ArticlePDF Available

Editorial: Entrepreneurial orientation, entrepreneurial resources, and entrepreneurial success: The need for further exploration

DOI:10.22430/24223182.2648
Authors:
Doanh Cong
Doanh Cong
Doanh Cong
  • This person is not on ResearchGate, or hasn't claimed this research yet.
Doanh Duong at National Economics University
Doanh Duong
Download full-text PDF
Read full-text
Download citation

Abstract

Starting new businesses is important for the social and economic development of each country (Esfandiar et al., 2019; Fayolle & Liñán, 2014). However, research on starting a business has so far been more about clarifying the influence of factors on the intention of starting a business (Duong, 2022; Ghosh, 2022; Loan et al., 2021; Vasilev, 2022; Vuong et al., 2020), and there have not been many studies on entrepreneurial success—the determinant of the meaning of starting a business (Wang et al., 2023; Welsh et al., 2023). Entrepreneurial success is defined as a complex phenomenon, and it covers both financial and non-financial criteria (Glosenberg et al., 2022). Initially, entrepreneurial success is often equated to financial/economic indicators (Staniewski & Awruk, 2019). For example, it includes business efficiency, growth rate, profitability, liquidity, market share (Glosenberg et al., 2022), and staff growth rate (Welsh et al., 2023). Meanwhile, it is criticized that, if “entrepreneurial success” is measured only by financial (or economic) indicators, it is difficult to fully reflect the meaning of this term and it should not be limited in one way (Cumming et al., 2022). Entrepreneurial success does not necessarily equate to wealth, and researchers are very interested in entrepreneurs' work-life balance (Yu et al., 2022).
Content uploaded by Doanh Duong
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Doanh Duong on Feb 22, 2023
Content may be subject to copyright.
Cong Doanh Duong
Revista CEA, ISSN-p 2390-0725, ISSN-e 2422-3182, Vol. 8 – No. 18, septiembre-diciembre 2022, e2648
Editorial:
Entrepreneurial orientation, entrepreneurial
resources, and entrepreneurial success: The
need for further exploration
Cong Doanh Duong, PhD
Faculty of Business Management
National Economics University
Associate editor of Entrepreneurial Business and Economics Review
Hanoi, Vietnam
Email: doanhdc@neu.edu.vn
https://doi.org/10.22430/24223182.2648
Entrepreneurial success
Starting new businesses is important for the social and economic development of each country
(Esfandiar et al., 2019; Fayolle & Liñán, 2014). However, research on starting a business has so far
been more about clarifying the influence of factors on the intention of starting a business (Duong,
2022; Ghosh, 2022; Loan et al., 2021; Vasilev, 2022; Vuong et al., 2020), and there have not been
many studies on entrepreneurial success—the determinant of the meaning of starting a business
(Wang et al., 2023; Welsh et al., 2023). Entrepreneurial success is defined as a complex phenomenon,
and it covers both financial and non-financial criteria (Glosenberg et al., 2022). Initially,
entrepreneurial success is often equated to financial/economic indicators (Staniewski & Awruk,
2019). For example, it includes business efficiency, growth rate, profitability, liquidity, market share
(Glosenberg et al., 2022), and staff growth rate (Welsh et al., 2023). Meanwhile, it is criticized that, if
Editorial
Revista CEA, ISSN-p 2390-0725, ISSN-e 2422-3182, Vol. 8 – No. 18, septiembre-diciembre 2022, e2648
2 / 5
“entrepreneurial success” is measured only by financial (or economic) indicators, it is difficult to fully
reflect the meaning of this term and it should not be limited in one way (Cumming et al., 2022).
Entrepreneurial success does not necessarily equate to wealth, and researchers are very interested
in entrepreneurs' work-life balance (Yu et al., 2022).
As such, the definition of entrepreneurial success is very diverse because researchers with different
ideas and perspectives will have different ways of measuring it (Staniewski & Awruk, 2019), for
example, self-employment income, survivability, number of jobs created, and financial indicators.
Therefore, the entrepreneurial success of entrepreneurs should be assessed from two perspectives:
objective and subjective. From an objective perspective, entrepreneurial success should be measured
in terms of achieving business goals, financial success, success in the lifestyle, and business growth
(Singh et al., 2021). From a subjective perspective, entrepreneurial success is measured by a self-
assessment of the entrepreneur’s satisfaction with the firm’s performance, growth, and position
(Elmassah et al., 2022).
The role of entrepreneurial orientation
Entrepreneurial orientation is a firm’s inclination to adopt strategies that involve innovativeness,
risk-taking, proactiveness (Bouhalleb &Tapinos, 2023; Simpson & Sariol, 2022). Moreover, a definition
used in many studies confirms it: entrepreneurial orientation is a term that reflects the degree of
association of functions including innovation (innovativeness), risk-taking, and proactiveness (Covin
& Wales, 2012). Covin and Lumpkin (2011) also explained that entrepreneurial orientation is either
considered to be a term combining the three functions or a multidimensional term that reflects
innovativeness, risk taking, and proactiveness—which have their own independent characteristics.
Studies on entrepreneurship hold that entrepreneurial orientation has a positive effect on company
performance (Aftab et al., 2022; Covin & Wales, 2012; Dessì et al., 2022) because firms that have a
strong entrepreneurial orientation can often adjust their operating environment to find new business
opportunities and enhance their competitive position (Clarysse et al., 2023; Mozumdar & Islam,
2022). Therefore, entrepreneurial orientation can have a direct impact on entrepreneurial success.
The role of entrepreneurial resources
The Resource-Based View (RBV) emphasizes that firms with valuable and unique resources will have
the potential to achieve outstanding business performance (Barney, 2016). These resources are the
“inputs” for the business processes of an enterprise and are divided into two types: knowledge-based
resources and property-based resources (Du et al., 2022). Knowledge-based resources are important
in helping businesses build sustainable competitive advantages because they are unique and make a
difference for businesses (Marshall et al., 2020). They also reflect the competence of enterprises
when a business is starting (Teixeira et al., 2019) and improve the likelihood of success of a new
venture and its long-term business performance (Kohtamäki et al., 2019). Property-based resources
are tangible input resources such as financial resources, technology resources, human resources…
Enterprises need to combine these two types of resources to improve their competitive advantage
and business performance (Bird & Wennberg, 2016).
The strategy of the RBV is particularly relevant for the context of small and medium-sized businesses,
considering that the long-term survival of this kind of enterprises depends on their uniqueness
José Sixto-García
Revista CEA, ISSN-p 2390-0725, ISSN-e 2422-3182, Vol. 8 – No. 18, septiembre-diciembre 2022, e2648
3 / 5
(Barney, 2016). Additionally, developing the core competences of new ventures takes time (Buccieri
et al., 2022). Several studies have shown that small businesses often face a lack of resources, and this
forces them to operate under a severe shortage of both knowledge-based and property-based
resources (de Faria et al., 2019; Wu, 2007). This deficiency leads enterprises to focus more on short-
term rather than long-term goals, preventing them from developing and exploiting existing
opportunities in the business environment (Marshall et al., 2020).
An overview of the most cited research papers about entrepreneurial success shows that
entrepreneurial competence includes skills, educational background, business know-how, and
personal motivation—they are considered key factors contributing to the success of small businesses
(Kohtamäki et al., 2019; Marshall et al., 2020). The next factor involved in it is financial resources.
However, small businesses are often known to face limited access to investment funds, and so they
rely heavily on personal funds. Financial constraints can lead to cuts in large investments with longer
payback times, which creates a barrier to entrepreneurial success, growth, and the long-term growth
of new enterprises (Kallmuenzer et al., 2021; Teixeira et al., 2019). In addition to these resources,
marketing capability is also thought to influence the success of new businesses (Yu & Wang, 2021).
Although marketing power was once considered an area that only belonged to big companies, this
power is being increasingly used by small businesses in the current context of expanding globalization
(de Faria et al., 2019).
REFERENCES
Aftab, J., Veneziani, M., Sarwar, H., Ishaq, M. I. (2022). Organizational ambidexterity, firm
performance, and sustainable development: Mediating role of entrepreneurial orientation in
Pakistani SMEs. Journal of Cleaner Production, 367.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.132956
Barney, J. B. (2016). Resource-based theories of competitive advantage: A ten-year retrospective on
the resource-based view. Journal of Management, 27(6), 643-650.
https://doi.org/10.1177/014920630102700602
Bird, M., and Wennberg, K. (2016). Why family matters: The impact of family resources on immigrant
entrepreneurs' exit from entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing, 31(6), 687-704.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2016.09.002
Bouhalleb, A., and Tapinos, E. (2023). The impact of scenario planning on entrepreneurial orientation.
Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 187.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2022.122191
Buccieri, D., Javalgi, R. G., Gross, A. (2022). Examining the formation of entrepreneurial resources in
emerging market international new ventures. Industrial Marketing Management, 103, 1-12.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2022.02.011
Clarysse, B., Andries, P., Boone, S., Roelandt, J. (2023). Institutional logics and founders' identity
orientation: Why academic entrepreneurs aspire lower venture growth. Research Policy,
52(3). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2022.104713
Covin, J. G., and Lumpkin, G. T. (2011). Entrepreneurial Orientation Theory and Research: Reflections
on a Needed Construct. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 35(5), 855-872.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2011.00482.x
Editorial
Revista CEA, ISSN-p 2390-0725, ISSN-e 2422-3182, Vol. 8 – No. 18, septiembre-diciembre 2022, e2648
4 / 5
Covin, J. G., and Wales, W. J. (2012). The Measurement of Entrepreneurial Orientation.
Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 36(4), 677-702. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-
6520.2010.00432.x
Cumming, D. J., Nguyen, G., Nguyen, M. (2022). Product market competition, venture capital, and the
success of entrepreneurial firms. Journal of Banking & Finance, 144.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbankfin.2022.106561
de Faria, A. M., Oliveira Junior, M. d. M., Borini, F. M. (2019). Public funding for innovation: The
importance of individual resources of the entrepreneur and the relational resources of the
firm. Technology in Society, 59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2019.101159
Dessì, C., Dettori, A., Floris, M. (2022). Exploring different configurations of entrepreneurial
orientation in small artisan family firms: A multi-case study. Journal of Family Business
Strategy. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfbs.2022.100503
Du, Y., Kim, P. H., Fourné, S. P. L., Wang, X. (2022). In times of plenty: Slack resources, R&D
investment, and entrepreneurial firms in challenging institutional environments. Journal of
Business Research, 145, 360-376. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.03.004
Duong, C. D. (2022). Entrepreneurial fear of failure and the attitude-intention-behavior gap in
entrepreneurship: A moderated mediation model. The International Journal of Management
Education. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2022.100707
Elmassah, S., James, R., Mostafa Bacheer, S. (2022). Ethnic entrepreneurial success factors: evidence
from the United Arab Emirates. Heliyon, 8(6), e09639.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e09639
Esfandiar, K., Sharifi-Tehrani, M., Pratt, S., Altinay, L. (2019). Understanding entrepreneurial
intentions: A developed integrated structural model approach. Journal of Business Research,
94, 172-182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.10.045
Fayolle, A., and Liñán, F. (2014). The future of research on entrepreneurial intentions. Journal of
Business Research, 67(5), 663-666. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2013.11.024
Ghosh, S. (2022). COVID-19, clean energy stock market, interest rate, oil prices, volatility index,
geopolitical risk nexus: evidence from quantile regression. Journal of Economics and
Development. https://doi.org/10.1108/jed-04-2022-0073
Glosenberg, A., Phillips, D., Schaefer, J., Pollack, J. M., Kirkman, B. L., McChesney, J., Noble, S. M.,
Ward, M. K., Foster, L. L. (2022). The relationship of self-efficacy with entrepreneurial
success: A meta-analytic replication and extension. Journal of Business Venturing Insights, 18.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbvi.2022.e00342
Kallmuenzer, A., Baptista, R., Kraus, S., Ribeiro, A. S., Cheng, C.-F., Westhead, P. (2021).
