Keywords

Port Competitiveness, Organizational Change Readiness, Service Innovation, Perceived Opportunity Challenge, Corporate Identity, Pelindo 1, Indonesia.

Introduction

One of the port services available in Indonesia is PT. Pelabuhan Indonesia (Pelindo) I which is a State-Owned Enterprise (BUMN). The work area of Pelindo I is the western region of Indonesia, which faces the Strait of Malacca, which is the busiest waters in the world so that the presence of Pelindo I also has a strategic role in connecting the international transportation network based on sea transportation in Indonesia. Therefore, in order to continue to improve the economy, it is crucial for Pelindo I to increase port competitiveness. Port competitiveness is closely related to the corporate sustainability of PT Pelindo 1, considering that soon there will be a change in the world transportation system, which of course also has an impact on sea transportation in Indonesia.

As an archipelagic country, Indonesia holds a great potential related to shipping, because of its location in the crossing of international trade routes. Shipping has become an essential sector in supporting the social, economic, government, defence, security, cultural and other life to unite separate islands and broad seas. Thus, the port automatically becomes an essential facility in Indonesia.

The description implies that PT Pelindo 1's port competitiveness issues are essential. The problem of increasing the competitiveness (port competitiveness) of PT Pelindo 1 is seen as urgent and very urgent. Thus, the research on how to improve the competitiveness (port competitiveness) of PT Pelindo 1 is essential and exciting.

This research was conducted to prepare Pelindo I's competitiveness by examining variables that were seen as driving competitiveness. Based on several perspectives on concepts and theories that have been carried out the review, obtained variable Organizational Change Readiness, Service Innovation, related to Port competitiveness.

Some previous studies that have discussed the relationship between Organizational Change Readiness, Service Innovation, and Port competitiveness are described as follows. With Organizational Change Readiness (organizational readiness for change), resistance to change can be avoided. Elias (2009) states that Organizational Change Readiness is the process of changing employee cognition to facilitate organizational change. Organizational Change Readiness is needed to achieve effective change in a company.

In addition to organizational change, Service Innovation also becomes vital for organizations. Aas et al. (2010) say that Service Innovation includes new ideas, practices or objects for relevant organizations and environments, which are the reference group of innovators. In a broad sense, Service Innovation refers to all innovation behaviour and activities related to services or services. Service Innovation uses the opportunity to create a combination of new resources derived from established knowledge and existing technology, which occurs between many actors and actor networks. From the customer's perspective, how the combination of newly developed resources is not necessary; the key is value created together through new services.

In addition to this description, several previous studies also examined the effect of Perceived opportunity challenge and Corporate Identity on Port competitiveness. According to Walgito (2010), Preception Opportunity Challenge consists of (1) Absorption of stimuli or objects from outside the individual, (2) Understanding or understanding, and (3) evaluation or evaluation. Some previous studies that discussed the relationship between perceived opportunity challenge and port competitiveness, namely Lam et al. (2013) and De-Langen (2006). Also, the relationship between Corporate Identity and Port competitiveness has been discussed in research by Zelenovic and Davidovic (2011) and Zorkóciová et al. (2014).

Along with this research gap, this research was conducted to develop a Port competitiveness model or concept. Development is carried out by involving the Organizational Change Readiness, Service Innovation, Perceived Opportunity Challenge and Corporate Identity together by referring and using perspectives from the results of previous research. The development of the Port competitiveness model or concept can be seen as a novelty from this research, where the development is carried out through a compilation of several concepts from previous research results.

Moreover, this study not only examines the effect of Organizational Change Readiness, Service Innovation directly on Port competitiveness, but also through mediating the Perceived Opportunity Challenge and Corporate Identity variable which also can also be seen as a novelty from this research.

Literature Review

The fundamental theory in this research is the Strategic Management Theory. Strategic Management is a dynamic process because it takes place continuously in an organization. Every strategy always requires a review and maybe even a change in the future. Because the conditions handled by an organization, both internal and external, are always changing. In other words, the management strategy is intended so that the organization becomes a unit that can display high performance because a successful organization is an organization whose effectiveness and productivity are getting higher and higher.

Goodstein et al. (1992), defines strategic management as the process used by an organization or company to predict its future. Then the development of procedures and operations needed to achieve that future is carried out. Strategic management is a systems approach to identifying and making the necessary changes and measuring the performance of an organization as it strives towards the vision and achieving its goals.

Resource-Based View (RBV) is a managerial framework used to determine strategic resources that can be exploited by companies to achieve sustainable competitive advantage. The assumptions used in theory are that business organizations gain sustainable competitive advantages by implementing strategies that exploit their internal strengths, through responding to environmental opportunities, while neutralizing external threats and avoiding internal weaknesses.

Wernerfelt (1984) was a pioneer in developing the Resource-Based View (RBV) Theory. The view of the Resource-Based View (RBV) Theory that company resources and capabilities are a crucial principal aspect. The goal of the Resource-Based View (RBV) Theory is how to manage the resources owned under the capacity to obtain a competitive advantage.

The conceptual framework of this study connects the relationship between variables, where Organizational Change Readiness and Service Innovation have an influence on Port competitiveness with the Perceived Opportunity Challenge and Corporate Identity as mediators (Figure 1).

Referring to the conceptual framework and hypotheses model of the research that has been stated above, the theoretical influence between variables in research can be explained as follows.

The effect of organizational change readiness on the perceived opportunity challenge. Cunningham et al. (2002) conducted a study entitled "Readiness for organizational change: A longitudinal study of workplace, psychological and behavioural correlates".

The purpose of this study is to examine the factors that influence readiness for organizational change (Organizational Change Readiness) in health services. A total of 654 randomly selected hospital staff completed a questionnaire that measured the risks of logistical and work changes, the ability to cope with changes and to solve work-related problems, social support. Karasek measures (1979) active vs passive work construction (job demand x cross decision) and readiness for organizational change. With hierarchical regression analysis, it was found that productive work, actual work problem-solving style and self-efficacy of job change contribute independently to predictions of readiness for organizational change. Readiness for organizational change and an active approach to work problem solving are the best predictors of participation in redesign activities during reengineering program.

H1: Organizational Change Readiness has a significant effect on the Perceived Opportunity Challenge

The Effect of Organizational Change Readiness on the Perceived Opportunity Challenge. Bartholmé and Melewar (2011) conducted a study entitled "Exploring the auditory dimensions of corporate identity management". This study aims to expand the domain of corporate identity and corporate communication by focusing on the dimension of hearing as a component of corporatecontrolled communication. Based on an extensive review of corporate identity and corporate communication literature, a series of hypotheses are proposed that reflect the antecedents of corporate hearing identity management. One of the hypotheses offered in exploration in this study is that the adoption of organizational innovation is positively related to the company's auditory identity management. The results of this study not only illustrate the importance of the auditory dimension as part of corporate identity management but also provide preliminary suggestions of the antecedent factors expected to determine sound utilization at the company level.

H2: Service Innovation has a significant effect on Corporate Identity

The Effect of Organizational Change Readiness on the Perceived Opportunity Challenge. Azevedo & Ferreira (2008) conducted a study entitled "Competitiveness of the Port of Sines: The Rbv Contribution". The primary purpose of this paper is to analyse the competitiveness of the leading maritime port located in Portugal, the Port of Sines. Port of Sines is an open-air seaport with exceptional maritime access, without restrictions, used to lead the Portuguese Port sector in the volume of cargo handled, and offers unique natural characteristics for receiving all types of vessels. Because of its modern nature, the port can handle various types of cargo. This paper was developed based on the Resource-based View (RBV) approach. The case study methodology is used to gather all the information on the primary resources needed and the ability and competitiveness of the Port (Port competitiveness).

