighting the importance of “designing the innovative business model.” From 2019 to 2021, the focus stayed on the “novel and innovative business model,” while also considering the economic value of the electric vehicle industry. After 2021, the scope expanded to include “environment,” “circular economy,” and “supply chain.” Throughout the bibliometric mapping process, a gap was identified in understanding the “organizational resilience” concept within the “electric vehicle” sector.
Figure 4. Trend topic keyword mapping on electric vehicle business model literature between 2018 and 2024 (source: Author’s work, 2025).
Following the bibliometric mapping review, a further literature review of the top 40 studies published between 2021 and 2025 examines the electric vehicle industry from various angles. These studies include 24 empirical papers, 7 case studies, and theoretical analyses—such as systematic reviews and a bibliometric study—covering markets in China (14 studies), Europe (6 studies), a global perspective (5 studies), and other regions. An analysis of these papers regarding industry trends, key findings, impacts on the business model, and future implications is presented in Table 3. These findings highlight keywords that refer to a phenomenon in the electric vehicle industry.
Table 3. Literature analysis on 40 papers on electric vehicle business between 2021 and 2025 (Source: Author’s work, 2025).
Few literature reviews of the electric vehicle industry have been conducted to understand organizational resilience, entrepreneurial skills, and innovation capabilities in advancing the electric vehicle sector (Boateng and Klopp, 2024; Dehkordi et al., 2024; Pisano et al., 2023; von Kolpinski et al., 2024). Dehkordi et al. (2024) carried out qualitative research on new business model solutions among electric commercial vehicle companies in Finland and Sweden. The study involved semi-structured interviews with 26 freight and logistics experts, revealing a crucial link between a diverse innovation approach, integration of the electric vehicle ecosystem, and technology adoption in building a business model. Despite these insights, the research highlighted controversy over the industry’s fragmented and opaque business model, as well as inconsistencies in its business focus, which can be characterized by two approaches: infrastructure development and customer-centricity. Furthermore, additional research is required to explore the contextual factors that impact the performance of the business model.
Previous studies on the business model of electric vehicles were also conducted by Ziegler and Abdelkafi (2022), as well as Shalender (2018). Ziegler and Abdelkafi (2022) conducted a literature review of 60 articles published between 2012 and June 2021, focusing on the structures of electric vehicle business models. The qualitative research concluded that the business model for electric mobility necessitates a different approach compared to the traditional automotive business model, and collaboration with all stakeholders in electric mobility is essential to mitigate evident business risks. Additionally, the research also highlighted the importance of the business model to ensure financial sustainability beyond its funding period. In concluding the study, the researchers recommended future scientific inquiries to provide a comprehensive perspective on developing sustainable-oriented business models in electric mobility. Similarly, Shalender (2018) conducted qualitative research through a systematic literature review of four electric vehicle business cases: BYD from China, Mahindra Reva from India, Tesla from the United States, and BlueIndy from the United States. The research concluded that entrepreneurial orientation, ecosystem partnerships, and flexible, innovative business models are crucial for success in the electric vehicle industry.
With the absence of a single proven business strategy in the electric vehicle industry, a review is extended beyond the electric vehicle industry. von Kolpinski et al. (2024) conducted qualitative research focusing on developing business models for new circular-social companies, defined as “financially self-sustaining companies applying a combination of circular and social business”. The research employed a grounded theory methodology, utilizing multiple case studies and semi-structured interviews with 20 start-up leaders from Central and Southern Europe, as well as Scandinavia. As a result, the research emphasized the importance of continuous business model adjustments and a long-term commitment to sustainability in generating profits. As a business model enables a company to be resilient, inductive literature studies were conducted to further explore this particular topic.
3.2 Organization resilience
Research on organizational resilience originates from the concept of individual resilience, which appeared in the 1960s and 1970s and has significantly developed over the past 30 years (Cruickshank, 2020). Organizational resilience is seen as a set of capabilities that allow actors to anticipate, manage, and adapt to disruptions. To clarify the definition, Hepfer and Lawrence (2022) reviewed management literature related to organizational resilience and found that it is a diverse concept with three main forms: functional, operational, and strategic. The first, functional resilience, is defined as an organization’s ability to respond positively during difficult times. The second, operational resilience, refers to an organization’s ability to respond effectively when faced with a threat that could disrupt its operations. Lastly, the third, strategic resilience, encompasses an organization’s ability to counter threats to its strategy and long-term goals.
To improve understanding of how to become a resilient organization, Ciasullo et al. (2024) conducted a literature review of 51 scientific contributions published between 2002 and 2022. The findings of this qualitative research define organizational resilience as:
Firm's enduring ability to (1) timely detect information about challenging events within their domain, (2) effectively elaborate such information to activate adequate internal responses and cope with environmental jolts, and (3) design and implement interventions intended to advance the firm's sustainable development.
In examining the organizational resilience in a new venture, a study by Aldianto et al. (2021) offered valuable insights, especially regarding the innovation process during volatile and uncertain times. The study used a qualitative approach, combining a literature review with interviews of three Indonesian startups in the acceleration phase during the COVID-19 pandemic. With the limited data, the study noted a lack of empirical evidence and limited literature discussion on how to achieve higher levels of resilience.
3.3 Entrepreneur value creation theory and dynamic capabilities theory
In building an entrepreneurial strategy, Lanzolla and Markides (2021) introduced a thesis suggesting that constructing a business model serves as a complementary framework to traditional strategy frameworks, clarifying the relationship between strategy and performance. This thesis is supported by a study by Müller et al. (2021), which also highlights the importance of absorptive capacity and innovation strategies in redesigning business models, particularly in Industry 4.0.
Epistemology research on business strategy expands and explores various aspects of strategy. Among many, the Entrepreneurial Value Creation Theory, also known as the Theory of Entrepreneurship, was introduced in 2015 by Chandra S.Mishra, a Professor of Management at Florida Atlantic University, and Ramona K. Zachary, a Professor of Entrepreneurship and Innovation at Baruch College. This theory shifts the focus of entrepreneurship from roles, opportunities, and new venture creation to a non-autonomous process of creating and realizing entrepreneurial value through a two-stage model: venture formulation and monetization (Mishra and Zachary, 2015).
