Search results

Entrepreneurial orientation (EO) has emerged as a core concept in the field of entrepreneurship. Yet, there continue to be questions about the nature of EO and how best to conceptualize and measure it. This chapter makes the case that EO has grown beyond its roots as a firm-level unidimensional strategy construct and that a new multidimensional version of EO is needed to capture the diverse manifestations and venues for entrepreneurial activity that are now evident around the world – global entrepreneurial orientation (GEO). Building on the five-dimension multidimensional view of EO set forth when Lumpkin and Dess (1996) extended the work of Miller (1983) and Covin and Slevin (1989, 1991), the chapter offers an updated definition of EO and a fresh interpretation of why EO matters theoretically. Despite earnest efforts to reconcile the different approaches to EO, in order to move the study of EO and the theoretical conversation about it forward, we maintain that as a group of scholars and a field, we need to acknowledge that two different versions of EO have emerged. Given that, we consider original approaches to measuring EO, evaluate formative measurement models, consider multiple levels of analysis, call for renewed attention to EO configurations, and discuss whether there is a theory of EO.

The present study examines entrepreneurship in established firms holistically and critically. The authors start by reviewing previous research and highlight a variety of definitional, conceptual, methodological, contextual, and temporal factors that have been confounding the research. The authors then present a multidimensional framework that specifies a more nuanced picture of the determinants, motives, activities, and consequences of corporate in established firms. Finally, the authors discuss conceptual, methodological, and practical implications, as well as outline future research avenues.

The concept of entrepreneurial orientation (EO) attracts considerable attention in the organizational literature. Focusing on issues related to measurement of EO and using a three-pronged framework to organize the growing diversity of EO measures, the authors conduct a systematic literature review on how EO is captured and assessed in the empirical literature. Specifically, the authors classify 551 empirical works according to the approach to measurement (i.e., managerial perceptions, content analysis, and resource allocations) which allows the authors to document and critically analyze prevalent measurement practices within the literature. Based on the synthesis, the authors identify key measurement-related tensions that may inhibit cumulative knowledge development in the area of EO, such as ad hoc modification of seminal scales and lack of theoretical clarity with respect to measurement. Additionally, the authors find that research into the antecedents of EO as well as causality and temporality of the phenomenon is underdeveloped, which the authors attribute to scarce use of mixed methods. The authors conclude chapter by discussing the challenges involved in measuring EO and offering possible recommendations for future inquiry.

Patriotism is often described as the “love of country” that individuals display in the acclamation of their national community. Despite the prominence of this sentiment in various societies around the world, organizational research on patriotism is largely absent. This omission is surprising because entrepreneurs, human resource (HR) divisions, and firms frequently embrace both patriotism and patriotic organizational practices. These procedures include (among other interventions) national symbol embracing, HR practices targeted toward military members and first responders, the adulation of patriots and celebration of patriotic events, and patriotic-oriented corporate social responsibility (CSR). Here, the authors argue that research on HR management and organization studies will likely be further enhanced with a deeper understanding of the national obligation that can spur employee productivity and loyalty. In an attempt to jumpstart the collective understanding of this phenomenon, the authors explore the antecedents of patriotic organizational practices, namely, the effects of founder orientation, employee dispersion, and firm strategy. It is suggested that HR practices such as these lead to a patriotic organizational image, which in turn impacts investor, customer, and employee responses. Notably, the effect of a patriotic organizational image on firm-related outcomes is largely contingent on how it fits with the patriotic views of other stakeholders, such as investors, customers, and employees. After outlining this model, the authors then present a thought experiment of how this model may appear in action. The authors then discuss ways the field can move forward in studying patriotism in HR management and organizational contexts by outlining several future directions that span multiple levels (i.e., micro and macro). Taken together, in this chapter, the authors introduce a conversation of something quite prevalent and largely unheeded – the patriotic organization.

Building on the entrepreneurship, marketing and strategic management literature, we propose a conceptual model to investigate the effects of entrepreneurial strategic posture (ESP), perceived environmental uncertainty and international diversifi cation strategy on performance. The ESP‐International diversification‐Performance relationship is investigated using a contingency framework. Entrepreneurial strategic posture is postulated to influence the use of international diversifi cation strategy of entrepreneurial fi rms. Moreover, perceived environmental uncertainty is hypothesized to strengthen the relationship between a firm’s entrepreneurial strategic posture and international diversification strategy, which ultimately affect the firm’s performance. Propositions for further empirical studies are provided in addition to managerial and theoretical contributions.

Recent studies have questioned the direct relationship between entrepreneurial orientation (EO) and firm performance (e.g., Rauch, Wiklund, Lumpkin, & Frese, 2009; Wales, Gupta, & Mousa, 2013). Following this stream of research, this study examines this relationship by identifying the intermediate steps between these two variables (Alegre & Chiva, 2013; Wales, 2016; Zahra, Sapienza, & Davidsson, 2006). EO is considered essential for new market entry and new business foundation, which is why this study focuses on startups. Startups search for viable business opportunities, and this search is highly dependent on organizational learning (Kreiser, 2011). Previous studies suggest that organizational learning mediates the relationship between EO and performance (e.g., Real, Roldan, & Leal, 2014; Wang, 2008). This study investigates the role of organizational learning in this relationship by analyzing how EO and absorptive capacity (AC) interact. We propose a more direct and fine-grained measure of entrepreneurial success by developing a conceptual model that includes opportunity identification as an early outcome measure for startups. Drawing on a sample of 95 academic spin-offs in the Netherlands, this study examines the mediating role of AC and market readiness in the relationship between EO and market opportunities. The findings indicate that AC and market readiness mediate the direct effect of EO on market opportunity identification. By using opportunity identification as an outcome measure for EO, this study adopts a more direct measure for firm performance, resonating with recent discussions on the main effect of EO for organizations. These findings suggest that academic spin-offs’ AC leads entrepreneurial efforts to achieve a better product-market fit, and in return, helps to identify more market opportunities.

Studies of entrepreneurial orientation tend to merge its three components‐proactiveness, risk-taking, and innovativeness‐into a monolithic construct and analyze its relationship with firm outcomes at one point in time. This has resulted in knowledge voids related to the relative importance of the different components, their specific effect on value created by the firm, and their evolution over time. The present study links each component of entrepreneurial orientation to economic value creation using a longitudinal dataset. Results provide support for hypothesized relationships. Implications and avenues for future research are discussed.

In family firms, growth is intricately linked not only to strategic business decisions but also to the dynamics of generational involvement and entrepreneurial orientation (EO). While previous research has explored the connection between family firm growth and EO, it often overlooks the moderating role that generational involvement could play in this relationship. To address this gap in the literature and investigate its potential impact, this study aims to examine how generational involvement shapes the effects of EO on growth. Based on a quantitative study involving 150 Tunisian family firms and employing a questionnaire-based approach along with structural equation modeling using SPSS 22 and AMOS software, the findings reveal that not all dimensions of EO equally contribute to growth. Specifically, proactiveness, competitive aggressiveness, and autonomy influence growth directly and in the presence of generational involvement as moderators. The effectiveness of these dimensions in driving growth is contingent upon the active and collaborative participation of diverse family generations in the entrepreneurial activities of the family firm. This research pinpoints the importance of family firms that wish to ensure long-term EO when multiple generations are involved. It also reaffirms the importance of these notions within family firms for sustaining long-term EO. Furthermore, this study advocates for additional empirical research on the potential role of generational involvement in establishing professionalization and family governance mechanisms. It seeks to explore their impact on the sustainability of entrepreneurial family firms.

Today, newly founded businesses are inevitably driven to start in a digital form from day 1. Moreover, most existing businesses conceive digitalization as an important part of their strategic orientation by developing and improving their digital assets and digitalizing their processes. By taking account of this development, this chapter investigates how entrepreneurial orientation (EO) affects a small firm’s proclivity to both digitization and internationalization and their performance that comes from it. Internationalization has been a key topic for many small- and medium-sized companies (SMEs) over the past decades. As digitization is currently taking over the helm from internationalization as the most pressing topic affecting business, we carried out research among SMEs to understand the interplay of these factors influencing business performance. The focus of the research was on the precursory factors inducing firm performance as well as on their interrelationships. Using a sample of 357 SMEs, EO is found to be significantly closely associated with an SME’s degree of digitization as well as with its overall performance. In contrast, EO does not affect the SME’s level of internationalization. This result is surprising considering that proactive and risk-taking firms tend to be more inclined to enter foreign and distant markets.

This chapter synthesizes works contained within the volume and paints a picture of where entrepreneurial orientation (EO) research stands today and where it is likely heading in the future. From the necessity for better theorizing and measurement to new directions and context, today’s research into EO is setting the foundation for future research that brings greater understanding to what it means for firms and organizations of all types to be entrepreneurial.