Abstract :

This research was conducted at PT XYZ, an Indonesian digital telecommunications leader, to address declining profits and increasing competition which threaten its mission to provide reliable and innovative business services. The study aimed to develop a strategic measurement model to enhance business transformation performance. A mixed-methods approach was utilized, collecting qualitative data through in-depth interviews with 7 key individuals and focus group discussions with 6 participants, along with quantitative data from surveys involving 100 internal employees and 100 external stakeholders. This comprehensive approach helped identify several key factors affecting transformation success. Key findings included the necessity of a progressdriven approach with regular strategic alignment checkpoints, a significant gap in organizational capabilities due to insufficient training, lack of stakeholder engagement resulting in minimal buy-in, and the absence of clear Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) complicating progress tracking and decision-making. To overcome these challenges, the study proposes optimizing resource allocation via a robust management system, investing in ongoing training programs to enhance organizational capabilities, improving stakeholder engagement through continuous communication, and establishing definitive performance metrics and regular evaluation mechanisms. Implementing these strategies could significantly boost PT XYZ’s financial profits, customer satisfaction, and competitive standing in the telecommunications sector.

---

Keywords :

Change Management, Leadership, Performance measurement, Stakeholder Engagement, Strategic transformation, Telecommunications

---

References :

1. Li, X., & Chen, J. (2021). PESTLE Analysis of the Telecommunication Industry in the United States. Journal of Business and Economics, 9(2), 65-78.
2. Malik, M. A., & Khan, A. S. (2020). Analyzing the Impact of PESTEL Factors on Telecom Industry: A Case of Pakistan. Journal of Business and Economics, 8(3), 129-144.
3. Lewin, K. (1947). Frontiers in group dynamics: Concept, method and reality in social science; social equilibria and social change. Human Relations, 1(1), 5-41.
4. Kotter, J. P. (1996). Leading Change: Why Transformation Efforts Fail. Harvard Business Review.
5. Lewin, K. (1951). Field Theory in Social Science: Selected Theoretical Papers. Dorwin Cartwright (Ed.). Harper & Row.
6. Porter, M. E. (1979). “How Competitive Forces Shape Strategy.” Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from: https://hbr.org/1979/03/how-competitive-forces-shape-strategy

7. Porter, M. E. (1979). How Competitive Forces Shape Strategy. Harvard Business Review.
8. Barney, J. B. (1991). “Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage.” Journal of Management, 17(1), 99-120. Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639101700108
9. Kotler, P., & Keller, K. L. (2016). Marketing Management (15th ed.). Pearson.
10. Hooley, G., Piercy, N. F., & Nicoulaud, B. (2008). Marketing Strategy and Competitive Positioning (4th ed.). Pearson.
11. Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (1996). The Balanced Scorecard: Translating Strategy into Action. Harvard Business Press.
12. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook (2nd ed.). Sage Publications.
13. Akanbi, P. A., Omoregbe, N. A., & Oluwatosin, O. F. (2015). Research framework: A conceptual discussion. Covenant Journal of Research in the Built Environment (CJRBE), 3(1), 1-8.
14. Hox, J. J., & Boeije, H. R. (2005). Data collection, primary versus secondary. In J. P. Kempf-Leonard (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Social Measurement (Vol. 1, pp. 577-582). Academic Press.
15. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101.