Sustainable Leadership, Entrepreneurial Bricolage, and Frugal Innovation: A Machine Learning Approach to Sustainable Performance

Abstract

This study examines the relation between sustainable leadership, entrepreneurial bricolage, and frugal innovation and how these elements influence sustainable performance. The purpose is to assess the association between these constructs using not only quantitative measures but also sophisticated algorithms. The study assumed a quantitative design. In addition, the Extra Trees machine learning method was also implemented to enhance the predictive ability of the models. The research results supported that sustainable leadership was positively related to frugal innovation and sustainable performance. In addition, the square error of the machine learning model was small, and the R² values were high, indicating that the model fit well. These lessons imply that organisations need to implement sustainable leadership and effective knowledge-sharing mechanisms. The practical implications lead to the fact that organisations must adopt sustainable leadership and enact effective knowledge management practices so that organisations can enhance their performance and develop sustainable solutions.

References

Aaouid, B., Elboussadi, A., Boubker, O., & Nejari, Z. (2024). Entrepreneurial bricolage: A systematic literature network analysis and TCCM approach. Scientific African, 26(1), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sciaf.2024.e02474

Adanma, U. M., & Ogunbiyi, E. O. (2024). A comparative review of global environmental policies for promoting sustainable development and economic growth. International Journal of Applied Research in Social Sciences, 6(5), 954–977. https://doi.org/10.51594/ijarss.v6i5.1147

Ahsan, M. J., & Khawaja, S. (2024). Sustainable leadership impact on environmental performance: Exploring employee well-being, innovation, and organizational resilience. Discover Sustainability, 5(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43621-024-00422-z

Aldalur, I., Markiegi, U., Valencia, X., Cuenca, J., & Illarramendi, M. (2022). E-learning experience with flipped classroom quizzes using Kahoot, Moodle and Google Forms: A comparative study. Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Education Technology and Computers.

Ali, R., Rehman, R. U., Suleman, S., & Ntim, C. G. (2022). CEO attributes, investment decisions, and firm performance: New insights from upper echelons theory. Managerial and Decision Economics, 43(2), 398–417. https://doi.org/10.1002/mde.3389

AlMulhim, A. F. (2021). The role of internal and external sources of knowledge on frugal innovation: Moderating role of innovation capabilities. International Journal of Innovation Science, 13(3), 341–363. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJIS-09-2020-0130

Alsharif, H. Z. H., Shu, T., Obrenovic, B., Godinic, D., Alhujaili, A., & Abdullaev, A. M. (2021). Impact of entrepreneurial leadership and bricolage on job security and sustainable economic performance: An empirical study of Croatian companies during COVID-19 pandemic. Sustainability, 13(21), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132111958

Armani, A. B., Petrini, M., & Santos, A. C. (2020). What are the attributes of sustainable leadership? Revista Brasileira de Gestão de Negócios, 22(4), 820–835. https://doi.org/10.7819/rbgn.v22i4.4086

Awotunde, M. O., & Aregbeshola, R. A. (2025). Effect of leadership styles on entrepreneurship success: A comparative analysis. Cogent Business & Management, 12(1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2025.2516176

Bhardwaj, R., Bindra, S., Singh, T., & Sahay, A. (2023). Toward a typology of entrepreneurial bricolage and its capabilities. Journal of Entrepreneurship in Emerging Economies. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEEE-07-2022-0205

Chen, J., & Zhang, F. (2024). The innovation paradox: The role of knowledge heterogeneity in frugal innovation. Cogent Business & Management, 11(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2024.2431646

da Silva, F., Nodari, C. H., & Chaym, C. D. (2024). Frugal innovation and sustainable development in shrimp farming. The Journal of Environment & Development, 33(4), 833–855. https://doi.org/10.1177/10704965241266693

Dahle, Y., Nguyen-Duc, A., Steinert, M., & Reuther, K. (2020). Six pillars of modern entrepreneurial theory and how to use them. In A. Nguyen-Duc, J. Münch, R. Prikladnicki, X. Wang, & P. Abrahamsson (Eds.), Fundamentals of software startups: Essential engineering and business aspects (pp. 3–25). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-35983-6_1

De Beer, L. T., van der Vaart, L., & Uziel, L. (2024). Should positive psychology researchers control for response style? International Journal of Applied Positive Psychology, 9(3), 1225–1236. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41042-024-00150-9

De Marchi, V., Pineda-Escobar, M. A., Howell, R., Verheij, M., & Knorringa, P. (2022). Frugal innovation and sustainability outcomes: Findings from a systematic literature review. European Journal of Innovation Management, 25(6), 984–1007. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJIM-02-2022-0083

Dost, M., Lee, M., & Umrani, W. A. (2024). Implementing circular economy through bricolage, frugal innovation and technological turbulence. Sustainable Development. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.3200

Dost, M., Pahi, M. H., Magsi, H. B., & Umrani, W. A. (2019). Effects of sources of knowledge on frugal innovation: Moderating role of environmental turbulence. Journal of Knowledge Management, 23(7), 1245–1259. https://doi.org/10.1108/JKM-01-2019-0035

Elbasi, E., Zaki, C., Topcu, A. E., Abdelbaki, W., Zreikat, A. I., Cina, E., Shdefat, A., & Saker, L. (2023). Crop prediction model using machine learning algorithms. Applied Sciences, 13(16), Article 9288. https://doi.org/10.3390/app13169288

Escudero-Cipriani, C., García-del Junco, J., Chaffoque-Céspedes, R., & Alvarez-Risco, A. (2024). Frugal innovation in the business environment: A literature review and future perspectives. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence, 7(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.3389/frai.2024.1385522

Faraz, N. A., Ahmed, F., & Xiong, Z. (2024). How firms leverage corporate environmental strategy to nurture green behavior: Role of multi-level environmentally responsible leadership. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 31(1), 243–259. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2565

Fu, H., Xu, M., Wu, Y., & Wang, W. (2024). What facilitates frugal innovation? A configurational study on the antecedent conditions using fsQCA. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, 9(3), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jik.2024.100522

Goldenberg, S. L., Nir, G., & Salcudean, S. E. (2019). A new era: Artificial intelligence and machine learning in prostate cancer. Nature Reviews Urology, 16(7), 391–403. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41585-019-0193-3

Gómez, J. M., Franco, D. V., & Sánchez, G. R. (2024). Exploring frugal innovation’s contribution on the manufacturing companies: An in-depth systematic review. Serbian Journal of Management, 19(1), 219–242. https://doi.org/10.5937/sjm19-44091

Hambrick, D. C., & Mason, P. A. (1984). Upper echelons: The organization as a reflection of its top managers. Academy of Management Review, 9(2), 193–206. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1984.4277628

Hervas-Oliver, J.-L., Sempere-Ripoll, F., & Boronat-Moll, C. (2021). Technological innovation typologies and open innovation in SMEs: Beyond internal and external sources of knowledge. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 162, Article 120338. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2020.120338

Ho, S. Y., Phua, K., Wong, L., & Goh, W. W. B. (2020). Extensions of the external validation for checking learned model interpretability and generalizability. Patterns, 1(8). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patter.2020.100129

Hu, L., Li, H.-X., Lee, S.-C., Lee, Y.-S., & Yen, S.-J. (2024). How does sustainable leadership promote the willingness to adopt an environmental innovation strategy? The key mediating role of environmental value. Sustainability, 16(7), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16072988

Iqbal, Q., & Ahmad, N. H. (2021). Sustainable development: The colors of sustainable leadership in learning organization. Sustainable Development, 29(1), 108–119. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.2135

Iqbal, Q., Ahmad, N. H., & Halim, H. A. (2021). Insights on entrepreneurial bricolage and frugal innovation for sustainable performance. Business Strategy & Development, 4(3), 237–245. https://doi.org/10.1002/bsd2.147

Iqbal, Q., Ahmad, N. H., & Li, Y. (2021a). Sustainable leadership in frontier Asia region: Managerial discretion and environmental innovation. Sustainability, 13(9), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13095002

Iqbal, Q., Ahmad, N. H., & Li, Z. (2021b). Frugal-based innovation model for sustainable development: Technological and market turbulence. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 42(3), 396–407. https://doi.org/10.1108/LODJ-06-2020-0256

Iqbal, Q., Ahmad, N. H., Li, Z., & Li, Y. (2022). To walk in beauty: Sustainable leadership, frugal innovation and environmental performance. Managerial and Decision Economics, 43(3), 738–750. https://doi.org/10.1002/mde.3415

Iqbal, Q., & Piwowar-Sulej, K. (2023). Sustainable leadership and heterogeneous knowledge sharing: The model for frugal innovation. European Journal of Innovation Management, 26(7), 655–673. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJIM-03-2022-0144

Iqbal, Q., Piwowar-Sulej, K., & Kallmuenzer, A. (2024). Sustainable development through frugal innovation: The role of leadership, entrepreneurial bricolage and knowledge diversity. Review of Managerial Science. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11846-024-00764-y

Iqbal, Q., Piwowar-Sulej, K., & Kallmuenzer, A. (2025). Sustainable development through frugal innovation: The role of leadership, entrepreneurial bricolage and knowledge diversity. Review of Managerial Science, 19(2), 573–594. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11846-024-00764-y

Jafari, S., & Byun, Y.-C. (2024). Efficient state of charge estimation in electric vehicles batteries based on the extra tree regressor: A data-driven approach. Heliyon, 10(4).

Jobst, L. J., Auerswald, M., & Moshagen, M. (2022). The effect of latent and error non-normality on corrections to the test statistic in structural equation modeling. Behavior Research Methods, 54(5), 2351–2363. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-021-01729-9

Jones, K. R., Gwynn, E. P., & Teeter, A. (2019). Quantitative or qualitative: Selecting the right methodological approach for credible evidence. Journal of Human Sciences and Extension, 7(2), Article 5. https://doi.org/10.54718/KUET2761

Keadkraichaiwat, I., Sitticharoon, C., Lertsiripatarajit, V., & Maprapho, P. (2024). Effects of using audience response systems (Kahoot and Google Forms and Sheets) on learning of medical students in a large class: A questionnaire-based retrospective study. Education and Information Technologies, 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-12548-8

Khan, R. U., Saqib, A., Abbasi, M. A., Mikhaylov, A., & Pinter, G. (2023). Green leadership, environmental knowledge sharing, and sustainable performance in manufacturing industry: Application from upper echelon theory. Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments, 60(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seta.2023.103540

Kumar, S., & Stobdan, J. (2024). Bricolage as an adaptive tool in resource constrained environment: A conceptual framework. Asian Journal of Economics and Business, 5(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.47509/AJEB.2024.v05i01.01

Lazariou, G., Ionescu, L., Andronie, M., & Dijmarescu, I. (2020). Sustainability management and performance in the urban corporate economy: A systematic literature review. Sustainability, 12(18).

Le, T. T. (2022). How do corporate social responsibility and green innovation transform corporate green strategy into sustainable firm performance? Journal of Cleaner Production, 362, Article 132228. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.132228

Li, Y., Song, Y., Wang, J., & Li, C. (2019). Intellectual capital, knowledge sharing, and innovation performance: Evidence from the Chinese construction industry. Sustainability, 11(9), Article 2713. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11092713

Lira, B., O’Brien, J. M., Peña, P. A., Galla, B. M., D’Mello, S., Yeager, D. S., Defnet, A., Kautz, T., Munkacsy, K., & Duckworth, A. L. (2022). Large studies reveal how reference bias limits policy applications of self-report measures. Scientific Reports, 12(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-23373-9

Liu, H., Shah, S., & Jiang, W. (2004). On-line outlier detection and data cleaning. Computers & Chemical Engineering, 28(9), 1635–1647.

Malik, S. Y., Hayat Mughal, Y., Azam, T., Cao, Y., Wan, Z., Zhu, H., & Thurasamy, R. (2021). Corporate social responsibility, green human resources management, and sustainable performance: Is organizational citizenship behavior towards environment the missing link? Sustainability, 13(3).

Mignenan, V. (2022). Management of frugal innovation projects: Research approach and perspectives. International Business Research, 15(4), 121–142. https://doi.org/10.5539/ibr.v15n4p121

Misra, S., Rippy, M. A., & Grant, S. B. (2024). Analyzing knowledge integration in convergence research. Environmental Science & Policy, 162, Article 103902. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2024.103902

Nayak, M., & Narayan, K. (2019). Strengths and weaknesses of online surveys. Technology, 6(7), 0837–2405053138. https://doi.org/10.9790/0837-2405053138

Osei Bonsu, C., Liu, C., & Yawson, A. (2024). The impact of CEO attributes on corporate decision-making and outcomes: A review and an agenda for future research. International Journal of Managerial Finance, 20(2), 503–545. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJMF-02-2023-0092

Qayyum, F., Jamil, H., Iqbal, N., Kim, D., & Afzal, M. T. (2022). Toward potential hybrid features evaluation using MLP-ANN binary classification model to tackle meaningful citations. Scientometrics, 127(11), 6471–6499.

Reyes-García, V., García-Del-Amo, D., Porcuna-Ferrer, A., Schlingmann, A., Abazeri, M., Attoh, E. M., Vieira da Cunha Ávila, J., Ayanlade, A., Babai, D., & Benyei, P. (2024). Local studies provide a global perspective of the impacts of climate change on Indigenous Peoples and local communities. Sustainable Earth Reviews, 7(1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.1186/s42055-023-00063-6

Russo, D., & Stol, K.-J. (2021). PLS-SEM for software engineering research: An introduction and survey. ACM Computing Surveys, 54(4), 1–38. https://doi.org/10.1145/3447580

Ryman, J. A., & Roach, D. C. (2024). Innovation, effectuation, and uncertainty. Innovation, 26(2), 328–348. https://doi.org/10.1080/14479338.2022.2117816

Sahin, A., & Anil, D. (2017). The effects of test length and sample size on item parameters in item response theory. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 17(1).

Saif, N., Goh, G. G. G., Rubin, A., Shaheen, I., & Murtaza, M. (2024). Influence of transformational leadership on innovative work behavior and task performance of individuals: The mediating role of knowledge sharing. Heliyon, 10(11), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e32280

Saleem, F., Pinto, L., & Malik, M. I. (2024). Green knowledge sharing and the green performance nexus: A moderated mediation model. Sustainability, 16(22), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16229654

Sarasvathy, S., & Botha, H. (2022). Bringing people to the table in new ventures: An effectual approach. Negotiation Journal, 38(1), 11–34. https://doi.org/10.1111/nejo.12385

Sarasvathy, S. D. (2001). Causation and effectuation: Toward a theoretical shift from economic inevitability to entrepreneurial contingency. Academy of Management Review, 26(2), 243–263. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2001.4378020

Sarstedt, M., Hair, J. F., Jr., Nitzl, C., Ringle, C. M., & Howard, M. C. (2020). Beyond a tandem analysis of SEM and PROCESS: Use of PLS-SEM for mediation analyses! International Journal of Market Research, 62(3), 288–299. https://doi.org/10.1177/1470785320915686

Shahid, M. S., Hossain, M., Shahid, S., & Anwar, T. (2023). Frugal innovation as a source of sustainable entrepreneurship to tackle social and environmental challenges. Journal of Cleaner Production, 406(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.137050

Sharafati, A., Asadollah, S. B. H. S., & Hosseinzadeh, M. (2020). The potential of new ensemble machine learning models for effluent quality parameters prediction and related uncertainty. Process Safety and Environmental Protection, 140, 68–78.

Shehzad, M. U., Zhang, J., Alam, S., Cao, Z., Boamah, F. A., & Ahmad, M. (2023). Knowledge management process as a mediator between collaborative culture and frugal innovation: The moderating role of perceived organizational support. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 38(7), 1424–1446. https://doi.org/10.1108/JBIM-01-2022-0016

Shiferaw, R. M., Debela, K. L., & Kero, C. A. (2025). Effect of green leadership on sustainable performance of large manufacturing firms using leader innovation behaviour as a mediating role: Evidence from large manufacturing firm in Ethiopia. Sustainable Futures, 10(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sftr.2025.101005

Sinsomboonthong, S. (2022). Performance comparison of new adjusted min-max with decimal scaling and statistical column normalization methods for artificial neural network. International Journal of Mathematics and Mathematical Sciences.

Stone, A. A., Schneider, S., Smyth, J. M., Junghaenel, D. U., Couper, M. P., Wen, C., Mendez, M., Velasco, S., & Goldstein, S. (2024). A population-based investigation of participation rate and self-selection bias in momentary data capture and survey studies. Current Psychology, 43(3), 2074–2090. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-023-04426-2

Tariq, T., Farhan, H. M., & Rafique, A. (2024). Developing blueprints for sustainable excellence: The integration of green intellectual capital, green transformative leadership, entrepreneurial orientation, and cost leadership strategy. Pakistan Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 12(2), 1770–1794. https://doi.org/10.52131/pjhs.2024.v12i2.2275

Tehseen, S., Kayani, U. N., Haider, S. A., Aysan, A. F., Johara, F., Hossain, S. M., & Khalid, S. (2024). Unpacking the mechanisms of entrepreneurial bricolage for new venture growth: The mediating roles of new venture adaptiveness and innovative ambidexterity. Cogent Business & Management, 11(1), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2024.2316357

Tian, H., & Wang, A. (2023). Sustainable leadership, knowledge sharing, and frugal innovation: The moderating role of organizational innovation climate. Sage Open, 13(4), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440231200946

Torelli, R. (2021). Sustainability, responsibility and ethics: Different concepts for a single path. Social Responsibility Journal, 17(5), 719–739. https://doi.org/10.1108/SRJ-03-2020-0081

Ur Rehman, K., Anwar, R. S., Antohi, V. M., Ali, U., Fortea, C., & Laura Zlati, M. (2024). Driving frugal innovation in SMEs: How sustainable leadership, knowledge sources and information credibility make a difference. Frontiers in Sociology, 9(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsoc.2024.1344704

Vianny, D. M. M., John, A., Mohan, S. K., Sarlan, A., & Ahmadian, A. (2022). Water optimization technique for precision irrigation system using IoT and machine learning. Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments, 52, Article 102307. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seta.2022.102307

Walrave, B., van de Wal, N., & Gilsing, V. (2024). Knowledge diversity and technological innovation: The moderating role of top management teams. Technovation, 131, Article 102954. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2024.102954

Wang, D., Song, J., Sun, X., & Wang, X. (2022). A study on the impact of boundary-spanning search on the sustainable development performance of technology start-ups. Sustainability, 14(15), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14159182

Xie, X., Wu, Y., & Tejerob, C. B. G. (2024). How responsible innovation builds business network resilience to achieve sustainable performance during global outbreaks: An extended resource-based view. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 71, 12194–12208. https://doi.org/10.1109/TEM.2022.3186000