Search results

Strategic entrepreneurship rejuvenates firms to achieve a competitive advantage in current markets. It is effective in forming corporate entrepreneurship and involves the simultaneous opportunity-seeking and advantage-seeking behaviors of firms. The aim of this paper is to investigate the mediating effect of strategic entrepreneurship in the relationship between corporate entrepreneurship and firm performance through the resource-based view.

Adopting a quantitative research method and structural equation modeling technique, structural models were developed to test the research hypotheses. To this end, a questionnaire survey was conducted among 103 financial technology companies in Iran.

The results support the proposed hypotheses. The findings indicate that corporate entrepreneurship and strategic entrepreneurship are positively related to firm performance. They also reveal the mediating effect of strategic entrepreneurship in the relationship between corporate entrepreneurship and firm performance. In the developing context of Iran, financial technology companies are more likely to employ corporate entrepreneurship and strategic entrepreneurship to achieve firm performance.

The current study contributes to the literature on strategic entrepreneurship by employing a resource-based view and exploring the relationship between firm capabilities (i.e. strategic entrepreneurship) and firm performance. Applying a resource-based view leads to a better understanding of strategic entrepreneurship. Finally, this study singles out and discusses the various features that characterize the implementation of strategic entrepreneurship by Iranian financial technology companies to reach a competitive advantage.

The question of how to integrate strategic and entrepreneurial management to achieve a better balance between advantage‐ and opportunity‐seeking behaviours has received increased academic and practitioner interest in recent years. However, little consensus exists over the meaning of this concept of “strategic entrepreneurship” (SE), its constituents and its operation. This paper aims to address these issues.

In response, the paper reports a thorough review of SE's origins and current conceptualizations to map its core components and charts critical research directions for this exciting emerging field. Analysis of the terrain of SE reveals eight core components drawn from entrepreneurship and strategic management that captures conditions necessary for its application.

From this analysis, the paper offers an alternative model of SE, and charts four key research areas with accompanying research questions to inspire future research. These outcomes offer avenues to further sharpen the understanding of how SE might operate both in theory and practice.

A relative lack of analysis and integration of external factors influencing and shaping the process of SE represents a limitation. Also, whilst the authors have attempted to review, assess and understand its position in the entrepreneurship and strategic management literature, the full range of its strengths and weaknesses cannot be grasped.

The paper illustrates how these four question areas pose significant promise to better understand the development and application of SE in research and in practice.

The purpose of this study is to investigate the impact of strategic entrepreneurship on explorative and exploitative innovation in the presence of strategic learning capabilities. This study has also explored the moderating role of structural organicity between strategic entrepreneurship and strategic learning capabilities.

A total of 298 employees working in software houses of Pakistan participated in the study. The study used a questionnaire-based survey through “google forms” on convenience basis, and structural equation modeling was used to test the hypotheses.

The results supported the positive association of strategic entrepreneurship with explorative and exploitative dimensions of innovation. Further, strategic learning capabilities was noted to mediate the association between strategic entrepreneurship and explorative innovation; however, it did not mediate the association between strategic entrepreneurship and exploitative innovation. Finally, the study examined the moderating role of structural organicity and noted a higher positive impact of strategic entrepreneurship on learning capabilities in the case of high structural organicity.

The study collected data from a developing country during COVID-19, which may affect generalizability. The study suggests management to work on employees’ learning capabilities to cultivate the benefits of explorative innovation.

This study explores the mediating role of strategic learning capabilities between strategic entrepreneurship and innovation ambidexterity. In addition, it explores the conditional effect of structural organicity to trigger strategic learning capabilities.

This study proposes a logic to enable strategic entrepreneurship for export firms through absorptive capacity and adaptive culture to capitalise on the knowledge intensity from internationalisation.

The study sample comprises 422 key role employees at 98 export firms in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam. The data are analysed using a structural equation model.

The results reveal that the firm's knowledge intensity may serve as a reservoir, absorbing and reconciling knowledge acquired from internationalisation and redistributing it to strategic entrepreneurship. A firm's absorptive capacity and adaptive culture can act as buffers, allowing internationalisation knowledge to permeate and transfer to administrative bodies and fostering strategic entrepreneurship.

This study proposes an integrated model of the relationship between the degree of internationalisation and strategic entrepreneurship through novel lenses of knowledge-based perspective with the organisational capabilities.

Strategic entrepreneurship (SE) exemplifies the interconnection of strategic management and entrepreneurship, inferring that organisations could yield tremendous wealth by synchronously pursuing advantage- and opportunity-seeking behaviour. This study examines how small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) thrive SE by leveraging organisational change forces.

This study uses a covariance-based structural equation model (CB-SEM) based on 477 key role employees in 95 import and export SMEs in Vietnam.

SE in SMEs requires organisational change forces, namely leadership, employee engagement and buffering foundation of adaptive culture (AC). In particular, transformational leadership (TL) is beneficial and significantly influences SE behaviour via the mediating role of organisational change commitment. In addition, the adaptable culture of SMEs can serve as a buffer, allowing TL concepts to permeate and transfer to administrative bodies, thereby encouraging SE.

This paper describes why and how SME leaders can make decisions and manage SE to generate a comparative edge. Leaders must understand and assess organisational change forces that play a crucial role in thriving SE, which must pay considerable attention to employees' commitment to change and create an AC.

The findings indicate that achieving SE in SMEs requires a blend of core organisational change forces, such as leadership, cohesive employees and an environment that facilitates adaptation.

In this chapter, the authors examine the main effect of entrepreneurial orientation (EO) – a firm’s strategic entrepreneurial posture – on balancing exploration and exploitation in the form of organizational ambidexterity. Resource-constrained firms face an imperative to conduct innovative activities, survive hostile environments, and compete with larger and more resource-rich firms. The authors contend that firms can address these potential impediments through achieving ambidexterity via dynamic capabilities, firm-specific resources, and institutional factors. Specifically, The authors review the EO and ambidexterity literatures and summarize extant arguments related to the relationship between EO, exploration, and exploitation. The authors also discuss the most prominent scales and measures of EO, exploration, and exploitation. Moreover, the authors discuss operationalizational challenges that should be considered when conducting EO–ambidexterity research and suggest future research directions by specifying an agenda outlining useful theoretical perspectives and various contingencies that may influence the EO–ambidexterity relationship.

Public service organizations (PSOs) face a critical dilemma: how to generate more value for society but with a much-reduced resource base. The article advances the strategy axis of entrepreneurial orientation (EO) research by examining EO and proactive market orientation (PMO) as joint-strategic approaches to this end, and how the characteristics of public managers may moderate the paths to value creation.

The article draws on a unique survey-based dataset developed from Brazilian PSOs and employs structural equation modelling for hypotheses testing. Post-hoc analysis, by way of analysis of variance, demonstrates the joint impact of the two strategic approaches on public service performance level.

Entrepreneurial and PMOs are revealed as routes to enhanced service performance, but managers’ domain expertise negatively moderates these relationships. Post-hoc analysis reveals how organizations displaying higher levels of both orientations realize superior performance, relative to those favouring either/or.

The study contributes new evidence for EO model specificity by examining a narrowly bounded sample of PSOs; addresses the neglect of other outcome variables beyond traditional performance, showing the value of EO for society and offers new insights to the managerial conditions that moderate the positive synergies between EO, PMO and service performance.

Purpose – Although there is extensive work on labor mobility, research on entrepreneurial mobility is fragmented and many aspects are largely neglected. We develop a framework for analysis that integrates different perspectives on entrepreneurial mobility to provide a broad agenda for future research.

Design/methodology – We build upon the strategic entrepreneurship, entrepreneurial behaviour theory, resource-based theory and other literatures, to distinguish four quadrants involving high and low geographical mobility and high and low organizational mobility.

Findings – Within each quadrant we identify different types of entrepreneurial mobility, specifically habitual entrepreneurs, management buyouts, university spin-offs, returnee entrepreneurs and transnational entrepreneurs. Issues concerning the development of research programs and methods, with particular emphasis on datasets, are discussed.

Originality/value – It is hoped that this chapter will spur entrepreneurship and strategy scholars to recognize that the scope of the entrepreneurial mobility concept is considerably greater than hitherto appreciated, providing interesting new avenues for theoretical and methodological development in this area.

The purpose of this paper is to unpack the underlying mechanisms of entrepreneurs' passion, orientation and behavior by investigating the role of rational and nonrational cognitive elements. Building on dual process theory and sociointuitionism, a conceptual model is proposed in order to explore the relationship between entrepreneurial passion, entrepreneurial orientation (EO) and strategic entrepreneurship behavior (SEB). Specifically, entrepreneurs' linear thinking styles (System 2) and nonlinear thinking styles (System 1) are hypothesized as being significant moderators of such a relationship.

Covariance-based structural equation modeling (CB-SEM) is used to empirically validate the proposed conceptual model and test the moderating hypotheses on a sample of 300 entrepreneurs actively involved in European small and medium enterprises (SMEs).

Entrepreneurial passion is shown to be a significant antecedent of EO, which, in turn, strongly influences SEB. Moreover, entrepreneurs' linear thinking style positively moderates the EO-SEB relationship, but not the link between passion and EO. Instead, a nonlinear thinking style positively moderates the relationship between passion and EO, but not the links between EO and SEB.

Entrepreneurs should trust their nonlinear thinking style – related to affective/emotive and intuitive information processing systems – to foster the effect of their entrepreneurial passion on EO. Furthermore, entrepreneurs should rely on a linear thinking style, namely the rational and deliberative cognitive processes, to enhance the impact of their EO on SEB.

Dual process theory and sociointuitionism are integrated to simultaneously investigate the effect of nonrational and rational cognitive mechanisms on entrepreneurs' orientation and behavior. Moreover, the proposed model is empirically tested on a sample of entrepreneurs working in SMEs located in Europe, which have received little attention from entrepreneurship scholars in comparison to their US counterparts. The authors’ findings suggest important implications for entrepreneurs, policymakers and entrepreneurial universities educators.

Theories develop over time and are influenced by both events and people. Looking primarily at the applications between contracting principal-agent relationships, the purpose of this paper is to explore how agency theory emerged from a number of economic and social developments. In doing so, the authors explain how this once dominant theory comes up short regarding varying realms of entrepreneurship as well as with multiple modern business phenomena.

The authors first present a brief overview of agency theory. Second, the authors identify major events and people and address how they impacted the development of agency theory. Third, the authors provide insights on agency theory across three contexts (strategic entrepreneurship, social entrepreneurship, and family business). Implications, limitations, and future research directions are then offered.

The authors provide a deeper understanding of agency theory, thus broadening its underpinnings and enabling readers to more readily understand why agency theory is limited in its explanation of certain and modern business phenomena. The authors find that some of the seminal influences to agency theory are quite dated which has limited its explanatory power in terms of the modern day business and with more recent disciplines such as entrepreneurship.

The authors are limited by their choices of major events that influenced agency theory at the expense of not being able to include everything that may have impacted the theory over time. These limitations, however, are offset by the research implications. As the authors highlight the underpinning of agency theory, the authors subsequently provide scholars and practitioners with five primary boundary conditions, each of which are in need of attention for agency theory to maintain relevant explanatory power.

A deeper understanding of agency theory can be gained by looking at its underpinnings. By presenting numerous principal-agent conflicts and demonstrating areas in which it has fallen short (i.e. entrepreneurship and more recent business phenomenon), we shed light on the obstacles agency theory must overcome in order to maintain its position as a prominent theory.