In the first stage of venture formulation, entrepreneurs cultivate their entrepreneurial competence by combining resources and external opportunities, motivated by the desire for reward. During this initial phase, the entrepreneur maximizes an asymmetric advantage by setting a strategy to reorganize the opportunity to align with the available resources. The second stage involves developing dynamic capabilities and designing a business model to create sustained value. In this process, entrepreneurs may engage external resources, such as strategic partners; however, two key potential issues may arise: the adverse selection problem, which is indicated by overstating prospective venture profitability, and the adverse incentives problem, which is indicated by the transfer of risk from the entrepreneur to the strategic partner. The theory highlights the iterative nature of this process, with ventures potentially cycling through stages (Mishra and Zachary, 2015) (Figure 5).
Figure 5. Process of entrepreneurial value creation (Source: Mishra and Zachary, 2015).
As defined above, dynamic capabilities are recognized as a key factor in shaping an effective entrepreneurial strategy. An organization must develop a dynamic capability to tailor its strategy specifically toward addressing the most significant competitive forces and overcoming entry barriers, thereby securing a competitive advantage and sustaining firm profitability (Porter, 1998). Porter (2008) introduces the concept of five competitive forces that influence industry profitability and vary across sectors. These forces include the threat of new entrants bringing innovation and seeking market share; the bargaining power of suppliers to control quality or services and shift costs onto industry players; the influence of customers on prices, quality, and service; the threat of substitute products or services; and the rivalry among existing competitors, which can involve price wars, advertising, and service improvements.
Dynamic Capabilities, as a form of management knowledge, have gained prominence in strategic management discussions in recent years (Buzzao and Rizzi, 2021; Cavusgil et al., 2007; Gremme and Wohlgemuth, 2017). The theory was introduced by David J. Teece and Gary Pisano in 1994, in response to the Resource-Based Theory’s failure to sufficiently explain why specific organizations maintain a competitive advantage in rapidly changing and unpredictable environments, such as high-technology industries. According to the Resource-Based Theory, physical, human, organizational, and intangible assets act as resources for developing value-creating strategies that sustain a competitive advantage over time. Dynamic capabilities were developed as an antecedent to organizational processes where managers, rather than resources themselves, modify their resources through coordination, integration, learning, and reconfiguration processes to develop and adjust internal and external competencies to respond to swiftly changing environments (Bari et al., 2022; Eisenhardt and Martin, 2000; Gremme and Wohlgemuth, 2017; Teece et al., 1997).
The dynamic capabilities paradigm is built on three main frameworks: Michael Porter’s Competitive Theory, Carl Shapiro’s Business Strategy Theory, which uses Game Theory as a tool, and the Resource-Based View. It emerged from the realization that global competitive challenges in high-tech sectors, such as semiconductors, information services, and software, demanded a new way to explain how competitive advantage is attained. In this context, competitive advantage was gained by firms that could respond swiftly and innovate products flexibly, supported by management skills to effectively coordinate internal and external capabilities (Teece et al., 1997). The theory advanced further when Eisenhardt and Martin (2000) defined dynamic capabilities as “a set of specific and identifiable processes such as product development, strategic decision making, and alliances. They are neither vague nor tautological nor endlessly recursive.” Their study examined how established learning mechanisms, errors, pacing experience, and market changes influenced the development of dynamic capabilities. Furthermore, the analysis of competitive advantage values resulted in a focus on how to modify resources, including creating, integrating, recombining, and releasing resources. Although Teece and Pisano initially introduced the theory, there are differing perspectives between the dynamic capabilities original theory and the reconceptualization by Eisenhardt and Martin (2000).
The dynamic capabilities framework, though widely accepted, faces criticism for vague interpretations and measurement difficulties (Kurtmollaiev, 2020). Recent research by Carvalho (2023) also identified a paradox within dynamic capabilities and suggests a duality of perspective to address it: “to reliably achieve the required reconfiguration of their resources and operational capabilities as intended, organizations must combine and balance dynamic capabilities based on stable routines and improvisation.” Despite its broad recognition, the theory remains underdeveloped due to a lack of tools for empirically measuring variables (Gonzalez-Samaniego et al., 2023). Additionally, through the interviews, the study identified that dynamic capabilities, which lead to innovation outcomes, help the company attain business resilience (Table 4).
Table 4. Contrasting conceptions of dynamic capabilities (Source: Eisenhardt and Martin, 2000).
3.4 Interview outcomes
To verify the literature finding, primary data from interviews were analysed. Using these translated transcripts, all interviews were initially merged, coded, and examined to identify potential patterns. The initial coding process identified 228 keywords that appeared multiple times across all interviews. Using WordArt, a word cloud tool, the analysis revealed the following top five keywords: Government, Sustainability, Company, Market, and Industry (Figure 6) (Table 5).
Figure 6. Word cloud analysis of exploratory interviews (source: Author’s work, 2024).
Table 5. Interview keyword coding analysis outcome—top 15 keywords (Source: Author’s work, 2025).
Based on the keyword analysis, further examination was performed on individual interview transcripts, and several key findings were consistently observed across interviews. These findings provide an insight into the electric vehicle industry phenomenon in Indonesia. Some key statements delivered by the interviewees are presented in Table 6 and the key findings are summarised as follows:
1. The role of government policy is crucial for the electric vehicle (EV) industry ecosystem.
2. The company leaders continually innovate their business by introducing new products, services, or business models in response to technological advancements and shifting market conditions. They focus on reaching the organisation’s North Star.
3. All companies aim to support the Indonesian government’s goal of achieving a net-zero carbon target by 2060.
4. Some companies must ensure that their performance aligns with the Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) policies of their shareholders or regulators.
5. All leaders expressed a high level of confidence in the positive growth of the Indonesian electric vehicle ecosystem, and consequently, in the development of their own companies.
6. Partnerships between companies in the electric vehicle ecosystem are vital for delivering strong company performance.
7. The company’s performance aim is to achieve a strong commercial outcome.
Table 6. Interviewees’ highlighted statements (Source: Author’s work, 2024).
4 Discussion and proposition development
Entrepreneurs must adopt a flexible strategy to overcome growth barriers, be resilient, and adapt to survive in the evolving competitive landscape of the Indonesian automotive market. Using the Entrepreneurial Value Creation theory, the literature highlights a key variable—organizational resilience—that entrepreneurs and/or strategic partners see as a reward or a goal. The definition of resilience was verified during the explanatory study, and interpretations of the organization’s resilience vary among companies. The president director of the EV company emphasized resilience as “the company’s ability to ride the EV market wave.” Others focused on commercial performance, measured by the company’s sales figures, to assess resilience. In contrast, the managing director of a ride-hailing company offered a different interpretation, describing resilience as “the focus of the company is on the triple bottom line on achieving its north star—balancing people, profit (prosperity), and the planet.” This finding affirms the importance of organizational resilience in the Indonesian electric vehicle market.
To achieve the entrepreneurial reward of organizational resilience, innovation in the venture—through flexibility in technological innovation and/or the development of knowledge (an “invincible asset”)—is fostered during the monetization stage of the entrepreneurial process within a dynamic market characterized by disequilibrium and competitiveness (Jacobson, 1992). Innovation capability within an organization is essential for enabling firms to increase their business value in a competitive environment, encompassing aspects such as process, product, marketing, and organizational innovativeness (Mendoza-Silva, 2020; Noordin and Mohtar, 2013). This also applies to the electric vehicle sector, and to emphasize the importance of innovation in organizational resilience, the operational director of the EV company states, “the company will not stop innovating and continue developing products relevant to the market, even though they are diversified by risk.” Based on these findings, a dependency is established between the company’s innovation capabilities and organizational resilience, which is proposed as the first proposition.
Proposition 1 (P1) - Innovation is a critical strategy to achieve an organization’s resilience.
In promoting innovation, literature suggests that a focus on environmental sustainability generally enhances innovation capabilities across various contexts—mainly in manufacturing, but also in service sectors. Several empirical studies indicate that practices like green management, triple bottom line integration, and corporate environmentalism are linked to outcomes such as eco-innovation, green innovation performance, and product or process innovation (Bhatti et al., 2023; Ciasullo et al., 2024; Coelho et al., 2024; Dangelico et al., 2017; Zameer et al., 2024). However, an empirical study by Ong et al. (2020), analyzing 124 environmental management systems in 14,001-certified Malaysian manufacturing firms, found that environmental vision and strategic focus did not influence environmental innovation. Additionally, adopting this environmental framework has sometimes been seen as creating a competitive disadvantage (Gauthier, 2013).
As an eco-innovation company in the electric vehicle sector, it is considered essential for reaching sustainable development goals, and implementing a sustainability framework should be a standard practice to stay competitive and resilient (Arranz et al., 2020; Bari et al., 2022). Bari et al. (2022) reviewed 29 papers on how integrating dynamic capabilities and sustainability frameworks can generate a sustainable competitive advantage. The review revealed that combining sustainable strategies can help organizations gain an edge. While the environmental sustainable orientation sets the strategic intent and direction, it is the organization’s innovation capacity that turns these intentions into tangible results, thereby strengthening both adaptive and transformative resilience. In this way, innovation capabilities link sustainability and resilience by ensuring environmental orientation not only reduces ecological risks but also supports organizational renewal to obtain a sustainable competitive edge. Research exploring the overlapping constructs between environmental sustainability, innovation capabilities, and organizational resilience reveals complex interconnections (Barakat et al., 2023; Indarto et al., 2025; Issa et al., 2024). However, studies demonstrating innovation capabilities as a key mediator between entrepreneurial orientation and organizational resilience are very limited. A study by Aloulou (2023) on 225 randomly selected Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises in Saudi Arabia is one of the few that presents the mediating role of innovation capabilities between innovation capability and organizational resilience. The latest study by Issa et al. (2024) on the supply chain in the Turkish manufacturing industry adds to the understanding by providing strong evidence that green innovation strategies enhance the resilience of supply chains and logistics management.
In line with the above findings, all interviewees confirmed that their companies support Indonesia’s goal of achieving a net-zero carbon target by 2060, in addition to achieving their company growth objectives. The level of environmental sustainability implementation at the organizational level varied among companies, with full commitment embedded in the vision and mission of the hail-ride company, as stated by its managing director. Publicly listed or multi-investor companies are also obligated to adhere to environmental, social, and governance (ESG) policies set by shareholders or regulators. Meanwhile, some adopt sustainability practices to improve their chances of survival. Moreover, the operational director of EV company states, “As a public company, the company aligns with governance standards, including sustainability reporting and ESG considerations. Internally, success is measured by prioritizing shareholder interests, ensuring industry resilience, financial performance, and continuous innovation to remain relevant in a fast-evolving market.” Based on these insights, the second proposition is developed, proposing that environmental sustainability aims to bolster innovation capabilities in order to achieve its own survival.
Proposition 2 (P2) - The environmental sustainability framework positively correlates with organizational resilience and is mediated by innovation capabilities.
In developing and implementing strategies focused on innovation capabilities, all interviewees expressed high confidence in the growth of the Indonesian electric vehicle ecosystem. Therefore, they continue to monitor the market while adjusting their strategic approach to align with market conditions. This approach, known as Entrepreneurial Orientation, can significantly and positively influence various aspects of business performance, including external corporate venturing, subjective entrepreneurial success, and diverse opportunity development (Karami et al., 2023; Manzano-García and Ayala-Calvo, 2020; Titus et al., 2020; Zollo et al., 2020). The link between entrepreneurial orientation and innovation capabilities has been extensively studied in strategy, management, and entrepreneurship research. As outlined in Section 2.1.1, the crucial role of the entrepreneur and innovation in maintaining market presence is thoroughly explained in Schumpeter’s creative destruction theory (Jacobson, 1992; Wiggins and Ruefli, 2005). Entrepreneurial orientation—generally characterized by innovativeness, proactiveness, and risk-taking, and sometimes including autonomy or competitive aggressiveness—is consistently found to be positively related to innovation capabilities. This relationship applies to all types of companies, including small and medium-sized enterprises, which can enhance their innovation levels by adopting an entrepreneurial orientation as part of their daily operations (Maldonado-Guzman et al., 2019). The causal link between entrepreneurial orientation and innovation capabilities is not always direct, but in some cases, it involves mediating factors such as ambidextrous learning, absorptive capacity, market orientation, and strategic alignment (Aljanabi, 2018; Aloulou, 2023; Yu et al., 2023).
While entrepreneurial orientation provides the strategic mindset for risk-taking and opportunity-seeking by developing knowledge-sharing routines and research and development (R&D) ability, innovation capabilities translate these orientations into practical actions that strengthen both adaptive and transformative resilience. In this way, innovation capabilities bridge the gap between entrepreneurial orientation and organisational resilience, enabling firms not only to be flexible and withstand external shocks but also to leverage crises as opportunities for long-term growth and competitive advantage. Understanding the importance of variable relationships, especially in new ventures, Yu et al. (2023) conducted a study on 279 new ventures from China. The study found that when facing entry barriers as a new player, an entrepreneurial orientation encourages new ventures to utilize resources more creatively to upgrade existing technology and businesses more quickly than their competitors, while also pursuing innovation to adapt to external changes. This observation is similarly reflected in the Indonesian automotive scene, as described by the President Director of an EV company, who stated, “Innovation must be continuous. We cannot rely on one or two products. Technology evolves—battery tech, aerodynamics, pricing—all must be updated to avoid obsolescence. Research and development must follow market demand”. In fostering an entrepreneurial orientation, Indonesian electric vehicle players also recognize the importance of external factors such as collaboration with others, as highlighted by the President Director of an EV leasing company: “If you want to grow this EV market in Indonesia, it has to be an ecosystem. We work and collaborate hand-in-hand with all stakeholders and partners.” These findings set the third proposition, which suggests that entrepreneurial orientation positively contributes to innovation capabilities to achieve organizational resilience.
Proposition 3 (P3) - Entrepreneurial orientation has a positive contribution to organizational resilience and is mediated by innovation capabilities.
Given the uncertainties in the future EV market and stakeholders’ needs to ensure organizational resilience, the company is compelled to adapt to various changes and stay flexible in responding to market shifts (Berg et al., 2020; Foss and Saebi, 2018; von Kolpinski et al., 2024; Ziegler and Abdelkafi, 2022). Organisational agility enables firms to respond swiftly to disruptions and market changes (Chan et al., 2019; Teece et al., 1997). Among various forms of agility within an organisation, agile leadership is essential for organisations navigating the dynamic competitive landscape and has become a key factor in boosting innovation capabilities across different organizational settings, helping firms respond efficiently to market turbulence and technological shifts (Akkaya et al., 2022; Astuti et al., 2023; Marouf Abdelhamid Amr et al., 2023; Porkodi, 2024). In promoting innovation, agile leadership is sometimes mediated through variables such as fostering innovation ambidexterity (Porkodi, 2024). Deep diving into the Indonesian automotive market on the causal relationship between agile leadership and innovation capabilities, quantitative research was conducted by Astuti et al. (2023) on existing automotive manufacturing companies, which are characterized by their fast-growing market demand and the need for high adaptability to meet technological advancements and consumer expectations. The research involved 365 middle and senior management leaders and confirmed a positive correlation between agile leadership and innovation capabilities. It is observed that the leaders promote the innovation process by encouraging creative and collaborative thinking and by fostering an environment that supports calculated risk-taking.
Agile leadership, by fostering empowerment and collaboration, creates an environment that encourages knowledge sharing, experimentation, and creativity, thereby bolstering the company’s innovation capabilities. These capabilities, in turn, serve as the operational mechanism and conduit that enable organizations to reconfigure resources, develop adaptive solutions, and pursue new opportunities during crises, thus strengthening resilience. Research examining the links between leadership, innovation capabilities, and organizational resilience highlights several key patterns, with a limitation on the mediating role of innovation capabilities between agile leadership and organizational resilience. A study by Kaya (2023) on medium-sized and large enterprises in various cities in northwest Turkey is one of the closest studies to address this relationship. The study found that dynamic capabilities serve as mediators in value creation, while agile leadership has a notable positive impact on organizational outcomes. Another similar study, conducted by (Indrianti et al., 2024), examined 340 Indonesian start-up actors and found a correlation between ambidextrous leadership, business model innovation, and entrepreneurial resilience. Supporting this finding, interviews with Indonesian electric vehicle business leaders identified the significance of agile leadership in navigating their innovation in the competitive market, highlighting a high level of optimism as the foundation of leadership agility in the Indonesian electric vehicle market. In general, the President Director of an EV leasing company stressed, “The company road map contains our vision, mission, and milestones, but we must be agile and adaptive. If milestones aren’t feasible, we adjust.” Hence, the fourth proposition is constructed, emphasizing the importance of leadership agility, particularly in adapting the business model to achieve optimal performance.
Proposition 4 (P4) – Leadership agility positively correlates with organizational resilience and is mediated by innovation capabilities.
Throughout the interviews, the government’s role in driving the growth of the electric vehicle market was considered crucial, although differing opinions on this role emerged. From the perspective of EV associations, the focus should be on building an ecosystem through incentives and key policies that develop supporting EV infrastructure, standardize vehicle safety, and encourage the adoption of EVs. From an EV company’s perspective, the President Director of the EV company states that “the government support is assisting the company’s growth, and it could be in the form of sales incentives.” In studying the government policy for the electric vehicle industry, Boateng and Klopp (2024) employed narrative review analysis to examine grey literature from key public and private actors leading the carbon-neutral mobility transition, including governments, regional bodies, the media, and the automobile industry, and discussed the role of government in a limited manner. In the new venture, a study by Otache and Usang (2022) was conducted on 234 Nigerian small and medium enterprises, concluding that innovation capabilities were positively associated with firm performance, and government support had a positive moderating effect on this relationship. This finding about government policy aligns with Porter (2008), who identified it as a significant entry barrier in the industry, whether in a supportive or opposing role. In the entrepreneurial landscape, earlier studies on government policies have demonstrated that they play a crucial role in fostering entrepreneurship growth and development through targeted interventions and financial strategies (Salami et al., 2023). Government policy indeed influences entrepreneurs’ decision-making, making it an essential factor to include in the framework. The role of government policy is proposed as the moderating factor that affects how businesses can succeed in entrepreneurship, making it the fifth proposition.
Proposition 5 (P5) - Government policy is moderating on how businesses can achieve their resiliency.
To attain organizational resilience, an entrepreneur, among many, must design and orient a business model to create sustained value. In the context of electric vehicles, Ziegler and Abdelkafi (2022) and Shalender (2018) conducted literature studies on the business models of electric vehicles. Ziegler and Abdelkafi (2022) conducted a literature review of articles published between 2012 and June 2021, focusing on the business model structures of electric vehicles. The qualitative research concluded that the business model of electrical mobility requires a different approach than the current automotive business model, and a partnership with all stakeholders in electrical mobility is compulsory to mitigate the apparent business risks. It is documented that the business model must be financially sustainable beyond its funding period. The research was recommended for future scientific research to provide a holistic view of developing sustainable-oriented business models in electric mobility. Following a similar principle to Ziegler and Abdelkafi, Shalender (2018) conducted qualitative research through a systematic literature review of four electric vehicle business cases: BYD of China, Mahindra Reva of India, Tesla of the United States, and BlueIndy of the United States. The research concluded that entrepreneurial orientation, ecosystem partnership, and flexible, innovative business models are essential to achieving the company’s success in the electric vehicle industry. Analyzing the dynamic capabilities and business model is the second phase to introduce entrepreneurial value creation. Although a business model is mandatory in entrepreneurship development, the interviews with Indonesian electric vehicle experts were unable to determine whether business model innovation is one of the key variables in driving the organisation’s resilience; thus, the business model as an independent variable cannot be verified.
Building on the findings observed in Indonesia’s electric vehicle (EV) industry through qualitative research, a theoretical framework model is being developed and refined to illustrate how EV ventures can establish their businesses, succeed, and survive in the dynamic automotive market. Summarizing the above findings, the theoretical model illustrating the causal relationships is developed with the following details (Figure 7).
Figure 7. Theoretical proposition model for the Indonesian electrical vehicle business based on the qualitative research (source: Author’s work, 2025).
5 Conclusion
Electric vehicle entrepreneurship in Indonesia is still in its early stages and has developed in response to the Indonesian government’s initiative to reach net-zero emissions by 2060, which was announced in 2021. With various government policies introduced from 2022 to accelerate the growth of electric vehicles, a new venture in Indonesia’s electric vehicle industry still faces obstacles to market growth. The obstacle stems from the well-established non-electric automotive industry, dominated by Japanese automakers, that has grown within the Indonesian capitalist system, a system of patronage that nationalizes foreign companies and brings them into local ownership. As a result, by the end of 2024, the market share of four-wheel electric vehicles was only 11.2% of the total four-wheel automotive market, and the market share of two-wheel electric vehicles was only 1% of the total two-wheel automotive market. The low adoption rate has compelled entrepreneurs to continue innovating to avoid potential business closures, as exemplified by NETA’s 1.5-year business struggle, and to remain resilient.
To be resilient, the venture cannot focus solely on firm performance, whether financial or marketing. Instead, the venture must continuously innovate to penetrate the established market by developing a successful entrepreneurial model and consistently improving its products, services, or business strategies to stay competitive and survive. Additionally, collaborating with other key players within the electric vehicle ecosystem is seen as a way to reduce risk and liabilities. To understand how Indonesian electric vehicle entrepreneurs address the resilience challenge, qualitative research—including interviews and reviewing existing literature—was conducted.
In addressing the challenge, the study found that entrepreneurs must adopt a flexible strategy to achieve an organizational resilience to ride the electric vehicle market wave and innovation capability within the organization is essential part of the strategy. In the electric vehicle sector, implementing an environmental sustainable framework should be a standard practice to allow a company to continue innovate and gain a market edge. With a high confidence in the growth of the Indonesian electric vehicle ecosystem, the study recognized the role of entrepreneurial orientation, characterized by innovativeness, proactiveness and risk taking, and also the agility of company leadership to stay flexible and adapt to various changes. Lastly, the study also documented the importance of the government’s role in driving the electric vehicle market growth.
To capture the above findings based on the findings triangulating the literature review and interview outcomes, this study presents a theoretical model that can serve as a framework for entrepreneurs to enhance their companies’ market resilience. The model introduces a dependent variable of organizational resilience, which is influenced by the independent variables of environmental sustainability orientation, entrepreneurial orientation, and agile leadership. The relationship is mediated by organizational innovation capabilities and moderated by government policy. This model summarizes five propositions derived from the qualitative study.
To develop the theoretical framework, key variables and logical reasoning must be considered, and the causal relationship should be tested using quantitative, qualitative, or mixed methods approaches to verify its accuracy. Therefore, this study has several limitations, as the model is being developed through a cross-sectional qualitative approach. The rapid growth of this subject may not capture the full depth and could limit interpretative richness. Therefore, further research using longitudinal data and/or adopting an empirical approach, such as a quantitative method, is valuable to validate the model.
Data availability statement
The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors, without undue reservation.
