Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Analysis of the influence of the environment, stakeholder integration capability, absorptive capacity, and technological skills on organizational performance through corporate entrepreneurship

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

Abstract

This research seeks to analyze how factors such as the environment, stakeholder integration capability, absorptive capacity, and technological skills influence corporate entrepreneurship, and the repercussions of corporate entrepreneurship for the organization’s results. The hypotheses are tested empirically using a sample of 160 European technology firms. A positive relationship is found between the factors of the environment and stakeholder integration capability, and corporate entrepreneurship. The uncertainty and complexity of the environment in which the organization operates and its relationship with stakeholders require the firm to be involved in constant updating, collaboration between parties, and innovation of processes, products, and system to maintain competitive advantage. Further, the capacity to absorb new knowledge and develop technological skills can generate new, advanced technological processes. These processes foster corporate entrepreneurship to detect opportunities on the market and transform them into additional advantage over competitors. Corporate entrepreneurship increases organizational performance, as it entrusts entrepreneurs with the task of utilizing potentially value-creating resources more effectively than competitors.

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

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Acs, Z. J., & Plummer, L. (2005). Penetrating the ‘knowledge filter’ in regional economies. The Annals of Regional Science, 39, 439–456.

    Google Scholar 

  • Agostini, P., Pizzol, L., Critto, A., D’Alessandro, M., Zabeo, A., & Marcomini, A. (2012). Regional risk assessment for contaminated sites part 3: spatial decision support system. Environment International, 48, 121–132.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alvarez, S. A., & Barney, J. B. (2005). How entrepreneurs organize firms under conditions of uncertainty. Journal of Management, 31(5), 776–793.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alvarez, S. A., Ireland, R. D., & Reuer, J. J. (2006). Entrepreneurship and strategic alliances. Journal of Business Venturing, 21(4), 401–404.

    Google Scholar 

  • Amadeus 2009. http://amadeus.bvdep.com/ip/ Accessed April 6, 2010.

  • Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: a review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103(3), 411–423.

    Google Scholar 

  • Antoncic, B., & Hisrich, R. D. (2001). Intrapreneurship: construct refinement and cross-cultural validation. Journal of Business Venturing, 16(5), 495–527.

    Google Scholar 

  • Antoncic, B., & Hisrich, R. D. (2004). Corporate entrepreneurship contingencies and organizational wealth creation. Journal of Management Development, 23(6), 518–550.

    Google Scholar 

  • Antoncic, B., & Prodan, I. (2008). Alliances, corporate technological entrepreneurship and firm performance: testing a model on manufacturing firms. Technovation, 28, 257–265.

    Google Scholar 

  • Armstrong, J. S., & Overton, T. S. (1977). Estimating nonresponse bias in mail surveys. Journal of Marketing Research, 14, 396–402.

    Google Scholar 

  • Audretsch, D. B., Bönte, W., & Keilbach, M. (2008). Entrepreneurship capital and its impact on knowledge diffusion and economic performance. Journal of Business Venturing, 23, 687–698.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baden-Fuller, C., & Stopford, M. J. (1994). Rejuvenating the mature business. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bannon L. 1998. Mattel plans to double sales abroad. Wall Street Journal, February 11 (A3 and A8).

  • Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(1), 99–120.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barney, J., Wright, M., & Ketchen, D. (2001). The RBV of the firm: ten years after 1991. Journal of Management, 27, 625–641.

    Google Scholar 

  • Batjargal, B. (2007). Internet entrepreneurship: social capital, human capital, and performance of internet ventures in China. Research Policy, 36, 605–618.

    Google Scholar 

  • Begley, T. M., & Boyd, D. P. (1987). Psychological characteristics of associated with performance in entrepreneurial firms and small businesses. Journal of Business Venturing, 2, 79–83.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bojica, A. M., & Fuentes Fuentes, M. M. (2012). Knowledge acquisition and corporate entrepreneurship: insights from Spanish SMEs in the ICT sector. Journal of World Business, 47, 397–408.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bojica, A. M., Fuentes Fuentes, M. M., & Gomez Gras, J. M. (2011). Radical and incremental entrepreneurial orientation: the effect of knowledge acquisition. Journal of Management & Organization, 17(3), 326–343.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bolivar Ramos, M. T., Garcia Morales, V. J., & Garcia, S. E. (2012). Technological distinctive competencies and organizational learning: effects on organizational innovation to improve firm performance. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 29(3), 331–357.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. Michigan (United States of America): Wiley-Interscience Publication.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bouncken, R. B., & Kraus, S. (2013). Innovation in knowledge-intensive industries: the double-edged sword of coopetition. Journal of Business Research, 66(10), 2060–2070.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyles, T. (2012). Twenty-first century knowledge, skills, and abilities and entrepreneurial competencies: a model for undergraduate entrepreneurship education. Journal of Entrepreneurship Education, 15, 41–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brio, J. A., & Junquera, B. (2003). A review of the literature on environmental innovation management in SMEs: implications for public policies. Technovation, 23, 939–948.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brouthers, K. D. (2002). Institutional, cultural and transaction cost influences on entry mode choice and performance. Journal of International Business Studies, 33(2), 203–221.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buysse, K., & Verbeke, A. (2003). Proactive environmental strategies: a stakeholder management perspective. Strategic Management Journal, 24(5), 453–470.

    Google Scholar 

  • Byrd, A., & Davidson, N. (2003). Examining possible antecedents of IT impact on the supply chain and its effect on firm performance. Information and Management, 41, 243–255.

    Google Scholar 

  • Casillas, J. C., Moreno, A. M., & Barbero, J. L. (2011). Entrepreneurial orientation of family firms: family and environmental dimensions. Journal of Family Business Strategy, 2, 90–100.

    Google Scholar 

  • Choi, B., Poon, S. K., & Davis, J. G. (2008). Effects of knowledge management strategy on organizational performance: a complementarity theory-based approach. Omega, 36(2), 235–251.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J., & Cohen, P. (1983). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioural sciences (Second ed.). New Jersey: Laurence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, W., & Levinthal, D. (1990). Absorptive capacity: a new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 128–152.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, A. C. (1973). Technical entrepreneurship: what do we know? RandD Management, 3(2), 59–64.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • 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), 57–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cui, Y., Sun, C., Xiao, H., & Zhao, C. (2016). How to become an excellent entrepreneur: the moderating effect of risk propensity on alertness to business ideas and entrepreneurial capabilities. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 112, 171–177.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deste, P., Mahdi, S., Neely, A., & Rentocchini, F. (2012). Inventors and entrepreneurs in academia: what types of skills and experience matter? Technovation, 32(5), 293–303.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Damanpour, F. (1992). Organizational size and innovation. Organization Studies, 13(3), 375–402.

    Google Scholar 

  • DeTienne, D. R., & Chandler, G. N. (2004). Opportunity identification and its role in the entrepreneurial classroom: a pedagogical approach and empirical test. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 3(3), 13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Douglas, T. J., & Judge, W. Q. (2001). Total quality management implementation and competitive advantage: the role of structural control and exploration. Academy of Management Journal, 44(1), 158–169.

    Google Scholar 

  • Escribano, A., Fosfuri, A., & Tribo, J. A. (2009). Managing external knowledge flows: the moderating role of absorptive capacity. Research Policy, 39, 96–105.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fontes, M. (2001). Biotechnology entrepreneurs and technology transfer in an intermediate economy. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 66, 59–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fontes, M. (2005). The process of transformation of scientific and technological knowledge into economic value conducted by biotechnology spin-offs. Technovation, 25(4), 339–347.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fosfuri, A., & Tribo, J. A. (2008). Exploring the antecedents of potential absorptive capacity and its impact on innovation performance. Omega, 36, 173–187.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: a stakeholder approach. Boston, MA: Pitman/Ballinger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frooman, J. (1999). Stakeholder influence strategies. The Academy of Management Review, 24(102), 191–205.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fuentes Fuentes, M. M., Bojica, A. M., & Ruiz, A. M. (2010). La orientación emprendedora en las iniciativas empresariales de mujeres: Influencia de las relaciones externas. Cuadernos de Estudios Empresariales, 20, 35–53.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gallego, J., Rubalcaba, L., & Suarez, C. (2013). Knowledge for innovation in Europe: the role of external knowledge on firms cooperation strategies. Journal of Business Research, 66(10), 2034–2041.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garcia Morales, V. J., Ruiz Moreno, A., & Llorens Montes, F. J. (2007). Effects of technology absorptive capacity and technology proactivity on organizational learning, innovation and performance: an empirical examination. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 19(4), 527–558.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garcia-Morales, V. J., Bolivar-Ramos, M. T., & Martin-Rojas, R. (2014). Technological variables and absorptive capacity's influence on performance through corporate entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Research, 67(7), 1468–1477.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gomez Haro, S., Aragon Correa, J. A., & Cordon, P. E. (2011). Differentiating the effects of the institutional environment on corporate entrepreneurship. Management Decision, 49(10), 1677–1693.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodpaster, E. K. (1991). Business ethics and stakeholder analysis. Business Ethics Quarterly, 1, 53–71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Granovetter, M. (1985). Economic action and social structure: the problem of embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology, 91(3), 481–510.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gupta, A. K., & Govindarajan, V. (2000). Knowledge management’s social dimension: lesson from Nucor steel. Sloan Management Review Fall, 71–80.

  • Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (2010). Multivariate Data Analysis. New Jersey, USA: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harrison, J., & St. John, C. H. (1996). Managing and partnering with external stakeholders. Academy of Management Executive, 10, 46–60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hart, S. L., & Sharma, S. (2004). Engaging fringe stakeholders for competitive imagination. Academy of Management Executive, 18(1), 7–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayton, J. C. (2005). Promoting corporate entrepreneurship through human resource management practices: a review of empirical research. Human Resource Management Review, 15(1), 21–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heavey, C., & Simsek, Z. (2013). Top management compositional effects on corporate entrepreneurship: the moderating role of perceived technological uncertainty. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 30(5), 837–855.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henriques, I., & Sadorsky, P. (1999). The relationship between environmental commitment and managerial perceptions of stakeholder importance. Academy of Management Journal, 42(1), 87–99.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hillman, J. A., & Keim, D. G. (2001). Shareholder value, stakeholder management and social issues: What’s the bottom line? Strategic Management Journal, 22, 125–139.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hills, G., & Shrader, R. C. (1998). Successful entrepreneurs’ insights into opportunity recognition. In P. D. Reynolds (Ed.), Frontiers of entrepreneurship research. Babson College: Wellesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Homburg, C., Krohmer, H., & Workman, J. P. (1999). Strategic consensus and performance: the role of strategy type and market-related dynamism. Strategic Management Journal, 20, 339–357.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Jimenez, D., & Sanz, R. (2005). Innovation and human resource management fit: an empirical study. International Journal of Manpower, 26(4), 364–398.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jimenez Barrionuevo, M. M., Garcia Morales, V. J., & Molina, L. M. (2011). Validation of an instrument to measure absorptive capacity. Technovation, 31(5–6), 190–202.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, G. R., & Butler, J. E. (1992). Managing internal corporate entrepreneurship: an agency theory perspective. Journal of Management, 18(4), 733–749.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kannan-Narasimhan, R., & Glazer, S. (2005). Nurturing corporate entrepreneurship: a cross-cultural analysis of organizational elements that foster corporate entrepreneurship. International Journal of Entrepreneurship Education, 3(1), 31–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelley, D. (2011). Sustainable corporate entrepreneurship: evolving and connecting with the organization. Business Horizons, 54(1), 73–83.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kimberly, J. R., & Evanisko, M. J. (1981). Organizational innovation: the influence of individual, organizational and contextual factors on hospital adoption of technological and administrative innovation. Academy of Management Journal, 24, 689–713.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Konrad, A. M., & Linnehan, F. (1995). Formalized HRM structures: coordinating equal employment opportunity or concealing organizational practice? Academy of Management Journal, 38, 787–820.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kostopoulos, K., Papalexandris, A., Papachroni, M., & Ioannou, G. (2011). Absorptive capacity, innovation, and financial performance. Journal of Business Research, 64(12), 1335–1343.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuratko, D. F., & Audretsch, D. B. (2013). Clarifying the domains of corporate entrepreneurship. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 9(3), 323–335.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuratko, D. F., Hornsby, J. S., & Goldsby, M. G. (2004). Sustaining corporate entrepreneurship: a proposed model of perceived implementation/outcome comparisons at the organizational and individual levels. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation, 5(2), 77–89.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuratko, D. F., Hornsby, J. S., & Goldsby, M. G. (2007). The relationship of stakeholder salience, organizational posture, and entrepreneurial intensity to corporate entrepreneurship. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, 13(4), 56–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Langerak, F., Hultink, E. J., & Robben, H. S. J. (2004). The impact of market orientation, product advantage, and launch proficiency on new product performance and organizational performance. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 21(2), 79–94.

    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 

  • Lemke, C., Coughlin, E., Thadani, D. V., & Martin-Rojas, C. (2003). Gauge 21st-century skills: literacy in the digital age. Los Angeles: Metiri Group.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leonard-Barton, D. (1992). Core capabilities and core rigidities: a paradox in managing new product development. Strategic Management Journal, 13, 111–125.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lumpkin, G. T., & Dess, G. G. (1996). Clarifying the entrepreneurial orientation construct and linking it to performance. Academy of Management Review, 21(1), 135–172.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin-Rojas, R., Garcia-Morales, V. J., & Garcia-Sanchez, E. (2011). The influence on corporate entrepreneurship of technological variables. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 11(7), 984–1005.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin-Rojas, R., Garcia-Morales, V. J., & Bolivar-Ramos, M. T. (2013). Influence of technological support, skills and competencies, and learning on corporate entrepreneurship in European technology firms. Technovation, 33, 417–430.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin-Rojas R, Fernandez-Perez VJ, Garcia-Sanchez E. 2016. Encouraging organizational performance through the influence of technological distinctive competencies on components of corporate entrepreneurship. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, In Press.

  • Mascarenhas, B. (1992). Order of entry and performance in international markets. Strategic Management Journal, 13, 499–510.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGrath, R. M., & MacMillan, I. C. (2000). The entrepreneurial mindset. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Murray, J. Y., & Kotabe, M. (1999). Sourcing strategies of U.S. service companies: a modified transaction-cost analysis. Strategic Management Journal, 20, 791–809.

    Google Scholar 

  • Omerzel, D. G., & Antoncic, B. (2008). Critical entrepreneur knowledge dimensions for the SME performance. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 108(9), 1182–1199.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oviatt, B. M., & McDougall, P. P. (2005). Defining international entrepreneurship and modeling the speed of internationalization. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 29(5), 537–554.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pandey, S. K., Wright, B. E., & Moynihan, D. P. (2008). Public service motivation and interpersonal citizenship behaviour in public organizations: testing a preliminary model. International Public Management Journal, 11(1), 89–108.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pavitt, K. (1991). Key characteristics of the large innovating firm. British Journal of Management, 2(1), 41–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearce, J. A., Fritz, D. A., & Davis, P. S. (2010). Entrepreneurial orientation and the performance of religious congregations as predicted by rational choice theory. Entrepreneurship, Theory and Practice, 34(1), 219–248.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perez Lopez, S., & Alegre, J. (2012). Information technology competency, knowledge processes and firm performance. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 112(4), 644–662.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phan, P. H., Wright, M., Ucbasaran, D., & Tan, W. L. (2009). Corporate entrepreneurship: current research and future directions. Journal of Business Venturing, 24(3), 197–205.

    Google Scholar 

  • Podsakoff, P. M., & Organ, D. W. (1986). Self reports in organizational research: problems and prospects. Journal of Management, 12(4), 531–544.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Pollard, S. J. T., Brookes, A., Earl, N., Lowe, J., Kearny, T., & Nathanail, C. P. (2004). Integrating decision tools for the sustainable management of land contamination. Science of the Total Environment, 325, 15–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. (1980). Competitive strategy: techniques for Analysing industries and competitors. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Qian, H., & Acs, Z. J. (2013). An absorptive capacity theory of knowledge spillover entrepreneurship. Small Business Economics, 40(2), 185–197.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rangus K, Slavec A. 2017. The interplay of decentralization, employee involvement and absorptive capacity on firms' innovation and business performance. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, In press.

  • Ray, G., Muhanna, W. A., & Barnety, J. B. (2005). Information technology and the performance of the customer service process: a resource-based analysis. MIS Quarterly, 29(4), 625–652.

    Google Scholar 

  • Real, J. C., Leal, A., & Roldan, J. L. (2006). Information technology as a determinant of organizational learning and technological distinctive competencies. Industrial Marketing Management, 35, 505–521.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reuber, R., & Fischer, E. (1993). The learning experiences of entrepreneurs. In K. H. Vesper (Ed.), Frontiers in entrepreneurship research (pp. 234–245). Babson College: Wellesley, MA.

    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(2), 255–266.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rueda, M. A. (2005). Stakeholders, entorno y gestión medioambiental de la empresa: la moderación del entorno sobre la relación entre la integración de los stakeholders y las estrategias medioambientales. Doctoral thesis: Editorial de la Universidad de Granada.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rueda Manzanares, A., Aragon Correa, J. A., & Sharma, S. (2008). The influence of stakeholders on the environmental strategy of service firms: the moderating effects of complexity, uncertainty and munificence. British Journal of Management, 19, 185–203.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salvato, C. (2004). Predictors of entrepreneurship in family firms. Journal of Private Equity, 27(3), 68–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sathe, V. (2003). Corporate entrepreneurship: top managers and new business creation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schollhammer, H. (1982). Internal corporate entrepreneurship. In C. A. Kent, D. L. Sexton, & K. H. Vesper (Eds.), Encyclopedia of entrepreneurship (pp. 209–223). Prentice Hall: Englewood Cliffs.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shane, S., & Venkataraman, S. (2000). The promise of entrepreneurship as a field of research. Academy of Management Review, 25(1), 217–226.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharma, S. (2000). Managerial interpretations and organizational context as predictors of corporate choice of environmental strategy. Academy of Management Journal, 43(4), 681–697.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharma, S., & Henriques, I. (2005). Stakeholder influences on sustainability practices in the Canadian forest products industry. Strategic Management Journal, 26, 159–180.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharma, S., & Vredenburg, H. (1998). Proactive corporate environmental strategy and the development of competitively valuable organizational capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 19, 729–753.

    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 

  • Smart T. 1996. GE’s Welch: ‘Fighting like Hell to be No. 1. Business Week 8: 48.

  • Sommer, L., & Haug, M. (2011). Intention as a cognitive antecedent to international entrepreneurship: understanding the moderating roles of knowledge and experience. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 7(1), 111–142.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spar, D. L., & La Mure, L. T. (2003). The power of activism: assessing the impact of NGOs on global business. California Management Review, 45(3), 78–101.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stevenson, H. H., & Jarillo, J. C. (1990). A paradigm of entrepreneurship: Entrepreneurial management. Strategic Management Journal, 11, 17–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stevenson, H. H., Roberts, M. J., & Grousbeck, H. I. (1994). Business ventures and the entrepreneur. Homewood, IL: Irwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stopford, J. M., & Baden-Fuller, C. W. F. (1994). Creating corporate entrepreneurship. Strategic Management Journal, 15(7), 521–536.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tan, J. J., & Litschert, R. (1994). Environment-strategy relationship and its performance implications: an empirical study of the Chinese electronic industry. Strategic Management Journal, 15, 1–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509–533.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thorpe, R., Holt, R., Macpherson, A., & Pittaway, L. (2005). Using knowledge within small and medium-sized firms: a systematic review of the evidence. International Journal of Management Reviews, 7(4), 257–281.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsai, W. (2001). Knowledge transfer in intraorganizational networks: effects of network position and absorptive capacity on business unit innovation and performance. Academy of Management Journal, 44(5), 996–1004.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vandekerckhove, W., & Dentchev, N. A. (2005). A network perspective on stakeholder management: facilitating entrepreneurs in the discovery of opportunities. Journal of Business Ethics, 60(3), 221–232.

    Google Scholar 

  • Venkatraman, N., & Ramanujam, V. (1986). Measurement of business performance in strategy research: a comparison of approaches. Academy of Management Review, 11(4), 801–814.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vlasic, B. (1998). The little car that could carry Chrysler overseas. Business Week, 19, 39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vockley M. 2008. twenty-first Century Skills, Education and Competitiveness. Tucson, AZ: Partnership for twenty-first century skills.

  • Wagner, T. (2008). The global achievement gap: why even our best schools Don't teach the new survival skills our children need - and what We can do about it. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walter, A., Auer, R., & Ritter, T. (2005). The impact of network capabilities and entrepreneurial orientation on university spin-off performance. Journal of Business Venturing, 21, 541–567.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wandosell G. 2003. La creación de Empresas y el Perfil del Emprendedor. Análisis Empírico en la Comunidad Autónoma de la Región de Murcia . Doctoral thesis. Universidad Politécnica de Cartagena.

  • Westley, F., & Vredenburg, H. (1991). Strategic bridging: the collaboration between environmentalists and business in the marketing of green products. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 27, 65–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Westphal, J. D., & Fredickson, J. W. (2001). Who directs strategic change? Director experience, the selection of new CEOs, and change in corporate strategy. Strategic Management Journal, 22, 1113–1137.

    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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zahra, S. A. (1991). Predictors and financial outcomes of corporate entrepreneurship: an exploratory study. Journal of Business Venturing, 6(4), 259–285.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zahra, S. A. (1993). Environment, corporate entrepreneurship, and financial performance: a taxonomic approach. Journal of Business Venturing, 8(4), 319–340.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zahra, S. A. (1996). Technology strategy and new venture performance: a study of corporate-sponsored and independent biotechnology ventures. Journal of Business Venturing, 11, 289–321.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zahra, S. A., & Garvis, D. M. (2000). International corporate entrepreneurship and firm performance: the moderating effect of international environmental hostility. Journal of Business Venturing, 15(5–6), 469–492.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zahra, S. A., & George, G. (2002). Absorptive capacity: a review, reconceptualization, and extension. Academy of Management Review, 27(2), 185–203.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zahra, S. A., & James, C. H. (2008). The effect of international venturing on firm performance: the moderating influence of absorptive capacity. Journal of Business Venturing, 23(2), 195–220.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zahra, S. A., Nielsen, A. P., & Bogner, W. C. (1999). Corporate entrepreneurship, knowledge, and competence development. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 23(3), 169–189.

    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(3), 248–260.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Management, School of Economics and Business, University of Granada, Campus Cartuja, s.n., ES-18071, Granada, Spain

    Encarnacion García-Sánchez

  2. Department of Management, School of Economics and Business, University of Granada, Granada, Spain

    Víctor Jesús García-Morales & Rodrigo Martín-Rojas

Authors
  1. Encarnacion García-Sánchez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Víctor Jesús García-Morales
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Rodrigo Martín-Rojas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Encarnacion García-Sánchez.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

García-Sánchez, E., García-Morales, V.J. & Martín-Rojas, R. Analysis of the influence of the environment, stakeholder integration capability, absorptive capacity, and technological skills on organizational performance through corporate entrepreneurship. Int Entrep Manag J 14, 345–377 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-017-0436-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-017-0436-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation