LOGIN TO YOUR ACCOUNT

Username
Password
Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Or use your Academic/Social account:

Congratulations!

You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.

Important!

Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Name:
Username:
Password:
Verify Password:
E-mail:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Publisher: Elsevier
Languages: English
Types: Article
Subjects:
This paper uncovers the complexity between Entrepreneurial Orientation (EO) and performance. The paper explores the effect of the threat of imitation, which is a key external factor to explain competitive dynamics, and hence highlights effectiveness of EO. Also the paper accounts for the role of upstream (technical) and downstream (marketing) capabilities as they influence effectiveness of EO. Our results show that, under threat of imitation, downstream marketing capabilities facilitate taping into opportunities derived from EO, which positively affects performance. Conversely, available upstream technical capabilities do not aim at EO when imitation threats exist in the environment. Of importance is that we question the complexity between EO and performance can be better understood using a configurational approach.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • Armstrong, J. S., & Overton, T. S. (1977). Estimating nonresponse bias in mail surveys. Journal of Marketing Research, 16, 396-402.
    • Arnold, H. (1982). Moderator variables: A clarification of conceptual, analytic and psychometric issues. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 29, 134-174.
    • Barney, J. (1991). Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage. Journal of Management, 17, 99-120.
    • Barreto, I. (2010). Dynamic Capabilities: A Review of Past Research and an Agenda for the Future. Jounal of Management, 36, 256-280.
    • Bowman, D., & Gatignon, H. (1995). Determinants of Competitor Response Time to a New project Introduction. Journal of Marketing Research, 32, 42-53.
    • Burns, T., & Stalker, G. (1961). The management of innovation. London: Tavistock Publications.
    • Carmeli, A. (2004). Assessing Core Intangible Resources. European Management Journal, 22, 110-122.
    • Chaganti, R., De Carolis, D., & Deeds, D. (1995). Predictors of Capital Structure in Small Ventures. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 20, 7-18.
    • Chandler, G., & Hanks, S. (1994). Market Attractiveness, Resource-Based Capabilities, Venture Strategies and Venture Performance. Journal of Business Venturing, 94, 331- 349.
    • Chaney, P., Devinney, T., & Winer, R. (1991). The impact of new product introductions on the market value of firms. Journal of Business Research, 64, 573-610.
    • Coeurderoy, R., & Durand, R. (2004). Leveraging the first mover advantage: proprietary technologies versus cost leadership. Journal of Business Research, 57, 583-590.
    • Cohen, J., & Cohen, P. (1983). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioural sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
    • Covin, J., Green, K., & Slevin, D. P. (2006). Strategic Process Effects on the Entrepreneurial Orientation-Sales Growth Rate Relationship. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 30, 57-81.
    • Covin, J. G., & Slevin, D. P. (1986). The development and testing of an organizational-level entrepreneurship scale. In R. Ronstadt, J. A. Hornaday, R. Peterson & K. H. Vespar (Eds.), (pp. 628-639). Wellseley, MA: Babson College.
    • Covin, J. G., & Slevin, D. P. (1989). Strategic management of small firms in hostile and benign environments. Strategic Management Journal, 10, 75-87.
    • Covin, J. G., & Slevin, D. P. (1991). A conceptual model of entrepreneurship as a firm behavior. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 16, 7-25.
    • Dess, G. G., Lumpkin, G. T., & Covin, J. G. (1997). Entrepreneurial strategy making and firm performance: tests of contingency and configurational models. Strategic Management Journal, 18, 677-695.
    • Dimitratos, P., Lioukas, S., & Carter, S. (2004). The relationship between entrepreneurship and international performance: The importance of domestic environment. International Business Review, 13, 19-41.
    • Doty, D. H., Glick, W. H., & Huber, G. P. F. (1993). it, equifinality, and organizational effectiveness: A test of two configurational theories. Academy of Management Journal, 36, 1196-1250.
    • Drnevich, P. L., & A. P. Kriauciunas. (2011). Clarifying the conditions and limits of the contributions of ordinary and dynamic capabilities to relative firm performance. Strategic Management Journal, 32, 254-279.
    • Ethiraj, K., Levinthal, D., & Roy, R. (2008). The dual role of modularity: innovation and imitation. Management Science, 54, 939-955.
    • Ethiraj, S., & Zhu, D. (2008). Performance effects of imitative entry. Strategic Management Journal, 29, 797-817.
    • Ghemawat. (1991). Commitment: The Dynamic of Strategy. New York: The Free Press.
    • Giarratana, M. S. (2004). he Birth of a New Industry: Entry by Startups and the Drivers of Firm Growth. The Case of Encryption Software. Research Policy, 35, 787-806.
    • Green, K. M., Covin, J. G., & Slevin, D. P. (2008). Exploring the relationship between strategic reactiveness and entrepreneurial orientation: The role of structure-style fit. Journal of Business Venturing,, 23, 356-383.
    • Gupta, A. K., & Govindarajan, V. (1984). Business unit strategy, managerial characteristics, and business unit effectiveness at strategy implementation. Academy of Management Journal, 27, 25-41.
    • Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (2001). Multivariate data analysis. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall,.
    • Hambrick, D. C. (1981). Environment, Strategy, and Power within Top Management Teams. Administrative Science Quarterly, 26, 253-276.
    • Hambrick, D. C. (1982). Environmental Scanning and Organizational Strategy. Strategic Management Journal, 3, 159-174.
    • Hamel, G. (2000). Leading the Revolution. Camdridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press.
    • Hannan, M. T., & Freeman, J. (1977). The Population Ecology of Organizations. American Journal of Sociology, 82, 929-964.
    • Hart, S. L. (1992). An Integrative Framework for Strategy-Making Process. Academy of Management Review, 17, 327-351.
    • Henderson, R. (1993). Underinvestment and incompetence as responses to radical innovation: evidence from the photolithographic alignment industry. The Rand Journal of Economics, 24, 248-270.
    • Hill, S. A., & Birkinshaw, J. (2008). Strategy-organization configurations in corporate venture units: Impact on performance and survival. Journal of Business Venturing, 23, 423-444.
    • Ireland, R. D., Hitt, M. A., & Sirmon, D. G. (2003). A Model of Strategic Entrepreneurship: The Construct and its Dimensions. Journal of Management, 29, 963-989.
    • Keh, H. T., Nguyen, T. M., & Ng, H. P. (2007). The effects of entrepreneurial orientation and marketing information on the performance of SMEs. Journal of Business Venturing, 22, 592-611.
    • Ketchen, D. J., Thomas, J. B., & Snow, C. C. (1993). Organizational configurations and performance: A comparison of theoretical approaches. Academy of Management Journal, 36, 1278-1313.
    • Lado, A. A., Boyd, N. G., & Wright, P. (1992). A competency-based model of sustainable competitive advantage: Toward a conceptual synthesis. Journal of Management, 18, 77-91.
    • Lawrence, P., & Lorsch, J. (1967). Organization and environment. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.
    • Lee, H., Smith, K. G., Grimm, C. M., & Schomburg, A. (2000). Timing, order and durability of new product advantages with imitation. Strategic Management Journal, 21, 23-30.
    • Li, H., Zhang, Y., & Chan, T.-S. (2005). Entrepreneurial strategy making and performance in China's new technology ventures - the contingency effect of environments and firm competences. The Journal of High Technology Management Research, 16, 37-57.
    • Lieberman, M. B., & Asaba, S. (2006). Why do firms imitate each other? Academy of Management Review, 31, 366-385.
    • Lieberman, M. B., & Montgomery, D. B. (1998). First-mover (dis)advantages: Retrospective and link with the resource-based view. Strategic Management Journal, 19, 1111- 1125.
    • Lumpkin, G. T., & Dess, G. G. (1996). Clarifying the Entrepreneurial Orientation Construct and Linking it to Performance. Academy of Management Review, 21, 135-172.
    • Lumpkin, G. T., & Dess, G. G. (2001). Linking Two Dimensions of Entrepreneurial Orientation to Firm Performance: The Moderating Role of Environment and Industry Life Cycle. Journal of Business Venturing, 16, 429-451.
    • Lumpkin, G. T., Dess, G. G., & Covin, J. G. (1997). Entrepreneurial Strategy Making and Firm Performance: Tests of Contingency and Configurational Models. Strategic Management Journal, 18, 677-695.
    • Lyon, D. W., Lumpkin, G. T., & Dess, G. G. (2000). Enhancing Entrepreneurial Orientation Research: Operationalizing and Measuring a Key Strategic Decision Making Process. Journal of Management, 26, 1055-1085.
    • Madsen, E. L. (2007). The significance of sustained entrepreneurial orientation on performance of firms - A longitudinal analysis. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 19, 185-204.
    • Makadok, R. (1998). Can First-Mover and Early-Mover Advantages Be Sustained in an Industry with Low Barriers to Entry/Imitation? Strategic Management Journal, 19, 683-696.
    • Makadok, R., & Barney, J. (2001). Strategic Factor Intelligence: An Application of Information Economics to Strategy Formulation and Competitor Intelligence. Management Science, 47, 1621-1638.
    • McEvily, B., & Zaheer, A. (1999). Bridging ties: a source of firm heterogeneity in competitive capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 20, 1133-1156.
    • Meyer, A. D., Tsui, A. S., & Hinings, C. R. (1993). Guest co-editors' introduction: Configurational approaches to organizational analysis. Academy of Management Journal, 36, 1175-1195.
    • Miller, D. (1983). The correlates of entrepreneurship in three types of firms. Management Science, 29, 770-791.
    • Miller, D. (1986). Configurations of strategy and structure: Towards a synthesis. Strategic Management Journal, 7, 233-249.
    • Miller, D. (1986). Psychological and Traditional Determinants of Structure. Administrative Science Quarterly, 31, 539-558.
    • Miller, D. (1988). Relating Porter's business strategies to environment and structure. Academy of Management Journal, 31, 280-308.
    • Miller, D. (1996). Configurations Revisited. Strategic Management Journal, 17, 505-512.
    • Miller, D., & Friesen, P. H. (1983). Strategy making and environment. Strategic Management Journal, 4, 221-235.
    • Mintzberg, H. (1973). Strategy-Making in Three Modes. California Management Review, 16, 44-53.
    • Mitchell, W. (1989). Whether and when? Probability and timing of incumbents' entry into emerging industrial sub-fields. Administrative Science Quarterly, 34, 208-230.
    • Moatti, V. (2009). Learning to expand or expanding to learn? The role of imitation and experience in the choice among several expansion modes. European Management Journal, 27, 36-46.
    • Moreno, A. M., & Casillas, J. C. (2008). Entrepreneurial Orientation and Growth of SMEs: A Causal Model. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 32, 507-528.
    • Mukoyama, T. (2003). Innovation, imitation and growth with cumulative technology. Journal of Monetary Economics, 50, 361-380.
    • Naman, J., & Slevin, D. (1993). Naman, J. and Slevin, D. (1993): “Entrepreneurship and the concept of fit: a model and empirical tests”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 14, pp.137-153. Strategic Management Journal, 14.
    • Nelson, R. R., & Winter, S. G. (1982). Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change. Cambridge Mass: Harvard Univ. Press.
    • Palich, L. E., & Ray Bagby, D. (1995). Using cognitive theory to explain entrepreneurial risk-taking: Challenging conventional wisdom. Journal of Business Venturing, 10, 425-438.
    • Peteraf, M. A. (1993). The Cornerstone of Competitive Advantage: A Resource-Based View. Strategic Management Journal, 21, 179-191.
    • Pil, F. K., & Cohen, S. K. (2006). Modularity: implications for imitation, innovation, and sustained advantage. Academy of Management Review, 31, 995-1011.
    • Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 879-903.
    • Porter, M. E. (1985). Competitive advantage: Creating and sustaining superior performance. New York: The Free Press.
    • Rajagopalan, N. (1997). Strategic Orientations, Incentive Plan Adoptions and Firm Performance: Evidence form Electric Utility Firms. Strategic Management Journal, 18, 761-785.
    • Rauch, A., Wiklund, J., Lumpkin, G., & Frese, M. (2009). Entrepreneurial orientation and business performance: An assessment of past research and suggestions for the future. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 33, 761-787.
    • Reuber, A. R., & Fischer, E. (2002). Foreign Sales and Small Firm Growth: The Moderating Role of the Management Team. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 27.
    • Rivkin, J. W. (2000). Imitation of complex strategies. Management Science, 46, 824-844.
    • Roos, J., & Victor, B. (1999). Towards a New Model of Strategy-making as Serious Play. European Management Journal, 17, 348-355.
    • Rosenbusch, N., Brinckmann, J., & Bausch, A. (2011). Is innovation always beneficial? A meta-analysis of the relationship between innovation and performance in SMEs. Journal of Business Venturing, 26, 441-457.
    • Runyan, R. C., Droge, C., & Swinney, J. L. (2008). Entrepreneurial orientation versus small business orientation: Do their relationships to firm performance depend on longevity? Journal of Small Business Management, 46, 567-582.
    • Shamsie, J., Phelps, C., & Kuperman, J. (2004). Better late than never: A study of late entrants in household electrical equipment. Strategic Management Journal, 25, 69-84.
    • Short, J. C., Payne, G. T., & Ketchen, D. J. (2008). Research on organizational configurations: Past accomplishments and future challenges. Journal of Management, 34, 1053-1079.
    • Song, X. M., & Parry, M. E. (1997). A Cross-National Comparative Study of New Product Development Processes: Japan and the United States. Journal of Marketing, 61, 1-18.
    • Spanos, Y., & Lioukas, S. (2001). An examination into the causal logic of rent generation: contrasting Porter's competitive strategy framework and the resource-based perspective. Strategic Management Journal, 22, 907-934.
    • Stam, W., & Elfring, T. (2008). Entrepreneurial Orientation and new venture performance: The moderating role of intra- and extra industry social capital. Academy of Management Journal, 51, 97-111.
    • Stone, E. F., & Hollenbeck, J. R. ( 1984). Some issues associated with moderated regression Organization Behavior and Human Performance, 34, 195-213.
    • Teece, D. (1986). Profiting from technological innovation: implications for integration, collaboration, licensing, and public policy. Research Policy, 15, 285-305.
    • Teece, D. (2007). Explicating dynamic capabilities: the nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic Management Journal, 28, 1319-1330.
    • Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic Capabilities and Strategic Management. Strategic Management Journal, 18, 509-533.
    • Tsai, W. (2001). Knowledge Transfer in Intraorganizational Networks: Effects of Network Position and Absorptive Capacity on Business Unit Innovation and Performance. The Academy of Management Journal, 44, 996-1004.
    • Wernerfelt, B. (1984). A Resource-Based View of the Firm. Strategic Management Journal, 5, 171-180.
    • Wiklund, J. (1999). The sustainability of the entrepreneurial orientation-performance relationship. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Fall, 37-48.
    • Wiklund, J., & Shepherd, D. (2003). Knowledge-based resources, entrepreneurial orientation, and the performance of small and medium-sized businesses. Strategic Management Journal, 24, 1307-1314.
    • Wiklund, J., & Shepherd, D. (2005). Entrepreneurial orientation and small business performance: a configurational approach. Journal of Business Venturing, 20, 71-91.
    • Yip, G. S. (1982). Barriers to entry: a corporate perspective. Lexicon, MA.
    • Zahra, S., & Covin, J. (1995). Contextual influence on the corporate entrepreneurshipperformance relationship: A longitudinal analysis. Journal of Business Venturing, 10, 43-58.
    • Zahra, S. A. (1996). Technology strategy and financial performance: examining the moderating role of the firm's competitive environment. Journal of Business Venturing, 11, 189-219.
    • Zahra, S. A., Ireland, R., & Hitt, M. A. (2000). International expansion by new venture firms: international diversity, mode of market entry, technological learning and performance. Academy of Management Journal, 43, 925-950.
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Download from

Cite this article