Ethics statement
The studies involving humans were approved by Management Department, BINUS Business School Doctor of Research in Management, Bina Nusantara University, Jakarta, Indonesia. The studies were conducted in accordance with the local legislation and institutional requirements. Written informed consent for participation was not required from the participants or the participants’ legal guardians/next of kin because the data were collected through face-to-face interviews. The verbal informed consent was collected and recorded at the beginning of the interview. Written informed consent was not obtained from the individual(s), nor the minor(s)’ legal guardian/next of kin, for the publication of any potentially identifiable images or data included in this article because this study is not included any identifiable data.
Author contributions
AH: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Resources, Software, Validation, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. MH: Supervision, Writing – review & editing. SA: Supervision, Writing – review & editing. RR: Supervision, Writing – review & editing.
Funding
The author(s) declared that financial support was not received for this work and/or its publication.
Conflict of interest
The author(s) declared that this work was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Generative AI statement
The author(s) declared that Generative AI was not used in the creation of this manuscript.
Any alternative text (alt text) provided alongside figures in this article has been generated by Frontiers with the support of artificial intelligence and reasonable efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, including review by the authors wherever possible. If you identify any issues, please contact us.
Publisher’s note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
References
AC Ventures and AEML (2023) Indonesia’s electric vehicle outlook supercharging tomorrow’s mobility, Jakarta.
Adnan, R. S. (2014). Dinamika Struktur-Agensi dalam Perkembangan Industri Otomotif Indonesia. Masyarakat 19:4697. doi: 10.7454/mjs.v19i1.4697
Akkaya, B., Panait, M., Apostu, S. A., and Kaya, Y. (2022). Agile leadership and perceived career success: the mediating role of job embeddedness. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 19:834. doi: 10.3390/ijerph19084834,
Aldianto, L., Anggadwita, G., Permatasari, A., Mirzanti, I. R., and Williamson, I. O. (2021). Toward a business resilience framework for startups. Sustainability 13:132. doi: 10.3390/su13063132
Aljanabi, A. Q. R. A. (2018). The mediating role of absorptive capacity on the relationship between entrepreneurial orientation and technological innovation capabilities. Int. J. Entrep. Behav. Res. 24:233. doi: 10.1108/IJEBR-07-2017-0233
Aloulou, W. J. (2023). Be innovative and resilient: empirical evidence from Saudi firms on how to translate entrepreneurial orientation into firm performance. Adm. Sci. 13:168. doi: 10.3390/admsci13070168
Anugrah, I. P. (2018). Ersatz capitalism in Indonesian automotive industry during the new order era, 1969—1998. Lembaran Sejarah 12:33465. doi: 10.22146/lembaran-sejarah.33465
Arranz, N., Arroyabe, M., Li, J., and de Fernanz Arroyabe, J. C. (2020). Innovation as a driver of eco-innovation in the firm: an approach from the dynamic capabilities theory. Bus. Strateg. Environ. 29:2448. doi: 10.1002/bse.2448
Astuti, D., Pantja Djati, S., and Santosa, W. (2023). The effect of agile leadership, organizational culture and dynamic capabilities on organization agility mediated by innovation in automotive manufacturing companies. Int. J. Econ. Dev. Res. 4, 362–367. doi: 10.37385/ijedr.v5i3.6079
Barakat, M., Wu, J. S., and Tipi, N. (2023). Empowering clusters: how dynamic capabilities drive sustainable supply chain clusters in Egypt. Sustainability 15:787. doi: 10.3390/su152416787
Bari, N., Chimhundu, R., and Chan, K. C. (2022). Dynamic capabilities to achieve corporate sustainability: a roadmap to sustained competitive advantage. Sustainability 14:531. doi: 10.3390/su14031531
Bednár, P., and Tarišková, E. (2017) Startup definition. Proceedings of the 13th European conference on management, leadership & governance.
Berg, V., Birkeland, J., Nguyen-Duc, A., Pappas, I. O., and Jaccheri, L. (2020). Achieving agility and quality in product development - an empirical study of hardware startups. J. Syst. Softw. 167:599. doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2020.110599
Bhatti, S. M., Al Mamun, A., Wu, M., Naznen, F., Kanwal, S., and Makhbul, Z. K. M. (2023). Modeling the significance of green orientation and culture on green innovation performance: moderating effect of firm size and green implementation. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 30, 99855–99874. doi: 10.1007/s11356-023-29353-4,
Boateng, F. G., and Klopp, J. M. (2024). The electric vehicle transition: a blessing or a curse for improving extractive industries and mineral supply chains? Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 113:541. doi: 10.1016/j.erss.2024.103541
Brush, C. G., Manolova, T. S., and Edelman, L. F. (2008). Properties of emerging organizations: an empirical test. J. Bus. Ventur. 23:2. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusvent.2007.09.002
Buzzao, G., and Rizzi, F. (2021). On the conceptualization and measurement of dynamic capabilities for sustainability: building theory through a systematic literature review. Bus. Strat. Environ. 30:2614. doi: 10.1002/bse.2614
Carvalho, A. (2023). A duality model of dynamic capabilities: combining routines and improvisation. Admin. Sci. 13:84. doi: 10.3390/admsci13030084
Cavusgil, E., Seggie, S. H., and Talay, M. B. (2007). Dynamic capabilities view: foundations and research agenda. J. Mark. Theory Pract. 15:205. doi: 10.2753/MTP1069-6679150205
Chan, C. M. L., Teoh, S. Y., Yeow, A., and Pan, G. (2019). Agility in responding to disruptive digital innovation: case study of an SME. Inf. Syst. J. 29:215. doi: 10.1111/isj.12215
Ciasullo, M. V., Chiarini, A., and Palumbo, R. (2024). Mastering the interplay of organizational resilience and sustainability: insights from a hybrid literature review. Bus. Strat. Environ. 33:3530. doi: 10.1002/bse.3530
Cockayne, D. (2019). What is a startup firm? A methodological and epistemological investigation into research objects in economic geography. Geoforum 107:9. doi: 10.1016/j.geoforum.2019.10.009
Coelho, A., Ferreira, J., and Proença, C. (2024). The impact of green entrepreneurial orientation on sustainability performance through the effects of green product and process innovation: the moderating role of ambidexterity. Bus. Strat. Environ. 33:3648. doi: 10.1002/bse.3648
Cruickshank, N. (2020). He who defends everything, defends nothing: proactivity in organizational resilience. Transnatl. Corp. Rev. 12:326. doi: 10.1080/19186444.2020.1764326
Dangelico, R. M., Pujari, D., and Pontrandolfo, P. (2017). Green product innovation in manufacturing firms: a sustainability-oriented dynamic capability perspective. Bus. Strat. Environ. 26:1932. doi: 10.1002/bse.1932
Dehkordi, R., Ahokangas, P., Evers, N., and Sorvisto, M. (2024). Business model design for electric commercial vehicles (ECVs): an ecosystemic perspective. Energy Policy 186:971. doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2023.113971
Eisenhardt, K. M., and Martin, J. A. (2000). Dynamic capabilities: what are they? Strateg. Manag. J. 21:1121. doi: 10.1002/1097-0266(200010/11)21:10/11<1105::AID-SMJ133>3.0.CO;2-E
Foss, N. J., and Saebi, T. (2018). Business models and business model innovation: between wicked and paradigmatic problems. Long Range Plan. 51, 9–21. doi: 10.1016/j.lrp.2017.07.006
Gauthier, J. (2013). Institutional theory and corporate sustainability: determinant versus interactive approaches. Organ. Manag. J. 10:741. doi: 10.1080/15416518.2013.801741
Gonzalez-Samaniego, A., Valenzo-Jimenez, M. A., Martinez-Arroyo, J. A., and Casanova Valencia, S. A. (2023). Assessing the degree of development of dynamic capabilities theory: a systematic literature review. Probl. Perspect. Manage. 21:34. doi: 10.21511/ppm.21(3).2023.34
Gremme, K.-M., and Wohlgemuth, V. (2017). Dynamic capabilities: a systematic literature review of theory and practice. Eur. J. Manag. Issues 25:705. doi: 10.15421/191705
Hepfer, M., and Lawrence, T. B. (2022). The heterogeneity of organizational resilience: exploring functional, operational and strategic resilience. Organ. Theory 3:701. doi: 10.1177/26317877221074701
Indarto, I., Budiati, Y., Lestari, R. I., and Prawihatmi, C. Y. (2025). Determinants of business resilience and sustainable performance. Sriwijaya Int. J. Dynamic Econ. Bus. 2025, 57–80. doi: 10.29259/sijdeb.v9i1.57-80
Indrianti, Y., Sasmoko, B., Abdinagoro, S. B., and Rahim, R. K. (2024). Building bridges to entrepreneurial resilience: exploring the mediating role of business model innovation capacity in ambidextrous leadership and entrepreneurial mindfulness. Uncertain Supply Chain Manag. 12, 2245–2252. doi: 10.5267/j.uscm.2024.6.007
Issa, A., Khadem, A., Alzubi, A., and Berberoğlu, A. (2024). The path from green innovation to supply chain resilience: do structural and dynamic supply chain complexity matter? Sustainability 16:62. doi: 10.3390/su16093762
Jacobson, R. (1992). The “Austrian” school of strategy. Acad. Manag. Rev. 17:70. doi: 10.5465/amr.1992.4279070
Karami, M., Ojala, A., and Saarenketo, S. (2023). Entrepreneurial orientation and international opportunity development by SMEs: the mediating role of decision-making logic. J. Small Bus. Manage. 61:529. doi: 10.1080/00472778.2020.1824529
Kaya, Y. (2023). Agile leadership from the perspective of dynamic capabilities and creating value. Sustainability 15:253. doi: 10.3390/su152115253
Kurtmollaiev, S. (2020). Dynamic capabilities and where to find them. J. Manage. Inq. 29:126. doi: 10.1177/1056492617730126
Lanzolla, G., and Markides, C. (2021). A business model view of strategy. J. Manage. Stud. 58:12580. doi: 10.1111/joms.12580
Limanseto, H. (2022). Siaran Pers akselerasi net zero Emissions, Indonesia Deklarasikan Target Terbaru Penurunan Emisi Karbon. Akselerasi Net Zero Emissions, Indonesia Deklarasikan target terbaru penurunan emisi Karbon - Kementerian Koordinator Bidang perekonomian Republik Indonesia. Available online at: https://ekon.go.id/publikasi/detail/4652/akselerasi-net-zero-emissions-indonesia-deklarasikan-target-terbaru-penurunan-emisi-karbon (Accessed July 18, 2024).
Maldonado-Guzman, G., Pinzon-Castro, S. Y., and Rodriguez-Gonzalez, R. M. (2019). Entrepreneurial orientation and innovation capabilities in Mexican small business. J. Manage. Sustain. 9:151. doi: 10.5539/jms.v9n2p151
Manzano-García, G., and Ayala-Calvo, J. C. (2020). Entrepreneurial orientation: its relationship with the entrepreneur’s subjective success in SMEs. Sustainability 12:547. doi: 10.3390/su12114547
Marouf Abdelhamid Amr, A., Mostafa Shazly, M., Ali Hasan Omar, H., and Ibrahim Mahmoud, S. (2023). Agile leadership training program for head nurses and its effect on their innovative behavior. J. Nurs. Sci. Benha Univ. 4:299. doi: 10.21608/jnsbu.2023.310299
McRae, M. E. (2024). Nickel - mineral commodity summaries 2024 - USGS.GOV. Virginia, USA: US Geological Survey.
Mehta, M., Pancholi, G., and Saxena, A. (2024). Organizational resilience and sustainability: a bibliometric analysis. Cogent Bus Manag 11:513. doi: 10.1080/23311975.2023.2294513
Mendoza-Silva, A. (2020). Innovation capability: a systematic literature review. Eur. J. Innov. Manag. 24:263. doi: 10.1108/EJIM-09-2019-0263
Ministry of Industry. (2023). Kemenperin Kebut Pengembangan Ekosistem Kendaraan Listrik. Kementerian Perindustrian. Available online at: https://www.kemenperin.go.id/artikel/24383/Kemenperin-Kebut-Pengembangan-Ekosistem-Kendaraan-Listrik (Accessed July 19, 2024).
Mishra, C. S., and Zachary, R. K. (2015). The theory of entrepreneurship. Entrep. Res. J. 5:42. doi: 10.1515/erj-2015-0042
Müller, J. M., Buliga, O., and Voigt, K. I. (2021). The role of absorptive capacity and innovation strategy in the design of industry 4.0 business models - a comparison between SMEs and large enterprises. Eur. Manag. J. 39:2. doi: 10.1016/j.emj.2020.01.002
Noordin, M. A., and Mohtar, S. (2013). Innovation capability: a critical review of its role in determining firm performance. Res. J. Soc. Sci. Manag. 3:4.
Ong, T. S., Lee, A. S., Teh, B. H., Magsi, H. B., and Ng, S. H. (2020). Environmental capabilities and environmental innovations of manufacturing firms in Malaysia. Indones. J. Sustain. Account. Manag. 4:248. doi: 10.28992/ijsam.v4i1.248
Otache, I., and Usang, O. U. E. (2022). Innovation capability and SME performance in times of economic crisis: does government support moderate? Afr. J. Econ. Manag. Stud. 13:362. doi: 10.1108/AJEMS-08-2021-0362
Paradkar, A., Knight, J., and Hansen, P. (2015). Innovation in start-ups: ideas filling the void or ideas devoid of resources and capabilities? Technovation 42, 1–10. doi: 10.1016/j.technovation.2015.03.004,
Pisano, A., Saba, M., and Baldovino, J. A. (2023). A critical review of NIO’S business model. World Electr. Veh. J. 14:251. doi: 10.3390/wevj14090251
Porkodi, S. (2024). The effectiveness of agile leadership in practice: a comprehensive meta-analysis of empirical studies on organizational outcomes. J. Entrep. Manag. Innov. 20, 117–138. doi: 10.7341/20242026
Porter, M. E. (1998). Competitive advantage: creating and sustaining superior performance. The Free 1998:15. doi: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2009.11.015
Salami, C. G. E., Ekakitie, S. E., and Ebinim, L. O. (2023). Impact of government policy on entrepreneurship growth and development of small-scale business. J. Glob. Soc. Sci. 4:154. doi: 10.58934/jgss.v4i14.154
Sekaran, U., and Bougie, R. (2020). Research methods for business a skill-building approach. Eight Edn. Chichester, West Sussex, United Kingdom: John Wiley &Sons Ltd.
Shalender, K. (2018). Entrepreneurial orientation for sustainable mobility through electric vehicles: insights from international case studies. J. Enterp. Communities People Places Glob. Econ. 12:32. doi: 10.1108/JEC-05-2017-0032
Soto-Simeone, A., Sirén, C., and Antretter, T. (2020). New venture survival: a review and extension. Int. J. Manag. Rev. 22:1229. doi: 10.1111/ijmr.12229
Tai, W.-P. (2014). An industry without industrialization: the political economy of the failure of Indonesia’s auto industry. JAS 2:154. doi: 10.21512/jas.v2i1.154
Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., and Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strateg. Manag. J. 18, 509–533. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199708)18:7<509::AID-SMJ882>3.0.CO;2-Z
Titus, V., Parker, O., and Covin, J. (2020). Organizational aspirations and external venturing: the contingency of entrepreneurial orientation. Enterp. Theory Pract. 44, 645–670. doi: 10.1177/1042258719838473,
Veza, I., Abas, M. A., Djamari, D. W., Tamaldin, N., Endrasari, F., Budiman, B. A., et al. (2022). Electric vehicles in Malaysia and Indonesia: opportunities and challenges. Energies 15:2564. doi: 10.3390/en15072564
von Kolpinski, C., Cagno, E., and Neri, A. (2024). Investigating the entrepreneurial orientation of circular-social hybrid start-ups by assessing their path toward sustainability: evidence from 20 European cases. Sustain. Prod. Consum. 47, 222–235. doi: 10.1016/j.spc.2024.03.036
Wiggins, R. R., and Ruefli, T. W. (2005). Schumpeter’s ghost: is hypercompetition making the best of times shorter? Strateg. Manag. J. 26:492. doi: 10.1002/smj.492
Yu, X., Cao, N., and Ren, H. (2023). The impact of entrepreneurial orientation on the sustainable innovation capabilities of new ventures: from the perspective of ambidextrous learning. Sustainability 15:26. doi: 10.3390/su15119026
Zameer, H., Yasmeen, H., Wang, Y., and Saeed, M. R. (2024). Sustainability-oriented corporate strategy: green image and innovation capabilities. Manag. Decis. 62:1407. doi: 10.1108/MD-08-2023-1407
Ziegler, D., and Abdelkafi, N. (2022). Business models for electric vehicles: literature review and key insights. J. Clean. Prod. 330:129803. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.129803
Keywords: electric vehicle, entrepreneurship, environmental sustainability, organization resilience, dynamic capabilities, innovation capability
Citation: Haryanto AR, Hamsal M, Abdinagoro SB and Rahim RK (2026) Building an entrepreneurship model in Indonesia’s electric vehicle industry: struggling or sustaining. Front. Sustain. 6:1706858. doi: 10.3389/frsus.2025.1706858
Edited by:
Farhat Abbas, University of Doha for Science and Technology, QatarReviewed by:
Humam Santosa Utomo, Universitas Pembangunan Nasional Veteran Yogyakarta, IndonesiaSoebowo Musa, Kovida Daya Indonesia, Indonesia
Copyright © 2026 Haryanto, Hamsal, Abdinagoro and Rahim. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Antonius Rainier Haryanto, YW50b25pdXMuaGFyeWFudG9AYmludXMuYWMuaWQ=