This study investigates the impact of strategic implementation on institutional performance at Al-Quds Open University. A descriptive-analytical approach was employed, utilizing a validated and highly reliable questionnaire (overall Cronbach’s alpha = 0.98) administered to an available sample of 126 employees at the level of division head and above in the University’s northern governorates. Data were analyzed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS).
The findings revealed that the overall level of strategic implementation was high, with organizational culture being the highest-rated dimension, while human resources scored at a medium level. Institutional performance was also found to be high, with beneficiary satisfaction as the leading domain. Crucially, stepwise multiple regression analysis demonstrated a statistically significant positive impact of strategic implementation on institutional performance. The regression model, incorporating organizational culture, work procedures, and organizational structure, was statistically significant (p < .001) and accounted for 73.3% of the variance in institutional performance.
Based on these results, the study recommends ensuring the provision of financial resources dedicated to strategy implementation and conducting a thorough inventory of existing human competencies before new recruitment to better align human resources with strategic goals.
In light of the dynamic, rapid, and continuous changes facing global institutions—particularly higher education institutions—it has become necessary for these institutions to move forward in implementing their strategic plans according to planned timelines, programs, and budgets, and in an effective manner to ensure the achievement of their goals and competitiveness, thereby improving and enhancing their institutional performance.
Strategic planning plays the role of a compass that guides the work of institutions and defines the correct direction they should take through strategic analysis of their internal and external environments to determine the strategic position, select the most appropriate strategic alternative from among available options, and subsequently prepare functional-level plans that contribute to implementing the strategic plan. The role of strategic implementation then follows, supported by strategic control, review, and audit tools to determine whether the strategy has been properly implemented in institutions (Daoud, 2020).
The strategic implementation phase is a difficult, challenging, and ongoing process. It is a vital process that involves translating strategic goals into tangible reality, focusing on turning the strategy—with its vision, mission, and defined objectives—into concrete outcomes that help achieve and improve the institution’s overall institutional performance to the fullest. Strategic implementation is challenging because it is the true, real-world measure of success; many experienced managers in strategy formulation and implementation have affirmed that developing a sound strategy is far easier than implementing it (Nasser Eddin, 2022).
Given that Al-Quds Open University operates in a dynamic environment characterized by complexity, rapid change, and ongoing development—like other universities and higher education institutions in Palestine—it has become essential to implement its strategic plans optimally to achieve its objectives and improve its institutional performance. From this standpoint, this study explores the role of strategic implementation in improving institutional performance at the university.
Strategic implementation is “a series of interrelated activities that encompass the requirements of the chosen strategy” (Broekhuizen et al., 2018: 557). Accordingly, in the researchers’ view, strategic implementation at Al-Quds Open University means translating the orientations and goals in the strategic plan into the tasks required through mechanisms executed based on activities derived from the vision and involving all university departments by defining and assigning the tasks they are responsible for executing.
The dimensions of strategic implementation focus on a set of interrelated activities and actions carried out to put the strategy into effect through operational programs, budgets, and procedures. These activities include:
Bou Zaid (2020) indicated numerous barriers to strategic implementation, foremost among them administrative barriers, such as centralization and a lack of attention by top management to delegating authority to employees; unclear or overlapping responsibilities among units charged with task execution; and weak coordination among units within the organization, reflected in poor use of management information systems and weakened monitoring and follow-up. Aichaoi (2021) added environmental barriers—reliance on traditional decision-making methods, favoritism, and personal relationships—as well as professional barriers such as lack of competent leadership cadres, inadequate education, and insufficient administrative training.
El-Nakeeb (2022) defined institutional performance as “the resultant of the performance of the organizational units and individuals belonging to the organization, and the interactive reciprocal relations between the organization and its surrounding environment, in a way that reflects the positive role of how the institution uses its material and human resources and invests them effectively and efficiently to achieve its goals as intended.” The researchers define institutional performance as the outputs the organization seeks to achieve, reflecting goals, activities, and means necessary to achieve them. Thus, institutional performance is the link between activities and the objectives the organization strives to accomplish through the tasks carried out by employees.
