CEO Dimensions and Their Mediating Role on Innovation Capabilities: An Empirical Study of Colombian MSMEs

Tobias Alfonso Parodi-Camano; Jhon Víctor Vidal Durango; Iván Portnoy

doi:10.12688/f1000research.171456.2

Home Browse CEO Dimensions and Their Mediating Role on Innovation Capabilities:...

ALL Metrics

Views

Downloads

Get PDF

Get XML

Export

▬

✚

Research Article

Revised

CEO Dimensions and Their Mediating Role on Innovation Capabilities: An Empirical Study of Colombian MSMEs

[version 2; peer review: 2 approved with reservations]

Previously Titled: "CEO Dimensions and Their impact Mediating Role on Innovation Capabilities: An Empirical Study of Colombian MSMEs"

Tobias Alfonso Parodi-Camano ^1,2, Jhon Víctor Vidal Durango^3,4, Iván Portnoy³

PUBLISHED 28 Jan 2026

Author details Author details

¹ Industrial Engineering Department, Universidad de Cordoba, Montería, Cordoba, Colombia
² National Directorate of Research, Corporacion Unificada Nacional de Educacion Superior, Bogotá, Bogota, Colombia
³ Innovation and Productivity Department, Universidad de la Costa, Barranquilla, Atlantico, Colombia
⁴ Faculty of Basic Sciences, Universidad de Cordoba, Montería, Cordoba, Colombia

Tobias Alfonso Parodi-Camano
Roles: Conceptualization, Formal Analysis, Funding Acquisition, Investigation, Project Administration, Writing – Original Draft Preparation, Writing – Review & Editing

Jhon Víctor Vidal Durango
Roles: Conceptualization, Funding Acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Resources, Supervision

Iván Portnoy
Roles: Data Curation, Methodology, Software, Supervision, Validation, Visualization, Writing – Original Draft Preparation, Writing – Review & Editing

OPEN PEER REVIEW

REVIEWER STATUS

Abstract

Background

Innovation in micro, small, and medium-sized enterprises (MSMEs) often stems from CEO traits and leadership. While prior research highlights the role of executive traits in innovation, less is known about the mechanisms through which these traits translate into firm-level innovation capabilities in emerging-economy MSMEs.

Methods

Grounded in Upper Echelons Theory, the HEXACO personality framework, and transformational leadership theory, this study tests a sequential mediation model using data from 106 CEOs of Colombian MSMEs. Structural equation modeling (SEM) was employed to examine whether transformational leadership and innovative behavior mediate the relationship between CEO personality traits (Openness to Experience and Conscientiousness) and organizational innovation capabilities.

Results

The model showed good fit (CFI = 0.92, TLI = 0.90, RMSEA = 0.09, SRMR = 0.07). Openness and Conscientiousness significantly predicted transformational leadership, which in turn promoted innovative behavior. Innovative behavior subsequently enhanced firms’ innovation capabilities, confirming (through bootstrapped indirect effects) mediation from CEO traits to innovation capabilities through transformational leadership and innovative behavior.

Conclusions

The findings indicate that CEO personality and leadership are key to indirectly fostering innovation in resource-constrained MSMEs. The findings extend upper-echelons theory and suggest leadership development is key to improving innovation performance in emerging-economy MSMEs.

Keywords

CEO personality, HEXACO model, transformational leadership, innovative behavior, innovation capabilities, MSMEs

Corresponding author: Tobias Alfonso Parodi-Camano

Competing interests: No competing interests were disclosed.

Grant information: The author(s) declared that no grants were involved in supporting this work.

Copyright: © 2026 Parodi-Camano TA et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

How to cite: Parodi-Camano TA, Vidal Durango JV and Portnoy I. CEO Dimensions and Their Mediating Role on Innovation Capabilities: An Empirical Study of Colombian MSMEs [version 2; peer review: 2 approved with reservations]. F1000Research 2026, 14:1313 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.171456.2) First published: 26 Nov 2025, 14:1313 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.171456.1) Latest published: 28 Jan 2026, 14:1313 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.171456.2)

Revised Amendments from Version 1

The manuscript has undergone substantial revisions aimed at improving its theoretical clarity, methodological rigor, and overall coherence. The Introduction was significantly revised to strengthen the storyline, clearly articulate the research gap, and better contextualize the study within the challenges faced by Colombian MSMEs. Recent literature was incorporated to support the hypotheses while retaining seminal works essential to the theoretical framework. The mediating role of transformational leadership was emphasized throughout the paper, including a revised title and abstract that explicitly highlight mediation as a core contribution.
The Methods section was expanded to provide greater transparency, including official statistics on Colombian MSMEs, detailed inclusion and screening criteria for participating CEOs, and a clearer justification for the use of covariance-based structural equation modeling (CB-SEM) for theory testing and mediation analysis. Minor stylistic revisions were made in the Results section to improve clarity and consistency.
The Discussion and Conclusions were carefully rewritten to adopt a more critical perspective, clearly distinguishing theoretical contributions, practical and policy implications, study limitations, and directions for future research. Additionally, the overall organization of the manuscript was refined, including adjustments to ethical disclosures and stronger links between the literature review and research objectives. Collectively, these revisions enhance the manuscript’s rigor, readability, and contribution to leadership and innovation research in emerging economies.

See the authors' detailed response to the review by Diogo Ferraz
See the authors' detailed response to the review by Hatinah Abu Bakar

1. Introduction

Innovation is not a spontaneous process but rather the result of deliberate decisions made by leaders who shape their organizations. Behind every strategic choice that drives a company forward, there is a leader—often the CEO—whose vision, personality, and leadership style determine how opportunities are recognized and resources are mobilized. This influence becomes even more crucial in micro, small, and medium-sized enterprises (MSMEs), where structural limitations require agility, creativity, and a strong sense of direction. In such environments, the CEO plays a role not just as a decision-maker, but as a catalyst for organizational learning, experimentation, and transformation.

The Upper Echelons Theory (Hambrick & Mason, 1984) offers a compelling approach to understanding this phenomenon, suggesting that organizational outcomes reflect the values and cognitive bases of top executives. Over the past decade, scholars have increasingly explored how CEO traits influence firm-level innovation. Attributes such as openness to experience, conscientiousness, and emotional stability have been associated with proactive innovation behaviors (Zettler, Thielmann, Hilbig, & Moshagen, 2020), while narcissism has revealed a dual nature—driving ambition and risk-taking, but at times compromising long-term value (Parodi-Camano, Vidal-Durango, & Portnoy, 2025; Zhu, Jia, Zhang, & Wang, 2025). Beyond individual traits, leadership style also matters. Transformational leaders who inspire, challenge, and support their teams often foster cultures where innovation thrives (Jun & Lee, 2023).

However, much of the existing literature focuses on large corporations in developed economies, overlooking the complex realities of MSMEs in emerging markets. Additionally, few studies have integrated multidimensional personality models—such as the HEXACO framework—with leadership theory to explore their combined effects on innovation. HEXACO traits such as openness to experience and conscientiousness have been shown to influence both leadership behaviors and organizational outcomes, yet their role in innovation within MSMEs remains underexplored (O’Reilly, Cao, & Sull, 2025). Furthermore, CEO leadership styles—particularly transformational leadership—have been identified as key factors in driving organizational change and innovation, yet the mechanisms through which these traits interact with innovative behavior are still unclear (Pan, Verbeke, & Yuan, 2021). Even fewer studies have addressed these issues using comprehensive, validated instruments capable of capturing both dispositional and behavioral predictors of innovation capabilities. This study addresses these gaps by examining the combined effects of CEO traits, leadership style, and innovative behavior on innovation capabilities in MSMEs in Colombia.

This research addresses these gaps by focusing on MSMEs in Colombia, a country whose innovation potential remains largely untapped due to persistent structural barriers. Limited investment in research and development (R&D), weak linkages between academia and industry, and technological dependency continue to constrain innovation performance (Restrepo-Morales, Loaiza, & Vanegas, 2019; Tegethoff, Santa, Bucheli, Cabrera, & Scavarda, 2025). Within this landscape, the role of the CEO is amplified. Their ability to lead, adapt, and mobilize resources becomes critical to overcoming external limitations. MSMEs—representing over 90% of the country’s business sector—are both vulnerable to these constraints and vital to economic development (CEPAL, 2022).

Despite their economic relevance, Colombian MSMEs face persistent constraints that hinder their innovation performance. These include limited access to funding for innovation activities, low investment in R&D, weak linkages between firms, universities, and government agencies, and high levels of market uncertainty and informality. Unlike large firms, MSMEs typically lack formalized innovation processes and dedicated R&D units, making innovation outcomes highly dependent on the strategic orientation, leadership style, and behavioral characteristics of the CEO. In emerging economies such as Colombia, where institutional support for innovation remains uneven, the CEO often becomes the primary driver of opportunity recognition, resource mobilization, and innovation-related decision-making (Escobar-Castillo et al., 2023; Ocasal, Lugo, Melo, & Miranda, 2022; Restrepo-Morales, Valencia-Cárdenas, & López-Cadavid, 2024).

The reviewed literature suggests that CEO personality traits, leadership styles, and innovation-related behaviors play important roles in shaping organizational innovation outcomes. Nevertheless, much of the existing research examines these elements in isolation or focuses on large firms in developed economies, offering limited insight into how these factors interact within MSMEs in emerging markets. There is a lack of integrative models that explain how CEO personality traits are translated into firm-level innovation capabilities through leadership and behavioral mechanisms. Addressing this gap, the present study aims to examine the sequential relationships among CEO personality traits, transformational leadership, innovative behavior, and innovation capabilities in Colombian MSMEs.

Drawing on three validated instruments—the HEXACO Personality Inventory (Ashton & Lee, 2008a, 2008b; Lee & Ashton, 2008), a six-dimensional model measuring traits such as Honesty-Humility, Emotionality, and Openness to Experience; the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (Bass & Avolio, 1996; Batista-Foguet, Esteve, & van Witteloostuijn, 2021), which evaluates transformational, transactional, and laissez-faire leadership styles; and an Innovation Behavior Scale (Salessi & Etchevers, 2020), which assesses the generation, promotion, and realization of innovative ideas—this study contributes empirical evidence to a growing but still fragmented field. In doing so, it offers theoretical and practical insights for those interested in leadership, innovation, and the development of resilient innovation ecosystems in emerging economies.

2. Methods

2.1 Study design

This study employed a cross-sectional, correlational research design aimed at identifying relationships between CEO dimensions—specifically personality traits, leadership style, and innovation behavior—and the innovation capabilities of MSMEs. The model is grounded in the Upper Echelons Theory and integrates constructs from the HEXACO personality framework, transformational leadership theory, and behavioral innovation literature. Data were collected through validated psychometric instruments and analyzed using structural equation modeling (SEM) (Hair Jr et al., 2021).

This design allows for an understanding of CEO attributes over time without establishing causality and emphasizes the cross-sectional nature of the data collection, which was conducted at a single point in time. As noted by (Darouichi, Kunisch, Menz, & Cannella Jr, 2021), CEO tenure is a critical factor that influences strategic decision-making and performance, affecting both organizational behavior and long-term innovation capabilities. While CEO tenure has often been viewed as a determinant of leadership effectiveness, it remains an underexplored construct in the MSMEs context, especially in emerging markets like Colombia. This research fills that gap by examining how CEO tenure interacts with personality traits and leadership style, ultimately affecting innovation outcomes in firms under resource constraints.

2.2 Participants and sampling

The target population consisted of CEOs or top executives of MSMEs located in Colombia. According to the BBVA Bank, as of 2024, there were approximately 1.7 million of MSMEs in Colombia (BBVA Research, 2024), which underscores both the scale of the target population and the practical challenges of accessing top executives through probabilistic sampling methods. This is theoretically appropriate for testing the proposed relationships in a theory-driven SEM framework. Thus, a non-probability, purposive sampling method was employed, considering accessibility and the inclusion criteria of being the top decision-maker within the firm. Given the limited access to high-level executives in MSMEs, a convenience sampling approach was deemed acceptable and practical for this study. A total of 106 valid responses were obtained. The sample covered firms from diverse economic sectors, including services, manufacturing, agribusiness, and technology.

Inclusion criteria for the CEOS included:

• Firms were required to be formally registered as legal business entities in the national official business registry, which in Colombia corresponds to registration with the Chamber of Commerce. This criterion ensured that all participating enterprises operated within the formal economy and met the legal definition of MSMEs under Colombian regulations.
• CEOs were required to have occupied their executive position for a minimum of six months at the time of survey completion.
• Firms were required to demonstrate prior participation in innovation-fostering initiatives, preferably those supported or funded by public or governmental programs.

2.3 Instruments

Personality traits:

CEO personality was assessed using the HEXACO-60 inventory (Ashton & Lee, 2009), a validated Spanish-language adaptation that measures six dimensions: Honesty-Humility, Emotionality, Extraversion, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, and Openness to Experience. The inventory consists of 10 items per dimension, totaling 60 items with a 5-level Likert scale.

Leadership style:

The Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ-5X Short), adapted for the Colombian context, was used to evaluate transformational leadership. This instrument includes 10 items (also with a 5-point Likert scale) assessing the following dimensions: transformational leadership, transactional leadership, and passive leadership (Bass & Riggio, 2006). The internal consistency for the MLQ subscales has consistently shown Cronbach’s alpha values greater than 0.80.

Innovative behavior:

CEO innovation behavior was measured using a custom scale adapted from the work of Janssen (Janssen, 2000) and validated by Bedoya et al. (Antonio Bedoya, Pérez, Zapata-Molina, Baier-Fuentes, & Yenny Hernández, 2024; Bedoya, Pérez-Sanchéz, Zapata, Baier-Fuentes, & Hernandez-Sanchez, 2024), which captures the following dimensions: questioning, exploration-experimentation, achievement motivation, need for conformity, observation, idea networks, and tolerance for ambiguity. The scale includes 10 items, with a 5-point Likert scale used to assess CEO responses. Items assess both the frequency and quality of innovative behaviors demonstrated by CEOs.

Innovation capabilities:

Organizational innovation capabilities were assessed using a structured questionnaire, proposed by Calik et al. (Calik, Calisir, & Cetinguc, 2017), that incorporated five core dimensions: creation of new products and services, enhancement of internal processes, marketing innovation, knowledge management, and investment in research and development. This measurement approach draws on the dynamic capabilities framework developed by Teece (Teece, 2007) and has been adopted in prior research to evaluate firms’ capacity to adapt and generate value in dynamic environments (Edeh et al., 2022).

All instruments demonstrated satisfactory psychometric properties, including internal reliability and construct validity, based on prior applications and pilot testing conducted during this study.

2.4 Data collection

Data were gathered through a self-administered online questionnaire using Google Forms. Participation was voluntary and anonymous. Informed consent was obtained from all participants before they began the questionnaire, ensuring they understood the study’s purpose and their rights as participants. Prior to full deployment, the instrument was piloted with a subsample of 106 CEOs to assess clarity and response time. Minor adjustments were made based on participant feedback. Data collection took place between May and July 2025.

2.5 Statistical analysis

Descriptive statistics were calculated to summarize sample characteristics and variable distributions. Then, the Pearson correlation coefficients for all pairs of dimensions across the constructs were calculated. The statistical significance of these correlations was then evaluated using Fisher’s Z test at the 95% confidence level (Obilor & Amadi, 2018).

Reliability analyses to assess the data’s factorability were conducted on all scales using the Bartlett’s test of sphericity (Bartlett, 1951), the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) test (Dziuban & Shirkey, 1974; Kaiser, 1974), and the Cronbach’s alpha values (Tavakol & Dennick, 2011).

Structural equation modeling was conducted using a covariance-based SEM (CB-SEM) approach implemented with the lavaan package in R (Rosseel, 2012). CB-SEM was selected because the study is theory-driven and aims to test hypothesized relationships and mediation mechanisms derived from the Upper Echelons Theory, the HEXACO framework, and transformational leadership theory, rather than maximizing predictive accuracy. This approach is appropriate for assessing overall model fit, estimating indirect effects, and evaluating the consistency of empirical data with a theoretically specified model (Hair Jr et al., 2021).

The SEM model used maximum likelihood estimation to examine the hypothesized relationships between CEO dimensions and innovation capabilities. Model fit was assessed through standard indices: the comparative fit index (CFI), Tucker Lewis index (TLI), root-mean-squared error of approximation (RMSEA), and standardized root mean square residual (SRMR) (Rosseel, 2012).

All analyses were conducted using R (version 4.1.2) for statistical tests and structural equation modeling. Descriptive statistics, correlation analysis, and confirmatory path analysis were performed to test the hypothesized relationships among CEO traits, leadership style, innovative behavior, and innovation capabilities. The lavaan package in R (Rosseel, 2012) was used to perform SEM, while other statistical tests (e.g., Pearson correlation) were conducted using base R functions. The source code and the datasets are freely available at https://github.com/iportnoy1/CEO-Dimensions-and-Their-Impact-on-Innovation-Capabilities-An-Empirical-Study-of-Colombian-MSMEs - and https://zenodo.org/records/ 17609131 under an MIT and a CC BY 4.0 License, respectively.

2.6 Theoretical model and hypotheses

This study proposes a theoretical model that explores how CEO personality traits, leadership style, and innovative behavior contribute to the development of innovation capabilities in MSMEs. The model integrates four conceptual domains: (1) the HEXACO personality framework, (2) transformational leadership theory, (3) the behavioral dimensions of innovative work behavior, and (4) the innovation capabilities dimensions.

Based on the reviewed literature, the following hypotheses are formulated:

• H1: CEO personality traits related to Openness to Experience and Conscientiousness (as defined by the HEXACO model) are positively associated with transformational leadership style (Zettler et al., 2020).
• H2: Transformational leadership is positively associated with innovative behavior among CEOs (Kim & Yoon, 2025).
• H3: Innovative behavior is positively associated with the firm’s innovation capabilities (Hock-Doepgen, Montasser, Klein, Clauss, & Maalaoui, 2025; Janssen, 2000).
• H4: Transformational leadership mediates the relationship between CEO personality traits and innovative behavior (Yu & Xiang, 2024).
• H5: CEO personality traits have an indirect effect on innovation capabilities through the sequential mediation of transformational leadership and innovative behavior (Kim & Yoon, 2025).

The relationships hypothesized in this study are visually represented in Figure 1, which illustrates the proposed model linking CEO personality traits, transformational leadership, and innovative behavior with innovation capabilities in MSMEs.

Figure 1. Theoretical model of the influence of CEO dimensions on innovation capabilities.

This research tested the hypotheses using SEM with the lavaan package in R (Rosseel, 2012). The model was theory-driven, reflecting hypothesized links between CEO personality traits (HEXACO dimensions), transformational leadership, innovative behavior, and innovation capabilities. Specifically, Openness to Experience and Conscientiousness were modeled as exogenous predictors of transformational leadership, which in turn was expected to influence innovative behavior and, subsequently, innovation capabilities.

To ensure measurement validity, we modeled Innovative Behavior (seven subscales) and Innovation Capabilities (six subscales) as latent constructs, while Transformational Leadership was included as a manifest composite variable derived from its corresponding items. This approach balances parsimony and theoretical clarity while maintaining adequate reliability.

3. Results

3.1 Descriptive statistics

An exploratory analysis was conducted using responses from 106 CEOs representing MSMEs in various Colombian regions. Table 1 presents the means, standard deviations, and range (minimum and maximum values) of the key constructs measured: CEO personality traits (HEXACO model), transformational leadership, innovative behavior, and perceived innovation capabilities.

Table 1. Descriptive statistics of main constructs (n = 106).

Construct	Mean	St. Dev.	Min	Max
HEXACO Traits	3.04	0.36	2.19	4.39
Transformational Leadership	3.95	0.34	3.02	4.69
Innovative Behavior	4.04	0.49	2.79	5.00
Innovation Capabilities	3.88	0.41	2.95	4.73

The results show moderate to high mean scores across all dimensions. HEXACO traits averaged 3.04 (SD = 0.36), suggesting a generally high self-assessment of key personality attributes. Transformational leadership reported a mean of 3.95 (SD = 0.34), while innovative behavior exhibited slightly higher values (M = 4.04, SD = 0.49), indicating active involvement in innovation-related practices. Innovation capabilities also scored relatively high (M = 3.88, SD = 0.41), reflecting a positive perception among CEOs regarding their firms’ ability to innovate. Table 2 shows the factorability assessment metrics.

Table 2. Factorability analysis outcomes.

Questionnaire	Dimension	Cronbach’s Alpha	Mean	SD	KMO	Bartlett’s p-value
HEXACO	Honesty-Humility	0.62	3.64	0.5	0.6	2.05E-99
	Emotionality	0.62	3.24	0.32
	Extraversion	0.61	3.5	0.57
	Agreeableness	0.55	3.32	0.47
	Conscientiousness	0.79	3.83	0.62
	Openness to Experience	0.67	3.59	0.62
Leadership	Transformational Leadership	0.87	4.27	0.43	0.83	8.67E-156
	Transactional Leadership	0.68	3.5	0.32
	Passive Leadership	0.72	3.49	0.56
Innovative Behavior	Questioning	0.69	3.76	0.42	0.85	2.56E-128
	Exploration-Experimentation	0.76	3.85	0.73
	Achievement Motivation	0.83	4.42	0.57
	Need for Conformity	0.70	2.63	0.5
	Observation	0.77	4.27	0.65
	Idea Networks	0.75	3.78	0.83
	Tolerance for Ambiguity	0.56	3.49	0.49
Innovation Capabilities	Product Innovation	0.76	4.01	0.75	0.93	1.21E-283
	Process Innovation	0.60	3.81	0.79
	Organizational Innovation	0.79	3.6	0.94
	Marketing Innovation	0.83	3.88	0.86
	Innovation Culture	0.84	3.74	0.88
	Resources for Innovation	0.94	3.67	0.89

From Table 2, it is noticeable that Cronbach’s alpha values indicate that Leadership, Innovation Capabilities, most Innovative Behavior subscales, and most HEXACO subscales achieved acceptable reliability. In contrast, some HEXACO dimensions and the Tolerance for Ambiguity (Innovative Behavior) subscale displayed low reliability, warranting cautious interpretation if these dimensions are involved in the main hypotheses.

These findings provide an initial overview of the psychological and behavioral attributes of the CEOs in the sample and set the foundation for examining correlations and causal paths in subsequent analyses.

3.2 Correlational analysis

To assess the relationships among the key constructs, Pearson correlation coefficients were computed. The analysis examined the associations between CEO personality traits (HEXACO dimensions), transformational leadership, innovative behavior, and innovation capabilities dimensions.

Figure 2 shows the pair-wise (Pearson) correlations. The correlation structure illustration uses a blue-white-red diverging color scale, where positive correlations are represented by blue marbles and negative correlations by red marbles. The intensity of the color and the marble size are both proportional to the correlation values. Non-significant correlations are marked with an “X.”

Figure 2. Correlation structure.

Preliminary results reveal significant positive correlations between openness to experience and transformational leadership (r = .46, p < .05), supporting Hypothesis 1. Additionally, transformational leadership showed strong, significant correlations with innovative behavior dimensions (all of them positive, except for Need for Conformity, which is r = -0.26), consistent with Hypothesis 2. Overall, innovative behavior dimensions also correlated positively with perceived innovation capabilities dimensions, with the following exceptions: i) the Questioning dimension exhibited positive, yet non-significant, correlations with Process Innovation and Organizational Innovation, ii) the Need for Conformity dimension exhibited negative correlations with all of the Innovation Capabilities dimensions, among which significance was reached only by the Need for Conformity – Product Innovation and Need for Conformity – Organizational Innovation pair-wise correlations. These outcomes partially (yet strongly) support Hypothesis 3.

These associations provide preliminary empirical support for the proposed model and suggest meaningful pathways through which CEO traits and leadership style may influence innovation outcomes in MSMEs. Further mediation analysis is presented in the next section to explore indirect effects.

3.3 Confirmatory path analysis

To examine the hypothesized relationships, this study specified a confirmatory path analysis model in which Openness to Experience and Conscientiousness predicted Transformational Leadership, which in turn predicted Innovative Behavior. Innovative Behavior was modeled as a latent construct indicated by its seven subscales, and subsequently predicted Innovation Capabilities, modeled as a latent construct indicated by its six dimensions. This SEM model is illustrated in Figure 3.

Figure 3. SEM model structure.

Although HEXACO comprises six dimensions, prior research highlights Openness to Experience and Conscientiousness as the strongest predictors of leadership and innovation, and so does our initial exploratory analysis (as these show the strongest Cronbach’s Alpha values and consistency). Our SEM analysis confirmed that a model including only these two predictors achieved good fit indices, while adding all six traits yielded only marginal changes in fit but reduced model parsimony. Therefore, the theory-driven, two-trait model was retained as the primary analysis.

The model showed acceptable fit to the data, χ² = 195.29 (df = 102), p < .001; CFI = 0.92; TLI = 0.90; RMSEA = 0.09 (90% CI [.07, .11]); SRMR = 0.07. All hypothesized paths were statistically significant and in the expected direction. Specifically, both Openness to Experience (β = .27, p < .001) and Conscientiousness (β = .45, p < .001) positively predicted Transformational Leadership. Transformational Leadership in turn strongly predicted Innovative Behavior (β = .81, p < .001), which subsequently predicted Innovation Capabilities (β = .57, p = .001). Bootstrapped indirect effects further confirmed the mediating mechanisms: the effects of Openness to Experience and Conscientiousness on Innovative Behavior, as well as their serial effects on Innovation Capabilities through Transformational Leadership and Innovative Behavior, were significant.

Taken together, these results provide confirmatory evidence for the hypothesized mediation pathways linking CEO personality traits, leadership style, innovative behavior, and innovation capabilities.

Overall, the confirmatory path analysis confirms the theoretical model’s validity and emphasizes the role of transformational leadership as a conduit for converting individual traits into firm-level capabilities. These results reinforce the need to view innovation not merely as a function of strategy or resources, but also as an outcome of complex psychological and behavioral dynamics within top leadership.

4. Discussion

The findings of this study confirm the critical role of CEO personality and leadership style in shaping innovation outcomes in MSMEs operating in resource-constrained environments. The results offer preliminary empirical support for a path model where personality traits, particularly Openness to Experience, influence transformational leadership, which in turn enhances innovation-related behaviors and ultimately firm-level innovation capabilities.

These findings resonate with earlier research highlighting the mediating role of leadership in translating executive traits into strategic outcomes (Mai, Do, & Phan, 2022). They also align with the work of (Zettler et al., 2020), who identified strong associations between specific personality factors and leadership effectiveness. In particular, openness and conscientiousness appear to serve as psychological foundations that predispose leaders to adopt a transformational approach—characterized by vision, intellectual stimulation, and individualized consideration.

Moreover, our model reflects the sequential mediation logic explored by (Obeidat et al., 2021), where behavioral mechanisms such as innovative behavior act as essential conduits between personality and performance outcomes. This view is reinforced by studies like that of (Mismetti, Rovelli, Bettinelli, & Bergamaschi, 2025), who argue that innovation emerges not only from strategic intent but also from the CEO’s behavioral engagement with uncertainty and change. From a contextual perspective, our findings contribute to the limited empirical literature on MSMEs in Latin America. Unlike large corporations in developed markets, MSMEs in Colombia face persistent structural limitations. Here, the proactivity and behavioral orientation of CEOs toward innovation become crucial drivers of adaptation and competitive advantage.

Interestingly, this study also reinforces the idea that innovation is not a linear consequence of personality traits alone but the outcome of an integrated process where traits shape leadership styles, which in turn enable behavioral patterns aligned with innovation (Hock‐Doepgen et al., 2025). As noted by (Geerts, 2024), understanding these multidimensional interactions provides a richer framework for designing leadership development interventions tailored to innovation.

Future research should explore the role of moderators such as CEO tenure (Darouichi et al., 2021), organizational culture, and environmental turbulence to better understand the boundary conditions of the observed relationships. Longitudinal designs with larger and more diverse samples could also validate the temporal dynamics of the proposed mediation model.

In practical terms, the study suggests that innovation policies in emerging economies should move beyond firm-level subsidies or technology transfer schemes and invest in the psychological development of leadership within MSMEs. Training programs aimed at fostering transformational leadership and innovation-focused behaviors could amplify the latent potential of the sector.

The findings of this study offer several practical and policy-relevant implications for strengthening innovation capabilities in MSMEs, particularly in emerging economies. First, the results suggest that leadership development initiatives for MSME CEOs should move beyond traditional managerial training focused exclusively on technical skills or experience. Programs aimed at fostering transformational leadership behaviors may be especially effective in enhancing innovation-oriented behaviors and organizational innovation capabilities. Second, the evidence indicates that CEO selection and development processes may benefit from incorporating psychological and behavioral assessments alongside conventional criteria. Considering personality traits such as openness to experience and conscientiousness may help organizations identify leaders with greater potential to foster innovation under resource constraints.

From a policy perspective, the findings provide empirical support for the design of public innovation and entrepreneurship programs that explicitly target leadership capabilities within MSMEs. Government agencies, innovation centers, and business development organizations in emerging regions may leverage these insights to complement financial or technological support with leadership development components.

Overall, this research contributes to advancing theoretical and practical understanding of how executive psychology intersects with leadership and behavior to drive innovation outcomes in constrained yet dynamic environments.

5. Conclusions

This study provides valuable initial evidence on how CEO personality traits, leadership styles, and innovative behaviors interact to shape innovation capabilities in Colombian MSMEs. By integrating the HEXACO personality framework, transformational leadership theory, and innovation behavior scales, the research advances a multidimensional perspective on the antecedents of innovation.

The findings indicate that CEOs with higher levels of openness to experience and conscientiousness are more likely to adopt a transformational leadership style, which in turn stimulates innovative behaviors and ultimately enhances firm-level innovation capabilities. This sequential relationship highlights the importance of considering both dispositional traits and behavioral processes in models of innovation leadership.

From a theoretical perspective, the study contributes to upper echelons research by demonstrating the value of integrated psychological-behavioral models in an emerging market context. From a practical standpoint, it underscores the need for leadership development programs tailored to MSMEs, focusing on fostering transformational leadership behaviors—such as intellectual stimulation, vision sharing, and individualized consideration—that translate personality traits into innovation outcomes. These findings can inform policymakers seeking to strengthen innovation ecosystems in emerging economies by highlighting the role of CEO psychology and leadership.

Despite its limitations, including a relatively small sample size, the study lays a foundation for future research using longitudinal designs and larger samples to validate the robustness of the proposed model. Further work could explore potential moderators such as CEO tenure, firm age, organizational culture, or environmental turbulence, as well as cross-national comparisons to deepen understanding of how executive psychology drives innovation trajectories in resource-constrained environments.

This research makes several contributions to the literature on leadership and innovation. First, it advances upper echelons research by empirically demonstrating a sequential mechanism through which CEO personality traits influence firm-level innovation capabilities via transformational leadership and innovative behavior, extending prior work that has largely examined these constructs in isolation (Pan et al., 2021; Zettler et al., 2020). Additionally, the integration of the HEXACO personality framework with transformational leadership theory constitutes a more comprehensive and multidimensional approach to CEO psychology in organizational research (O’Reilly et al., 2025). Finally, the findings contribute to the growing literature on innovation in MSMEs by providing evidence from an emerging economy context, addressing the persistent underrepresentation of Latin American MSMEs in innovation research (Restrepo-Morales et al., 2024; Tegethoff et al., 2025).

Ethics and consent

This study was conducted in accordance with institutional ethical guidelines. No ethics committee approval was required for this study, as it involved voluntary participation and the collection of anonymous, de-identified data. Informed consent was obtained electronically from all participants prior to data collection. All personal and organizational data were de-identified, so that the CEOs’ identities and firms’ data are protected.

Data availability

All data underlying the results reported in this study are fully and openly available under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) license. The datasets include all variables, descriptive statistics, and raw values used to compute means, standard deviations, and figures reported in the paper, as well as the data required to replicate the structural equation modeling (SEM) and correlation analyses. No embargo applies. All datasets are openly accessible and include the values used to compute reported statistics, generate figures, and reproduce all analyses. No data were excluded for privacy, ethical, or security reasons.

• Source code available from: https://github.com/iportnoy1/CEO-Dimensions-and-Their-Impact-on-Innovation-Capabilities-An-Empirical-Study-of-Colombian-MSMEs -
• Archived data and materials available from (DOI): https://zenodo.org/records/17609131.
• License: under an MIT and a CC BY 4.0 License, respectively.

References

Antonio Bedoya M, Pérez E, Zapata-Molina C, et al.: Entrepreneurial Orientation and Transformational Leadership for the Development of Innovation Capabilities. Quality Innovation Prosperity/Kvalita Inovácia Prosperita. 2024; 28(1): 174–192. Publisher Full Text
Ashton MC, Lee K: The HEXACO model of personality structure and the importance of the H factor. Soc. Personal. Psychol. Compass. 2008a; 2(5): 1952–1962. Publisher Full Text
Ashton MC, Lee K: The prediction of Honesty–Humility-related criteria by the HEXACO and Five-Factor Models of personality. J. Res. Pers. 2008b; 42(5): 1216–1228. Publisher Full Text
Ashton MC, Lee K: The HEXACO–60: A short measure of the major dimensions of personality. J. Pers. Assess. 2009; 91(4): 340–345. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
Bartlett MS: The effect of standardization on a χ² approximation in factor analysis. Biometrika. 1951; 38(3/4): 337–344. Publisher Full Text
Bass BM, Avolio BJ: Multifactor leadership questionnaire. West. J. Nurs. Res. 1996.
Bass BM, Riggio RE: Transformational leadership. Psychology Press; 2006.
Batista-Foguet JM, Esteve M, van Witteloostuijn A : Measuring leadership an assessment of the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire. Plos One. 2021; 16(7): e0254329. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
BBVA Research: Colombia: A review to Micro and SMEs in Colombia. 2024, February. Reference Source
Bedoya MA, Pérez-Sanchéz E, Zapata C, et al.: Entrepreneurial orientation and transformational leadership for the development of innovation capabilities. Quality Innovation Prosperity. 2024; 28(1): 174–192. Publisher Full Text
Calik E, Calisir F, Cetinguc B: A scale development for innovation capability measurement. J. Adv. Manag. Sci. 2017; 5(2): 69–76. Publisher Full Text
Cepal NU: Panorama Social de América Latina y el Caribe 2022: la transformación de la educación como base para el desarrollo sostenible.2022.
Darouichi A, Kunisch S, Menz M, et al.: CEO tenure: An integrative review and pathways for future research. Corp. Gov. 2021; 29(6): 661–683. Publisher Full Text
Dziuban CD, Shirkey EC: When is a correlation matrix appropriate for factor analysis? Some decision rules. Psychol. Bull. 1974; 81(6): 358–361. Publisher Full Text
Edeh FO, Zayed NM, Nitsenko V, et al.: Predicting innovation capability through knowledge management in the banking sector. J. Risk Financ. Manag. 2022; 15(7): 312. Publisher Full Text
Escobar-Castillo A, Velandia-Pacheco G, Navarro-Manotas E, et al.: Factors that impact the innovation capability in MSMEs: case of Colombia’s Atlántico Department. Procedia Comput. Sci. 2023; 224: 490–494. Publisher Full Text
Geerts JM: Maximizing the impact and ROI of leadership development: A theory-and evidence-informed framework. Behav. Sci. 2024; 14(10): 955. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
Hair JF Jr, Hult GTM, Ringle CM, et al.: An introduction to structural equation modeling. Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) using R: a workbook. Springer; 2021; pp. 1–29.
Hambrick DC, Mason PA: Upper echelons: The organization as a reflection of its top managers. Acad. Manag. Rev. 1984; 9(2): 193–206. Publisher Full Text
Hock-Doepgen M, Montasser JS, Klein S, et al.: The role of innovative work behavior and organizational support for business model innovation. R&D Manag. 2025; 55(1): 7–26. Publisher Full Text
Kaiser HF: An index of factor simplicity. Psychometrika. 1974; 39: 31–36. Publisher Full Text
Hock-Doepgen M, Montasser JS, Klein S, et al.: The role of innovative work behavior and organizational support for business model innovation. R&D Manag. 2025; 55(1): 7–26. Publisher Full Text
Janssen O: Job demands, perceptions of effort-reward fairness and innovative work behaviour. J. Occup. Organ. Psychol. 2000; 73(3): 287–302. Publisher Full Text
Jun K, Lee J: Transformational leadership and followers’ innovative behavior: Roles of commitment to change and organizational support for creativity. Behav. Sci. 2023; 13(4): 320. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
Kim JY, Yoon D-Y: How transformational leadership of managers affects employee innovative behavior in IT corporations. Front. Psychol. 2025; 16: 1565307. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
Lee K, Ashton MC: The HEXACO personality factors in the indigenous personality lexicons of English and 11 other languages. J. Pers. 2008; 76(5): 1001–1054. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
Mai NK, Do TT, Phan NA: The impact of leadership traits and organizational learning on business innovation. J. Innov. Knowl. 2022; 7(3): 100204. Publisher Full Text
Mismetti M, Rovelli P, Bettinelli C, et al.: In the pursuit of innovation: The role of top management team functional diversity and open discussion in family firm innovation intentions. J. Prod. Innov. Manag. 2025. Publisher Full Text
O’Reilly C, Cao X, Sull D: CEO personality: the cornerstone of organizational culture? Group Org. Manag. 2025; 50(1): 82–118. Publisher Full Text
Obeidat U, Obeidat B, Alrowwad A, et al.: The effect of intellectual capital on competitive advantage: The mediating role of innovation. Management Science Letters. 2021; 11(4): 1331–1344. Publisher Full Text
Obilor EI, Amadi EC: Test for significance of Pearson’s correlation coefficient. International Journal of Innovative Mathematics, Statistics & Energy Policies. 2018; 6(1): 11–23.
Ocasal DLM, Lugo ALV, Melo LAB, et al.: Innovative thinking in the leaders and competitiveness of SMEs in the Industrial sector in Colombia. Procedia Comput. Sci. 2022; 210: 333–338. Publisher Full Text
Pan Y, Verbeke A, Yuan W: CEO transformational leadership and corporate entrepreneurship in China. Manag. Organ. Rev. 2021; 17(1): 45–76. Publisher Full Text
Parodi-Camano T, Vidal-Durango J-V, Portnoy I: CEO, innovation, and business performance–A bibliometric analysis and literature review.2025.
Restrepo-Morales JA, Loaiza OL, Vanegas JG: Determinants of innovation: A multivariate analysis in Colombian micro, small and medium-sized enterprises. J. Econ. Financ. Adm. Sci. 2019; 24(47): 97–112. Publisher Full Text
Restrepo-Morales JA, Valencia-Cárdenas M, López-Cadavid DA: Interplay of customer satisfaction, innovation, and product quality: Key determinants of company performance. J. Technol. Manag. Innov. 2024; 19(2): 28–42. Publisher Full Text
Rosseel Y: lavaan: An R package for structural equation modeling. J. Stat. Softw. 2012; 48(1): 1–36.
Salessi S, Etchevers MR: Innovative work behavior: Development and validation of a scale for teachers. Acta de Investigación Psicológica. 2020; 10(3): 112–123. Publisher Full Text
Tavakol M, Dennick R: Making sense of Cronbach’s alpha. Int. J. Med. Educ. 2011; 2: 53–55. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
Teece DJ: Explicating dynamic capabilities: the nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strateg. Manag. J. 2007; 28(13): 1319–1350. Publisher Full Text
Tegethoff T, Santa R, Bucheli JM, et al.: Sustainable development through eco-innovation: A focus on small and medium enterprises in Colombia. PloS One. 2025; 20(1): e0316620. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
Yu J, Xiang K: Transformational leadership, organizational resilience, and team innovation performance: A model for testing moderation and mediation effects. Behav. Sci. 2024; 15(1): 10. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
Zettler I, Thielmann I, Hilbig BE, et al.: The nomological net of the HEXACO model of personality: A large-scale meta-analytic investigation. Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 2020; 15(3): 723–760. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
Zhu H, Jia F, Zhang Y, et al.: The Relationship Between the Big Five Personality Model and Innovation Behavior: A Three-Level Meta-Analysis. Behav. Sci. 2025; 15(9): 1143. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

Comments on this article Comments (1)

Version 2

VERSION 2 PUBLISHED 28 Jan 2026

Revised

Comment

Version 1

VERSION 1 PUBLISHED 26 Nov 2025

Discussion is closed on this version, please comment on the latest version above.

Reader Comment 03 Dec 2025

Rubén Baena-Navarro, Department of Systems Engineer, Universidad de Cordoba, Montería, Colombia

03 Dec 2025

Reader Comment

The manuscript addresses a relevant and increasingly discussed topic within organizational and innovation studies: the extent to which CEO personality traits, transformational leadership, and innovative behavior shape innovation capabilities in ... Continue reading The manuscript addresses a relevant and increasingly discussed topic within organizational and innovation studies: the extent to which CEO personality traits, transformational leadership, and innovative behavior shape innovation capabilities in MSMEs. The conceptual framing is well crafted, and the integration of the HEXACO model with leadership and innovation literature provides a nuanced view of how executive characteristics influence firm-level outcomes in resource-constrained settings. Taken together, the theoretical scaffolding is coherent and positions the study within contemporary debates in the field.

That said, a few methodological clarifications could enhance the manuscript’s transparency. Several subscales exhibit moderate internal consistency. While this does not undermine the overall analytical approach, offering a short explanation of how these dimensions were incorporated into the SEM would allow readers to better assess the robustness of the modeling strategy. Even so, the structural modeling is generally well executed and reflects a thoughtful application of established techniques.
It may also be worthwhile to elaborate briefly on the decision to retain only two HEXACO traits as primary predictors. The choice is defensible; still, a concise reference to whether alternative specifications were considered could help illustrate the rationale behind favoring a more parsimonious structure. Such clarifications typically strengthen the interpretive logic without adding undue complexity.

The discussion section formulates conceptually relevant connections. Nonetheless, because the study is cross-sectional, a slight adjustment in phrasing could ensure that the interpretations remain within an associative rather than causal frame. This alignment tends to reinforce methodological coherence while preserving the value of the findings.

The manuscript contributes meaningfully to research on leadership and innovation in MSMEs. With a few refinements in methodological reporting and interpretive framing, the study can further enhance its clarity and usefulness for scholars examining the interplay between personality, leadership, and innovation performance in Latin American contexts.
The manuscript addresses a relevant and increasingly discussed topic within organizational and innovation studies: the extent to which CEO personality traits, transformational leadership, and innovative behavior shape innovation capabilities in MSMEs. The conceptual framing is well crafted, and the integration of the HEXACO model with leadership and innovation literature provides a nuanced view of how executive characteristics influence firm-level outcomes in resource-constrained settings. Taken together, the theoretical scaffolding is coherent and positions the study within contemporary debates in the field.

That said, a few methodological clarifications could enhance the manuscript’s transparency. Several subscales exhibit moderate internal consistency. While this does not undermine the overall analytical approach, offering a short explanation of how these dimensions were incorporated into the SEM would allow readers to better assess the robustness of the modeling strategy. Even so, the structural modeling is generally well executed and reflects a thoughtful application of established techniques.
It may also be worthwhile to elaborate briefly on the decision to retain only two HEXACO traits as primary predictors. The choice is defensible; still, a concise reference to whether alternative specifications were considered could help illustrate the rationale behind favoring a more parsimonious structure. Such clarifications typically strengthen the interpretive logic without adding undue complexity.

The discussion section formulates conceptually relevant connections. Nonetheless, because the study is cross-sectional, a slight adjustment in phrasing could ensure that the interpretations remain within an associative rather than causal frame. This alignment tends to reinforce methodological coherence while preserving the value of the findings.

The manuscript contributes meaningfully to research on leadership and innovation in MSMEs. With a few refinements in methodological reporting and interpretive framing, the study can further enhance its clarity and usefulness for scholars examining the interplay between personality, leadership, and innovation performance in Latin American contexts.
Competing Interests: No competing interests declared. Close
Report a concern
Discussion is closed on this version, please comment on the latest version above.

Author details Author details

Jhon Víctor Vidal Durango
Roles: Conceptualization, Funding Acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Resources, Supervision

Iván Portnoy
Roles: Data Curation, Methodology, Software, Supervision, Validation, Visualization, Writing – Original Draft Preparation, Writing – Review & Editing

Competing interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Grant information

The author(s) declared that no grants were involved in supporting this work.

Article Versions (2)

version 2

Revised

Published: 28 Jan 2026, 14:1313

https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.171456.2

version 1

Published: 26 Nov 2025, 14:1313

https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.171456.1

© 2026 Parodi-Camano TA et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Download

Export To

metrics

	Views	Downloads
F1000Research	-	-
PubMed Central Data from PMC are received and updated monthly.	-	-

Citations

SEE MORE DETAILS

CITE

how to cite this article

Parodi-Camano TA, Vidal Durango JV and Portnoy I. CEO Dimensions and Their Mediating Role on Innovation Capabilities: An Empirical Study of Colombian MSMEs [version 2; peer review: 2 approved with reservations]. F1000Research 2026, 14:1313 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.171456.2)

NOTE: If applicable, it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article.

track

receive updates on this article

Track an article to receive email alerts on any updates to this article.

Open Peer Review

Version 1

VERSION 1

PUBLISHED 26 Nov 2025

Views

Reviewer Report 12 Jan 2026

Hatinah Abu Bakar, Universiti Teknologi Mara, Shah Alam, Malaysia

Approved with Reservations

https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.189066.r443221

Topic:

The title "CEO Dimensions and Their Impact on Innovation Capabilities: An Empirical Study of Colombian MSMEs" is straightforward and informative; advisable, it is recommended to include "mediation" as a major contribution of the article lies in testing a mediation model.

Abstract
The abstract well written nonetheless, it does not clearly address the mediating function of essential constructions within the suggested model.

Introduction
This study focuses on MSMEs in Colombia, however there is a lacking of information about Colombian MSMEs. Moreover the problem statement does not adequately address the challenges or issues and research gaps related to Colombian MSMEs.

The paragraph is well written and conceptually coherent; however, several cited sources exceed the commonly preferred 5-year.
Moreover, there is lacking discussion on transformational leadership as mediator.

Methods
The paragraph clearly states the target population (CEOs or top executives of MSMEs in Colombia) and appropriately justifies the use of purposive and convenience sampling given practical constraints. However, to strengthen the sampling justification and enhance the generalizability of the study, the authors are encouraged to provide official statistics on the total number of MSMEs in Colombia.

It is advisable for the authors to provide more detailed information regarding the screening and inclusion criteria, including the procedures used to identify and select eligible CEOs for the study

The description of SEM could be more precise by indicating whether CB-SEM or PLS-SEM was employed and why this approach was appropriate for the study’s objectives (e.g., theory testing vs. prediction).

Results
Advisable do not used word "WE". Can change "to this study" or "this research".

Advisable for correlational analysis explained in result not as a correction structure (figure 2)

Discussion and Conclusion
Well discussed.

Overall Comment. :
The authors are encouraged to review the overall flow and organization of the manuscript. In particular:
(i) The placement of Section 2.6 (Ethical Considerations) may be reconsidered, as its current location may not best align with the manuscript structure.
(ii) The literature discussion could be further refined to ensure clearer linkage with the research objectives.
(iii) The statistical analysis and results sections may be combined into a single Findings and Analysis section to enhance clarity and coherence.

Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature?

Partly
Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound?

Partly
Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others?

Partly
If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate?

Partly
Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility?

Partly
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results?

Yes

Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.

Reviewer Expertise: My research interests encompass entrepreneurship, management, and organizational behavior, particularly in relation to organizational strategy, leadership, and entrepreneurial performance.

I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however I have significant reservations, as outlined above.

CITE

Report a concern

Author Response 28 Jan 2026

Tobias A. Parodi-Camano, Industrial Engineering Department, Universidad de Cordoba, Montería, Colombia

28 Jan 2026

Author Response

Reviewers’ Remark:
1. The title "CEO Dimensions and Their Impact on Innovation Capabilities: An Empirical Study of Colombian MSMEs" is straightforward and informative; advisable, it is recommended to include "mediation" ... Continue reading Reviewers’ Remark:
1. The title "CEO Dimensions and Their Impact on Innovation Capabilities: An Empirical Study of Colombian MSMEs" is straightforward and informative; advisable, it is recommended to include "mediation" as a major contribution of the article lies in testing a mediation model.
Change or Comment:
We have modified the title to stress the use of mediation in the model. The updated title is: “CEO Dimensions and Their Mediating Role on Innovation Capabilities: An Empirical Study of Colombian MSMEs”

Reviewers’ Remark:
2. The abstract well written nonetheless, it does not clearly address the mediating function of essential constructions within the suggested model.
Change or Comment:
We have modified the abstract to make highlight mediation more explicitly.

Reviewers’ Remark:
3. Introduction
This study focuses on MSMEs in Colombia, however there is a lacking of information about Colombian MSMEs. Moreover the problem statement does not adequately address the challenges or issues and research gaps related to Colombian MSMEs.

The paragraph is well written and conceptually coherent; however, several cited sources exceed the commonly preferred 5-year.
Moreover, there is lacking discussion on transformational leadership as mediator.
Change or Comment:
We have strengthened the Introduction section by explicitly discussing the structural and innovation-related challenges faced by Colombian MSMEs, including limited R&D investment, institutional constraints, and weak innovation ecosystems. Also, we have clarified how these contextual factors amplify the role of CEOs in fostering innovation outcomes, thus reinforcing the relevance of our research gap in the Colombian MSMEs context.

Additionally, we have included more recent (from 2021 onward) to support the research gap identification and give support to the research hypotheses. Nevertheless, we consider that some older research works provide a strong theoretical background, as well as some others are seminal works that are relevant to this date. Thus, we have kept some of them.

Reviewers’ Remark:
4. Methods
The paragraph clearly states the target population (CEOs or top executives of MSMEs in Colombia) and appropriately justifies the use of purposive and convenience sampling given practical constraints. However, to strengthen the sampling justification and enhance the generalizability of the study, the authors are encouraged to provide official statistics on the total number of MSMEs in Colombia.

It is advisable for the authors to provide more detailed information regarding the screening and inclusion criteria, including the procedures used to identify and select eligible CEOs for the study

The description of SEM could be more precise by indicating whether CB-SEM or PLS-SEM was employed and why this approach was appropriate for the study’s objectives (e.g., theory testing vs. prediction).

Change or Comment:

To strengthen the sampling justification and contextualize the scope of the target population, we have added (in Subsection 2.2 - Participants and Sampling) official statistics indicating that Colombia has more than 1.7 million MSMEs, representing over 90% of the country’s productive units. This information highlights the scale of the population under study and further supports the use of purposive and convenience sampling given the practical constraints associated with accessing CEOs of MSMEs.

Moreover, we have added the inclusion criteria used for the CEOs screening process (in Subsection 2.2 - Participants and Sampling).

We have clarified in the Methods section (in Subsection 2.5) that a covariance-based SEM (CB-SEM) approach was employed using the lavaan package in R. We further justified this choice by noting that the study is theory-driven and focused on hypothesis testing and mediation analysis rather than prediction

Reviewers’ Remark:
5. Results
Advisable do not used word "WE". Can change "to this study" or "this research".
Advisable for correlational analysis explained in result not as a correction structure (figure 2)
Change or Comment:
We have changed the pronoun “we” for “this study” (or something along those lines) as suggested throughout the entire manuscript.

Reviewers’ Remark:
6. Discussion and Conclusion
Well discussed.
Change or Comment:
We thank the reviewer for their feedback on this matter.

Reviewers’ Remark:
7. Overall Comment
The authors are encouraged to review the overall flow and organization of the manuscript. In particular:
(i) The placement of Section 2.6 (Ethical Considerations) may be reconsidered, as its current location may not best align with the manuscript structure.
(ii) The literature discussion could be further refined to ensure clearer linkage with the research objectives.
(iii) The statistical analysis and results sections may be combined into a single Findings and Analysis section to enhance clarity and coherence.
Change or Comment:
Overall Comment
The authors are encouraged to review the overall flow and organization of the manuscript. In particular:
(i) The placement of Section 2.6 (Ethical Considerations) may be reconsidered, as its current location may not best align with the manuscript structure.
(ii) The literature discussion could be further refined to ensure clearer linkage with the research objectives.
(iii) The statistical analysis and results sections may be combined into a single Findings and Analysis section to enhance clarity and coherence.
Reviewers’ Remark:
1. The title "CEO Dimensions and Their Impact on Innovation Capabilities: An Empirical Study of Colombian MSMEs" is straightforward and informative; advisable, it is recommended to include "mediation" as a major contribution of the article lies in testing a mediation model.
Change or Comment:
We have modified the title to stress the use of mediation in the model. The updated title is: “CEO Dimensions and Their Mediating Role on Innovation Capabilities: An Empirical Study of Colombian MSMEs”

Reviewers’ Remark:
2. The abstract well written nonetheless, it does not clearly address the mediating function of essential constructions within the suggested model.
Change or Comment:
We have modified the abstract to make highlight mediation more explicitly.

Reviewers’ Remark:
3. Introduction
This study focuses on MSMEs in Colombia, however there is a lacking of information about Colombian MSMEs. Moreover the problem statement does not adequately address the challenges or issues and research gaps related to Colombian MSMEs.

The paragraph is well written and conceptually coherent; however, several cited sources exceed the commonly preferred 5-year.
Moreover, there is lacking discussion on transformational leadership as mediator.
Change or Comment:
We have strengthened the Introduction section by explicitly discussing the structural and innovation-related challenges faced by Colombian MSMEs, including limited R&D investment, institutional constraints, and weak innovation ecosystems. Also, we have clarified how these contextual factors amplify the role of CEOs in fostering innovation outcomes, thus reinforcing the relevance of our research gap in the Colombian MSMEs context.

Additionally, we have included more recent (from 2021 onward) to support the research gap identification and give support to the research hypotheses. Nevertheless, we consider that some older research works provide a strong theoretical background, as well as some others are seminal works that are relevant to this date. Thus, we have kept some of them.

Reviewers’ Remark:
4. Methods
The paragraph clearly states the target population (CEOs or top executives of MSMEs in Colombia) and appropriately justifies the use of purposive and convenience sampling given practical constraints. However, to strengthen the sampling justification and enhance the generalizability of the study, the authors are encouraged to provide official statistics on the total number of MSMEs in Colombia.

It is advisable for the authors to provide more detailed information regarding the screening and inclusion criteria, including the procedures used to identify and select eligible CEOs for the study

The description of SEM could be more precise by indicating whether CB-SEM or PLS-SEM was employed and why this approach was appropriate for the study’s objectives (e.g., theory testing vs. prediction).

Change or Comment:

To strengthen the sampling justification and contextualize the scope of the target population, we have added (in Subsection 2.2 - Participants and Sampling) official statistics indicating that Colombia has more than 1.7 million MSMEs, representing over 90% of the country’s productive units. This information highlights the scale of the population under study and further supports the use of purposive and convenience sampling given the practical constraints associated with accessing CEOs of MSMEs.

Moreover, we have added the inclusion criteria used for the CEOs screening process (in Subsection 2.2 - Participants and Sampling).

We have clarified in the Methods section (in Subsection 2.5) that a covariance-based SEM (CB-SEM) approach was employed using the lavaan package in R. We further justified this choice by noting that the study is theory-driven and focused on hypothesis testing and mediation analysis rather than prediction

Reviewers’ Remark:
5. Results
Advisable do not used word "WE". Can change "to this study" or "this research".
Advisable for correlational analysis explained in result not as a correction structure (figure 2)
Change or Comment:
We have changed the pronoun “we” for “this study” (or something along those lines) as suggested throughout the entire manuscript.

Reviewers’ Remark:
6. Discussion and Conclusion
Well discussed.
Change or Comment:
We thank the reviewer for their feedback on this matter.

Reviewers’ Remark:
7. Overall Comment
The authors are encouraged to review the overall flow and organization of the manuscript. In particular:
(i) The placement of Section 2.6 (Ethical Considerations) may be reconsidered, as its current location may not best align with the manuscript structure.
(ii) The literature discussion could be further refined to ensure clearer linkage with the research objectives.
(iii) The statistical analysis and results sections may be combined into a single Findings and Analysis section to enhance clarity and coherence.
Change or Comment:
Overall Comment
The authors are encouraged to review the overall flow and organization of the manuscript. In particular:
(i) The placement of Section 2.6 (Ethical Considerations) may be reconsidered, as its current location may not best align with the manuscript structure.
(ii) The literature discussion could be further refined to ensure clearer linkage with the research objectives.
(iii) The statistical analysis and results sections may be combined into a single Findings and Analysis section to enhance clarity and coherence.
Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Close
Report a concern
Respond or Comment

COMMENTS ON THIS REPORT

Author Response 28 Jan 2026

Tobias A. Parodi-Camano, Industrial Engineering Department, Universidad de Cordoba, Montería, Colombia

28 Jan 2026

Author Response

Reviewers’ Remark:
1. The title "CEO Dimensions and Their Impact on Innovation Capabilities: An Empirical Study of Colombian MSMEs" is straightforward and informative; advisable, it is recommended to include "mediation" ... Continue reading Reviewers’ Remark:
1. The title "CEO Dimensions and Their Impact on Innovation Capabilities: An Empirical Study of Colombian MSMEs" is straightforward and informative; advisable, it is recommended to include "mediation" as a major contribution of the article lies in testing a mediation model.
Change or Comment:
We have modified the title to stress the use of mediation in the model. The updated title is: “CEO Dimensions and Their Mediating Role on Innovation Capabilities: An Empirical Study of Colombian MSMEs”

Reviewers’ Remark:
2. The abstract well written nonetheless, it does not clearly address the mediating function of essential constructions within the suggested model.
Change or Comment:
We have modified the abstract to make highlight mediation more explicitly.

Reviewers’ Remark:
3. Introduction
This study focuses on MSMEs in Colombia, however there is a lacking of information about Colombian MSMEs. Moreover the problem statement does not adequately address the challenges or issues and research gaps related to Colombian MSMEs.

The paragraph is well written and conceptually coherent; however, several cited sources exceed the commonly preferred 5-year.
Moreover, there is lacking discussion on transformational leadership as mediator.
Change or Comment:
We have strengthened the Introduction section by explicitly discussing the structural and innovation-related challenges faced by Colombian MSMEs, including limited R&D investment, institutional constraints, and weak innovation ecosystems. Also, we have clarified how these contextual factors amplify the role of CEOs in fostering innovation outcomes, thus reinforcing the relevance of our research gap in the Colombian MSMEs context.

Additionally, we have included more recent (from 2021 onward) to support the research gap identification and give support to the research hypotheses. Nevertheless, we consider that some older research works provide a strong theoretical background, as well as some others are seminal works that are relevant to this date. Thus, we have kept some of them.

Reviewers’ Remark:
4. Methods
The paragraph clearly states the target population (CEOs or top executives of MSMEs in Colombia) and appropriately justifies the use of purposive and convenience sampling given practical constraints. However, to strengthen the sampling justification and enhance the generalizability of the study, the authors are encouraged to provide official statistics on the total number of MSMEs in Colombia.

It is advisable for the authors to provide more detailed information regarding the screening and inclusion criteria, including the procedures used to identify and select eligible CEOs for the study

The description of SEM could be more precise by indicating whether CB-SEM or PLS-SEM was employed and why this approach was appropriate for the study’s objectives (e.g., theory testing vs. prediction).

Change or Comment:

To strengthen the sampling justification and contextualize the scope of the target population, we have added (in Subsection 2.2 - Participants and Sampling) official statistics indicating that Colombia has more than 1.7 million MSMEs, representing over 90% of the country’s productive units. This information highlights the scale of the population under study and further supports the use of purposive and convenience sampling given the practical constraints associated with accessing CEOs of MSMEs.

Moreover, we have added the inclusion criteria used for the CEOs screening process (in Subsection 2.2 - Participants and Sampling).

We have clarified in the Methods section (in Subsection 2.5) that a covariance-based SEM (CB-SEM) approach was employed using the lavaan package in R. We further justified this choice by noting that the study is theory-driven and focused on hypothesis testing and mediation analysis rather than prediction

Reviewers’ Remark:
5. Results
Advisable do not used word "WE". Can change "to this study" or "this research".
Advisable for correlational analysis explained in result not as a correction structure (figure 2)
Change or Comment:
We have changed the pronoun “we” for “this study” (or something along those lines) as suggested throughout the entire manuscript.

Reviewers’ Remark:
6. Discussion and Conclusion
Well discussed.
Change or Comment:
We thank the reviewer for their feedback on this matter.

Reviewers’ Remark:
7. Overall Comment
The authors are encouraged to review the overall flow and organization of the manuscript. In particular:
(i) The placement of Section 2.6 (Ethical Considerations) may be reconsidered, as its current location may not best align with the manuscript structure.
(ii) The literature discussion could be further refined to ensure clearer linkage with the research objectives.
(iii) The statistical analysis and results sections may be combined into a single Findings and Analysis section to enhance clarity and coherence.
Change or Comment:
Overall Comment
The authors are encouraged to review the overall flow and organization of the manuscript. In particular:
(i) The placement of Section 2.6 (Ethical Considerations) may be reconsidered, as its current location may not best align with the manuscript structure.
(ii) The literature discussion could be further refined to ensure clearer linkage with the research objectives.
(iii) The statistical analysis and results sections may be combined into a single Findings and Analysis section to enhance clarity and coherence.
Reviewers’ Remark:
1. The title "CEO Dimensions and Their Impact on Innovation Capabilities: An Empirical Study of Colombian MSMEs" is straightforward and informative; advisable, it is recommended to include "mediation" as a major contribution of the article lies in testing a mediation model.
Change or Comment:
We have modified the title to stress the use of mediation in the model. The updated title is: “CEO Dimensions and Their Mediating Role on Innovation Capabilities: An Empirical Study of Colombian MSMEs”

Reviewers’ Remark:
2. The abstract well written nonetheless, it does not clearly address the mediating function of essential constructions within the suggested model.
Change or Comment:
We have modified the abstract to make highlight mediation more explicitly.

Reviewers’ Remark:
3. Introduction
This study focuses on MSMEs in Colombia, however there is a lacking of information about Colombian MSMEs. Moreover the problem statement does not adequately address the challenges or issues and research gaps related to Colombian MSMEs.

The paragraph is well written and conceptually coherent; however, several cited sources exceed the commonly preferred 5-year.
Moreover, there is lacking discussion on transformational leadership as mediator.
Change or Comment:
We have strengthened the Introduction section by explicitly discussing the structural and innovation-related challenges faced by Colombian MSMEs, including limited R&D investment, institutional constraints, and weak innovation ecosystems. Also, we have clarified how these contextual factors amplify the role of CEOs in fostering innovation outcomes, thus reinforcing the relevance of our research gap in the Colombian MSMEs context.

Additionally, we have included more recent (from 2021 onward) to support the research gap identification and give support to the research hypotheses. Nevertheless, we consider that some older research works provide a strong theoretical background, as well as some others are seminal works that are relevant to this date. Thus, we have kept some of them.

Reviewers’ Remark:
4. Methods
The paragraph clearly states the target population (CEOs or top executives of MSMEs in Colombia) and appropriately justifies the use of purposive and convenience sampling given practical constraints. However, to strengthen the sampling justification and enhance the generalizability of the study, the authors are encouraged to provide official statistics on the total number of MSMEs in Colombia.

It is advisable for the authors to provide more detailed information regarding the screening and inclusion criteria, including the procedures used to identify and select eligible CEOs for the study

The description of SEM could be more precise by indicating whether CB-SEM or PLS-SEM was employed and why this approach was appropriate for the study’s objectives (e.g., theory testing vs. prediction).

Change or Comment:

To strengthen the sampling justification and contextualize the scope of the target population, we have added (in Subsection 2.2 - Participants and Sampling) official statistics indicating that Colombia has more than 1.7 million MSMEs, representing over 90% of the country’s productive units. This information highlights the scale of the population under study and further supports the use of purposive and convenience sampling given the practical constraints associated with accessing CEOs of MSMEs.

Moreover, we have added the inclusion criteria used for the CEOs screening process (in Subsection 2.2 - Participants and Sampling).

We have clarified in the Methods section (in Subsection 2.5) that a covariance-based SEM (CB-SEM) approach was employed using the lavaan package in R. We further justified this choice by noting that the study is theory-driven and focused on hypothesis testing and mediation analysis rather than prediction

Reviewers’ Remark:
5. Results
Advisable do not used word "WE". Can change "to this study" or "this research".
Advisable for correlational analysis explained in result not as a correction structure (figure 2)
Change or Comment:
We have changed the pronoun “we” for “this study” (or something along those lines) as suggested throughout the entire manuscript.

Reviewers’ Remark:
6. Discussion and Conclusion
Well discussed.
Change or Comment:
We thank the reviewer for their feedback on this matter.

Reviewers’ Remark:
7. Overall Comment
The authors are encouraged to review the overall flow and organization of the manuscript. In particular:
(i) The placement of Section 2.6 (Ethical Considerations) may be reconsidered, as its current location may not best align with the manuscript structure.
(ii) The literature discussion could be further refined to ensure clearer linkage with the research objectives.
(iii) The statistical analysis and results sections may be combined into a single Findings and Analysis section to enhance clarity and coherence.
Change or Comment:
Overall Comment
The authors are encouraged to review the overall flow and organization of the manuscript. In particular:
(i) The placement of Section 2.6 (Ethical Considerations) may be reconsidered, as its current location may not best align with the manuscript structure.
(ii) The literature discussion could be further refined to ensure clearer linkage with the research objectives.
(iii) The statistical analysis and results sections may be combined into a single Findings and Analysis section to enhance clarity and coherence.
Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Close
Report a concern

Views

Reviewer Report 07 Jan 2026

Diogo Ferraz, University of Sao Paulo, São Paulo, State of São Paulo, Brazil

Approved with Reservations

https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.189066.r437424

The article "CEO Dimensions and Their Impact on Innovation Capabilities" offers a relevant approach for Latin American countries, employs an appropriate method, and presents interesting findings that other researchers in developing regions might replicate. Some revisions must be made before acceptance.
1. Please, improve the storyline of your paper. The Introduction must be reviewed to present a relevant research gap.
2. Please, provide a paragraph with all the contributions of this paper and present citations to prove each contribution.
3. Please provide better policy recommendations or practical implications. The current version is weak.
4. Please review the entire Conclusions section. Rewrite more critically.

Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature?

Yes
Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound?

Yes
Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others?

Yes
If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate?

Yes
Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility?

Yes
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results?

Yes

Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.

Reviewer Expertise: Economic Complexity, Innovation, Sustainable Development.

CITE

Report a concern

Author Response 28 Jan 2026

Tobias A. Parodi-Camano, Industrial Engineering Department, Universidad de Cordoba, Montería, Colombia

28 Jan 2026

Author Response

Reviewers’ Remark:
1. Please, improve the storyline of your paper. The Introduction must be reviewed to present a relevant research gap.
Change or Comment:
We have revised the Introduction to ... Continue reading Reviewers’ Remark:
1. Please, improve the storyline of your paper. The Introduction must be reviewed to present a relevant research gap.
Change or Comment:
We have revised the Introduction to strengthen the narrative progression from prior literature to the study’s objectives. Specifically, we clarified how existing research on CEO personality, leadership, and innovation remains scarce, particularly in the context of MSMEs in emerging economies. Then, we stressed how the particular conditions faced by Colombian MSMEs highlights the relevance of CEO-level factors, making the motivation for the proposed integrative model clear. Also, we updated the literature base with recent papers (from 2021 onward) to support the gap identification and hypotheses, while retaining seminal works that provide essential theoretical foundations.

Reviewers’ Remark:
2. Please, provide a paragraph with all the contributions of this paper and present citations to prove each contribution.
Change or Comment:
We have included a paragraph in the Conclusions section outlining the main contributions of the study. Each contribution is backed by relevant prior research works.

Reviewers’ Remark:
3. Please provide better policy recommendations or practical implications. The current version is weak.
Change or Comment:
We have added two paragraphs within the Discussion section providing more detailed and comprehensive policy recommendations and implications stemmed from the main findings of our research.

Reviewers’ Remark:
4. Please review the entire Conclusions section. Rewrite more critically.
Change or Comment:
We have carefully rewritten the Conclusions to adopt a more critical perspective. Now it synthesizes the main findings, explicitly distinguishes between theoretical and practical contributions, acknowledges the key limitations of the study, and outlines concrete directions for future research. Moreover, we consolidated the discussion of contributions to emphasize the study’s added value in relation to existing leadership and innovation literature.
Reviewers’ Remark:
1. Please, improve the storyline of your paper. The Introduction must be reviewed to present a relevant research gap.
Change or Comment:
We have revised the Introduction to strengthen the narrative progression from prior literature to the study’s objectives. Specifically, we clarified how existing research on CEO personality, leadership, and innovation remains scarce, particularly in the context of MSMEs in emerging economies. Then, we stressed how the particular conditions faced by Colombian MSMEs highlights the relevance of CEO-level factors, making the motivation for the proposed integrative model clear. Also, we updated the literature base with recent papers (from 2021 onward) to support the gap identification and hypotheses, while retaining seminal works that provide essential theoretical foundations.

Reviewers’ Remark:
2. Please, provide a paragraph with all the contributions of this paper and present citations to prove each contribution.
Change or Comment:
We have included a paragraph in the Conclusions section outlining the main contributions of the study. Each contribution is backed by relevant prior research works.

Reviewers’ Remark:
3. Please provide better policy recommendations or practical implications. The current version is weak.
Change or Comment:
We have added two paragraphs within the Discussion section providing more detailed and comprehensive policy recommendations and implications stemmed from the main findings of our research.

Reviewers’ Remark:
4. Please review the entire Conclusions section. Rewrite more critically.
Change or Comment:
We have carefully rewritten the Conclusions to adopt a more critical perspective. Now it synthesizes the main findings, explicitly distinguishes between theoretical and practical contributions, acknowledges the key limitations of the study, and outlines concrete directions for future research. Moreover, we consolidated the discussion of contributions to emphasize the study’s added value in relation to existing leadership and innovation literature.
Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Close
Report a concern
Respond or Comment

COMMENTS ON THIS REPORT

Author Response 28 Jan 2026

Tobias A. Parodi-Camano, Industrial Engineering Department, Universidad de Cordoba, Montería, Colombia

28 Jan 2026

Author Response

Reviewers’ Remark:
1. Please, improve the storyline of your paper. The Introduction must be reviewed to present a relevant research gap.
Change or Comment:
We have revised the Introduction to ... Continue reading Reviewers’ Remark:
1. Please, improve the storyline of your paper. The Introduction must be reviewed to present a relevant research gap.
Change or Comment:
We have revised the Introduction to strengthen the narrative progression from prior literature to the study’s objectives. Specifically, we clarified how existing research on CEO personality, leadership, and innovation remains scarce, particularly in the context of MSMEs in emerging economies. Then, we stressed how the particular conditions faced by Colombian MSMEs highlights the relevance of CEO-level factors, making the motivation for the proposed integrative model clear. Also, we updated the literature base with recent papers (from 2021 onward) to support the gap identification and hypotheses, while retaining seminal works that provide essential theoretical foundations.

Reviewers’ Remark:
2. Please, provide a paragraph with all the contributions of this paper and present citations to prove each contribution.
Change or Comment:
We have included a paragraph in the Conclusions section outlining the main contributions of the study. Each contribution is backed by relevant prior research works.

Reviewers’ Remark:
3. Please provide better policy recommendations or practical implications. The current version is weak.
Change or Comment:
We have added two paragraphs within the Discussion section providing more detailed and comprehensive policy recommendations and implications stemmed from the main findings of our research.

Reviewers’ Remark:
4. Please review the entire Conclusions section. Rewrite more critically.
Change or Comment:
We have carefully rewritten the Conclusions to adopt a more critical perspective. Now it synthesizes the main findings, explicitly distinguishes between theoretical and practical contributions, acknowledges the key limitations of the study, and outlines concrete directions for future research. Moreover, we consolidated the discussion of contributions to emphasize the study’s added value in relation to existing leadership and innovation literature.
Reviewers’ Remark:
1. Please, improve the storyline of your paper. The Introduction must be reviewed to present a relevant research gap.
Change or Comment:
We have revised the Introduction to strengthen the narrative progression from prior literature to the study’s objectives. Specifically, we clarified how existing research on CEO personality, leadership, and innovation remains scarce, particularly in the context of MSMEs in emerging economies. Then, we stressed how the particular conditions faced by Colombian MSMEs highlights the relevance of CEO-level factors, making the motivation for the proposed integrative model clear. Also, we updated the literature base with recent papers (from 2021 onward) to support the gap identification and hypotheses, while retaining seminal works that provide essential theoretical foundations.

Reviewers’ Remark:
2. Please, provide a paragraph with all the contributions of this paper and present citations to prove each contribution.
Change or Comment:
We have included a paragraph in the Conclusions section outlining the main contributions of the study. Each contribution is backed by relevant prior research works.

Reviewers’ Remark:
3. Please provide better policy recommendations or practical implications. The current version is weak.
Change or Comment:
We have added two paragraphs within the Discussion section providing more detailed and comprehensive policy recommendations and implications stemmed from the main findings of our research.

Reviewers’ Remark:
4. Please review the entire Conclusions section. Rewrite more critically.
Change or Comment:
We have carefully rewritten the Conclusions to adopt a more critical perspective. Now it synthesizes the main findings, explicitly distinguishes between theoretical and practical contributions, acknowledges the key limitations of the study, and outlines concrete directions for future research. Moreover, we consolidated the discussion of contributions to emphasize the study’s added value in relation to existing leadership and innovation literature.
Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Close
Report a concern

Comments on this article Comments (1)

Version 2

VERSION 2 PUBLISHED 28 Jan 2026

Revised

Comment

Version 1

VERSION 1 PUBLISHED 26 Nov 2025

Discussion is closed on this version, please comment on the latest version above.

Reader Comment 03 Dec 2025

Rubén Baena-Navarro, Department of Systems Engineer, Universidad de Cordoba, Montería, Colombia

03 Dec 2025

Reader Comment

The manuscript addresses a relevant and increasingly discussed topic within organizational and innovation studies: the extent to which CEO personality traits, transformational leadership, and innovative behavior shape innovation capabilities in ... Continue reading The manuscript addresses a relevant and increasingly discussed topic within organizational and innovation studies: the extent to which CEO personality traits, transformational leadership, and innovative behavior shape innovation capabilities in MSMEs. The conceptual framing is well crafted, and the integration of the HEXACO model with leadership and innovation literature provides a nuanced view of how executive characteristics influence firm-level outcomes in resource-constrained settings. Taken together, the theoretical scaffolding is coherent and positions the study within contemporary debates in the field.

That said, a few methodological clarifications could enhance the manuscript’s transparency. Several subscales exhibit moderate internal consistency. While this does not undermine the overall analytical approach, offering a short explanation of how these dimensions were incorporated into the SEM would allow readers to better assess the robustness of the modeling strategy. Even so, the structural modeling is generally well executed and reflects a thoughtful application of established techniques.
It may also be worthwhile to elaborate briefly on the decision to retain only two HEXACO traits as primary predictors. The choice is defensible; still, a concise reference to whether alternative specifications were considered could help illustrate the rationale behind favoring a more parsimonious structure. Such clarifications typically strengthen the interpretive logic without adding undue complexity.

The discussion section formulates conceptually relevant connections. Nonetheless, because the study is cross-sectional, a slight adjustment in phrasing could ensure that the interpretations remain within an associative rather than causal frame. This alignment tends to reinforce methodological coherence while preserving the value of the findings.

The manuscript contributes meaningfully to research on leadership and innovation in MSMEs. With a few refinements in methodological reporting and interpretive framing, the study can further enhance its clarity and usefulness for scholars examining the interplay between personality, leadership, and innovation performance in Latin American contexts.
The manuscript addresses a relevant and increasingly discussed topic within organizational and innovation studies: the extent to which CEO personality traits, transformational leadership, and innovative behavior shape innovation capabilities in MSMEs. The conceptual framing is well crafted, and the integration of the HEXACO model with leadership and innovation literature provides a nuanced view of how executive characteristics influence firm-level outcomes in resource-constrained settings. Taken together, the theoretical scaffolding is coherent and positions the study within contemporary debates in the field.

That said, a few methodological clarifications could enhance the manuscript’s transparency. Several subscales exhibit moderate internal consistency. While this does not undermine the overall analytical approach, offering a short explanation of how these dimensions were incorporated into the SEM would allow readers to better assess the robustness of the modeling strategy. Even so, the structural modeling is generally well executed and reflects a thoughtful application of established techniques.
It may also be worthwhile to elaborate briefly on the decision to retain only two HEXACO traits as primary predictors. The choice is defensible; still, a concise reference to whether alternative specifications were considered could help illustrate the rationale behind favoring a more parsimonious structure. Such clarifications typically strengthen the interpretive logic without adding undue complexity.

The discussion section formulates conceptually relevant connections. Nonetheless, because the study is cross-sectional, a slight adjustment in phrasing could ensure that the interpretations remain within an associative rather than causal frame. This alignment tends to reinforce methodological coherence while preserving the value of the findings.

The manuscript contributes meaningfully to research on leadership and innovation in MSMEs. With a few refinements in methodological reporting and interpretive framing, the study can further enhance its clarity and usefulness for scholars examining the interplay between personality, leadership, and innovation performance in Latin American contexts.
Competing Interests: No competing interests declared. Close
Report a concern
Discussion is closed on this version, please comment on the latest version above.

Open Peer Review

Reviewer Status

Reviewer Reports

	Invited Reviewers
	1	2
Version 2 (revision) 28 Jan 26
Version 1 26 Nov 25	read	read

Diogo Ferraz, University of Sao Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil
Hatinah Abu Bakar, Universiti Teknologi Mara, Shah Alam, Malaysia

Comments on this article

All Comments(1)

Add a comment

Browse by related subjects

Back to all reports

Reviewer Report

7 Views

12 Jan 2026 | for Version 1

Hatinah Abu Bakar, Universiti Teknologi Mara, Shah Alam, Malaysia

7 Views Cite this report Responses(1)

Approved With Reservations

Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature?

Partly
Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound?

Partly
Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others?

Partly
If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate?

Partly
Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility?

Partly
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results?

Yes

Competing Interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Reviewer Expertise

My research interests encompass entrepreneurship, management, and organizational behavior, particularly in relation to organizational strategy, leadership, and entrepreneurial performance.

Respond to this report

Responses (1)

Author Response

28 Jan 2026

Tobias A. Parodi-Camano, Industrial Engineering Department, Universidad de Cordoba, Montería, Colombia

Reviewers’ Remark:
1. The title "CEO Dimensions and Their Impact on Innovation Capabilities: An Empirical Study of Colombian MSMEs" is straightforward and informative; advisable, it is recommended to include "mediation" as a major contribution of the article lies in testing a mediation model.
Change or Comment:
We have modified the title to stress the use of mediation in the model. The updated title is: “CEO Dimensions and Their Mediating Role on Innovation Capabilities: An Empirical Study of Colombian MSMEs”

Reviewers’ Remark:
2. The abstract well written nonetheless, it does not clearly address the mediating function of essential constructions within the suggested model.
Change or Comment:
We have modified the abstract to make highlight mediation more explicitly.

Reviewers’ Remark:
3. Introduction
This study focuses on MSMEs in Colombia, however there is a lacking of information about Colombian MSMEs. Moreover the problem statement does not adequately address the challenges or issues and research gaps related to Colombian MSMEs.

The paragraph is well written and conceptually coherent; however, several cited sources exceed the commonly preferred 5-year.
Moreover, there is lacking discussion on transformational leadership as mediator.
Change or Comment:
We have strengthened the Introduction section by explicitly discussing the structural and innovation-related challenges faced by Colombian MSMEs, including limited R&D investment, institutional constraints, and weak innovation ecosystems. Also, we have clarified how these contextual factors amplify the role of CEOs in fostering innovation outcomes, thus reinforcing the relevance of our research gap in the Colombian MSMEs context.

Additionally, we have included more recent (from 2021 onward) to support the research gap identification and give support to the research hypotheses. Nevertheless, we consider that some older research works provide a strong theoretical background, as well as some others are seminal works that are relevant to this date. Thus, we have kept some of them.

Reviewers’ Remark:
4. Methods
The paragraph clearly states the target population (CEOs or top executives of MSMEs in Colombia) and appropriately justifies the use of purposive and convenience sampling given practical constraints. However, to strengthen the sampling justification and enhance the generalizability of the study, the authors are encouraged to provide official statistics on the total number of MSMEs in Colombia.

It is advisable for the authors to provide more detailed information regarding the screening and inclusion criteria, including the procedures used to identify and select eligible CEOs for the study

The description of SEM could be more precise by indicating whether CB-SEM or PLS-SEM was employed and why this approach was appropriate for the study’s objectives (e.g., theory testing vs. prediction).

Change or Comment:

To strengthen the sampling justification and contextualize the scope of the target population, we have added (in Subsection 2.2 - Participants and Sampling) official statistics indicating that Colombia has more than 1.7 million MSMEs, representing over 90% of the country’s productive units. This information highlights the scale of the population under study and further supports the use of purposive and convenience sampling given the practical constraints associated with accessing CEOs of MSMEs.

Moreover, we have added the inclusion criteria used for the CEOs screening process (in Subsection 2.2 - Participants and Sampling).

We have clarified in the Methods section (in Subsection 2.5) that a covariance-based SEM (CB-SEM) approach was employed using the lavaan package in R. We further justified this choice by noting that the study is theory-driven and focused on hypothesis testing and mediation analysis rather than prediction

Reviewers’ Remark:
5. Results
Advisable do not used word "WE". Can change "to this study" or "this research".
Advisable for correlational analysis explained in result not as a correction structure (figure 2)
Change or Comment:
We have changed the pronoun “we” for “this study” (or something along those lines) as suggested throughout the entire manuscript.

Reviewers’ Remark:
6. Discussion and Conclusion
Well discussed.
Change or Comment:
We thank the reviewer for their feedback on this matter.

Reviewers’ Remark:
7. Overall Comment
The authors are encouraged to review the overall flow and organization of the manuscript. In particular:
(i) The placement of Section 2.6 (Ethical Considerations) may be reconsidered, as its current location may not best align with the manuscript structure.
(ii) The literature discussion could be further refined to ensure clearer linkage with the research objectives.
(iii) The statistical analysis and results sections may be combined into a single Findings and Analysis section to enhance clarity and coherence.
Change or Comment:
Overall Comment
The authors are encouraged to review the overall flow and organization of the manuscript. In particular:
(i) The placement of Section 2.6 (Ethical Considerations) may be reconsidered, as its current location may not best align with the manuscript structure.
(ii) The literature discussion could be further refined to ensure clearer linkage with the research objectives.
(iii) The statistical analysis and results sections may be combined into a single Findings and Analysis section to enhance clarity and coherence.

View more View less

Competing Interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Back to all reports

Reviewer Report

9 Views

07 Jan 2026 | for Version 1

Diogo Ferraz, University of Sao Paulo, São Paulo, State of São Paulo, Brazil

9 Views Cite this report Responses(1)

Approved With Reservations

Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature?

Yes
Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound?

Yes
Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others?

Yes
If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate?

Yes
Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility?

Yes
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results?

Yes

Competing Interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Reviewer Expertise

Economic Complexity, Innovation, Sustainable Development.

Respond to this report

Responses (1)

Author Response

28 Jan 2026

Tobias A. Parodi-Camano, Industrial Engineering Department, Universidad de Cordoba, Montería, Colombia

Reviewers’ Remark:
1. Please, improve the storyline of your paper. The Introduction must be reviewed to present a relevant research gap.
Change or Comment:
We have revised the Introduction to strengthen the narrative progression from prior literature to the study’s objectives. Specifically, we clarified how existing research on CEO personality, leadership, and innovation remains scarce, particularly in the context of MSMEs in emerging economies. Then, we stressed how the particular conditions faced by Colombian MSMEs highlights the relevance of CEO-level factors, making the motivation for the proposed integrative model clear. Also, we updated the literature base with recent papers (from 2021 onward) to support the gap identification and hypotheses, while retaining seminal works that provide essential theoretical foundations.

Reviewers’ Remark:
2. Please, provide a paragraph with all the contributions of this paper and present citations to prove each contribution.
Change or Comment:
We have included a paragraph in the Conclusions section outlining the main contributions of the study. Each contribution is backed by relevant prior research works.

Reviewers’ Remark:
3. Please provide better policy recommendations or practical implications. The current version is weak.
Change or Comment:
We have added two paragraphs within the Discussion section providing more detailed and comprehensive policy recommendations and implications stemmed from the main findings of our research.

Reviewers’ Remark:
4. Please review the entire Conclusions section. Rewrite more critically.
Change or Comment:
We have carefully rewritten the Conclusions to adopt a more critical perspective. Now it synthesizes the main findings, explicitly distinguishes between theoretical and practical contributions, acknowledges the key limitations of the study, and outlines concrete directions for future research. Moreover, we consolidated the discussion of contributions to emphasize the study’s added value in relation to existing leadership and innovation literature.

View more View less

Competing Interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article:

Approved - the paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested

Approved with reservations - A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit.

Not approved - fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions

[1] Antonio Bedoya M, Pérez E, Zapata-Molina C, et al.: Entrepreneurial Orientation and Transformational Leadership for the Development of Innovation Capabilities. Quality Innovation Prosperity/Kvalita Inovácia Prosperita. 2024; 28(1): 174–192. Publisher Full Text

[2] Ashton MC, Lee K: The HEXACO model of personality structure and the importance of the H factor. Soc. Personal. Psychol. Compass. 2008a; 2(5): 1952–1962. Publisher Full Text

[3] Ashton MC, Lee K: The prediction of Honesty–Humility-related criteria by the HEXACO and Five-Factor Models of personality. J. Res. Pers. 2008b; 42(5): 1216–1228. Publisher Full Text

[4] Ashton MC, Lee K: The HEXACO–60: A short measure of the major dimensions of personality. J. Pers. Assess. 2009; 91(4): 340–345. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[5] Bartlett MS: The effect of standardization on a χ² approximation in factor analysis. Biometrika. 1951; 38(3/4): 337–344. Publisher Full Text

[6] Bass BM, Avolio BJ: Multifactor leadership questionnaire. West. J. Nurs. Res. 1996.

[7] Bass BM, Riggio RE: Transformational leadership. Psychology Press; 2006.

[8] Batista-Foguet JM, Esteve M, van Witteloostuijn A : Measuring leadership an assessment of the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire. Plos One. 2021; 16(7): e0254329. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[9] BBVA Research: Colombia: A review to Micro and SMEs in Colombia. 2024, February. Reference Source

[10] Bedoya MA, Pérez-Sanchéz E, Zapata C, et al.: Entrepreneurial orientation and transformational leadership for the development of innovation capabilities. Quality Innovation Prosperity. 2024; 28(1): 174–192. Publisher Full Text

[11] Calik E, Calisir F, Cetinguc B: A scale development for innovation capability measurement. J. Adv. Manag. Sci. 2017; 5(2): 69–76. Publisher Full Text

[12] Cepal NU: Panorama Social de América Latina y el Caribe 2022: la transformación de la educación como base para el desarrollo sostenible.2022.

[13] Darouichi A, Kunisch S, Menz M, et al.: CEO tenure: An integrative review and pathways for future research. Corp. Gov. 2021; 29(6): 661–683. Publisher Full Text

[14] Dziuban CD, Shirkey EC: When is a correlation matrix appropriate for factor analysis? Some decision rules. Psychol. Bull. 1974; 81(6): 358–361. Publisher Full Text

[15] Edeh FO, Zayed NM, Nitsenko V, et al.: Predicting innovation capability through knowledge management in the banking sector. J. Risk Financ. Manag. 2022; 15(7): 312. Publisher Full Text

[16] Escobar-Castillo A, Velandia-Pacheco G, Navarro-Manotas E, et al.: Factors that impact the innovation capability in MSMEs: case of Colombia’s Atlántico Department. Procedia Comput. Sci. 2023; 224: 490–494. Publisher Full Text

[17] Geerts JM: Maximizing the impact and ROI of leadership development: A theory-and evidence-informed framework. Behav. Sci. 2024; 14(10): 955. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[18] Hair JF Jr, Hult GTM, Ringle CM, et al.: An introduction to structural equation modeling. Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) using R: a workbook. Springer; 2021; pp. 1–29.

[19] Hambrick DC, Mason PA: Upper echelons: The organization as a reflection of its top managers. Acad. Manag. Rev. 1984; 9(2): 193–206. Publisher Full Text

[20] Hock-Doepgen M, Montasser JS, Klein S, et al.: The role of innovative work behavior and organizational support for business model innovation. R&D Manag. 2025; 55(1): 7–26. Publisher Full Text

[21] Kaiser HF: An index of factor simplicity. Psychometrika. 1974; 39: 31–36. Publisher Full Text

[22] Hock-Doepgen M, Montasser JS, Klein S, et al.: The role of innovative work behavior and organizational support for business model innovation. R&D Manag. 2025; 55(1): 7–26. Publisher Full Text

[23] Janssen O: Job demands, perceptions of effort-reward fairness and innovative work behaviour. J. Occup. Organ. Psychol. 2000; 73(3): 287–302. Publisher Full Text

[24] Jun K, Lee J: Transformational leadership and followers’ innovative behavior: Roles of commitment to change and organizational support for creativity. Behav. Sci. 2023; 13(4): 320. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[25] Kim JY, Yoon D-Y: How transformational leadership of managers affects employee innovative behavior in IT corporations. Front. Psychol. 2025; 16: 1565307. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[26] Lee K, Ashton MC: The HEXACO personality factors in the indigenous personality lexicons of English and 11 other languages. J. Pers. 2008; 76(5): 1001–1054. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[27] Mai NK, Do TT, Phan NA: The impact of leadership traits and organizational learning on business innovation. J. Innov. Knowl. 2022; 7(3): 100204. Publisher Full Text

[28] Mismetti M, Rovelli P, Bettinelli C, et al.: In the pursuit of innovation: The role of top management team functional diversity and open discussion in family firm innovation intentions. J. Prod. Innov. Manag. 2025. Publisher Full Text

[29] O’Reilly C, Cao X, Sull D: CEO personality: the cornerstone of organizational culture? Group Org. Manag. 2025; 50(1): 82–118. Publisher Full Text

[30] Obeidat U, Obeidat B, Alrowwad A, et al.: The effect of intellectual capital on competitive advantage: The mediating role of innovation. Management Science Letters. 2021; 11(4): 1331–1344. Publisher Full Text

[31] Obilor EI, Amadi EC: Test for significance of Pearson’s correlation coefficient. International Journal of Innovative Mathematics, Statistics & Energy Policies. 2018; 6(1): 11–23.

[32] Ocasal DLM, Lugo ALV, Melo LAB, et al.: Innovative thinking in the leaders and competitiveness of SMEs in the Industrial sector in Colombia. Procedia Comput. Sci. 2022; 210: 333–338. Publisher Full Text

[33] Pan Y, Verbeke A, Yuan W: CEO transformational leadership and corporate entrepreneurship in China. Manag. Organ. Rev. 2021; 17(1): 45–76. Publisher Full Text

[34] Parodi-Camano T, Vidal-Durango J-V, Portnoy I: CEO, innovation, and business performance–A bibliometric analysis and literature review.2025.

[35] Restrepo-Morales JA, Loaiza OL, Vanegas JG: Determinants of innovation: A multivariate analysis in Colombian micro, small and medium-sized enterprises. J. Econ. Financ. Adm. Sci. 2019; 24(47): 97–112. Publisher Full Text

[36] Restrepo-Morales JA, Valencia-Cárdenas M, López-Cadavid DA: Interplay of customer satisfaction, innovation, and product quality: Key determinants of company performance. J. Technol. Manag. Innov. 2024; 19(2): 28–42. Publisher Full Text

[37] Rosseel Y: lavaan: An R package for structural equation modeling. J. Stat. Softw. 2012; 48(1): 1–36.

[38] Salessi S, Etchevers MR: Innovative work behavior: Development and validation of a scale for teachers. Acta de Investigación Psicológica. 2020; 10(3): 112–123. Publisher Full Text

[39] Tavakol M, Dennick R: Making sense of Cronbach’s alpha. Int. J. Med. Educ. 2011; 2: 53–55. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[40] Teece DJ: Explicating dynamic capabilities: the nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strateg. Manag. J. 2007; 28(13): 1319–1350. Publisher Full Text

[41] Tegethoff T, Santa R, Bucheli JM, et al.: Sustainable development through eco-innovation: A focus on small and medium enterprises in Colombia. PloS One. 2025; 20(1): e0316620. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[42] Yu J, Xiang K: Transformational leadership, organizational resilience, and team innovation performance: A model for testing moderation and mediation effects. Behav. Sci. 2024; 15(1): 10. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[43] Zettler I, Thielmann I, Hilbig BE, et al.: The nomological net of the HEXACO model of personality: A large-scale meta-analytic investigation. Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 2020; 15(3): 723–760. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[44] Zhu H, Jia F, Zhang Y, et al.: The Relationship Between the Big Five Personality Model and Innovation Behavior: A Three-Level Meta-Analysis. Behav. Sci. 2025; 15(9): 1143. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

CEO Dimensions and Their Mediating Role on Innovation Capabilities: An Empirical Study of Colombian MSMEs

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Keywords

Revised Amendments from Version 1

1. Introduction

2. Methods

2.1 Study design

2.2 Participants and sampling

2.3 Instruments

2.4 Data collection

2.5 Statistical analysis

2.6 Theoretical model and hypotheses

Figure 1. Theoretical model of the influence of CEO dimensions on innovation capabilities.

3. Results

3.1 Descriptive statistics

Table 1. Descriptive statistics of main constructs (n = 106).

Table 2. Factorability analysis outcomes.

3.2 Correlational analysis

Figure 2. Correlation structure.

3.3 Confirmatory path analysis

Figure 3. SEM model structure.

4. Discussion

5. Conclusions

Ethics and consent

Data availability

References

Comments on this article Comments (1)

Open Peer Review

Comments on this article Comments (1)

Open Peer Review

Reviewer Status

Reviewer Reports

Comments on this article

Browse by related subjects

Competing Interests Policy

Stay Updated