Entrepreneurs' human capital resources and tourism firm sales growth: A fuzzy-set
qualitative comparative analysis. Tourism Management Perspectives, 38.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2021.100801
Kohtamäki, M., Heimonen, J., Parida, V. (2019). The nonlinear relationship between entrepreneurial
orientation and sales growth: The moderating effects of slack resources and absorptive
capacity. Journal of Business Research, 100, 100-110.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.03.018
Loan, L. T., Doanh, D. C., Thang, H. N., Viet Nga, N. T., Van, P. T., Hoa, P. T. (2021). Entrepreneurial
behaviour: The effects of the fear and anxiety of Covid-19 and business opportunity
recognition. Entrepreneurial Business and Economics Review, 9(3), 7-23.
https://doi.org/10.15678/eber.2021.090301
José Sixto-García
Revista CEA, ISSN-p 2390-0725, ISSN-e 2422-3182, Vol. 8 – No. 18, septiembre-diciembre 2022, e2648
5 / 5
Marshall, D. R., Meek, W. R., Swab, R. G., Markin, E. (2020). Access to resources and entrepreneurial
well-being: A self-efficacy approach. Journal of Business Research, 120, 203-212.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.08.015
Mozumdar, L., and Islam, M. A. (2022). Business and family livelihood performance of Bangladeshi
pond aquaculture entrepreneurs: Do business networks and entrepreneurial orientation
matter? Aquaculture, 554. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaculture.2022.738185
Simpson, J. J., and Sariol, M. (2022). Uncertainty, entrepreneurial orientation, and the pursuit of
M&A: Managing the unpredictable. Journal of Business Research, 142, 423-434.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.01.006
Singh, S. H., Bhowmick, B., Eesley, D., Sindhav, B. (2021). Grassroots innovation and entrepreneurial
success: Is entrepreneurial orientation a missing link? Technological Forecasting and Social
Change, 164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2019.02.002
Staniewski, M. W., and Awruk, K. (2019). Entrepreneurial success and achievement motivation – A
preliminary report on a validation study of the questionnaire of entrepreneurial success.
Journal of Business Research, 101, 433-440. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.01.073
Teixeira, R. M., Andreassi, T., Köseoglu, M. A., Okumus, F. (2019). How do hospitality entrepreneurs
use their social networks to access resources? Evidence from the lifecycle of small hospitality
enterprises. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 79, 158-167.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2019.01.006
Vasilev, A. (2022). A business-cycle model with monopolistically competitive firms and Calvo wages:
lessons for Bulgaria. Journal of Economics and Development, 24(1), 80-95.
https://doi.org/10.1108/jed-09-2020-0131
Vuong, Q. H., La, V. P., Vuong, T. T., Nguyen, H. T., Ho, M. T., Ho, M. T. (2020). What have Vietnamese
scholars learned from researching entrepreneurship? A Systematic review. Heliyon, 6(4),
e03808. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e03808
Wang, R., Guo, L.-m., Cao, C., Chen, Y.-s. (2023). The key success factors of the AI industry
entrepreneurial process in China Great Bay Area: A systematic approach study. Technological
Forecasting and Social Change, 186. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2022.122170
Welsh, D. H. B., Kaciak, E., Fadairo, M., Doshi, V., Lanchimba, C. (2023). How to erase gender
differences in entrepreneurial success? Look at the ecosystem. Journal of Business Research,
154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.113320
Wu, L.-Y. (2007). Entrepreneurial resources, dynamic capabilities and start-up performance of
Taiwan's high-tech firms. Journal of Business Research, 60(5), 549-555.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2007.01.007
Yu, W., Zhu, F., Foo, M. D., Wiklund, J. (2022). What does not kill you makes you stronger:
Entrepreneurs’ childhood adversity, resilience, and career success. Journal of Business
Research, 151, 40-55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.06.035
Yu, X., and Wang, X. (2021). The effects of entrepreneurial bricolage and alternative resources on
new venture capabilities: Evidence from China. Journal of Business Research, 137, 527-537.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.08.063
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
COVID-19, clean energy stock market, interest rate, oil prices, volatility index, geopolitical risk nexus: evidence from quantile regression
Article
Full-text available
  • Sep 2022