The relationship between strategic implementation and institutional performance is complementary. The principles underlying institutional performance must be present when formulating the organization’s mission and strategic plan. Strategic planning is important and linked to institutional performance by achieving organizational objectives and is one of its most important components and criteria. The importance of strategic implementation emerges by embodying the link between planning and the quality of institutional work as essential elements upon which institutional orientations and strategies are defined. It also represents the decision that determines the organization’s vision, its course of action, and the accuracy of its success and impact on the environment in which it operates (Saad, 2021).
After reviewing a group of local, Arab, and foreign studies related to strategic implementation and institutional performance, the researchers highlight several key contributions.
Al-Tarawneh et al. (2021) aimed to identify the impact of entrepreneurial culture dimensions on the effectiveness of strategic implementation in Jordanian commercial banks. Using a descriptive-analytical approach, they found a statistically significant positive effect of entrepreneurial culture (organizational enthusiasm, cohesion, opportunities as a driver for change) on the effectiveness of strategic implementation.
Kombate (2021) investigated the impact of strategic implementation style and middle management efforts on strategic management implementation and organizational performance in public organizations. The study found that selecting a rational implementation style via middle management did not achieve statistical significance, whereas applying an incremental implementation style was statistically significant, in contexts characterized by traditional bureaucracy and limited administrative reform.
Al-Bahri (2024) examined the impact of transparency in work procedures on institutional performance at Al-Sabeen Hospital for Maternity and Childhood in Sana’a, finding high application of transparency but medium institutional performance, and recommending reinforcement of good governance, organizational clarity, and awareness of anti-corruption laws.
Fares et al. (2023) studied human resource management (HRM) and institutional performance with total quality management (TQM) as a mediating variable in the Palestinian Ministry of Health, finding significant effects of HRM and TQM on institutional performance and a mediating role for TQM.
Al-Sharif (2022) investigated the impact of practicing strategic planning on improving the quality of institutional performance at Cairo University and the Higher Institute for Cooperative and Administrative Studies, finding medium levels of performance quality and a positive effect of strategic planning.
Yousef (2021) examined knowledge management and institutional performance in higher education institutions and highlighted the need to improve services, maintain knowledge experts, and invest in IT infrastructure to support institutional performance.
From the theoretical framework and previous studies, the researchers found the necessity and importance of strategic implementation in enhancing institutional performance at Al-Quds Open University. They believe that even outstanding strategic planning does not necessarily guarantee successful implementation in practice, which motivated the present focus on implementation as a distinct and critical phase.
Al-Quds Open University has prepared all its administrative, academic, and financial aspects to work together to optimally formulate and implement its strategic plans, focusing on strategic implementation as a core stage and complement of modern strategic planning. The success of these strategic plans lies in their practical execution, as every institution looks to the future and seeks improvement, attempting to realize this future within its capabilities and available opportunities by adopting strategic planning that maximizes internal strengths, overcomes weaknesses, capitalizes on opportunities, and confronts external threats.
Based on the university’s two five-year strategic plans that began in 2012 and ended in 2022, and the current strategic plan (2023–2027), it was noted that weaknesses and challenges accompanying strategic implementation across their multiple elements were rolled over into subsequent years without adequate and timely treatment as planned. This affected workflows and led to several administrative and financial problems, burdening the university’s budget and hindering its ability to fully carry out its duties and activities.
This study seeks to identify the implications and impacts of implementing the university’s strategic plans on its institutional performance, taking into account exceptional circumstances and crises faced by the university and the country—namely the COVID-19 pandemic in 2019 and the war launched by the occupation on the Gaza Strip since October 7, 2023—affecting all sectors in Palestine, the region, and the world. After reviewing many prior studies on the study variables, and given the lack of research specifically examining strategic implementation and its impact on institutional performance at the university (to the researchers’ knowledge), this study addresses this research gap.
The main research question is:
What is the impact of strategic implementation on institutional performance at Al-Quds Open University?
From this, the following sub-questions arise:
What is the reality of strategic implementation across its elements (availability of financial and material resources, human resources, work procedures, organizational structure, organizational culture, programs and projects) at Al-Quds Open University?
What is the level of institutional performance across its elements (efficiency, effectiveness, responsiveness, beneficiary satisfaction) at Al-Quds Open University?
Is there an impact of strategic implementation on institutional performance at Al-Quds Open University?
The main null hypothesis of the study is formulated as follows:
H₀: There is no statistically significant effect at α ≤ 0.05 of strategic implementation in its domains (availability of financial and material resources, human resources, work procedures, organizational structure, organizational culture, programs and projects) on institutional performance at Al-Quds Open University.
The study seeks to:
Identify the reality of strategic implementation at Al-Quds Open University.
Determine the level of institutional performance at Al-Quds Open University.
Identify whether there is a significant impact of strategic implementation on institutional performance at Al-Quds Open University.
Identify proposals that help develop institutional performance at Al-Quds Open University.
The researchers used a descriptive-analytical approach to describe the problem and understand it more deeply, then analyze it inductively while focusing on the meanings expressed by respondents and describing them convincingly.
The study population comprised employees holding the position of division head and above (N = 157). A purposive random sample was selected; the sample size reached 126 participants. In choosing the sample size, the researchers followed Melhem (2012), who noted that for small populations of a few hundred, the sample should not be less than 80% of the population.
A questionnaire was adopted as the main research instrument. Its variables were derived from relevant literature. To achieve the study’s objectives, scales were adopted for the six strategic implementation domains and the four institutional performance domains to collect data.
To verify content validity (expert validity), the preliminary version of the scales was presented to experts with relevant specialization and experience. The number of items in the strategic implementation scale was set at 40, and the number of items in the institutional performance scale at 22.
Construct validity was assessed by computing Pearson correlation coefficients between each item and the total score of its domain. Item–total correlations ranged from 0.65 to 0.92 and were greater than the critical value at df = 28 and p = 0.01, indicating acceptable and statistically significant correlations. Garcia (2011) notes that correlations < 0.30 are weak, 0.30–0.70 are moderate, and > 0.70 are strong. This confirms that the items of each strategic implementation domain belong to the domain they were designed to measure; thus, no items were deleted. The same held for the institutional performance domains.
Internal consistency was verified using Cronbach’s alpha on pilot data after establishing validity. Table 1 shows the results.
| Instrument | Domain | Number of items | Cronbach’s alpha |
|---|---|---|---|
| Strategic Implementation Scale | Financial and material resources | 9 | 0.92 |
| Strategic Implementation Scale | Human resources | 7 | 0.95 |
| Strategic Implementation Scale | Work procedures | 6 | 0.93 |
| Strategic Implementation Scale | Organizational structure | 7 | 0.92 |
| Strategic Implementation Scale | Organizational culture | 6 | 0.91 |
| Strategic Implementation Scale | Programs and projects | 5 | 0.90 |
| Strategic Implementation Scale | 40 | 0.98 | |
| Institutional Performance Scale | Efficiency | 7 | 0.89 |
| Institutional Performance Scale | Effectiveness | 5 | 0.91 |
| Institutional Performance Scale | Responsiveness | 5 | 0.93 |
| Institutional Performance Scale | Beneficiary satisfaction | 5 | 0.95 |
| Institutional Performance Scale | 22 | 0.97 | |
| 62 | 0.98 |
Note: All alphas statistically significant at p < 0.01.
As Table 1 shows, Cronbach’s alpha values for the strategic implementation domains ranged from 0.90 to 0.95; the total was 0.98. For the institutional performance domains, alphas ranged from 0.89 to 0.95; the total was 0.97. The overall instrument alpha was 0.98. These values are suitable and indicate the instrument can be relied upon for the main sample (Fraenkel & Wallen, 2003; α ≥ 0.70).
