Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The role of organizational size in the heterogeneous nature of corporate entrepreneurship

  • Published:
Small Business Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Organizational size is an important factor contributing to the heterogeneous nature of corporate entrepreneurship (CE). We focus on explicating size-based differences in CE and integrating them into new theoretical development. Through a search of the contemporary CE literature, we argue that there has been a tendency toward examining CE dimensions within the context of large public firms, even though they represent a relatively small proportion of the firms that engage in CE activities. Drawing on resource-based theorizing, we identify how size confers CE competitive advantages via slack resources and resource structuring processes, but disadvantages via bureaucratic structures and resource bundling. Aware of these weaknesses, we suggest that small firms are more likely to utilize CE for growth to overcome liabilities of smallness, while large firms are more likely to utilize CE for learning to overcome liabilities of inertia. We thereby provide greater specificity to CE research and stimulate new theoretical development with a forward-looking CE research agenda that incorporates the role of organizational size.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. In general, we use the terms size, firm size, and organizational size interchangeably.

  2. The EU definition technically defines size categories based on employees and assets. However, as most studies did not report both assets and employees, we base our categorization on either indicator available.

References

  • Due to space limitations not all articles included in the review are included in the references cited. Only the articles we specifically cite in the text are included in the references list.

  • Acs, Z. J., & Audretsch, D. B. (2003). Innovation and technological change. Handbook of entrepreneurship research international handbook series on entrepreneurship (Vol. 1, pp. 55–79). USA: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Amit, R., & Schoemaker, P. J. H. (1993). Strategic assets and organizational rent. Strategic Management Journal, 14(1), 33–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Atinc, G., Simmering, M. J., & Kroll, M. J. (2012). Control variable use and reporting in micro and macro management research. Organizational Research Methods, 15, 57–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Autio, E., Sapienza, H. J., & Almeida, J. G. (2000). Effects of age at entry, knowledge intensity and imitability of international growth. Academy of Management Journal, 43, 909–924.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baker, D., & Cullen, J. (1993). Administrative reorganization and configurational context: The contingent effects of age, size and change in size. Academy of Management Journal, 36, 1251–1277.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barney, J. (1986). Strategic factor markets: Expectations, luck, and business strategy. Management Science, 32(10), 1231–1241.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barney, J., Wright, M., & Ketchen, D. J. (2001). The resource-based view of the firm: Ten years after 1991. Journal of Management, 27(6), 625–641.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benson, D., & Ziedonis, R. H. (2009). Corporate venture capital as a window on new technologies: Implications for the performance of corporate investors when acquiring startups. Organization Science, 20, 329–351.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bhardwaj, G., Camillus, J. C., & Hounshell, D. A. (2006). Continual corporate entrepreneurial search for long-term growth. Management Science, 52, 248–261.

    Google Scholar 

  • Birkinshaw, J. M. (1997). Entrepreneurship in multinational corporations: The characteristics of subsidiary initiatives. Strategic Management Journal, 18, 207–230.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blau, P. M. (1970). A format theory of differentiation in organizations. American Sociological Review, 35, 201–218.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bluedorn, A. C. (1993). Pilgrim’s Progress: Trends and convergence in research on organizational size and environments. Journal of Management, 19, 163–191.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borch, O. J., Huse, M., & Senneseth, K. (1999). Resource configuration, competitive strategies, and corporate entrepreneurship: An empirical examination of small firms. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 24(1), 49–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brinckmann, J., & Hoegl, M. (2011). Effects of initial teamwork capability and initial relational capability on the development of new technology based firms. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 5, 37–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bromiley, P., Miller, K.D., & Rau, D. (2001). Risk in strategic management research. In M. A. Hitt, R. E. Freeman, & J. S. Harrison (Eds.), The Blackwell Handbook of Strategic Management (pp. 259–288). Malden, MA: Blackwell.

  • Brush, C. G., & Vanderwerf, P. A. (1992). A comparison of methods and sources for obtaining estimates of new venture performance. Journal of Business Venturing, 7, 157–170.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burgelman, R. A. (1983). Corporate entrepreneurship and strategic management: Insights from a process study. Management Science, 29(12), 1349–1364.

    Google Scholar 

  • Camisón-Zornoza, C., Lapiedra-Alcami, R., Segarra-Ciprés, M., & Boronat-Navarro, M. (2004). A meta-analysis of innovation and organizational size. Organization Studies, 25, 331–361.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carrier, C. (1994). Intrapreneurship in large firms and SMEs: A comparative study. International Small Business Journal, 12, 54–61.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carrier, C. (1996). Intrapreneurship in small businesses: An exploratory study. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 21(1), 5–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chandler, A. (1962). Strategy and structure. Cambridge, MA: M.I.T. Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chandler, G. N., McKelvie, A., & Davidsson, P. (2009). Asset specificity and behavioral uncertainty as moderators of the sales growth—Employment growth relationship in emerging ventures. Journal of Business Venturing, 24(4), 373–387.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, M. J., & Hambrick, D. C. (1995). Speed, stealth, and selective attack: How small firms differ from large firms in competitive behavior. Academy of Management Journal, 38, 453–482.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chesbrough, H. W. (2002). Making sense of corporate venture capital. Harvard Business Review, 80(3), 90–99.

    Google Scholar 

  • Child, J., & Kieser, A. (1981). Development of organizations over time. In P. C. Nystrom & W. H. Starbuck (Eds.), Handbook of organizational design (pp. 28–64). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, W. M., & Klepper, S. (1996). A reprise of size and R&D. The Economic Journal, 106(437), 925–951.

    Google Scholar 

  • Corbett, A., Covin, J. G., O’Connor, G. C., & Tucci, C. L. (2013). Corporate Entrepreneurship: State-of-the-art research and a future research agenda. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 30(5), 812–820.

    Google Scholar 

  • Courtney, H. (2001). 20/20 Foresight: Crafting strategy in an uncertain world. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crockett, D. R., McGee, J. E., & Payne, G. T. (2013). Employing new business divisions to exploit disruptive innovations: The interplay between characteristics of the corporation and those of the venture management team. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 30(5), 856–879.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Jong, J., & Marsili, O. (2006). The fruit flies of innovations: A taxonomy of innovative small firms. Research Policy, 35, 213–229.

    Google Scholar 

  • Delmar, F., Davidsson, P., & Gartner, W. B. (2003). Arriving at the high-growth firm. Journal of Business Venturing, 18(2), 189–216.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dess, G. G., Ireland, R. D., Zahra, S. A., Floyd, S. W., Janney, J. J., & Lane, P. J. (2003). Emerging issues in corporate entrepreneurship. Journal of Management, 29, 351–378.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dierickx, I., & Cool, K. (1989). Asset stock accumulation and sustainability of competitive advantage. Management Science, 35(12), 1504–1511.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dobrev, S., & Carroll, G. (2003). Size (and competition) among organizations: Modeling scale-based selection among automobile producers in four major countries, 1885–1981. Strategic Management Journal, 24, 541–558.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dushnitsky, G., & Lavie, D. (2010). How alliance formation shapes corporate venture capital investment in the software industry: A resource-based perspective. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 4, 22–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dushnitsky, G., & Shaver, J. M. (2009). Limitations to interorganizational knowledge acquisition: The paradox of corporate venture capital. Strategic Management Journal, 30, 1045–1064.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fama, E., & Jensen, M. C. (1983). Agency problems and residual claims. Journal of Law and Economics, 26, 325–344.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fini, R., Grimaldi, R., Marzocchi, G. L., & Sobrero, M. (2012). The determinants of corporate entrepreneurial intention within small and newly established firms. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 36(2), 387–414.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ford, J. D. (1980). The occurrence of structural hysteresis in declining organizations. Academy of Management Review, 5, 589–598.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, J., Carroll, G., & Hannan, M. (1983). The liability of newness: Age dependence in organizational death rates. American Sociological Review, 48, 692–710.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gersick, C. J. G. (1994). Pacing strategic change: The case of a new venture. Academy of Management Journal, 37, 9–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gooding, R., & Wagner, J, III (1985). A meta-analytic review of the relationship between size and performance: The productivity and efficiency or organizations and their subunits. Administrative Science Quarterly, 30, 462–481.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greve, H. R. (2003). A behavioral theory of R&D expenditures and innovations: Evidence from shipbuilding. Academy of Management Journal, 46(6), 685–702.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greve, H. R. (2007). Exploration and exploitation in product innovation. Industrial and Corporate Change, 16(5), 945–975.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greve, H. R. (2008). A behavioral theory of firm growth: Sequential attention to size and performance goals. Academy of Management Journal, 51(3), 476–494.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guth, W. D., & Ginsberg, A. (1990). Guest editors’ introduction: Corporate entrepreneurship. Strategic Management Journal, 11, 5–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hannan, M. T., & Freeman, J. (1977). The population ecology of organizations. American Journal of Sociology, 82, 929–964.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haveman, H. (1993). Organizational size and change: Diversification in the savings and loan industry after deregulation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38, 20–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayton, J. C. (2005). Promoting corporate entrepreneurship through human resource management practices: A review of empirical research. Human Resource Management Review, 15, 21–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henrekson, M., & Johansson, D. (2010). Gazelles as job creators: A survey and interpretation of the evidence. Small Business Economics, 35, 227–244.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoang, H., & Rothaermel, F. T. (2005). The effect of general and partner-specific alliance experience on joint R&D project performance. Academy of Management Journal, 48, 332–345.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hockerts, K., & Wüstenhagen, R. (2010). Greening Goliaths versus emerging Davids: Theorizing about the role of incumbents and new entrants in sustainable entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing, 25, 481–492.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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, 236–247.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hult, G. T. M., Snow, C. C., & Kandemir, D. (2003). The role of entrepreneurship in building cultural competitiveness in different organizational types. Journal of Management, 29(3), 401–426.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ireland, R. D., Hitt, M. A., & Sirmon, D. G. (2003). A model of strategic entrepreneurship: The construct and its dimensions. Journal of Management, 29(6), 963–989.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ireland, D., Reutzel, C., & Webb, J. (2005). Editor’s note: Entrepreneurship research in AMJ: What has been published, and what might the future hold? Academy of Management Journal, 48, 556–564.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behavior, agency costs, and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3, 305–360.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keil, T. (2004). Building external corporate venturing capability. Journal of Management Studies, 41(5), 799–825.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kellermanns, F. W., & Eddleston, K. A. (2006). Corporate Entrepreneurship in family firms: A family perspective. Entrepreneurship: Theory & Practice, 30, 809–830.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ketchen, D. J., Ireland, R. D., & Snow, C. C. (2007). Strategic entrepreneurship, collaborative innovation, and wealth creation. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 1(3–4), 371–385.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kimberly, J. (1976). Organizational size and the structuralist perspective: A review, critique, and proposal. Administrative Science Quarterly, 21, 571–597.

