Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The role of the institutional environment in determining firm orientations towards entrepreneurial behavior

  • Published:
International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This research suggests that an entrepreneurial orientation may be to an important extent a strategic response to institutional forces. Small to medium-sized firms are assumed to be more likely to adopt an entrepreneurial orientation when it is seen as a legitimate response and aligned with the normative, regulative and cognitive aspects of the institutions that make up the environment of the firm. This assumption is first supported by a review of the prescriptions of institutional theory regarding strategic choices available to firms and then tested through the analysis of a survey of 1621 firms from seven countries and multiple manufacturing and service industries. The findings of the research indicate that the choice of an entrepreneurial orientation may be significantly motivated by drives for legitimacy through alignment with the normative, regulative and cognitive forces in the institutional environment of the firm.

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

References

  • Ahlstrom, D., & Bruton, G. (2002). An institutional perspective on the role of culture in shaping strategic actions by technology-focused entrepreneurial firms in China. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 26(4), 53–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brislin, R. W. (1980). Translation and content analysis of oral and written materials. In H. C. Triandis, & J. W. Berry (Eds.) Handbook of Cross-cultural Psychology, vol. 2 (pp. 389–444). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, T. E. (1995). Resource orientation, entrepreneurial orientation and growth: how the perception of resource availability affects small firm growth. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 20(2), 59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, T. E., Davidsson, P., & Wiklund, J. (2001). An operationalization of Stevenson’s conceptualization of entrepreneurship as opportunity-based firm behavior. Strategic Management Journal, 22(10), 953–968.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Covin, J., & Slevin, D. P. (1994). Implementing strategic missions: effective strategic, structural and tactical choices. Journal of Management Studies, 31(4), 481–505.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dacin, M. T., Goodstein, J., & Scott, W. R. (2002). Institutional theory and institutional change: introduction to the special research forum. Academy of Management Journal, 45, 45–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, L. E., & North, D. C. (1971). Institutional change and American economic growth. UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dickson, P., & Weaver, K. (1997). Environmental determinants and individual-level moderators of alliance use. Academy of Management Journal, 40, 404–425.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dickson, P. H., Weaver, K. M., & Hoy, F. (2006). Opportunism in the R&D alliances of SMEs: the roles of the institutional environment and SME size. Journal of Business Venturing, 21(4), 487–513.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48, 147–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1991). Introduction. In W. W. Powell, & P. J. DiMaggio (Eds.) The new institutionalism in organizational analysis (pp. 1–38). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhardt, K. M., & Schoonhoven, C. B. (1990). Organizational growth: linking founding team, strategy, environment, and growth among U.S. semiconductor ventures, 1978–1988. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35, 504–529.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hagedoorn, J. (1993). Understanding the rationale of strategic technology partnering: interorganizational modes of cooperation and sectoral differences. Strategic Management Journal, 14, 371–385.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hitt, M. A., Ahlstrom, D., Dacin, M. T., Levitas, E., & Svobodina, L. (2004). The institutional effects on strategic alliance partner selection in transition economies: China vs Russia. Organization Science, 15(2), 173–185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hladik, K. (1988). R&D and international joint ventures. In F. J. Contractor, & P. Lorange (Eds.) Cooperative strategies in international business (pp. 187–203). Lexington: Lexington Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture’s consequences: International differences in work related values. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hofstede, G. (1991). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind. London: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • House, R. J., Hanges, P. J., Javidan, M., Dorfman, P. W., & Gupta, V. (2004). Culture, leadership, and organizations: The Globe study of 62 societies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Khandwalla, P. N. (1977). The design of organizations. New York: Harcourt Brace.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knight, G. (1997). Cross-cultural reliability and validity of a scale to measure firm entrepreneurial orientation. Journal of Business Venturing, 12(3), 213–225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krauss, S. I., Frese, M., Friedrich, C., & Unger, J. M. (2005). Entrepreneurial orientation: a psychological model of success among southern African small business owners. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 14(3), 315–344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kreiser, P. M., Marino, L., & Weaver, K. M. (2002). Assessing the psychometric properties of the entrepreneurial orientation scale: a multi-country analysis. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 26(4), 71–94.

