1. Introduction

In today's ever-changing global business environment, organizations need to focus on developing innovative ways to develop. These approaches must be genuine in the organization's potential to produce long-term, sustainable success. One of the most widely recognized principles that can ensure this capability is "organizational excellence". Organizational excellence ensures that all organizational systems are compatible with one another and work in concert (Nenadal et al., 2018).

Organizational excellence reflects the organization’s sustainability and success, as well as its ability to achieve its mission and vision within superior performance in a highly complex changing environment. Organizations are able to obtain distinguished results, in accordance with the adoption of globally applied standards and models of excellence (Medne et al., 2020,33)

Strategic behavior is a major factor and tool in competition between organizations because it helps to explore opportunities and invest them optimally to achieve excellence and sustainability (Aldalimy et al., 2019, p2). Over time, new approaches to strategy design and evaluation have emerged. The typology of business strategy was used for this study's approach. With a common strategic orientation, each type of business strategy is thought to have its own unique set of characteristics. It is acknowledged that the typology approach contributes to a deeper understanding of the organization's strategic reality.

On the other hand, the pursuit of excellence in any educational institution is a basic requirement in light of environmental changes and global competitiveness, which necessitates these institutions to adopt a philosophy and management strategy to enable them to advance the institutional reality and go beyond the institutional reality. Difficulties and a significant change in performance, lead to a continued competition. Thus, in order to achieve and succeed in the strategies of organizations in the markets, organizations need tools to assist them in correcting their successful strategic path and continually adjusting their programs. As a result, it must invest in its leaders' behaviors in prospecting for opportunities or protecting competitive positions, as well as their analytical talents and interactions with events (Al-Khalidi, 2020).

The development of research that seeks to understand the strategic behavior of managers as well as its consequences has been the goal of many researchers in the field of strategies. This practice aims to broaden the academic and experiential horizons on the subject, thereby improving the process of thinking about alternative methods to improve organizational excellence and performance (Martins et al., 2014, 393). Organizational excellence is contemplated using models developed by many bodies globally and subsequently adopted by organisations to improve performance and achieve organizational success (Ringrose, 2013, Enquist, Johnson, & Rönnbäck, 2015).

The term "excellence" refers to the efforts of these organizations to seize crucial opportunities in an era of globalization and openness that has been marked by the dominance of clarity of goals, sufficient resources, and an eye keen on performance and excellence. (Shilton et al., 2010, p. 75).

For an organization, in order to succeed in excelling in the environment in which it operates, needs tools that help with correcting its successful strategic path and work to constantly modify its programs. They should also work on their analytical capabilities and their interaction with events, and then become more flexible and able to modify their operations and products, as this comes as a result of the experience factor, skill, and the ability to make changes in their various businesses. It is certain that the strategic behavior of leaders towards competition variables will generate a kind of distinction in the resources and capabilities of the organization within the framework of analyzing competition variables and drawing future scenarios, which is accompanied by providing the organization with the appropriate resources and capabilities to implement those scenarios (AL-Fatlawy et al. 2021).

The strategic behavior of leaders according to Al-hariry (2012), plays a significant role in determining the group's objectives in setting its values, standards, and culture, as well as setting plans for the various activities of their groups; and how to take advantage of the leadership’s role in changing the strategies and tools they use in order to gain customer satisfaction, improve quality of service provided, increase profits, and develop strategies for leadership that contribute to achieving institutional excellence and improving performance, especially with the increase in competition and the emergence of other factors. (Wolf et al, 2010) believe that behavior patterns were considered one of the abilities that reveal the specificity of the leadership philosophy in dealing with the problems at hand, as well as they are considered one of the main pillars of decision models that mainly affect the building of the general direction of strategic leaders and the nature of their reflections on the current and future reality for the life of the organization. This enables organizations to achieve organizational excellence and outperform their competitors. This paper seeks to determine the effect of strategic behavior typology on organizational excellence, in order to achieve the aims of the research, we will first review the previous literature, on the basis of which we formulate hypotheses. In the next part, the paper will introduce the methodology of the study. In the following part the search results will be presented. Finally, the paper highlights the discussion and implications for theory and practice, as well as the limitations of the research and conclusion.

2. Literature Review

2.1 Strategic Behavior

Strategic behavior leads the organization to market opportunities and maintains control over existing resources (Brown; Davidsson; Wiklund, 2001,956). Managers show different strategic behaviors in response to a wide range of external and internal factors. Thus, in order to attain superior performance, leaders' behavior must be considered while developing strategy or executing organizational capacity (Slater; Olson; Hult, 2006, 1221).

According to Estévez et al., )2018,2) strategic behavior is a concept that has a profound impact in the field of strategic management, and depends on what leaders do in solving the various problems facing the organization

Through previous literature, behavioral strategy was defined as the integration of " cognitive and social psychology is combined with strategic management and practice. with the aim of "improving the practical value of strategy theory by constructing strategic management. Realistic presumptions regarding human perception, emotion, and social interaction are used (Powell et al., 2011, 1359). For Gavetti (2012, 267), behavior indicates the psychological foundations of a particular phenomenon; for a behavioral strategy is a limited rational assumption. Hastheetham & Hadikusumo (2011,210) define strategic behavior as strategic decisions and actions that result from choosing the competitive attributes that are incorporated into each level of a firm's strategy.

Parnell (2013) defends his opinion and considers that the Miles and Snow models are still among the most cited and tested on a large scale in samples from large enterprises and small- and medium-sized enterprises (Parnell, 2013). In their study of the Miles and Snow Model, Andrews et al. (2008) consider it to be one of the most comprehensive general models of strategy developed in the field of management research. While Desarbo et al. (2008) refer to the durability of the model and state that even more than thirty years after its creation, the model is still widely accepted.

In Laurent et al.'s (2007) study, statistically significant differences between the strategy and the direct response method were not found, indicating that the results of the study help explain the behavior in the end. Ahmed and Jassim (2017) presented a set of recommendations that contribute in thinking towards supporting patterns of strategic behavior in enhancing the capabilities and leadership capabilities of educational organizations.

The findings of the Quddu study (2007) further supported the existence of three strategic behaviors (prospector, analyzer, and defender) in the researched companies, which demonstrates the presence of a state to diversity behavioral among the top management of these companies to adapt to the environments in which they operate and the variation in their strategic directions.

Ghobril and Morri (2009), in their study indicate to the first three strategic types are compatible because, once a strategic objective has been identified by the affiliate of the product market, the company develops an appropriate response in technology, manufacturing, systems, processes, and controls, so that the chosen strategy can be appropriately implemented.

Miles and Snow (classification has also proven that it is a unique classification because it shows the organization as an integrated system of dynamic interaction with its environment, this classification has also proven its feasibility experimentally most of the time, as well as its ease of application in practice and its consistency in implementation. It also proved its usefulness in many studies that confirmed the basic assumptions of the model in the fields of strategic management and strategic marketing (Wulf et al., 2010, 25; Deserbo et al., 2005).

Strategy-driven behavior, according to Kazemi et al. (2017), refers to how a company's strategy processes as a core principle or the role of employees in the workplace. They are also based on the assumption that a person will be more interactive the more he or she understands how his or her contributions to the strategy align with the overall strategy. Additionally, there is a good correlation between strategy and personnel.

In addition, the literature shows a wealth of methodologies proposing to classify the behavior of managers, Costa and Silva (2002), Silva, Brandt, Costa (2003), and Brandt (2008), Mayer et al (2014) suggest that Miles and Snow (type of behavior) and Porter (general strategies) and Mintzberg refer to general strategies as the most representative and at the same time more to do with pilot tests. This view is supported by Moreira et al. (2009) and Monk (2010), who highlight these four types as primary strategies amongst those that have been developed.

In line with the above mentioned, researchers tend to adopt the procedural concept that they mentioned; these are the directions adopted by the strategic leaders of the organization, which are identified:(Anwar and Hasnu, 2016) in light of the parameters of response to environmental events, its components are derived from personal specifications and characteristics that enhance the intellectual state of the strategic leader.

Each type of behavior has a distinctive cycle reaction, as explained by Miles and Snow in 1978. in Table (1) (Behling & Fernando, 2019).

2.2 Organizational Excellence:

Organizational excellence is important for the growth of organizations, and since organizations play a big role in the economic and social development of societies in the modern world, it is also thought of as the ability of organizations to adapt to sudden changes and restore the stability of organizational systems through the organization's dynamic process (Felício et al,.2022). Organizational excellence is demonstrated when an organization is capable of achieving high expectations (Arussy, 2008). (Mohammed and Al-Zeidi 2022, p107) argued, that Organizational excellence is the ability to harmonize and coordinate the resources of the organization and operate them in integration and interdependence for the maximum rates of effectiveness in order to achieve output levels that match the needs and expectations of all parties involved in the organization.

Organizational excellence according to (Daharat, 2022, 1) is the result of employee training and empowerment. This source can be unique to humans, a unique technology, or a unique way of working that no one else can replicate. Investing in higher education is one of the most important new directions to achieve institutional excellence at the level of inputs and operations and to ensure outputs according to specific criteria based on what was said above. Organizational excellence is considered the core of all business success. Any organization that wants to succeed should create sustainable organizational excellence due to the dynamism of the business environment. All the elements that have an impact on the performance of the organization should always be taken into consideration for sustainable organizational excellence. Market changes, business development, competition innovation, quality management, and customers' satisfaction are among these elements in the first place (Hussain et al., 2018, p2).

Smith and Fingar (2003) suggested in their study that companies with excellent performance should work hard for continuous improvement and that organizations with excellence in environmental performance are linked to committed and transparent management as well as consistent internal and external goals and continuous improvement.

Furthermore, Robert and Dowling (2002), in their study, which was conducted on a sample of observations across 546 firms competing within 63 different industries, highlighted the relationship between excellent performance and good corporate reputation. Also, through a survey of previous literature, others have indicated the effect of marketing strategies on competitive excellence performance. Firms pursuing a cost leadership strategy support high-volume production at a competitive price to customers. It also emphasizes how the company's operations are impacted by the cost leadership strategy. The study of Al Khafaji et al. (2010) highlights the importance of performance excellence in creating value for customers through various means such as product innovation, high quality, technology, and superior service that sets the company apart from its competitors (Hung, 2006, p37).

In the same context, researchers dealt with various kinds of excellence. For instance, the study of Pil and Rothenberg (2003) illustrated the nature of efforts that improved environmental performance also helped improve manufacturing patterns in support of quality, which in turn contributed to achieving excellence.

Nenadal et al. (2018) also believe that organizational excellence provides a competitive advantage, which makes the organization excellent compared to other organizations that offer similar products or services. Organizational excellence also provides all the tools needed for product promotion. Thus, organizational excellence helps build strong client relationships.

Organizational excellence aims to create a strong workforce that has the ability to produce services and goods that exceed internal and external consumer expectations and recognition. Organizations seeking to achieve organizational excellence must also consider the following main criteria: (Altaha & ALhilali, 2020, 351).

1. Excellence in Leadership: represents the level of a leader's competence and ability to provide developmental opportunities, exploit (invest in) organizational opportunities, and accept actions that help the organization.

2. Excellence in strategy: The organization’s strategy expresses its future directions and how to exploit its capabilities and material and human resources to achieve its goals. Through building a strategy that focuses on the needs and expectations of employees and their work, measuring their performance, and facilitating their tasks.

3. Excellence in Human Resources: Working on developing effective and correct plans for human resources by identifying and developing the skills of employees and empowering them.

4. Excellence in Structure: The organizational structure plays an important role in increasing the awareness of the organization's ability to achieve its goals and objectives more efficiently and effectively. It is considered the starting point in identifying the path and form of the organization and helps in analysing its operations.

2.3 Strategic Behavior and Organizational Excellence

Cunningham (2002) believes that it is logical that strategic behavior types are linked to organizational excellence and performance, as strategic behavior is the most valuable in owning the possibilities of excellence in the organization. This is the result of its role at the internal level, in which the optimal consistency between the structure of an organization and its competitive strategies is achieved through the role of leadership in an organization, which is one of the poles of organizational excellence. This is consistent with what was indicated by the study (Olson, 2005), which showed that the strategic behavior of the leaders of organizations is carried out according to the situational point of view and in a manner and way that encourages achieving the level of excellence for the organization by achieving its long-term goals in light of various challenges and emergency situations, meaning that leaders may act according to what the current situations dictate to them or according to the future situations and conditions of the organization, as the level of success in this depends on the extent of their willingness to face those circumstances and situations resulting from environmental changes. Regardless of the nature of the leaders' approach to looking at the environment, as a result, their behaviors take into account the change of events and situations, so we find them mostly observers of those environmental variables.

Larssona and Vinberg (2010) emphasized the existence of a critical role for leadership behavior in creating successful organizations, and a successful leader uses a highly oriented approach to relationships as a rule.

Hassan (2020) carried out a study to determine how proactive and analytical strategic direction on the dimensions of tax organizational excellence represented in leadership, strategic planning, information and management of analysis and knowledge, focus on taxpayers, operations, work forces, and business results) and found an effect of the orientation of analytical strategies on the dimensions of tax regulatory excellence.

The study of Al-Fatlawi et al. (2021,48), which focused on strategic behavior and its role in achieving organizational excellence in the Ur State Company in Thi-Qar Governorate, indicated that the company shows an interest in strategic behavior, but more attention should be paid to the strategic behavior of Ur company managers as an influential tool to achieve organizational excellence.

On the other hand, AL-Abrrow et al. (2018) investigated the effect of organizational integrity and leadership conduct on organizational excellence: The mediating role of work engagement in the banking industry in Southern and Central Iraq. In their research, they concluded that leaders' techniques or behaviors and how well they fit with their co-workers have an impact on how efficient and productive the co-workers are. As a result, the strategies and methods utilized by leaders will have an effective impact on organizational processes and excellence.

The study by Al-Khalaf and Hamed (2022), tested a study to show the role of strategic behavior in organizational excellence among senior leadership. The research conducted at the University of Karbala found that to adopt any kind of strategic behavior within the organization if it achieves high performance for it, there is no problem in the application, but the researcher found that adopting the behavior of the prospector was the most approved by the university, but with simple procedures and mechanisms. The study recommended conducting training courses to qualify leaders in the university administration to be able to achieve administrative excellence, which is reflected in human, structural, and strategic excellence. In light of the discussion above, the researcher set the following hypotheses:

H1: Strategic behavior will positively relate to organizational excellence.

and the following hypotheses arise from it:

H1a: prospector behavior positively relates to organizational excellence.

H1b: defensive behavior significantly relates to organizational excellence.

H1c: analyst’s behavior significantly relates to organizational excellence.

H1d: respondent behavior significantly relates to organizational excellence.

H2: Strategic behavior has a positive influence on organizational excellence.

and the following hypotheses stem from it:

H2a: Prospective behavior has a positive influence on organizational excellence.

H2b: Defensive behavior has a positive influence on organizational excellence.

H2c: Analyst behavior has a positive influence on organizational excellence.

H2d: Reactors behavior has a positive influence on organizational excellence.

3. Research Method

3.1 Proposed Conceptual Framework

In light of the arguments and the above literature, and in line with the objectives of the current study and its questions, a model of the study was formulated in which a set of variables that make up the current study were highlighted so that it gives an initial perception of a set of correlation and influence relationships between the constructs of the study. This study aims to achieve its main objective of verifying the role of strategic behavior in achieving organizational excellence in private universities, in the Kurdistan Region. In order to experimentally test the model, the researcher used SmartPLS (V. 4.0.7) PLS-SEM modelling with at least a partial structural equation squared method (Ringle et al. 2015). Figure 1 illustrates the proposed model.

3.2 Data collection and sample selection

The data used for fulfilling the purposes of the study, were gathered through questionnaires in both languages (English and Arabic), which are two official languages used in universities, in order to make it clearer for the participants. The respondents were the heads of the scientific departments of the private universities in the KRG. Two months were given to participants to complete the survey. The researchers used descriptive analytical approach and used the questionnaire as a tool for data gathering. A total of 181 usable questionnaires were collected out of 210. After the data was collected, coded and analysed using two software tools: SPSS version (26), and SmartPLS version (4.0.7).

3.3 Data Measurement

The level of measurement should be recognized in order to choose the most appropriate analytical method. There is an appropriate method that can be used for each sort of measurement. The ordinal scale was applied in the current study. The numbers (1,2,3,4,5) given for the assignment do not represent absolute quantities or an equal distance between measurements. They are only numbered names, according to the Likert scale.

As a result, Robson and Newman (2014,142) emphasized that it is preferable for researchers to use a five-point Likert scale to obtain better results, the current study used the five-point Likert scale. Findings from previous research, such as that of Al-Suwaidi and Mahmoud (2011), Naybenet, Kogchavivong, Quitayakorn, and Na Sakulnakorn (2014), also agree with this scale.

4. Data Analysis and Results

(Partial Least Squares) (PLS) and SEM-VB (based on structural equations modelling-variance) were used to evaluate the search model by using the SmartPLS software version (4) (Ringle, Wende, and Becker, 2015,359). These are two-stage analytical methods that are used following a descriptive assessment approach and consist of (1) measurement model analysis (reliability and validity) and (2) structural model analysis (study of intelligible relationships). This two-stage analytical method, which combines a structural assessment with a measurement model, is superior to a one-phase approach (Hair et al., 2014, 215). The structural model depicts the correlation between the parameters in this model, while the scaling model illustrates the measurement of each parameter. Structural equation modelling (SEM) is one of the most prominent and desired statistical approaches used by researchers to analyze collected data in order to get important and recognizable findings. SEM is regarded as the most powerful statistical approach of the second generation, and it is the primary criterion for discovering correlations in social science research. This approach was created using two algorithms: covariance-based SEM (CB-SEM) and partial least squares SEM (PLS-SEM) (Hair et al., 2017).

4.1 Demographic information of Respondent Profile

The respondents' demographic information was provided in this section. Gender, age, education, job experience, years in current employment, academic title, and participation in leadership training courses. Table 2 below summarizes the respondents' demographic information.

A detailed descriptive analysis of the demographic information of the respondents is laid out in Table 2. The profiling showed that there were (N = 117, 64.6%) male and 35.4 %) female respondents that participated in the survey. According to the statistics, male participants in this study appeared more frequently than female participants. In the analysis of respondents’ age, it was revealed that 6.1 %, N = 11) belong to the age group between 31 and 40 years old, (35.79%, N = 65) from the age group between 41 and 50 years, and the major percentage was to the age group 51-60 years old, with 39.8 percent, N = 72, and less than 15.3 percent, N = 33).

Moreover, the result showed that 64.6% (N = 117) of the respondents hold doctorate certification and 35.4% (N = 64) of the respondents hold master’s certification. Regarding the scientific title, it was demonstrated that 20.4 % (N = 37) of the respondents were assistant lecturers while 39.8% (N = 72) were lecturers. Among the respondents, 33.1 % (N = 60) have an assistant professor academic title. while only 5.6% (N = 12) held the academic title of professor. In terms of experience in current position groups,

The majority of participants have experience of little more than four years in their current position with (45.3%, N=82), followed by 5-8 years with (22.82%, N=50), while (26.5 %, N=48) have 9 years or above experience. Furthermore, and based on university services, the analysis showed that 19.9 %, N = 36, have less than 5 years of university experience, while those who have 6–10 years of university experience are (37.6 %, N = 68).

Profiling showed that 22.7% (N = 41) of respondents had 11–15 years of university service, and 19.9% (N = 36) had more than 16 years. The profiling analysis showed that respondents have diverse backgrounds and have a variety of university experiences that represent the targeted population. Regard participation in leadership courses, the analysis showed that 29.3% (N = 53) of respondents have participated in courses or training in leadership once, while 29.8 % (N = 54) have participated in 2-3 courses. In addition to that, 16.6% (N = 30) participated in over 4 courses. In contrast, 24.3% (N=44) of respondents have not participated in any courses during their career.

Table 2 Respondent Profile
Respondent characteristics						Frequency (n = 210)			Percentage (%)
Gender
	Male						117	64.6
	Female						64	35.4
Total							181	%100
Age
	31-40						11	6.1
	41–50 years						65	35.9
	51–60 years						72	39.8
	51 and above						33	18.2
Total							181	%100
Years of service
		Less than (5) years					36	19.9
		6-10 years					68	37.6
		11-15 years					41	22.7
		16 and above					36	19.9
Total							181	%100
Qualification
					Master		64	35.4
					Doctorate		117	64.6
Total							181	%100
Scientific Title
				Assistant lecturer			37	20.4
				lecturer			72	39.8
				Assistant prof.			60	33.1
				Professor			12	5.6
Total							181	%100
Current position experience
			Less than 4 years				82	45.3
			5-8				51	28.2
			9 and over				48	26.5
Total							181	%100
Leadership courses participation
				1 participation			53	29.3
				2-3 participations			54	29.8
				4 and above			30	16.6
				Not participated			44	24.3
Total							181	%100

Table 4 Loadings, Composite Reliability and Average Variance Extracted
Construct (Item)	Code	Factor Loading	Alpha.C	rho_A	Composite reliability	(AVE)
Prospector Behavior	PB1	0.705	0.721	0.743	0.825	0.542
	PB2	0.856
	PB3	0.782
	PB4	0.814
Defender Behavior	DB1	0.765	0.728	0.721	0.789	0.528
	DB2	0.865
	DB3	0.783
	DB4	0.806
Analyzer Behavior	AB1	0.727	0.740	0.799	0.815	0.525
	AB2	0.741
	AB3	0.744
	AB4	0.878
Reactor Behavior	RB1	0.828	0.725	0.778	0.813	0.532
	RB2	0.767
	RB3	0.809
	RB4	0.743
Excellence in Leadership	EL1	0.743	0.882	0.886	0.914	0.681
	EL2	0.706
	EL3	0.797
	EL4	0.746
	EL5	0.750
Excellence in Strategic	ES1	0.743	0.826	0.830	0.885	0.658
	ES2	0.749
	ES3	0.743
	ES4	0.754
	ES5	0.724
Excellence in Human Resources	EHR1	0.735	0.850	0.862	0.898	0.688
	EHR2	0.781
	EHR3	0.754
	EHR4	0.770
	EHR5	0.760
Excellence in Structure	EST1	0.740	0.731	0.700	0.712	0.569
	EST2	0.720
	EST3	0.729
	EST4	0.759

Through the above result (see table 9), it can be noted that the R square of the dependent variable is almost (64%), which is considered the strong value and, respectively, the R square.

From the results shown in Table 9, it can be deduced that some variables have some exploratory power with regard to the endogenous constructs. Specifically, defender behavior (IV) have has a small exploratory power (f2) on organizational excellence, while analyser behavior and reactor behavior had no effect on organizational excellence. On the other hand, the effect size of supervisor behavior (SB) and consistency have a medium effect on organizational excellence. which it was the highest effectiveness in organizational excellence.

5. Discussion

In this study, there were two main hypotheses tested. H1: strategic behavior has a positive relationship to organizational excellence and H2: strategic behavior positively impacts on organizational excellence "One of the top significant practices of management is strategy, and it could help in achieving the goals of the organizations as an instrument and active key that is able to shift strategic planning into real and actual execution" (Valliappan R., Phung P. S., 2018,45). Strategic behavior was found to have a positive relationship with organizational excellence (= 0.777, T = 29.625, P = 0.000), describing its important in overall excellence and, consequently, organizational performance. Most studies revealed a positive relationship between (prospector behavior, defender behavior, and analyzer behavior) and excellence. For instance, private institutions should be admitted to the effect of strategic behavior across the institutions for excellence and organizational sustainability (Arshad et al., 2015).

Moving to the impact on organizational excellence, the results were positive at the 0.001 level of significance (= 0.561, t = 9.098, p 0.0001). This is consistent with the link to (AL-Fatlawey, 2021), who proposed that strategic behavior and its dimensions significantly relate to organizational excellence. In the sub-hypothesis, each of the strategic behavior patterns had a positive impact on organizational excellence, except for the respondent's behavior pattern, which had an insignificant effect on organizational excellence. (=0.0251, T.value =21.20, and P=0.084). This is in line with previously reported findings by Al-Ansari (2008) and Pittino and Visintin (2009,298). This result indicates the strategic behavior of leadership in order to achieve organizational excellence. Consistent with the previous literature, results have shown that prospector behavior is a drive for organizational excellence (Ingram et al., 2016).

Overall, the evidence presented by this study strongly suggests that the type of strategic behavior used makes a significant difference in the performance of an organization that drives excellence. The result shows that the type of strategy a university adopts matters. While the prospector strategy and the analyzer strategy are associated with superior organizational excellence, the defender strategy is associated with low performance, while the reactor strategy is associated with organizational failure. The present study found that some sample universities were adopting a reactor and waiting and watching strategy to do business and were already showing signs of distress and failure that characterize universities that are unable to develop the ability to run their businesses efficiently and effectively. as evidenced by lower total income and fewer clients.

Therefore, the strategic orientation chosen by the prospect probably requires a focus on developing university capabilities and competencies and is thus related to a long-term perspective. Consequently, it is worth emphasizing the prospector strategic type.

5.1 Implications, limitations and Future Directions

Several ideas emerged during the conduction of this study regarding issues of organizational excellence in the context of private institutions. This study, which investigated how strategic behavior affects organizational excellence, is one of several of its kind to date in the region's business environment.

Future studies should be conducted to investigate the relationship between variables through conducting more studies on the role of strategic behavior in correcting strategic decisions through information technology, recommended in previous studies (Al-Khalidi, 2020, 243). Using the findings of this study will be useful for managers, practitioners, and decision-makers. It can also improve organizational performance and the standard of educational programs.

The results enhance the awareness of private university leaders of the competencies and capabilities that could be utilized for the development and improvement process as well as to achieve business excellence.

In addition, apart from the advantages of the private sector, the results of the study can also be used by the public sector in the Kurdistan region of Iraq and the countries of the region for performance improvement and localization initiatives.

Ultimately, the results can be applied as a platform for setting policies and rules for private universities in the practices and application of models of excellence in order to enhance growth, development, excellence, and performance among private organizations. This research focused on the region's private sector institutions, particularly private universities, while also investigating additional public sectors and working with more organizations to promote the findings more widely.

The private university’s structure involves not only heads of departments but also deans, council members, heads of the administrative units and departments, and teaching staff. One of the limitations of the study is that it exclusively examined the impact of heads of departments. Therefore, future research should examine how employees (who do not hold any leadership positions) individually perceive excellence and corporate entrepreneurship. The results of this study will also be further supported by a combined study that examines how corporate entrepreneurship and excellence are affected by managers and non-managers.

In essence, it is highly recommended to use a more complex technique that takes into account people, management, organizational characteristics, and structure. This will serve as a guide for selecting people for leadership positions or any other relevant jobs with success potential for the division, centers, and lead unit (Cumberland et al., 2015). The discussion of the hierarchical level at which managers' strategic behavior is most beneficial will also be discussed.

5.2. Conclusion

The empirical evidence the study has provided clearly indicates how important a contribution it provides to literature and performance. Specifically, the institution and regulatory authorities benefit from the impact of strategic behavior on excellence. This study aimed to examine the strategic behaviors in organizational excellence within the private sector, specifically private universities in the region. Although private universities in the region are known to be less advanced and compatible with their regional counterparts in terms of performance and ranking (Webometrics ranks 2022), they strive to enhance the productivity of their outputs. The study's findings may be considered as one of the efforts being made in this direction.

Despite the study's limitations, the findings were positive and helped to highlight a new perspective. The model put forth in this study investigates how organizational strategic behavior affects organizational excellence. According to the results, the model significantly explains 64% of organizational excellence.

REFERENCES:

Ahmad Arshad, D., Razalli, M. R., Abu Bakar, L. J., Ahmad, H., & Mahmood, R. (2015). Exploring the incidence of strategic improvisation: Evidence from Malaysian government link corporations. Asian Social Science, 11(24), 105-112.

Antony, J.P. and Bhattacharyya, S. 2010 Measuring Organizational Performance and Organizational Excellence of SMEs—Part 2: An Empirical Study on SMEs in

India. Measuring Business Excellence,14,42-52.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/13683041011074209.

AL-Abrrow, H., Abdullah, H. and Atshan, N., 2018. Effect of organisational integrity and leadership behaviour on organisational excellence: Mediator role of work engagement. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 27(4), pp.972-985.

Aldalimy, M.J.H., Al-Sharifi, A.K.H. and Bannay, D.F., 2019. Strategic alignment role in achieving the organizational excellence through organizational dexterity. Journal of southwest Jiaotong university, 54(6).

Al-Swidi, A. K., and Mahmood, R. 2011. How does organizational culture shape the? relationship between entrepreneurial orientation and the organizational performance of banks? European Journal of Social Sciences, 20(1), 28-46

Altaha, L.D.S.M.M. and ALhilali, K.H., 2020. The extent contribution of Strategic Ambidexterity in an Organizational Excellence An Analytical Study at Northern Cement State Company. Tikrit Journal of Administration and Economics Sciences, 16(50 Part 1).

Al-Khalidi, A. 2020. The impact of strategic behavior and entrepreneurial orientation on the success of competitive strategies: The mediating role of organizational excellence. Doctoral thesis, University of Karbala, college of business and management.

AL-Fatlawey, M. H., Brias, A. K., & Atiyah, A. G. (2021). The role of Strategic Behavior in achievement the Organizational Excellence" Analytical research of the manager’s views of Ur State Company at Thi-Qar Governorate". Journal of Administration and Economics, 10(37).

Al-Khafaji, N., and Al-Ghalbi,Tahir. 2010. Theory of the organization. business entry, Amman: Dar Amman.

Khalaf, Z. A. A., and Hamed, S. A. 2022. Strategic Behavior and Role in Organizational Excellence, Senior Leadership Sample Field Research at University of Karbala. Zien Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, 7, 28-40.

Al-Harriry, M. 2012. Human Resources Department, Amman, Dar Al-Bidaa for Publishing and Distribution.

Anwar, J. and Hasnu, S., 2016, Business strategy and firm performance: a multiindustry analysis, Journal of Strategy and Management, Vol. 9 No. 3, pp. 361-382.

Arussy, L., 2008. Excellence Every Day: Make the Daily Choice--Inspire Your Employees and Amaze Your Customers. Information Today, Inc.

Bland, M. 2016. Missing data in randomised controlled trials evaluating palliative interventions: a systematic review and metaanalysis. The Lancet, 387, S53. http://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(16)00440-2.

Bagozzi, R. P., and Yi, Y. 1988. On the evaluation of structural equation models. Journal of the academy of marketing science, 16(1), 74-94.

Behling, G., & Lenzi, F. C. 2019. Entrepreneurial Competencies and Strategic Behavior: a Study of Micro Entrepreneurs in an Emerging Country. Brazilian Business Review, 16(3), 255–272. https://doi.org/10.15728/bbr.2019.16.3.4

Brown, T., Davidsson, P. and Wiklund, J. 2001. An Operationalization of Stevenson’s Conceptualization of Entrepreneurship as Opportunity-Based Firm Behavior. Strategic Management Journal, 22, 953-968.
https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.190.

Bustaman U S A and Pech R. 2016. 2nd International Conference on Social Sciences
Titanic Business Europe.

Cumberland, D. m., Meek, W. r., and Germain, R. 2015. Entrepreneurial Self- Efficacy and Firm Performance In Challenging Environments: Evidence From The Franchise Context. Journal of Developmental, 20(1), 19. http://doi.org/10.1142/S1084946715500041.

Cunningham, G.B., 2002. Examining the relationship among Miles and Snow's strategic types and measures of organizational effectiveness in NCAA Division I athletic departments. International review for the sociology of sport, 37(2), pp.159-175.

Chin, W. W. 1998. The partial least squares approach to structural equation modelling. Modern methods for business research, 295(2), 295-336.

Costa, V., & Silva, J. 2002. Do Strategic Typologies “Really” Exist? In: National Meeting Of

The National Association of Post Graduate Programs in Administration, 26, Salvador:

Electronic annals http://www.anpad.org.br/diversos/trabalhos/

EnANPAD/enanpad_2002/ESO/2002_ESO378. pdf>.

Daharat, A.N.M., Sued, M.K. and Gheisari, A., 2022. The Impact of Integrated Management System on the Organizational Excellence and Organizational Innovation. Education Research International, 2022.

Enquist, B., Johnson, M. and Rönnbäck, Å. 2015, "The paradigm shift to Business Excellence 2.0", International Journal of Quality and Service Sciences,Vol.7 No.2/3, pp.321-333. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJQSS-03-2015-0032.

Estévez, Vanessa Y., Pérez, Ana María G., & Rodríguez, Juan Ramón O. 2018. "The Strategic Behaviour of SMEs", Adm. Sci.,8(61):1-21.

Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. 1981. Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: Algebra and statistics. Journal of marketing research, 382-388.

Felício, J.A., Rodrigues, R., Patino-Alonso, C. and Felício, T., 2022. Allostasis and organizational excellence. Journal of Business Research, 140, pp.107-114.

Gresov, C. & Drazin, R 2000, "Functional Equivalence in Organization Design",Journal of Management Review,22(2):403-428.

Hair, J.F., Ringle, C.M. and Sarstedt, M., 2011. PLS-SEM: Indeed, a silver bullet. Journal of Marketing theory and Practice, 19(2), pp.139-152.

Hair, J. F. J., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C., and Sarstedt, M. 2014. A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM), 46 Long Range Planning 328 London: Thousand Oaks: SAGE. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2013.01.002

Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., and Sarstedt, M. 2017. A Primer on Partial

Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM), 2nd Ed., Sage: Thousand Oaks.

Hair, J.F., Risher, J.J., Sarstedt, M. and Ringle, C.M., 2019. When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM. European business review, 31(1), pp.2-24.

Hassan H., F. and. Lafta., B., S., 2020. The impact of Proactiveness and analysis strategic orientation tax organizational excellence Practical research in the General Authority for Taxes. Journal of Accounting and Financial Studies, 15(50).

Hastheetham, A., & Hadikusumo, B. H. 2011. Theoretical framework of strategic behaviors in Thai contractors: An empirical case study. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management.

Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., and Sinkovics, R. R. 2009. The use of partial least squares path modeling in international marketing. In New challenges to international marketing (pp. 277-319). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

Hung, R.Y.Y., 2006. Business process management as competitive advantage: a review and empirical study. Total quality management & business excellence, 17(1), pp.21-40.

Hussain, T., Edgeman, R., Eskildsen, J., Shoukry, A. M., & Gani, S. 2018. Sustainable enterprise excellence: Attribute-based assessme protocol. Sustainability, 10(11), 4097.

Ingram, T., Kraśnicka, T., Wronka-Pośpiech, M., Głód, G., and Głód, W. 2016 Relationships between miles and snow strategic types and organizational performance in polish production companies. Journal of Management and Business Administration. Central Europe, (1), 17-45.

Gavetti, G., 2012. Perspective: Toward a behavioral theory of strategy. Organization Science Journal, 23(1), 267-285.

Götz, O., Liehr-Gobbers, K., and Krafft, M. 2010. Evaluation of structural equation models using the partial least squares (PLS) approach. In Handbook of partial least squares (pp. 691-711). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.

Kazemi, A., Javanmard, H., and Mohammadi, R. 2017. Determining the Relationship between the Effective Factors of Strategic Behavior: A Case Study for Social Insurance Company of Tehran. East Asian Journal of Business Management,7(1), 5-12. doi: 10.13106/eajbm.2017.vol7.no1.5.

Mayer, C., Morrison, E., Piskorski, T. and Gupta, A., 2014. Mortgage modification and strategic behavior: Evidence from a legal settlement with countrywide. American Economic Review, 104(9), pp.2830-57.

Miles, R.E., Snow, C.C., 1978, Organizational strategy, structure and process, New York, McGraw-Hill.

Mohammed, T. J., & Ibrahim, R. A. 2017. The Role of Strategic Behavior Patterns in Enhancing the Capacities and Capabilities of Educational Leadership, Analytical Study of the Opinions of a Sample of Academic Leaders in Iraqi Universities. Tikrit Journal of Administration and Economics Sciences, 13(38).

Mohammed R.M., Al-Zeidi N.J.A. 2022. Knowledge Sharing and Its Role in Organizational Excellence, International Journal of Research in Social Sciences & Humanities, April-June 2022 Vol. 12, Issue 2; 105-118 DOI: http://doi.org/10.37648/ijrssh.v12i02.006

Martins, E.S., Rosseto, C.R., Lima, N.C. and Penedo, A.S.T., 2014. Strategic behavior and ambidexterity: a study applied along the brazilian wineries. Revista Brasileira de Gestão de Negócios, 16, pp.392-415.

- Medne, A., Lapina, I., & Zeps, A. 2020 , "Sustainability of a University’s Quality System: Adaptation of the EFQM excellence model". International Journal of Quality and Service Sciences, 12 (1), 29-43

Nenadál, J., Vykydal, D. and Waloszek, D., 2018. Organizational excellence: approaches, models and their use at Czech organizations. Quality innovation prosperity, 22(2), pp.47-64.

Naipinit, T., Kojchavivong, S., Kowittayakorn, V., and Sakolnakorn, T. P. N. 2014. McKinsey 7S model for supply chain management of local SMEs construction business in upper northeast region of Thailand. Asian Social Science, 10(8), 35.

Latan, H., Jabbour, C. J. C., de Sousa Jabbour, A. B. L., Wamba, S. F., & Shahbaz, M. (2018). Effects of environmental strategy, environmental uncertainty and top management's commitment on corporate environmental performance: The role of environmental management accounting. Journal of cleaner production, 180, 297-

Larsson, J. and Vinberg, S., 2010. Leadership behavior in successful organizations: Universal or situation-dependent? Quality control and applied statistics, 55(3), pp.217-218.

Laurent, M., Martin, S., Richard, S., & Vesterlund, L. 2007. Strategic behavior and learning in repeated voluntary contribution experiments. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, (67), 782–793. doi: 10.1016/j.jebo.2007.09.001

Olson, E.M., Slater, S.F. and Hult, G.T.M., 2005. The performance implications of fit among business strategy, marketing organization structure, and strategic behavior. Journal of marketing, 69(3), pp.49-65.

Parnell, J.A., 2013. Strategic management. Theory and Practice, Sage.4 edition, university of north of Carolina, pembroke.

Powell, C., Lovallo, D., & Fox, C. 2011. Behavioral strategy. Strategic Management Journal, 32(13), 1369-1386.

Pittino, D and Visintin, F. 2009, "Innovation and Strategic Types of Family SME. A Test and Extension of Miles and Snow’s Configurational Model", Journal Enterprising Culture, 6(4):257-295.

Pil, F.K. and Rothenberg, S., 2003. Environmental performance as a driver of superior quality. Production and operations management, 12(3), pp.404-415.

Quddu, H., Al-Sebawi, A.,and Abboudi, S., 2007. The Effect of Organizational Culture on Determining the Strategic Behavior of Senior Management: A Field Study in a Sample of Joint-Stock Industrial Companies. Journal of Futuristic Research, (18), 45-76.

Ringrose, D., 2013. Development of an organizational excellence framework. The TQM Journal Development, 25(4), 441–452. http://doi.org/10.1108/17542731311314917.

Roberts, P.W. and Dowling, G.R., 2000, August. reputation and sustained superior financial performance. In Academy of Management Proceedings (Vol. 2000, No. 1, pp. M1-M6). Briarcliff Manor, NY 10510: Academy of Management.

Ringle, C. M., Wende, S., and Becker, J.-M. 2015. SmartPLS 3. Bonningstedt: SmartPLS. Journal of Service Science and Management, 10(3), pp.32-49.

Robson, D., Sadler, P., & Newman, G. 2014. Carbon sequestered in UK forest products and wood-based panels in construction: helping to meet UK’s greenhouse gas emission reduction targets. International Wood Products Journal, 5(3), 139-145.

Smith, J., and Fingar, C. 2003. Business Process Management: The Third wave. Florida: Meghan-Kiffer Press.184

Selya, A. S., Rose, J. S., Dierker, L. C., Hedeker, D.,and Mermelstein, R. J. 2012. A practical guide to calculating Cohen’sf 2, a measure of local effect size, from PROC MIXED. Frontiers in psychology, 3, 111.

Shelton, C.; Darling, J and Walker, W., 2010. Foundations of Organizational Excellence: Leadership Values, Strategies, and Skills, LTA, Vol.1, No.2.

Silva, F., Brandt, E., & Costa, V. 2003. Truelo Of Strategic Typologies In The Arena Of Fast

Food Franchises in Brazil: Porter X Miles & Snow Vs. Mintzberg. In: National Meeting of

The National Postgraduate Programs Association in Administration, 27, São Paulo:

Electronic Proceedings ... São Paulo: ANPAD. http://www.anpad.org.

Valliappan R. and Chetty, Phung, S., 2018. "Conceptualizing the Application for Ethereum Blockchains: Front End Application Development". Eurasian Journal of Analytical Chemistry 13 no. 6 emEJAC181124.

Wulf, T., Stubner ,S., and Blarr,W. 2010. Ambidexterity and Concept of Fit in Strategic Management – Which Better Predicts Success? Annual Conference of the European Academy of Management, 19(22), 243-271.

Table 1: Miles and Snow typology
Prospectors	Prospectors continually seek business opportunities in new products or markets and strive to be the best. Their efforts to innovate frequently have a short-term negative impact on their profitability, but this is not a concern because the company and its leaders are depending on the future returns that their strategies provide.
Defenders	In order to preserve their supremacy through specialization, advocates restrict the scope of their operations to a predictable market or product line. They stick to what they are good at and outperform the competition at it.
Analyzers	Analysts look at market trends in the areas where they operate and only use proven strategies that have been successfully employed by other organizations. It therefore combines defensive and futuristic features in order to reduce risks and increase profits.
Reactors	Reactors only respond to their external environments by developing new products or markets when they perceive a threat from other businesses, all while attempting to retain their existing customers and economic feasibility. They present themselves as if they don't have a strategy or as if their strategies are inconsistent.
Source: Prepared based on Miles and Snow (1978).

Table 3 Descriptive Statistics for Latent Variables
Constructs	N	Mean	Std. Deviation
Strategic Behavior
Prospector Behavior	181	3.9050	0.55521
Defender Behavior	181	3.6630	0.68752
analyser Behavior	181	3.8934	0.62663
Reactor Behavior	181	3.8011	0.80905
Total	181	3.6260	0.43518
Organizational Excellence
Excellence in leadership	181	4.0497	0.79719
Excellence in Strategic	181	3.7602	0.78186
Human Excellence	181	4.0099	1.71299
Excellence in structure	181	3.7536	0.75517
Total	181	3.8934	0.80905

Table 6 Discriminant validity (Fornell and Larcker Criterion).
Constant	PB	DB	AB	RB	EL	E Str	EH	ES
Prospector B.	0.724
Defender B.	0.678	0.722
Analyzer B.	0.391	0.296	0.669
Reactor B.	0.379	0.547	0.186	0.686
Excellence L.	0.543	0.657	0.276	0.456	0.825
Excellence Stra.	0.475	0.550	0.159	0.447	0.678	0.811
Excellence Hu.	0.635	0.679	0.268	0.574	0.665	0.671	0.830
Excellence S.	0.386	0.591	0.180	0.504	0.550	0.532	0.483	0.735

Table 7 Hypotheses testing (bootstrapping)H1
Latin variables	Original sample	Sample Mean	Standard D.	T. Statistics	P. Value	Decision	R²
Strategic Behavior -> OE	0.775	0.785	0.026	29.696	0.000	Supported	0.64
a. Prospector Behavior -> OE	0.518	0.516	0.065	7.974	0.000	Supported
b. Defender Behavior -> OE	-0.022	-0.009	0.057	0.386	0.699	Not Supported
c. Analyzer Behavior -> OE	0.365	0.367	0.055	6.614	0.000	Supported
d. Reactor Behavior -> OE	0.1140	0.138	0.042	3.307	0.001	Supported

Table 8: H2 Hypothesis, Structural Model Assessment
Hypothesis	Path coefficient	T. value	P. value	Results
H2	0.561	9.098	0.000	Supported
H2a	0.622	10.669	0.001	Supported
H2b	0.180	2.455	0.015	Supported
H2c	0.596	9.283	0.000	Supported
H2d	1.000	21.20	0.084	Not Supported

Table 2 Respondent Profile

Table 3 Descriptive Statistics for Latent Variables

Table 4 Loadings, Composite Reliability and Average Variance Extracted

Table 7 Hypotheses testing (bootstrapping)H1

Table 8: H2 Hypothesis, Structural Model Assessment

Table 9: Effect Sizes of the Latent Variables on Cohen’s (1988) Recommendation