nach oben

Small Business Economics

Erschienen in:

24.05.2019

Corporate entrepreneurship strategy: extending our knowledge boundaries through configuration theory

verfasst von: Patrick M. Kreiser, Donald F. Kuratko, Jeffrey G. Covin, R. Duane Ireland, Jeffrey S. Hornsby

Erschienen in: Small Business Economics | Ausgabe 2/2021

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

Corporate entrepreneurship strategy (CES) represents a firm’s coordinated efforts towards entrepreneurship and is an over-arching strategic approach that may be suitable for diverse types of organizations and industries. Yet, it remains on the knowledge frontier because the actual implementation of this strategy remains a challenge for many organizations. CES is built upon three internal elements: an entrepreneurial strategic vision, a pro-entrepreneurship organizational architecture, and entrepreneurial processes and behaviors. We integrate CES with the precepts of configuration theory to extend our knowledge boundaries in order to suggest a proper alignment of these elements for successful CES implementation. By examining the relationship between external CES fit (conceptualized and operationalized as ‘matched’ linkages between the external environment and the internal elements of CES) and internal CES fit (conceptualized and operationalized as aligning the internal elements of CES in a manner consistent with a specified ‘ideal’ profile), as well as the relationship between internal CES fit and firm performance, our results suggest that the fit of these elements is associated with greater financial performance.

Vorheriger Artikel The complementarity perspective to the entrepreneurial ecosystem taxonomy

Nächster Artikel Diversity, innovation and entrepreneurship: where are we and where should we go in future studies?

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich

As would be expected, the top performers exhibited stronger mean performance levels and less variance in performance than the random performers. There was a mean performance level of 2.50 with a range from 2.20 to 3.00 and a standard deviation of 0.27 for the 18 top performers, while there was a mean performance level of 0.51 with a range from −2.84 to 2.00 and a standard deviation of 1.43 for the 18 random performers.

We would like to thank an anonymous reviewer for underscoring this important point.

Audretsch, D. B., & Belitski, M. (2013). The missing pillar: The creativity theory of knowledge spillover entrepreneurship. Small Business Economics, 41(4), 819–836.

Audretsch, D. B., & Lehmann, E. (2006). Entrepreneurial access and absorption of knowledge spillovers: Strategic board and managerial composition for competitive advantage. Journal of Small Business Management, 44(2), 155–166.

Bettis, R., & Hitt, M. A. (1995). The new competitive landscape. Strategic Management Journal, 16, 7–19.

Bhuian, S. N., Menguc, B., & Bell, S. J. (2005). Just entrepreneurial enough: The moderating effect of entrepreneurship on the relationship between market orientation and performance. Journal of Business Research, 58(1), 9–17.

Bierwerth, M., Schwens, C., Isidor, R., & Kabst, R. (2015). Corporate entrepreneurship and performance: A meta-analysis. Small Business Economics, 45(2), 255–278.

Biniari, M. G., Simmons, S. A., Monsen, E. W., & Pizarro Moreno, M. I. (2015). The configuration of corporate venturing logics: An integrated resource dependence and institutional perspective. Small Business Economics, 45(2), 351–367.

Bourgeois, L. J. (1985). Strategic goals, perceived uncertainty, and economic performance in volatile environments. Academy of Management Journal, 28, 548–573.

Bradley, S. W., Aldrich, H., Shepherd, D., & Wiklund, J. (2011). Resources, environmental change, and survival: Asymmetric paths of young independent and subsidiary organizations. Strategic Management Journal, 32(5), 486–509.

Chandler, G. N., & Hanks, S. H. (1993). Measuring the performance of emerging businesses: A validation study. Journal of Business Venturing, 8, 391–408.

Chattopadhyay, P., Glick, W. H., & Huber, G. P. (2001). Organizational actions in response to threats and opportunities. Academy of Management Journal, 44(8), 937–955.

Corso, M., Martini, A., Pellegrini, L., & Paolucci, E. (2003). Technological and organizational tools for knowledge management: In search of configurations. Small Business Economics, 21(4), 397–408.

Covin, J. G., & Lumpkin, G. T. (2011). Entrepreneurial orientation theory and research: Reflections on a needed construct. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 35(5), 855–872.

Covin, J. G., & Slevin, D. P. (1989). Strategic management of small firms in hostile and benign environments. Strategic Management Journal, 10(1), 75–87.

Covin, J. G., & Slevin, D. P. (1991). A conceptual model of entrepreneurship as firm behavior. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 16(1), 7–25.

Covin, J. G., Slevin, D. P., & Heeley, M. B. (2000). Strategic decision making in an intuitive vs. technocratic mode: Structural and environmental considerations. Journal of Business Research, 52(1), 51–67.

Covin, J. G., Green, K. M., & Slevin, D. P. (2006). Strategic process effects on the entrepreneurial orientation-sales growth rate relationship. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 30(1), 57–82.

Crawford, G., & Kreiser, P. (2015). Corporate entrepreneurship strategy: Extending the integrative framework through the lens of complexity science. Small Business Economics, 45(2), 403–423.

Cucculelli, M., & Bettinelli, C. (2015). Business models, intangibles and firm performance: Evidence on corporate entrepreneurship from Italian manufacturing SMEs. Small Business Economics, 45(2), 329–350.

Damanpour, F. (1991). Organizational innovation: A meta-analysis of effects of determinants and moderators. Academy of Management Journal, 34(3), 555–590.

Diamantopoulos, A., & Winklhofer, H. M. (2001). Index construction with formative indicators: An alternative to scale development. Journal of Marketing Research, 38(2), 269–277.

Doty, D. H., Glick, W. H., & Huber, G. P. (1993). Fit, equifinality and organizational effectiveness: A test of two configurational theories. Academy of Management Journal, 30, 1196–1250.

Drazin, R., & Van de Ven, A. H. (1985). Alternative forms of fit in contingency theory. Administrative Science Quarterly, 30, 514–539.

Eddleston, K. A., & Kellermanns, F. W. (2007). Destructive and productive family relationships: A stewardship theory perspective. Journal of Business Venturing, 22(4), 545–565.

Ferrier, W. J., MacFhionnlaoich, C., Smith, K. G., & Grimm, C. M. (2002). The impact of performance distress on aggressive competitive behavior: A reconciliation of conflicting views. Managerial and Decision Economics, 23, 301–316.

Gillett, R. (1985). The matching paradigm: An exact test procedure. Psychological Bulletin, 97, 106–108.

Gupta, A. K., & Govindarajan, V. (1984). Business unit strategy, managerial characteristics, and business unit effectiveness at strategy implementation. Academy of Management Journal, 27(1), 25–41.

Hambrick, D. C. (1981). Strategic awareness within top management teams. Strategic Management Journal, 2(3), 263–279.

Hamel, G., & Prahalad, C. K. (1989). Strategic intent. Harvard Business Review, 67(3), 67–76.

Harman, D. (1967). A single factor test of common method variance. Journal of Psychology, 35, 359–378.

Hornsby, J. S., Naffziger, D. W., Kuratko, D. F., & Montagno, R. V. (1993). An interactive model of the corporate entrepreneurship process. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 17(2), 29–37.

Hornsby, J. S., Kuratko, D. F., & Zahra, S. A. (2002). Middle managers’ perception of the internal environment for corporate entrepreneurship: Assessing a measurement scale. Journal of Business Venturing, 17(3), 253–273.

Hornsby, J. S., Kuratko, D. F., Shepherd, D. A., & Bott, J. P. (2009). Managers’ corporate entrepreneurial actions: Examining perception and position. Journal of Business Venturing, 24(3), 236–247.

Hornsby, J. S., Kuratko, D. F., Holt, D. T., & Wales, W. J. (2013). Assessing a measurement of organizational preparedness for corporate entrepreneurial behavior. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 30(5), 937–955.

Hughes, M., Hughes, P., & Morgan, R. E. (2007). Exploitative learning and entrepreneurial orientation alignment in emerging young firms: Implications for market and response performance. British Journal of Management, 18, 359–375.

Ireland, R. D., Covin, J. G., & Kuratko, D. F. (2009). Conceptualizing corporate entrepreneurship strategy. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 33(1), 19–46.

Jarvis, C. B., MacKenzie, S. B., & Podsakoff, P. M. (2003). A critical review of construct indicators and measurement model misspecification in marketing and consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 30(2), 199–218.

Ketchen, D. J., Thomas, J. B., & Snow, C. C. (1993). Organizational configuration and performance: A comparison of theoretical approaches. Academy of Management Journal, 36, 1278–1313.

Khandwalla, P.N. (1976). Some top management styles, their context and performance, Organization and Administrative Sciences, 7 (4), 21–51.

Kollmann, T., & Stöckmann, C. (2014). Filling the entrepreneurial orientation-performance gap: The mediating effects of exploratory and exploitative innovations. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 38(5), 1001–1026.

Kreiser, P. M., Marino, L. D., Kuratko, D. F., & Weaver, K. M. (2013). Disaggregating entrepreneurial orientation: The non-linear impact of innovativeness, proactiveness and risk-taking on SME performance. Small Business Economics, 40(2), 273–291.

Kuratko, D.F., Montagno, R.V., & Hornsby, J.S. (1990). Developing an entrepreneurial assessment instrument for an effective corporate entrepreneurial environment. Strategic Management Journal, Special Issue 11, 49–58.

Kuratko, D. F., Ireland, R. D., & Hornsby, J. S. (2001). The power of entrepreneurial outcomes: Insights from Acordia, Inc. Academy of Management Executive, 15(4), 60–71.

Kuratko, D. F., Ireland, R. D., Covin, J. G., & Hornsby, J. S. (2005). A model of middle-level managers’ entrepreneurial behavior. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 29, 699–716.

Kuratko, D. F., Covin, J. G., & Hornsby, J. S. (2014a). Why implementing corporate innovation is so difficult. Business Horizons, 57(5), 647–655.

Kuratko, D. F., Hornsby, J. S., & Covin, J. G. (2014b). Diagnosing a firm’s internal environment for corporate entrepreneurship. Business Horizons, 57(1), 37–47.

Kuratko, D. F., Hornsby, J. S., & Hayton, J. (2015). Corporate entrepreneurship: The innovative challenge for a new global economic reality. Small Business Economics, 45(2), 245–253.

Lomberg, C., Urbig, D., Stöckmann, C., Marino, L. D., & Dickson, P. H. (2017). Entrepreneurial orientation: The dimensions’ shared effects in explaining firm performance. Entrepreneurship: Theory & Practice, 41(6), 973–998.

Lumpkin, G. T., & Dess, G. G. (1996). Clarifying the entrepreneurship orientation construct and linking it to performance. Academy of Management Review, 21, 135–172.

McGrath, R. G., & MacMillan, I. C. (2000). The entrepreneurial mindset: Strategies for continuously creating opportunity in an age of uncertainty. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

Meyer, A. D., Tsui, A. S., & Hinings, C. R. (1993). Configurational approaches to organizational analysis. Academy of Management Journal, 30, 1175–1195.

Miller, D. (1983). The correlates of entrepreneurship in three types of firms. Management Science, 27, 770–791.

Miller, D. (1986). Configurations of strategy and structure: Towards a synthesis. Strategic Management Journal, 7(3), 233–250.

Miller, D. (1988). Relating Porter’s business strategies to environment and structure: Analysis and performance implications. Academy of Management Journal, 31(2), 280–308.

Miller, D. (1992). Environmental versus internal fit. Organization Science, 3(2), 159–178.

Miller, D. (2011). Miller (1983) revisited: A reflection on EO research and some suggestions for the future. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 35(5), 873–894.

Miller, D., & Chen, M. J. (1994). Sources and consequences of competitive inertia: A study of the U.S. airline industry. Administrative Science Quarterly, 39, 1–23.

Miller, D., & Friesen, P. H. (1978). Archetypes of strategy formulation. Management Science, 24(9), 921–933.

Miller, D., & Friesen, P. H. (1982). Innovation in conservative and entrepreneurial firms: Two models of strategic momentum. Strategic Management Journal, 3(1), 1–25.

Miller, D., & Le Breton-Miller, I. (2011). Governance, social identity, and entrepreneurial orientation in closely held public companies. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 35(5), 1051–1076.

Morris, M. H., Kuratko, D. F., & Covin, J. G. (2011). Corporate entrepreneurship and innovation (3rd ed.). Cincinnati: Cengage/SouthWestern Publishing.

Mueller, B. A., Wolfe, M. T., & Syed, I. (2017). Passion and grit: An exploration of the pathways leading to venture success. Journal of Business Venturing, 32(3), 260–279.

Murphy, G. B., Trailer, J. W., & Hill, R. C. (1996). Measuring performance in entrepreneurship research. Journal of Business Research, 36(1), 15–24.

Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J., & Podsakoff, N. (2003). Common methods biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 879–903.

Porter, M. E. (1996). Changing patterns of international competition. California Management Review, 28, 9–40.

Powell, T. C. (1992). Organizational alignment as competitive advantage. Strategic Management Journal, 13, 119–134.

Rauch, A., Wiklund, J., Lumpkin, G. T., & Frese, M. (2009). Entrepreneurial orientation and business performance: An assessment of past research and suggestions for the future. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 33(3), 761–787.

Rosenbusch, N., Rauch, A., & Bausch, A. (2013). The mediating role of entrepreneurial orientation in the task environment – Performance relationship: A meta-analysis. Journal of Management, 39(3), 633–659.

Short, J. C., Broberg, J. C., Cogliser, C. C., & Brigham, K. H. (2009). Construct validation using computer-aided text analysis (CATA): An illustration using entrepreneurial orientation. Organizational Research Methods, 13(2), 320–347.

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(1), 97–111.

Turner, T., & Pennington, W. (2015). Organizational networks and the process of corporate entrepreneurship: How the motivation, opportunity, and ability to act affect firm knowledge, learning, and innovation. Small Business Economics, 45(2), 447–463.

Venkatraman, N. (1989). The concept of fit in strategy research: Toward verbal and statistical correspondence. Academy of Management Review, 14(3), 423–444.

Venkatraman, N., & Prescott, J. E. (1990). Environment-strategy coalignment: An empirical test of its performance implications. Strategic Management Journal, 11(1), 1–23.

Vorhies, D. W., & Morgan, N. A. (2003). A configuration theory assessment of marketing organization fit with business strategy and its relationship with marketing performance. Journal of Marketing, 67, 100–115.

Wales, W. J., Patel, P. C., Parida, V., & Kreiser, P. M. (2013). Nonlinear effects of entrepreneurial orientation on small firm performance: The moderating role of resource orchestration capabilities. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 7(2), 93–121.

Wiklund, J., Patzelt, H., & Shepherd, D. (2009). Building an integrative model of small business growth. Small Business Economics, 32(4), 351–374.

Zahra, S. (2015). Corporate entrepreneurship as knowledge creation and conversion: The role of entrepreneurial hubs. Small Business Economics, 44(4), 727–735.

Zahra, S. A., & Covin, J. G. (1995). Contextual influences on the corporate entrepreneurship performance relationship: A longitudinal analysis. Journal of Business Venturing, 10, 43–58.

Titel: Corporate entrepreneurship strategy: extending our knowledge boundaries through configuration theory
verfasst von: Patrick M. Kreiser
Donald F. Kuratko
Jeffrey G. Covin
R. Duane Ireland
Jeffrey S. Hornsby
Publikationsdatum: 24.05.2019
Verlag: Springer US
Erschienen in: Small Business Economics / Ausgabe 2/2021
Print ISSN: 0921-898X
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-0913
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-019-00198-x

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 2/2021

Entrepreneurial ecosystem elements

How do country R&D change the allocation of self-employment across different types?

Local knowledge composition and the emergence of entrepreneurial activities across industries: evidence from Italian NUTS-3 regions

The relationship between origin and performance of innovative start-ups: the role of technological knowledge at founding

Diversity, innovation and entrepreneurship: where are we and where should we go in future studies?

The complementarity perspective to the entrepreneurial ecosystem taxonomy

Premium Partner