    Google Scholar 

  • La Porta, R., Lopez-de-Silanes, F., & Shleifer, A. (1998). Law and finance. Journal of Political Economy, 106, 1113–1155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • La Porta, R., Lopez-de-Silanes, F., & Shleifer, A. (1999). Corporate ownership around the world. Journal of Finance, 54(2), 471–517.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • La Porta, R., Lopez-de-Silanes, F., & Shleifer, A. (2002). Investor protection and corporate valuation. Journal of Finance, 57, 1147–1170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • La Porta, R., Lopez-de-Silanes, F., Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. W. (1997). Legal determinants of external finance. The Journal of Finance, 52(3), 1131–1150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marino, L., Strandholm, K., Steensma, H. K., & Weaver, K. M. (2002). The moderating effect of national culture on the relationship between entrepreneurial orientation and strategic alliance portfolio effectiveness. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 26(4), 145–161.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGrath, R. G., Macmillan, I. C., Yang, E. A., & Tsai, W. (1992). Does culture endure, or is it malleable? Issues for entrepreneurial economic development. Journal of Business Venturing, 7(6), 441–458.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miles, M. P., Arnold, D. R., & Thompson, D. L. (1993). The interrelationship between environmental hostility and entrepreneurial orientation. Journal of Applied Business Research, 9(4), 12–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, D. (1983). The correlates of entrepreneurship in three types of firms. Management Science, 29(7), 770–791.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, D., & Friesen, P. H. (1983). Strategy-making and environment: the third link. Strategic Management Journal, 4, 221–235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Milliken, F. J. (1987). Three types of perceived uncertainty about the environment: state, effect, and response uncertainty. Academy of Management Review, 12, 133–143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mintzberg, H. (1973). Strategy-making in three modes. California Management Review, 16(2), 44–53.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mueller, S. L., & Thomas, A. S. (2000). Culture and entrepreneurial potential: a nine country study of locus on control and innovativeness. Journal of Business Venturing, 16, 51–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • OECD (2003). OECD Science, technology and industry scoreboard. Paris: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oxley, J. E. (1997). Appropriability hazards and governance in strategic alliances: a transaction cost approach. Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, 13, 387–409.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oxley, J. E. (1999). Institutional environment and the mechanism of governance: the impact of intellectual property protection on the structure of inter-firm alliances. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 38, 283–309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schultz, R. L., Slevin, D. P., & Covin, J. G. (1995). The strategic management profile: An executive questionnaire. Unpublished questionnaire, Joseph M. Katz Graduate School of Business, University of Pittsburgh.

  • Scott, W. R. (1987). Organizations: Rational, natural and open systems. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, W. R. (1995). Institutions and organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Snijders, T. A. B., & Boskers, R. J. (2003). Multilevel analysis: An introduction to basic and advanced multilevel modeling. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steensma, H., Marino, L., Weaver, K., & Dickson, P. (2000). The influence of national culture on the formation of technology alliances by entrepreneurial firms. Academy of Management Journal, 43, 951–973.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Triandis, H. C. (1995). Individualism and collectivism. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • United States Government Printing Office (2005). The small business economy: A report to the President 2005. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiklund, J. (1999). The sustainability of the entrepreneurial orientation–performance relationship. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 24, 37–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yiu, D., & Makino, S. (2002). The choice between joint venture and wholly owned subsidiary: an institutional perspective. Organization Science, 13, 667–683.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zukin, S., & DiMaggio, P. (1990). Structures of capital: The social organization of the economy. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Wake Forest University, P.O. Box 7285, Winston-Salem, NC, 27109, USA

    Pat H. Dickson

  2. Louisiana State University, 3307 B CEBA Building, Baton Rouge, LA, 70803, USA

    K. Mark Weaver

Authors
  1. Pat H. Dickson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. K. Mark Weaver
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Pat H. Dickson.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Dickson, P.H., Weaver, K.M. The role of the institutional environment in determining firm orientations towards entrepreneurial behavior. Int Entrep Manage J 4, 467–483 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-008-0088-x

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-008-0088-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation