Gain more insight from your PLS-SEM results: The importance-performance map analysis

By Christian M. Ringle, Marko Sarstedt. Industrial management & data systems, 2016

1,342 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

How do digital capabilities affect firm performance? The mediating role of technological capabilities in the “new normal” (2022, methodology): “The SRMR for the model was less than 0.10, as suggested by Ringle, Sarstedt and Straub (2012) Table 3. shows that the deviations were not signi ﬁ cant because the 99 percent bootstrap quantiles of the three measures (SRMR, the unweighted least squares discrepancy dULS, and the geodetic discrepancy d”
An assessment of the use of partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) in hospitality research (2017, positive): “…and Ismail, 2016), consistent PLS (Bentler and Huang, 2014; Dijkstra and Henseler, 2015b), methods for uncovering unobserved heterogeneity (e.g., Becker et al., 2013; Ringle et al., 2014), and impact-performance map analyses (Ringle and Sarstedt, 2016)—see Hair et al. (2018) for an overview.”
When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM (2019, background): “More precisely, the IPMA compares the structural model’s total effects on a specific target construct with the average latent variable scores of this construct’s predecessors (Ringle and Sarstedt, 2016).”
A Review of Dynamic Capabilities, Innovation Capabilities, Entrepreneurial Capabilities and Their Consequences (2020, methodology): “More so, Smart PLS is suitable for simultaneously addressing multiple dependency associations with higher statistical efficiency (Ringle & Sarstedt, 2016).”