    Google Scholar 

  • König, A., Kammerlander, N., & Enders, A. (2013). The family innovator’s dilemma: How family influence affects the adoption of discontinuous technologies by incumbent firms. Academy of Management Review, 38(3), 418–441.

  • Kuratko, D. (2007). Corporate entrepreneurship. Cambridge, MA: Foundations and Trends in Entrepreneurship.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawless, M. (2014). Age or size? Contributions to job creation. Small Business Economics, 42, 815–830.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, C., Lee, K., & Pennings, J. M. (2001). Internal capabilities, external networks, and performance: A study on technology-based ventures. Strategic Management Journal, 22, 615–640.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levie, J., & Lichtenstein, B. (2010). A terminal assessment of stages theory: Introducing dynamic states approach to entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 34, 317–350.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levinthal, D. A. (1991). Random walks and organizational mortality. Administrative Science Quarterly, 36, 397–420.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ling, Y. A., Simsek, D., Lubatkin, M., & Viega, D. (2008). Transformational leadership’s role in promoting corporate entrepreneurship: Examining the CEO-TMT interface. Academy of Management Journal, 51, 557–576.

    Google Scholar 

  • Low, M. B., & MacMillan, I. C. (1988). Entrepreneurship: Past research and future challenge. Journal of Management, 14, 139–151.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lubatkin, M. H., Simsek, Z., Ling, Y., & Veiga, J. F. (2006). Ambidexterity and performance in small-to medium-sized firms: The pivotal role of top management team behavioral integration. Journal of Management, 32(5), 646–672.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lumpkin, G. T., & Lichtenstein, B. B. (2005). The role of organizational learning in the opportunity-recognition process. Entrepreneurship: Theory & Practice, 29, 451–472.

    Google Scholar 

  • Markides, C. C., & Williamson, P. J. (1996). Corporate diversification and organizational structure: A resource-based view. Academy of Management Journal, 39(2), 340–367.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mauri, A. J., & Michaels, M. P. (1998). Firm and industry effects within strategic management: An empirical examination. Strategic Management Journal, 19(3), 211–219.

    Google Scholar 

  • McKelvie, A., McKenney, A. F., Lumpkin, G. T., & Short, J. C. (2014). Corporate entrepreneurship in family businesses: Past contributions and future opportunities. In L. Melin, M. Nordqvist, & P. Sharma (Eds.), SAGE handbook of family business (pp. 340–363). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

    Google Scholar 

  • McKelvie, A., & Wiklund, J. (2010). Advancing firm growth research: A focus on growth mode instead of growth rate. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 34, 261–288.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, G. D. (2009). Commentary: On the integration of strategic management and entrepreneurship: Views of a contrarian. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 33(1), 341–351.

    Google Scholar 

  • Michael, S. C. (2007). Transaction cost entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing, 22(3), 412–426.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miles, R. E., & Snow, C. C. (1978). Organizational strategy, structure and process. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, D., & Toulouse, J. M. (1986). Chief executive personality and corporate strategy and structure in small firms. Management Science, 32, 1389–1409.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mishina, Y., Pollock, T. G., & Porac, J. F. (2004). Are more resources always better for growth? Resource stickiness in market and product expansion. Strategic Management Journal, 25(12), 1179–1197.

    Google Scholar 

  • Monsen, E., & Boss, R. W. (2009). The impact of strategic entrepreneurship within the organization: Examining job stress and employee retention. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 33, 71–104.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morris, M. H., Kuratko, D. F., & Covin, J. G. (2011). Corporate entrepreneurship and innovation (3rd ed.). Mason, OH: Cengage/Thomson South-Western.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morse, C. W. (1986). The delusion of intrapreneurship. Long Range Planning, 19, 92–95.

    Google Scholar 

  • Narayanan, V., Yang, Y., & Zahra, S. (2009). Corporate venturing and value creation: A review and proposed framework. Research Policy, 38, 58–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neergaard, H., & Ulhøi, J. P. (2006). Government agency and trust in the formation and transformation of interorganizational entrepreneurial networks. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 30, 519–539.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, R., & Winter, S. (1984). An evolutionary theory of economic change. Cambridge: Belknap.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nohria, N., & Gulati, R. (1996). Is slack good or bad for innovation? Academy of Management Journal, 39(5), 1245–1264.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ozcan, P., & Eisenhardt, K. M. (2009). Origin of alliance portfolios: Entrepreneurs, network strategies, and firm performance. Academy of Management Journal, 52, 246–279.

    Google Scholar 

  • Patzelt, H., Shepherd, D. A., Deeds, D., & Bradley, S. (2008). Financial slack and venture managers’ decisions to seek a new alliance. Journal of Business Venturing, 23, 465–481.

    Google Scholar 

  • Penrose, E. T. (1959). The theory of the growth of the firm. New York: John Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, G. R. (1978). The external control of organizations: A resource dependence perspective. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phan, P., Wright, M., Ucbasaran, D., & Tan, W. (2009). Corporate entrepreneurship: Current research and future directions. Journal of Business Venturing, 24, 197–205.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. E. (1980). Competitive strategy: Techniques for analyzing industries and competitors. New York: Simon and Schuster.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 & Practice, 3, 761–787.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richard, O. C., Barnett, T., Dwyer, S., & Chadwick, K. (2004). Cultural diversity in management, firm performance, and the moderating role of entrepreneurial orientation dimensions. Academy of Management Journal, 47, 255–266.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sarasvathy, S. D. (2001). Causation and effectuation: Toward a theoretical shift from economic inevitability to entrepreneurial contingency. Academy of Management Review, 26, 243–263.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scherer, F. (1991). Changing perspectives on the firm size problem. In Zoltan J. Acs & David B. Audretsch (Eds.), Innovation and technological change: An international comparison (pp. 24–38). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schildt, H. A., Maula, M. V. J., & Keil, T. (2005). Explorative and exploitative learning from external corporate ventures. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 29, 493–515.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schulze, W. S., Lubatkin, M. H., Dino, R. N., & Buchholtz, A. K. (2001). Agency relationships in family firms: Theory and evidence. Organization Science, 12(2), 99–116.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharma, P., & Chrisman, J. J. (1999). Toward a reconciliation of the definitional issues in the field of corporate entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 23, 11–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharma, P., & Manikutty, S. (2005). Strategic divestments in family firms: Role of family structure and community culture. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 29(3), 293–311.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shepherd, D. A., & Wiklund, J. (2009). Are we comparing apples with apples or apples with oranges? Appropriateness of knowledge accumulation across growth studies. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 33, 105–123.

    Google Scholar 

  • Short, J. C. (2009). The art of writing a review article. Journal of Management, 35, 1312–1317.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shrader, R. C., & Simon, M. (1997). Corporate versus independent new ventures: Resource, strategy and performance differences. Journal of Business Venturing, 12, 47–66.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sieger, P., Zellweger, T., Nason, R. S., & Clinton, E. (2011). Portfolio entrepreneurship in family firms: A resource-based perspective. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 5(4), 327–351.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simonin, B. L. (1999). Ambiguity and the process of knowledge transfer in strategic alliances. Strategic Management Journal, 20(7), 595–623.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sirmon, D. G., Hitt, M. A., & Ireland, R. D. (2007). Managing firm resources in dynamic environments to create value: Looking inside the black box. Academy of Management Review, 32, 273–292.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sirmon, D. G., Hitt, M. A., Ireland, R. D., & Gilbert, B. A. (2011). Resource orchestration to create competitive advantage breadth, depth, and life cycle effects. Journal of Management, 37(5), 1390–1412.

    Google Scholar 

  • Souitaris, V., Zerbinati, S., & Liu, G. (2012). Which iron cage? Endo-and exoisomorphism in corporate venture capital programs. Academy of Management Journal, 55(2), 477–505.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stinchcombe, A. L. (1965). Social structure and organizations. In J. G. March (Ed.), Handbook of organizations. Chicago: Rand McNally.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teng, B.-S. (2007). Corporate entrepreneurship activities through strategic alliances: A resource-based approach toward competitive advantage. Journal of Management Studies, 44(1), 119–142.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Burg, E., Romme, A. G. L., Gilsing, V. A., & Reymen, I. M. J. (2008). Creating university spin-offs: A science-based design perspective. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 25, 114–128.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Voss, G. B., Sirdeshmukh, D., & Voss, Z. G. (2008). The effects of slack resources and environmental threats on product exploration and exploitation. Academy of Management Journal, 51(1), 147–164.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wadhwa, A., & Kotha, S. (2006). Knowledge creation through external venturing: Evidence from the telecommunications equipment manufacturing industry. Academy of Management Journal, 49, 819–835.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wales, W. J., Monsen, E., & McKelvie, A. (2011). The organizational pervasiveness of entrepreneurial orientation. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 35, 895–923.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiklund, J., & Shepherd, D. A. (2008). Portfolio entrepreneurship: Habitual and novice founders, new entry, and mode of organizing. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 32, 701–725.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, O. E. (1979). Transaction-cost economics: The governance of contractual relations. Journal of Law and Economics, 22(2), 233–261.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wolcott, R. C., & Lippitz, M. J. (2007). The four models of corporate entrepreneurship. MIT Sloan Management Review, 49(1), 75–82.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yiu, D. W., & Lau, C.-M. (2008). Corporate entrepreneurship as resource capital configuration in emerging market firms. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 32(1), 37–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zahra, S. A. (1993). Environment, corporate entrepreneurship, and financial performance: A taxonomic approach. Journal of Business Venturing, 8, 319–341.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zahra, S. A. (2005). Entrepreneurial risk taking in family firms. Family Business Review, 18(1), 23–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zahra, S. A. (2007). Contextualizing theory building in entrepreneurship research. Journal of Business Venturing, 22(3), 443–452.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zahra, S. A., & Filatotchev, I. (2004). Governance of the entrepreneurial threshold firm: A knowledge-based perspective. Journal of Management Studies, 41, 883–895.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zahra, S. A., Filatotchev, I., & Wright, M. (2009). How do threshold firms sustain corporate entrepreneurship? The role of boards and absorptive capacity. Journal of Business Venturing, 24, 248–260.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zahra, S. A., & Hayton, J. C. (2008). The effect of international venturing on firm performance: The moderating influence of absorptive capacity. Journal of Business Venturing, 23, 195–220.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zahra, S. A., Neubaum, D. O., & Huse, M. (2000). Entrepreneurship in medium-size companies: Exploring the effects of ownership and governance systems. Journal of Management, 26, 947–976.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zellweger, T. (2007). Time horizon, costs of equity capital, and generic investment strategies of firms. Family Business Review, 20, 1–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zenger, T. R., Felin, T., & Bigelow, L. (2011). Theories of the firm-market boundary. The Academy of Management Annals, 5(1), 89–133.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank action editor Donald F. Kuratko and two anonymous reviewers for their insightful comments on this manuscript throughout the review process. The authors also benefited from feedback at the special issue conference held at the University of Warwick, including the special issue editors and Erik Monsen, and on an earlier version of this paper presented at the 2012 Academy of Management Conference.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. John Molson School of Business, Concordia University, 1455 Boulevard de Maisonneuve O., Montréal, QC, H3G 1M8, Canada

    Robert S. Nason

  2. Department of Entrepreneurship and Emerging Enterprises, Whitman School of Management, Syracuse University, 721 University Ave., Syracuse, NY, 13244, USA

    Alexander McKelvie & G. T. Lumpkin

Authors
  1. Robert S. Nason
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Alexander McKelvie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. G. T. Lumpkin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alexander McKelvie.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Nason, R.S., McKelvie, A. & Lumpkin, G.T. The role of organizational size in the heterogeneous nature of corporate entrepreneurship. Small Bus Econ 45, 279–304 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-015-9632-6

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-015-9632-6

Keywords

JEL Classifications

Search

Navigation