H3: Perceived Opportunity Challenge has a significant effect on Port competitiveness

The Effect of Organizational Change Readiness on the Perceived Opportunity Challenge. Adeniji et al. (2014) have conducted a study entitled "Corporate image: A strategy for enhancing customer loyalty and profitability" to create a platform framework that identifies the relationship variables between company image and customer loyalty with profitability. This study uses descriptive statistics, bivariate correlations and linear regression to investigate the impact of company image on customer loyalty and profitability in the Nigerian (banking) service industry. This study adopted a self-structured questionnaire research instrument that was in line with the literature reviewed and focused on the main variables in this study. The results showed that the physical environment, service offerings and customer loyalty have a significant impact on the level of profitability. Thus, we can rightly conclude that the level of satisfaction among customers tends to influence service offerings and customer loyalty which has a direct relationship with company profitability.

H4: Corporate identity has a significant effect on Port competitiveness

Methodology

This study was a research analysis of numerical data with a quantitative approach. This research variable is a latent variable that is measured using a questionnaire as the research instrument. The variables employed are Organizational Change Readiness, Service Innovation, Corporate Identity, Perceived Opportunity Challenge, and Port competitiveness. Data analysis was performed using the statistical method. Based on the data collection method, this study uses a survey method, namely by providing questionnaires to respondents. In the questionnaire design, the attitude scale model is used; the most frequently used is the Likert Scale.

This research was conducted in 259 companies consisting of Transportation Management Business Services (UJPT) companies, shipping companies, and loading and unloading companies (PBM) under PT. Pelindo I Belawan. The time of data collection is conducted from June to July 2020. This activity can be extended if the sample has not been fulfilled, keeping the data collection done online, using online media, such as the WA group and Google form.

The sample unit in this study is an organization, which is a company under the auspices of PT. Pelindo 1 Belawan. The companies studied consisted of Transportation Management Business Services (UJPT) companies, shipping companies, and Loading and Unloading Company (PBM) companies. The population in this study are all Transportation Management Business Services (UJPT) companies, shipping companies, and Loading and Unloading Companies (PBM) under PT. Pelindo 1 Belawan, which is N = 259 companies.

Based on these calculations, the sample of this study was 158 companies (rounding) and added 10% to anticipate if there were questionnaires that were filled in incomplete. Thus, the sample size in this study was 175 companies.

Data analysis using descriptive and PLS (Partial Least Square) models with the WarpPLS program, by the following reasons: (1). the analysis model is tiered, and the structural equation model meets the recursive model. (2) Measurement of latent variables, i.e. any variables that cannot be measured directly.

Results and Discussion

Analysis

This study used the SEM Warppls approach to estimate the model's parameters. Before estimating the parameters, it is necessary to check the validity and reliability of each questionnaire item on each variable. Validity testing is required to ensure that the research data used is correct, while reliability is done to assure that the instruments used are suitable in measuring variables (Table 1).

Table 1 Validity and Reliability Test Results
Variable	Indicator	Correlation	Conclusion	Alpha Crobach	Conclusion
Organizational Change Readiness (X1)	X111	0.689	Valid	0.742	Reliable
	X112	0.723	Valid
	X113	0.711	Valid
	X114	0.730	Valid
	X115	0.726	Valid
	X121	0.730	Valid
	X122	0.723	Valid
	X123	0.685	Valid
Service Innovation (X2)	X211	0.715	Valid	0.735	Reliable
	X212	0.702	Valid
	X213	0.712	Valid
	X214	0.725	Valid
	X215	0.702	Valid
	X221	0.712	Valid
	X222	0.720	Valid
	X223	0.676	Valid
Perceived Opportunity Challenge (Y1)	Y211	0.727	Valid	0.758	Reliable
	Y212	0.719	Valid
	Y213	0.728	Valid
	Y221	0.744	Valid
	Y222	0.746	Valid
	Y223	0.743	Valid
	Y231	0.736	Valid
	Y232	0.741	Valid
	Y233	0.733	Valid
Corporate Identity (Y2)	Y111	0.686	Valid	0.707	Reliable
	Y112	0.638	Valid
	Y113	0.659	Valid
	Y121	0.658	Valid
	Y123	0.670	Valid
Port Competitiveness (Y3)	Y311	0.809	Valid	0.821	Reliable
	Y312	0.812	Valid
	Y313	0.809	Valid
	Y321	0.815	Valid
	Y322	0.815	Valid
	Y323	0.809	Valid
	Y331	0.815	Valid
	Y332	0.813	Valid
	Y333	0.815	Valid
	Y341	0.812	Valid
	Y342	0.809	Valid
	Y343	0.812	Valid
	Y351	0.808	Valid
	Y352	0.800	Valid
	Y353	0.811	Valid

All variables have been analysed for validity and reliability and can be concluded that all Organizational Change Readiness (X1), Service Innovation (X2), Perceived Opportunity Challenge (Y1), Corporate Identity (Y2) and Port Competitiveness (Y3) variables are valid and reliable (Figure 2).

The two indicators namely, Readiness to Face Change (X1.1) and Change Effectiveness (X1.2) are significant as a measure of Organizational Change Readiness (X1). From the size of the outer loading coefficient, it is obtained that the Readiness to Face Change (X1.1) and Change Effectiveness (X1.2) as the most substantial measure of Organizational Change Readiness (X1) because it has the same outer loading value. That is, Organizational Change Readiness (X1), mainly seen from the high indication of Readiness to Face Change (X1.1) and Effectiveness of Change (X1.2)

The second part presents the Service Innovation (X2) variable measurement model. This variable is measured by two indicators, namely Innovation in the service delivery process (X2.1) and Innovation that satisfies customers (X2.2). Figure 3 below presents the Service Innovation (X2) variable measurement model.

The two indicators; Innovation in the service delivery process (X2.1) and Innovation that satisfy the customer (X2.2) are significant as gauges of Service Innovation (X2). Both indicators have the same outer loading for Service Innovation (X2). That is Service Innovation (X2), mainly seen from the high indication of Innovation in the service delivery process (X2.1) and Innovations that satisfy customers (X2.2).

The third part presents the measurement model of the Corporate Image (X3) variable. This variable is measured by four indicators; Personality (X3.1), Reputation (X3.2), Value (X3.3), and Corporate Characteristics (X3.4). Figure 4 below presents the measurement model of the Corporate Image variable (X3).

The three indicators, namely the absorption of stimuli or objects from outside the individual (Y1.1), understanding or understanding (Y1.2), and evaluation or evaluation (Y1.3), are significant as a measure of perceived opportunity challenge (Y1). From the highest outer loading coefficient, it is obtained that the absorption of stimuli or objects from outside the individual (Y1.1) is the most reliable measure of perceived opportunity challenge (Y1). That is the perceived opportunity challenge (Y1), mainly seen from the high indication of absorption of stimuli or objects from outside the individual (Y1.1). The most robust measurement to the weakest variable is the perceived opportunity challenge (Y1) is as follows: Absorption of stimuli or objects from outside the individual (Y1.1), Understanding or understanding (Y1.2), and Assessment or evaluation (Y1.3).

The fifth part presents the measurement model of Corporate Identity (Y2) variables. This variable is measured by two indicators, namely Identity (Y2.1) and Consistency (Y2.2). Figure 5 below presents a measurement model for Corporate Identity (Y2) variables.

The two indicators are Identity (Y2.1), and Consistency (Y2.2) is significant as a measure of Corporate Identity (Y2). From the highest outer loading coefficient obtained that Identity (Y2.1) and Consistency (Y2.2) as the most substantial measure of Corporate Identity (Y2). That is Corporate Identity (Y2), mainly seen from the height of the two indications, namely Identity (Y2.1) and Consistency (Y2.2).

In the sixth part, the Port Competitiveness (Y3) variable measurement model is presented. This variable is measured by five indicators, namely Port Location (Y3.1), Port Facility (Y3.2), Cargo Volume (Y3.3), Service Level (Y3.4), and Port Fees (Y3.5). Table 2 and Figure 6 below present the measurement model for Port Competitiveness (Y3) variables.

Table 2 Results of Warppls Analysis of Direct Effects
No	Relations	Coefficient	P-value	Conclusion
1.	Organizational Change Readiness (X1) on Perceived opportunity challenge (Y1)	0.339**	<0.001	Significant
2.	Service Innovation (X2) on Corporate Identity (Y2)	0.259*	0.007	Significant
3.	Perceived Opportunity Challenge (Y1) on Port competitiveness (Y3)	0.289*	0.003	Significant
4.	Corporate Identity (Y2) on Port competitiveness (Y3)	0.290*	0.003	Significant

The five indicators, namely Port Location (Y3.1), Port Facility (Y3.2), Cargo Volume (Y3.3), Service Level (Y3.4), and Port Fees (Y3.5), are significant as a measure of Corporate Identity (Y3). From the highest outer loading coefficient, Port Fee (Y3.5) is the most reliable measure of Port Competitiveness (Y3). That is, Port Competitiveness (Y3), mainly seen from the high indication of Port Fees (Y3.5). The most robust measurements to the weakest variable are Port Competitiveness (Y3): Port Fees (Y3.5), Port Facility (Y3.2), Cargo Volume (Y3.3), Service Level (Y3.4), and Port Location (Y3.1).

The effect of Organizational Change Readiness (X1) on the Perceived Opportunity Challenge (Y1), obtained a structural coefficient of 0.339 and P-value <0.001. Because the Pvalue <0.001, and the coefficient marked, positive indicates that there is a significant and positive influence between Organizational Change Readiness (X1) on the Perceived Opportunity Challenge (Y1). This means that the higher the Organizational Change Readiness (X1), the higher the Perceived Opportunity Challenge (Y1) will be. Thus, hypothesis 1 of this study was accepted.

The effect of Service Innovation (X2) on Corporate Identity (Y2), obtained a structural coefficient of 0.259 and P-value 0.007. Because the P-value <0.05, indicates that there is a significant influence between Service Innovation (X2) on Corporate Identity (Y2). This means that the higher the Service Innovation (X2), the higher will be Corporate Identity (Y2). Thus, hypothesis 2 of this study was accepted.

The effect of Perceived Opportunity Challenge (Y1) on Port Competitiveness (Y3), obtained a structural coefficient of 0.289 and P-value of 0.003. Because the P-value <0.05, and the coefficient marked, positive indicates that there is a significant and positive influence between the Perceived Opportunity Challenge (Y1) on Port Competitiveness (Y3). This means that the higher the Perceived Opportunity Challenge (Y1), the higher the Port Competitiveness (Y3) will be. Thus, hypothesis 3 of this study was accepted.

The influence of Corporate Identity (Y2) on Port Competitiveness (Y3), obtained a structural coefficient of 0.290 and P-value 0.003. Because the P-value <0.05, and the coefficient marked positive indicates that there is a significant and positive influence between Corporate Identity (Y2) on Port Competitiveness (Y3). This means that the higher the Corporate Identity (Y2) will lead to the higher Port Competitiveness (Y3). Thus, hypothesis 4 of this study was accepted.

Based on the Table 3 above, there are two indirect effects. The indirect effect between Organizational Change Readiness (X1) on Port Competitiveness (Y3) through the Perceived Opportunity Challenge (Y1), obtained an indirect effect coefficient of 0.098 with p-value = 0.05, which is significant.

Table 3 Analysis of Warppls Indirect Effects
Indirect Effects	Coefficient of Direct Effect		Indirect Effects		Conclusion
			Coefficient	p-value
X1 → Y1 → Y3	X1 → Y1=0.339**	Y1 → Y3 = 0.289*	0.098*	0.05	Significant
X2 → Y2 → Y3	X2 → Y2=0.259*	Y2 → Y3=0.290*	0.075*	0.05	Significant

The indirect effect between Service Innovation (X2) on Port Competitiveness (Y3) through Corporate Identity (Y2), obtained the coefficient of the indirect effect of 0.075 with pvalue = 0.05, which is significant.

Discussion

This study found that Organizational Change Readiness (X1) had a significant and positive effect on the Perceived Opportunity Challenge (Y1). It is illustrated in the analysis of the coefficient value of 0.339 and p-value <0.001. This means that the higher the Organizational Change Readiness (X1) will result in a higher Perceived Opportunity Challenge (Y1). Given the structural coefficients positive, it was indicating that the relationship between the two is positive. Hence, the increased readiness to change employee cognition to facilitate organizational change, especially at PT Pelindo I can also improve the process of concluding a message or information in the form of events or experiences that exist in the organization that allows a person to make progress.

This study supports the results of several previous studies, research conducted by Cunningham et al. (2002) argue that actual work, productive work problem-solving style and self-efficacy of job change contribute independently to predictions of readiness for organizational change. Readiness for organizational change and an active approach to work problem solving are the best predictors of participation in the activities of redesigning the organizational point of view especially PT Pelindo I regarding information retrieval and the steps to be taken next. This study supports the results of Weber & Weber's (2001) research that explores employee trust in management, perceptions of supervisory support, and perceptions of the organization's readiness, to accept changes during planned change and the resulting difference in the perception of supervisory for improvement and readiness organization is one of the factors that can encourage employees' perspectives, on opportunities to take advantage of circumstances and continue the behaviour that can benefit themselves and the company. So Pelindo I also need to revolutionize, make various types of breakthroughs based on the three pillars of Pelindo I's transformation which consists of business models, business processes and IT systems, as well as culture, human resources, and organizations.

This study found that Service Innovation (X2) had a significant and positive effect on Corporate Identity (Y2). It is seen from the analysis of the coefficient value of 0.259 and p-value <0.001. This means that the higher the Service Innovation (X2) will lead to the higher Corporate Identity (Y2). Thus, increasing all innovative behaviours and activities related to services or for existing services at the port of PT Pelindo I can also increase all the manifestations of PT Pelindo I that allow it to be different. Hence, PT Pelindo I have the characteristics that distinguish it.

This study supports the results of several previous studies, namely, research conducted by Bartholmé and Melewar (2011). Which not only illustrates the importance of the auditory dimension as part of corporate identity management but also provides preliminary suggestions of the antecedent factors expected to determine sound utilization at the company level. This research is also in line with the results of Abratt and Kleyn's (2012) research which shows that managers will be able to use a framework to help them align and optimize efforts to build their brand and organizational reputation. Pelindo I's reputation is expected to be optimally enhanced to face increasingly intense global competition. Besides, this study also supports the results of Yang et al. research (2017), which proves that innovation is not only the key to increasing the value of development but also an effective instrument for the parent company's brand and building company loyalty only innovation related to products that have a significant impact on the value of the development. Functional and emotional values encourage a more profitable corporate image, and corporate branding induced by events is more effective in securing repeat business than attracting new customers. Pelindo I changed their service pattern with a service package system. Service extension carried out. Services ranging from loading and unloading, tracking, and storage are still offered to business partners of PT Pelindo I.

This study found that the Perceived Opportunity Challenge (Y1) had a significant and positive effect on Port Competitiveness (Y3). It is explained from the analysis of the coefficient value of 0.289 and p-value 0.003. This means that the higher the Perceived Opportunity Challenge (Y1) will lead to the higher Port Competitiveness (Y3). So, the increased process of concluding a message or information in the form of events or experiences that enable a person to take action further can also improve the functional activities carried out at PT Pelindo I, from the perspective of the logistics chain to the competitiveness of the port.

Furthermore, this study supports the results of several previous studies, namely, research conducted by Azevedo & Ferreira (2008), which argues that through superior resources, ports can offer quick responses and better access to information, superior customer service and also better processing and faster communication between entities involved in Port operations. The digitalization carried out at Pelindo I assisted port operations, significantly reducing interactions between officers and service users in the office and the field.

This study also found that Corporate Identity (Y2) had a significant and positive effect on Port Competitiveness (Y3). It is illustrated from the analysis of the coefficient value of 0.290 and p-value 0.003. This means that the higher the Corporate Identity (Y2) will lead to the higher Port Competitiveness (Y3). So that the increase in manifestations/characteristics of an organization that allows it to be different can also increase the functional activities carried out at PT Pelindo I, from the perspective of the logistics chain to the competitiveness of the port.

This study supports the results of several previous studies, namely research conducted by Adeniji et al. (2014) argue that the physical environment, service offerings and customer loyalty have a significant impact on the level of profitability. Thus, the authors can correctly conclude that the level of satisfaction among customers tends to affect service offerings and customer loyalty which has a direct relationship with company profitability. This research is also in line with the results of Zelenovic and Davidovic's (2011) research which shows that there are a reciprocal correlation and a close relationship between market competition and the company's name and character. For example, clarification regarding the names and trademarks of successful companies in the market.

Limitations

The Organizational Change Readiness culture is a dynamic variable, thus that respondents could capture different points of view from one another. It is possible that the applicable Organizational Change Readiness there is confusion in the interpretation of the respondents when they see the readiness for changes related to organizational performance or readiness to make changes in the strategic context.

The measurement of the Perceived Opportunity Challenge has not been established (established) in the port corporation is also prone to misunderstanding in the acceptance and interpretation of each statement in the questionnaire. However, validity and reliability checks have been carried out.

Port Competitiveness measurements from previous studies Çetinkaya et al. (2019) and Azevedo & Ferreira (2008) which were initially more oriented towards the economic and industrial fields were changed into a more perspective context so that they are susceptible to misunderstanding in acceptance and interpretation.

Conclusion

Based on the results and discussion in the previous chapter, it was concluded that this study produced a more integrated and simultaneous model of corporate sustainability, placing the concept of the Perceived Opportunity Challenge as a determining factor for Port Competitiveness. The concept of Organizational Change Readiness variables, Service Innovation, Perceived Opportunity Challenge and Corporate Identity are the results of Service Innovation being the most reliable driver of Port Competitiveness. This conclusion can be explained in more detail, as follows: 1) Organizational Change Readiness has a significant effect on the Perceived Opportunity Challenge. From the positive structural coefficients, it can be concluded that the relationship between the two is positive. So, the increased readiness to change employee cognition to facilitate organizational change, especially at PT Pelindo I can also improve the process of concluding a message or information in the form of events or experiences that exist in the organization that allows a person to take action next. This study supports the results of several previous studies, namely research conducted by Cunningham et al. (2002), Weber and Weber (2001), Hatjidis, et al. (2019), and Yeo and Ajam (2010). Readiness for organizational change and an active approach to work problem solving are the best predictors of participation in the activities of redesigning the organizational point of view especially PT Pelindo I regarding information retrieval and the steps to be taken next. Implementation of Organizational Change Readiness of employees must be oriented to the readiness of significant and flexible changes and effective change to be able to encourage and increase the Perceived Opportunity Challenge. 2) Service Innovation has a significant effect on Corporate Identity. From the positive structural coefficients, it can be concluded that the relationship between the two is positive. So that the increase in all innovative behaviours and activities related to services or for existing services at the port of PT Pelindo I can also increase all manifestations of PT Pelindo I that allow it to be different. Hence, PT Pelindo I have the characteristics that distinguish it, this study supports the results of several previous studies, namely research conducted by Bartholmé and Melewar (2011), Abratt and Kleyn (2012), Yang et al. (2017), and Li et al. (2019). Pelindo I changed their service pattern with a service package system. Service extension carried out. Services ranging from loading and unloading, tracking, and storage are still offered to business partners of PT Pelindo I. That experience will be the identity of the agency in the eyes of the customer. Therefore, excellent service will make the agency known as a competent agency in the eyes of customers and vice versa. So, it is hoped that active search for opportunities can foster innovative new ideas and make PT Pelindo I an active company in making updates. Service Innovation implementation must be oriented to innovations that satisfy customer desires and service offering innovations in order to be able to encourage and enhance all manifestations of PT Pelindo I that enable them to be different.

References

Aas, T.H. (2010). Implementing a value assessment tool for service innovation ideas. International Journal of Innovation Management, 14(6), 1149-1167.