Purpose The outbreak and the spreading of the COVID-19 pandemic has impacted the global financial sector, including the alternative clean and renewable energy sector This paper aims to assess the impact of the pandemic, COVID-19 on the stock market indices of the clean energy sector using quantile regression methods. Design/methodology/approach This study utilized daily data sets on the four major categories of stocks: (1) Morgan Stanley Capital International Global Alternative Energy Index, (2) WilderHill Clean Energy Index, (3) Renewable Energy Industrial Index (RENIXX) and (4) the S&P 500 Global Clean Index. The study adopts a multifactor capital asset pricing model. Findings The clean and alternative energy stocks are significant instruments for diversification. However, the impact of the volatility index induced by infectious disease is negative and significant across quantiles. Practical implications For investors and policymakers, considering how uncertainty caused by COVID-19 and geopolitical index influences renewable energy markets is of great practical importance. For investors, it throws insights on portfolio diversification. For policy makers, it helps to devise strategies to reboot the economy along the lines of deployment of renewables. This study sheds light on a global green-energy transition and has practical implications for renewable energy resilience in post-pandemic times. Originality/value This paper can be considered as a pioneer that explores the nexus between oil prices, interest rates, volatility index, geopolitical risk upon the stock indices of clean and alternative sources of (renewable) energy in the COVID-19 pandemic situation. The results have important insights in the area of energy and policy decision-making. Additionally, the novelty of the paper lies in the use of the explanatory variables, which is associated with the COVID-19 pandemic.
View
Institutional logics and founders' identity orientation: Why academic entrepreneurs aspire lower venture growth
Article
This study examines how the identity orientation of founders, i.e., the extent to which they define themselves in terms of their relationships to others and to social groups, is imprinted by their professional logic and influences their ambitions for venture growth. We draw on existing insights regarding the Darwinian, Communitarian, and Missionary orientation of entrepreneurs and on interviews with 29 founders to develop our hypotheses, which we then test in a sample of 58 academic and 113 non-academic founders that participated in a venture competition. We argue that, compared to non-academic institutional logics, academic logics are tied to a stronger Communitarian and Missionary orientation and a weaker Darwinian orientation in founders. A stronger Darwinian orientation values venture growth, whereas a stronger Communitarian orientation appraises the benefit of the technology for a restricted set of people at the expense of such growth ambitions. A stronger Missionary orientation values welfare maximization for society which may to some degree entail higher growth aspirations. We argue and empirically confirm that these identity orientations explain why academic founders hold lower growth aspirations for their start-up than non-academic founders. Our findings can at least partially clarify why academic start-ups do not grow according to expectancies. They theoretically advance our insights in academic entrepreneurship and founders' growth aspirations while also extending the literature on founders' identity orientation.
View
The impact of scenario planning on entrepreneurial orientation
Article
It is well established in the foresight literature that strategy tools, such as scenario planning, have multiple reported outcomes. Much of the existing research focuses on direct outcomes, such as identifying uncertainties and developing strategies. While indirect outcomes, such as improving organisational learning and culture, are acknowledged, the existing literature provides limited empirical evidence. This paper focuses on an indirect outcome of scenario planning that has largely been ignored: entrepreneurial orientation. This research investigates whether the use of scenario planning affects key dimensions of entrepreneurial orientation among organisations that engage with it. Our model is tested through a series of hypotheses, taking advantage of a unique dataset of 133 companies from the health sector in France. This study uses a partial least squares (PLS) analysis; the findings show that scenario planning promotes risk-taking and proactive behaviour, but does not affect the innovativeness of organisations that use it. Based on these findings, we theorise about the impact of scenario planning on the entrepreneurial behaviour of organisations and discuss the practical implications of this research.
View
The key success factors of the AI industry entrepreneurial process in China Great Bay Area: A systematic approach study
Article
In the traditional entrepreneurial process theory, opportunities, resources and entrepreneurs (teams) are regarded as the basic elements of the entrepreneurial process. In the era of artificial intelligence under the new economic normal, the diffusion of technological innovation not only catalyzes the internal components and external environment of entrepreneurship, but more importantly reconstructs a new combination of the key success factors (KSFs) for entrepreneurship. Technological innovation-driven entrepreneurship, as a new form of entrepreneurship, poses new challenges to the traditional entrepreneurial process theory. Using the Co-citation Context Analysis (CCA) method, we innovated the operational definition of the KSFs of entrepreneurship, and horizontally displayed 4 stages of the entrepreneurial process, including 66 key success factors in 17 dimensions. We used the explanatory structural modeling method and Matrice d'Impacts Croises-Multipication Applique A Classement (MICMAC) to analyze and identify the driving force and dependence force of KSFs, and longitudinally present the multi-level structural process relationship of the systematic entrepreneurial process. Our research focuses on three aspects: (1) To find out the KSFs of innovation-driven entrepreneurial processes. (2) To explore the relationship between internal drivers and new combinations of external dynamic environmental factors in the process of systematic entrepreneurship. (3) To demonstrate the common characteristics of the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area (GBA) entrepreneurs' teamwork, innovation drive and competitiveness. The results show that entrepreneurial performance, entrepreneurial environment, and entrepreneurial group characteristics are still the basic elements of the entrepreneurial process, but in the era of artificial intelligence under the new economic normal, the KSFs of the systematic entrepreneurial process are changing dynamically, interactively and iteratively. The two-way influence and criss-cross evolution of the driving force and dependence of the KSFs in the entrepreneurial process promote the occurrence of innovation-driven entrepreneurship, which is a topic that initial entrepreneurs and entrepreneurs must pay attention to.
View
The relationship of self-efficacy with entrepreneurial success: A meta-analytic replication and extension
Article
  • Nov 2022
The replication of meta-analyses is important for developing stable and accurate insights into entrepreneurship. To that end, we replicate key aspects of the meta-analysis conducted by Miao et al. (2017) on the relationships between entrepreneurial self-efficacy (ESE) and financial measures of firm performance and extend their meta-analysis by considering generalized forms of self-efficacy and non-financial measures of entrepreneurial success. We expand the number of included samples from 27 in Miao et al. (2017) to 159. Overall, we find that the relationship between self-efficacy and success is small (ρ = 0.24) using guidelines from Cohen (1988); however, the relationship between ESE and at least partially financial measures of success was moderate, but larger in size (ρ = 0.44 vs. ρ = 0.31), than that estimated by Miao et al. (2017). We find that effect sizes vary widely depending on the type of success variable—with small to practically insignificant relations between self-efficacy and firm size as measured by the number of employees. In addition, we find stronger relations between ESE and success than generalized self-efficacy. Altogether we find that without properly accounting for the influence of the type of success variable, researchers might draw incorrect conclusions regarding the role of self-efficacy in entrepreneurial dynamics. We discuss the methodological and theoretical implications of our findings.
View
How to erase gender differences in entrepreneurial success? Look at the ecosystem
Article
Entrepreneurial ecosystems have become a popular concept within research and practitioner contexts. Yet, while both literature streams have produced relevant eco-factors, no clear empirical evidence has emerged on their impact. This study addresses the following question: in impoverished areas, to what extent does the business ecosystem reduce gender differences in entrepreneurial success (controlling ownership and business longevity)? Our framework distinguishes three levels-cultural, social, and material-in the four major regions of the Indian ecosystem. Our results show that family support is most important in reducing the gender gap in the success of entrepreneurs. We establish the importance of social network support. We find no evidence that capital funding influences the gender gap in entrepreneurial success. Last, our study suggests that the more female entrepreneurs are exposed to local markets at the beginning of their enterprise, the more entrepreneurially successful they are than male entrepreneurs. Implications are discussed.
View
Entrepreneurial fear of failure and the attitude-intention-behavior gap in entrepreneurship: A moderated mediation model
Article
  • Sep 2022
Although studies have suggested strong correlations between attitude, intention and actual behaviour across various domains, the study on entrepreneurial attitude–intention–behaviour links has received scant attention. Moreover, recent studies have claimed that investigating the negative moderation effects of entrepreneurial fear of failure on the entrepreneurial process can help explain why many prospective entrepreneurs do not translate the start-up attitude and initial intention into actual entrepreneurial action. In this study, a moderated mediation model, using the data from 611 master's degree students in Vietnam, has been developed to bridge the attitude–intention–behaviour gap in entrepreneurship and examine the moderation effect of entrepreneurial fear of failure on the entrepreneurial process. Cronbach's alpha and confirmatory factor analysis were approached to examine the consistent reliability and validity of constructs, and then hierarchical regression and PROCESS macro approach were used to estimate the direct, moderated and mediated coefficient paths. The findings reveal that start-up intentions act as a partial mediator in the entrepreneurial attitude–action link, while the effect of start-up intentions on entrepreneurial actions becomes weaker when entrepreneurial fear of failure is high. Moreover, the indirect effect of entrepreneurial attitude on actual behaviour through start-up intention is negatively moderated by entrepreneurial fear of failure. Our findings significantly contribute to extant understandings and create a paradigm for further studies in the entrepreneurship literature.
View
Exploring different configurations of entrepreneurial orientation in small artisan family firms: A multi-case study
Article
  • Aug 2022
Studies analyzing the entrepreneurial orientation of family businesses compared to their nonfamily counterparts have contributed to spreading the myth that family firms are less entrepreneurially oriented. However, the distinctive aspects characterizing the entrepreneurial orientation of family firms have received less scholarly attention. Aiming to advance this literature stream, this study postulates that family businesses are neither more nor less entrepreneurially oriented than nonfamily firms but express their entrepreneurial orientation differently, even when manifesting a similar level of entrepreneurial orientation. Building on entrepreneurial orientation studies and adopting a family embeddedness perspective, our multi-case study of 10 small artisan family firms with a high entrepreneurial orientation shows that family firms express their entrepreneurial orientation according to a set of interplaying firm- and family-level factors. The relationship among these factors leads to three different entrepreneurial orientation configurations: generational clash, family mirroring, and evolutionary adaptation. Our study of these configurations and the underlying nuances provide novel contributions to the literature and several implications for practice.
View
Organizational ambidexterity, firm performance, and sustainable development: Mediating role of entrepreneurial orientation in Pakistani SMEs
Article
This empirical research investigates the mediating role of entrepreneurial orientation in the relationships between organizational ambidexterity and sustainable development engagement and firm performance. The data were collected from 339 small and medium enterprises using a time-lagged approach and further analyzed using structural equation modeling. The results confirm the mediation of entrepreneurial orientation in the relationships between organizational ambidexterity and firm performance and sustainable development engagement. Institutional support also strengthens the entrepreneurial orientation relationship with firm performance and sustainable development practices. This study provides detailed theoretical and managerial implications by effectively using institutional support to increase firm performance and sustainable development engagement.
View
What does not kill you makes you stronger: Entrepreneurs’ childhood adversity, resilience, and career success
Article
Childhood adversities, such as neglect, abuse, and poverty, lead to negative career outcomes. Anecdotal stories of entrepreneurs, however, present a contrasting picture, showing that many successful entrepreneurs had a difficult childhood. Building on the underdog framework of entrepreneurship and the stress inoculation model, we resolve the puzzle by hypothesizing the inverted U-shaped relationship between entrepreneurs’ childhood adversities and career success that is mediated by resilience. Using data from a representative sample of 573 U.S. entrepreneurs from the Midlife in the United States (MIDUS) study, we find support for the hypotheses. We further find resilience is more important for less-successful entrepreneurs. Our results are robust to various checks, including an additional study based on a sample of U.S. entrepreneurs from the Qualtrics online panel. Our study indicates the need to consider nonlinear and context-specific implications of childhood adversities and examine performance-related outcomes, thus enriching existing research on childhood adversities and entrepreneurship.
View