The researchers faced several constraints, especially communication with the university’s branches in the Gaza Strip (southern governorates) during wartime, as all branches were targeted and completely destroyed. Electricity, internet, and all communications were cut off. Another challenge was distributing the questionnaire in the northern governorates (the West Bank) due to the university’s spread across multiple cities rather than being in one location, along with military checkpoints that imposed strict closures and segmented the West Bank. The researchers had to travel under risk to reach respondents and communicate with them electronically.
Table 2 shows that the overall level of strategic implementation at Al-Quds Open University across the domains (availability of financial and material resources, human resources, work procedures, organizational structure, organizational culture, programs and projects) was high, while the “human resources” domain was at a medium level.
| Rank | Domain | Mean | SD | Relative Weight (%) | Level |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 5 | Financial and material resources | 3.51 | 0.71 | 70.3 | High |
| 6 | Human resources | 3.21 | 0.89 | 64.3 | Medium |
| 4 | Work procedures | 3.59 | 0.72 | 71.8 | High |
| 3 | Organizational structure | 3.63 | 0.71 | 72.6 | High |
| 1 | Organizational culture | 3.67 | 0.68 | 73.3 | High |
| 2 | Programs and projects | 3.64 | 0.68 | 72.8 | High |
| - | 3.53 | 0.67 | 70.7 | High |
| Item | Statement | Mean | SD | Relative Weight (%) | Level |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Financial resources and budgets are available in a way that ensures the implementation of the university’s strategies. | 3.28 | 1.03 | 65.6 | Medium |
| 2 | Material resources are available in a way that ensures the implementation of the university’s strategies. | 3.29 | 1.00 | 65.8 | Medium |
| 3 | The university administration has a team with experience and competence in managing different resources (material and financial) to implement its strategy. | 3.76 | 0.87 | 75.2 | High |
| 4 | The university administration is keen to adjust financial resource plans to align with internal environmental changes. | 3.52 | 0.90 | 70.4 | High |
| 5 | The university administration analyzes the external environment to capitalize on opportunities. | 3.33 | 0.95 | 66.6 | Medium |
| 6 | The university administration strives for alignment between the university’s general orientations and financial resource management orientations. | 3.62 | 0.87 | 72.4 | High |
| 7 | The university’s mission serves as the basis for the mission of financial resources. | 3.73 | 0.81 | 74.6 | High |
| 8 | The university administration invests financial resources in achieving its strategic objectives. | 3.56 | 0.85 | 71.2 | High |
| 9 | The university administration develops its strategy to reinforce the importance of financial resources for achieving it. | 3.52 | 0.89 | 70.4 | High |
| - | 3.51 | 0.71 | 70.3 | High |
| Item | Statement | Mean | SD | Relative Weight (%) | Level |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10 | The university administration attracts suitable human cadres to achieve strategic goals. | 3.26 | 0.97 | 65.2 | Medium |
| 11 | The university administration trains human cadres to support successful strategy implementation. | 3.27 | 0.98 | 65.4 | Medium |
| 12 | Before appointing any new staff, the university administration inventories internal human resources to meet strategic requirements. | 3.25 | 1.02 | 65.0 | Medium |
| 13 | The university administration uses scientific methods to assess staff performance to meet strategic plan requirements. | 3.34 | 1.01 | 66.8 | Medium |
| 14 | The university administration provides financial incentives to encourage strategy implementation. | 2.88 | 1.06 | 57.6 | Medium |
| 15 | The university administration provides nonfinancial incentives to encourage strategy implementation. | 3.10 | 0.98 | 62.0 | Medium |
| 16 | The university administration uses the HR database to transfer staff to suitable positions for strategic goals. | 3.38 | 1.02 | 67.6 | Medium |
| - | 3.21 | 0.89 | 64.3 | Medium |
| Item | Statement | Mean | SD | Relative Weight (%) | Level |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 17 | The university administration provides clear procedures to employees to achieve desired goals. | 3.56 | 0.84 | 71.2 | High |
| 18 | The university administration uses standard procedures to facilitate achieving strategic goals. | 3.54 | 0.85 | 70.8 | High |
| 19 | The university administration follows up on work procedures to ensure proper execution toward strategic goals. | 3.60 | 0.81 | 72.0 | High |
| 20 | The university administration reviews work procedures to align with contemporary requirements for strategic goals. | 3.62 | 0.82 | 72.4 | High |
| 21 | Work procedures used in the university keep pace with developments supporting successful strategy implementation. | 3.58 | 0.88 | 71.6 | High |
| 22 | The university modifies work procedures as needed to implement strategic goals. | 3.65 | 0.88 | 73.0 | High |
| - | 3.59 | 0.72 | 71.8 | High |
| No. | Rank | Statement | Arithmetic Mean | SD | Relative Weight (%) | Level |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 23 | 6 | The organizational structure at the university possesses the flexibility that ensures the achievement of strategic goals. | 3.49 | 0.85 | 69.8 | High |
| 24 | 5 | The university delegates authorities to employees in a way that supports the achievement of strategic goals. | 3.52 | 0.89 | 70.4 | High |
| 25 | 7 | Authority is balanced with the responsibility granted to employees to enable them to execute strategic goals. | 3.46 | 0.81 | 69.2 | High |
| 26 | 3 | The university administration adopts a flexible organizational structure that enables administrative units to exchange the necessary data for achieving strategic goals. | 3.69 | 0.93 | 73.8 | High |
| 27 | 4 | The university defines the responsibilities of employees in a way that aligns with achieving strategic goals. | 3.67 | 0.81 | 73.4 | High |
| 28 | 2 | The university adopts a clear job description for employees that defines their authorities for achieving strategic goals. | 3.71 | 0.90 | 74.2 | High |
| 29 | 1 | The university has effective communication systems between administrative units. | 3.94 | 0.87 | 78.8 | High |
| - | - | 3.64 | 0.71 | 72.8 | High |
| No. | Rank | Statement | Arithmetic Mean | SD | Relative Weight (%) | Level |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 30 | 1 | The hierarchy for executing tasks is important in the university’s organizational culture for implementing strategic goals. | 3.89 | 0.79 | 77.8 | High |
| 31 | 3 | The university focuses on implementing regulations and systems in work management to ensure the successful implementation of the strategy. | 3.76 | 0.75 | 75.2 | High |
| 32 | 2 | The university focuses on employees’ commitment to executing tasks with precision to achieve strategic goals. | 3.84 | 0.76 | 76.8 | High |
| 33 | 4 | The organizational culture at the university supports work teams to confront problems they face in achieving strategic goals. | 3.60 | 0.81 | 72.0 | High |
| 34 | 6 | The organizational culture at the university provides an atmosphere of transparency to ensure the successful implementation of the strategy. | 3.44 | 0.84 | 68.8 | High |
| 35 | 5 | The university is keen on achieving fairness in distributing tasks among employees for the successful implementation of the strategy. | 3.46 | 0.94 | 69.2 | High |
| - | - | 3.67 | 0.68 | 73.3 | High |
| Item | Statement | Mean | SD | Relative Weight (%) | Level |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 36 | Programs and projects are designed to enhance the university management’s ability to achieve strategic goals. | 3.75 | 0.77 | 75.0 | High |
| 37 | The university administration is keen to develop programs and projects to ensure implementing strategic orientations. | 3.60 | 0.77 | 72.0 | High |
| 38 | The university’s implementation plans include innovative programs to achieve strategic goals. | 3.48 | 0.90 | 69.6 | High |
| 39 | Qualified cadres participate in preparing academic programs. | 3.76 | 0.84 | 75.2 | High |
| 40 | The university administration provides everything necessary to implement programs and projects. | 3.62 | 0.80 | 72.4 | High |
| - | 3.64 | 0.68 | 72.8 | High |
The results related to the level of institutional performance with its elements (efficiency, effectiveness, responsiveness, beneficiary satisfaction) at Al-Quds Open University came at a high degree in all its elements and overall.
| Field Rank | Field | Arithmetic Mean | SD | Relative Weight (%) | Level |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4 | Efficiency | 3.67 | 0.63 | 73.3 | High |
| 3 | Effectiveness | 3.68 | 0.74 | 73.6 | High |
| 2 | Responsiveness | 3.75 | 0.71 | 74.9 | High |
| 1 | Beneficiary Satisfaction | 3.89 | 0.72 | 77.7 | High |
| - | 3.74 | 0.63 | 74.8 | High |
| Item No. | Rank | Statement | Arithmetic Mean | SD | Relative Weight (%) | Level |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 3 | The parity between the qualifications of employees in all departments contributes to the implementation of strategic directions in the university. | 3.79 | 0.76 | 75.8 | High |
| 2 | 2 | Employees participate in facing the challenges they face during work to achieve strategic goals. | 3.94 | 0.63 | 78.8 | High |
| 3 | 5 | The university invests all available resources optimally to achieve its strategic goals. | 3.55 | 0.83 | 71.0 | High |
| 4 | 1 | The university adopts modern technology in its work, which contributes to the effectiveness of performance in achieving strategic goals. | 3.96 | 0.80 | 79.2 | High |
| 5 | 7 | The university adopts efficient training programs to improve performance levels in implementing strategic directions. | 3.39 | 0.95 | 67.8 | Medium |
| 6 | 4 | The university works to improve its processes to ensure the achievement of strategic goals. | 3.56 | 0.86 | 71.2 | High |
| 7 | 6 | The university achieves its strategic goals as planned. | 3.48 | 0.86 | 69.6 | High |
| - | - | 3.67 | 0.63 | 73.3 | High |
| Item No. | Rank | Statement | Arithmetic Mean | SD | Relative Weight (%) | Level |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 8 | 5 | Employees at the university at all levels participate in performing the university’s strategic plans. | 3.52 | 0.93 | 70.4 | High |
| 9 | 3 | Employees effectively achieve the strategic goals that have been set. | 3.67 | 0.88 | 73.4 | High |
| 10 | 4 | Employees use teamwork spirit to achieve strategic goals. | 3.63 | 0.85 | 72.6 | High |
| 11 | 2 | Employees at the university effectively complete their assigned tasks which achieve the strategic goals. | 3.70 | 0.83 | 74.0 | High |
| 12 | 1 | Employees at the university use information technology in a modern way to achieve strategic goals. | 3.86 | 0.81 | 77.2 | High |
| - | - | 3.68 | 0.74 | 73.6 | High |
| Item No. | Rank | Statement | Arithmetic Mean | SD | Relative Weight (%) | Level |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 13 | 1 | Employees use training skills to achieve positive results in achieving strategic goals. | 3.85 | 0.72 | 77.0 | High |
| 14 | 4 | Employees use communication between different administrative levels in the university to achieve strategic goals. | 3.69 | 0.85 | 73.8 | High |
| 15 | 2 | The capabilities possessed by employees at the university contribute to achieving strategic goals at the required speed. | 3.79 | 0.80 | 75.8 | High |
| 16 | 3 | Employees are aware of the importance of information related to strategic goals which helps them accomplish them quickly. | 3.72 | 0.86 | 74.4 | High |
| 17 | 5 | Employees at the university quickly address problems they may face during the achievement of strategic goals. | 3.68 | 0.83 | 73.6 | High |
| - | - | 3.75 | 0.71 | 74.9 | High |
| Item No. | Rank | Statement | Arithmetic Mean | SD | Relative Weight (%) | Level |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18 | 1 | Employees at the university provide the best services to beneficiaries correctly, which achieve strategic goals. | 3.91 | 0.74 | 78.2 | High |
| 19 | 3 | Employees at the university care about the problems of beneficiaries and answer their inquiries. | 3.88 | 0.80 | 77.6 | High |
| 20 | 5 | The employees’ performance of their duties ensures confidence between the beneficiaries and the university. | 3.86 | 0.79 | 77.2 | High |
| 21 | 2 | Workers at the university are committed to implementing services for beneficiaries at the specified times. | 3.90 | 0.84 | 78.0 | High |
| 22 | 4 | Employees at the university address all issues related to beneficiaries to achieve the highest degree of their satisfaction. | 3.87 | 0.80 | 77.4 | High |
| - | - | 3.89 | 0.72 | 77.7 | High |
To answer the third question (and test the main hypothesis), stepwise multiple regression was used with institutional performance as the dependent variable and strategic implementation domains as predictors.
| Model Variables | B | Std. Error | Beta (β) | t-value | Sig. | Correlation Coefficient (R) | Explained Variance (R²) | Adjusted R² |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constant | 0.77 | 0.16 | - | 4.75 | 0.00** | 0.860 | 0.739 | 0.733 |
| Organizational Culture | 0.35 | 0.09 | 0.38 | 4.10 | 0.00** | |||
| Work Procedures | 0.26 | 0.08 | 0.30 | 3.18 | 0.00** | |||
| Organizational Structure | 0.21 | 0.10 | 0.24 | 2.18 | 0.03* |
Calculated F-value = 115.39, significant at p < 0.001.
* Significant at α < 0.05; ** Significant at α < 0.01.
The domains organizational culture, work procedures, and organizational structure together explained 73.3% of the variance in institutional performance (adjusted R² = 0.733). Other domains (availability of financial and material resources, human resources, and programs and projects) were excluded from the stepwise model due to lack of unique additional explanatory power.
The resulting regression equation is:
where ŷ = Institutional Performance; x₁ = Organizational Culture; x₂ = Work Procedures; x₃ = Organizational Structure.
H₀₁: There is no statistically significant effect of the availability of financial and material resources on institutional performance.
| Model Variables | B | Std. Error | Beta (β) | t-value | Sig. | Correlation Coefficient (R) | Explained Variance (R²) | Adjusted R² |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constant | 1.56 | 0.21 | - | 7.62 | 0.00** | 0.698 | 0.488 | 0.483 |
| Availability of Financial and Material Resources | 0.62 | 0.06 | 0.70 | 10.86 | 0.00** |
Calculated F-value = 117.98, significant at p < 0.001.
** Significant at α < 0.01.
The regression equation:
H₀₁ is rejected: availability of financial and material resources has a significant positive effect on institutional performance (R² ≈ 0.488).
H₀₂: There is no statistically significant effect of human resources on institutional performance.
| Model Variables | B | Std. Error | Beta (β) | t-value | Sig. | Correlation Coefficient (R) | Explained Variance (R²) | Adjusted R² |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constant | 2.12 | 0.15 | - | 14.07 | 0.00** | 0.707 | 0.499 | 0.495 |
| Human Resources | 0.50 | 0.05 | 0.71 | 11.12 | 0.00** |
Calculated F-value = 123.70, significant at p < 0.001.
** Significant at α < 0.01.
Regression equation:
H₀₂ is rejected: human resources have a significant positive effect on institutional performance (R² ≈ 0.499).
H₀₃: There is no statistically significant effect of work procedures on institutional performance.
| Model Variables | B | Std. Error | Beta (β) | t-value | Sig. | Correlation Coefficient (R) | Explained Variance (R²) | Adjusted R² |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constant | 1.23 | 0.17 | - | 7.18 | 0.00** | 0.803 | 0.645 | 0.642 |
| Work Procedures | 0.70 | 0.05 | 0.80 | 14.99 | 0.00** |
Calculated F-value = 224.81, significant at p < 0.001.
** Significant at α < 0.01.
Regression equation:
H₀₃ is rejected: work procedures have a strong positive effect on institutional performance (R² ≈ 0.645).
H₀₄: There is no statistically significant effect of organizational structure on institutional performance.
| Model Variables | B | Std. Error | Beta (β) | t-value | Sig. | Correlation Coefficient (R) | Explained Variance (R²) | Adjusted R² |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constant | 1.11 | 0.17 | - | 6.48 | 0.00** | 0.814 | 0.663 | 0.660 |
| Organizational Structure | 0.72 | 0.05 | 0.81 | 15.61 | 0.00** |
Calculated F-value = 243.56, significant at p < 0.001.
** Significant at α < 0.01.
Regression equation:
H₀₄ is rejected: organizational structure has a strong positive effect on institutional performance (R² ≈ 0.663).
H₀₅: There is no statistically significant effect of organizational culture on institutional performance.
| Model Variables | B | Std. Error | Beta (β) | t-value | Sig. | Correlation Coefficient (R) | Explained Variance (R²) | Adjusted R² |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constant | 0.98 | 0.18 | - | 5.51 | 0.00** | 0.818 | 0.669 | 0.667 |
| Organizational Culture | 0.75 | 0.05 | 0.82 | 15.85 | 0.00** |
Calculated F-value = 251.11, significant at p < 0.001.
** Significant at α < 0.01.
Regression equation:
H₀₅ is rejected: organizational culture has a strong positive effect on institutional performance (R² ≈ 0.669).
H₀₆: There is no statistically significant effect of programs and projects on institutional performance.
| Model Variables | B | Std. Error | Beta (β) | t-value | Sig. | Correlation Coefficient (R) | Explained Variance (R²) | Adjusted R² |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Constant | 1.07 | 0.19 | - | 5.72 | 0.00** | 0.792 | 0.628 | 0.625 |
| Programs and Projects | 0.73 | 0.05 | 0.79 | 14.47 | 0.00** |
Calculated F-value = 209.25, significant at p < 0.001.
** Significant at α < 0.01.
Regression equation:
H₀₆ is rejected: programs and projects have a strong positive effect on institutional performance (R² ≈ 0.628).
Work procedures were perceived as clear and standardized, facilitating adherence and enhancing efficiency. Organizational structure was viewed as clear with well-defined roles and responsibilities and effective communication systems, supporting coordination and decision-making. Organizational culture was perceived as transparent and values-based, fostering belonging, collaboration, innovation, and creativity. Programs and projects were linked to comprehensive strategic planning and clarity of goals, helping staff connect daily work with strategic objectives.
These results agree with Hosny (2022) regarding the role of planning and implementation in Egypt’s Sustainable Development Strategy and with Al-Tarawneh et al. (2021) on the importance of change drivers for strategic implementation in Jordanian banks; they differ from Kombate (2021), which highlighted weaknesses associated with traditional bureaucracy and rational implementation styles in some developing-country public organizations.
These findings are consistent with Yousef (2021), who emphasized improved services and research for raising institutional performance, but differ from Al-Bahri (2024), who found medium performance levels at Al-Sabeen Hospital, and from Al-Sharif (2022), who reported medium quality of institutional performance among university managers.
These results align with Fares et al. (2023), who found a significant effect of HR-related practices on performance in the Palestinian Ministry of Health, Husny (2022), who emphasized planning and implementation roles in Egypt’s Vision 2030, and Al-Tarawneh et al. (2021), who found entrepreneurial culture to be a driver of effective strategic implementation.
Based on the findings, the researchers propose:
Ensure the provision of financial resources and budgets that guarantee the implementation of university-approved strategies. The Board of Trustees should fulfill its responsibilities to secure funding from internal and external sources. The university should also open new programs at the bachelor’s, master’s, and doctoral levels to provide additional revenue that can help bridge budget deficits.
Continuously analyze the external environment to capitalize on available opportunities that can create funding to alleviate the university’s financial crisis.
Train the university’s human resources according to identified needs to support successful strategic implementation, reducing the need to recruit externally to implement strategic goals effectively.
Adopt efficient, internationally recognized training programs to elevate performance levels in implementing strategic orientations.
Before hiring new staff, inventory existing human resources to align with strategic implementation needs.
Use advanced scientific methods and standards for staff performance evaluation to direct human resources toward precise execution of the strategic plan.
Provide financial incentives to encourage human resources to implement the strategy efficiently and effectively.
Provide nonfinancial (moral) incentives to encourage human resources to implement the strategy efficiently and effectively.
Use advanced HR databases to facilitate redeploying staff to suitable positions for implementing strategic goals.