Indexed at, Google scholar, Cross Ref

Abratt, R., & Kleyn, N. (2012). Corporate identity, corporate branding and corporate reputations: Reconciliation and integration. European Journal of Marketing.

Indexed at, Google scholar, Cross Ref

Adeniji, A.A., Osibanjo, A.O., Abiodun, A.J., & Oni-Ojo, E.E. (2014). Corporate image: A strategy for enhancing customer loyalty and profitability. Journal of South African Business Research, 20(1), 1-9.

Indexed at, Google scholar, Cross Ref

Bartholme, R., & Melewar, T. (2011). Exploring the auditory dimension of corporate identity management. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 29(2), 92-107.

Indexed at, Google scholar, Cross Ref

Cetinkaya, A.S., Niavand, A., & Rashid, M. (2019). Organizational change and competitive advantage: Business size matters. Business & Management Studies: An International Journal, 7(3), 40-67.

Indexed at, Google scholar, Cross Ref

Cunningham, C. E., Woodward, C. A., Shannon, H. S., MacIntosh, J., Lendrum, B., Rosenbloom, D., & Brown, J. (2002). Readiness for organizational change: A longitudinal study of workplace, psychological and behavioural correlates. Journal of Occupational and Organizational psychology, 75(4), 377-392.

Indexed at, Google scholar, Cross Ref

De-Langen, P. W. (2006). Stakeholders, conflicting interests and governance in port clusters. Research in Transportation Economics, 17(2), 457-477.

Indexed at, Google scholar, Cross Ref

Elias, S. M. (2009). Employee commitment in times of change: Assessing the importance of attitudes toward organizational change. Journal of Management, 35(1), 37-55.

Indexed at, Google scholar, Cross Ref

Goodstein, D. (1992). The science literacy gap: A Karplus lecture. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 1(3), 149-155.

Indexed at, Google scholar, Cross Ref

Hatjidis, D., Griffin, M., & Younes, M. (2019). Linking universal network quality perception and change readiness: The mediating roles of tacit knowledge and organizational climate. International Journal of Organizational Analysis.

Indexed at, Google scholar, Cross Ref

Lam, J.S.L., Ng, A.K., & Fu, X. (2013). Stakeholder management for establishing sustainable regional port governance. Research in Transportation Business & Management, 8(1), 30-38.

Indexed at, Google scholar, Cross Ref

Li, L., Li, G., Yang, X., & Yang, Z. (2019). Pursuing superior performance of service innovation through improved corporate social responsibility: from a knowledge acquisition perspective. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics.

Indexed at, Google scholar, Cross Ref

Walgito, B. (2010). Introduction to general psychologist. Yogyakarta: C.V Andi Offset.

Weber, P. S., & Weber, J. E. (2001). Changes in employee perceptions during organizational change. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 22(6), 291-300.

Indexed at, Google scholar, Cross Ref

Wernerfelt, B. (1984). A resource based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 5(2), 171-180.

Indexed at, Google scholar, Cross Ref

Yang, W., Tan, Y., Yoshida, K., & Takakuwa, S. (2017). Digital twin-driven simulation for a cyber-physical system in Industry 4.0. DAAAM International Scientific Book, 20(2), 227-234.

Indexed at, Google scholar, Cross Ref

Yeo, R.K., & Ajam, M.Y. (2010). Technological development and challenges in strategizing organizational change. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 18(3), 295-320.

Indexed at, Google scholar, Cross Ref

Zorkociova, O., Simorova, L., & Dan-Sasikova, M. (2014). Corporate Identity as a strategic tool for companies to remain competitiveness in car industry during current financial and economic crisis. Journal of Applied Economics and Business Research, 4(1), 3-22.

Indexed at, Google scholar

Received: 16-July-2021, Manuscript No. JLERI-21-5927; Editor assigned: 19-July-2021, PreQC No. JLERI-21-5927(PQ); Reviewed: 09-Aug-2021, QC No. JLERI-21-5927; Revised: 27-Dec-2021, Manuscript No. JLERI-21-5927(R); Published: 03-Jan-2022