Advertisement

Entrepreneurial Orientation and the Handling of Complexity in Small and Medium Enterprise Research

  • Markus BraunEmail author
  • Thomas Steger
Chapter
Part of the FGF Studies in Small Business and Entrepreneurship book series (FGFS)

Abstract

Entrepreneurial small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) are regularly operating in very complex settings. The methods and tools used by SME research to account for that complexity are commonly derived from only one of both worlds: Either the world of entrepreneurship with its emphasis on personal traits and characteristics of the entrepreneur, or from the world of large corporations and its focus on singular issues, such as processes or organizations. SME research is stuck in the middle, being the step-child of two unlikely parents who live in worlds apart. Specific research, targeted at entrepreneurial small and medium enterprises as a whole, could help to close this gap and to integrate the different approaches in a comprehensive context. A holistic view of the formation and growth process as well as on later stages, using a company-related perspective, is needed in SME research. One approach that could prove helpful is configurational analysis using the concept of Entrepreneurial Orientation. Configurational approaches are helpful particularly in ongoing transformation phases, as common in young companies. Embedding of Entrepreneurial Orientation in the context of the company therefore could establish an instrument that would make it possible to analyze especially small and medium enterprises in all phases of their lifecycle appropriately. The complexity of the enterprise as such as well as of its environment can hereby be described and analyzed in a holistic way, independent of the stage and age of the company, thus providing a bridging of the gap described above.

Keywords

Configurational analysis Entrepreneurial orientation SME research 

References

  1. Aldrich, H. E. (1979). Organizations and environments. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  2. Anderson, B. S., & Eshima, Y. (2013). The influence of firm age and intangible resources on the relationship between entrepreneurial orientation and firm growth among Japanese SMEs. Journal of Business Venturing, 28(3), 413–429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ansoff, H. I. (1965). Corporate strategy: An analytic approach to business policy for growth and expansion. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  4. Bennett, R. J., & Robson, P. A. (1990). The use of external business advice by SMEs in Britain. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 11(2), 155–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bhide, A. (1994). How entrepreneurs craft strategies that work. Harvard Business Review, 72(2), 150–161.Google Scholar
  6. Boyd, B. K. (1995). CEO duality and firm performance: A contingency model. Strategic Management Journal, 16(4), 301–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Boyd, B. K., Dess, G. G., & Rasheed, A. M. A. (1993). Divergence between archival and perceptual measures of the environment: Causes and consequences. Academy of Management Review, 18(2), 204–226.Google Scholar
  8. Bruhn, M., Karlan, D. S., & Schoar, A. (2013). The impact of consulting services on small and medium enterprises: Evidence from a randomized trial in Mexico (Working paper No. 6508). Retrieved from World Bank eLibrary website. doi:  10.1596/1813-9450-6508.Google Scholar
  9. Brunswicker, S., & Vanhaverbeke, W. (2015). Open innovation in small and medium‐sized enterprises (SMEs): External knowledge sourcing strategies and internal organizational facilitators. Journal of Small Business Management, 53(4), 1241–1263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Child, J., & Hsieh, L. H. Y. (2014). Decision mode, information and network attachment in the internationalization of SMEs: A configurational and contingency analysis. Journal of World Business, 49(4), 598–610.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Chrisman, J. J. (1989). Strategic, administrative, and operating assistance: The value of outside consulting to pre-venture entrepreneur. Journal of Business Venturing, 4(6), 401–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Colombo, M. G., Piva, E., & Rossi-Lamastra, C. (2014). Open innovation and within-industry diversification in small and medium enterprises: The case of open source software firms. Research Policy, 43(5), 891–902.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Covin, J. G., & Lumpkin, G. T. (2011). Entrepreneurial orientation theory and research: reflections on a needed construct. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 35(5), 855–872.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Covin, J. G., & Slevin, D. P. (1989). Strategic management of small firms in hostile and benign environment. Strategic Management Journal, 10(1), 75–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Covin, J. G., & Slevin, D. P. (1991). A conceptual model of entrepreneurship as firm behavior. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 16(1), 7–25.Google Scholar
  16. Covin, J. G., & Wales, W. J. (2012). The measurement of entrepreneurial orientation. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 36(4), 677–702.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Daily, C. M., McDougall, P. P., Covin, J. G., & Dalton, D. R. (2002). Governance and strategic leadership in entrepreneurial firm. Journal of Management, 28(3), 387–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Dess, G. G., & Beard, D. W. (1984). Dimensions of organizational task environment. Administrative Science Quarterly, 29(1), 52–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Dess, G. G., Newport, S., & Rasheed, A. M. (1993). Configuration research in strategic management: Key issues and suggestions. Journal of Management, 19(4), 775–795.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Fayolle, A., Basso, O., & Bouchard, V. (2010). Three levels of culture and firms’ entrepreneurial orientation: A research agenda. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 22(7–8), 707–730.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Forlani, D., & Mullins, J. W. (2000). Perceived risks and choices in entrepreneurs’ new venture decisions. Journal of Business Venturing, 15(4), 305–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Gartner, W. B. (1985). A conceptual framework for describing the phenomenon of new venture creation. Academy of Management Review, 10(4), 696–706.Google Scholar
  23. Greenwood, R., & Hinings, C. R. (1993). Understanding strategic change: The contribution of archetypes. Academy of Management Journal, 36(5), 1052–1081.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hall, W. K. (1980). Survival strategies in a hostile environment. Harvard Business Review, 58(5), 75–85.Google Scholar
  25. Hart, S. L. (1992). An integrative framework for strategy-making processes. Academy of Management Review, 17(2), 327–351.Google Scholar
  26. Hatten, K. J., Schendel, D. E., & Cooper, A. C. (1978). A strategic model of the U.P. brewing industry: 1952-1971. Academy of Management Journal, 21(4), 592–610.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. IBM Corp. (2011a). IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows (Version 20.0) [Computer software]. Armonk, NY: IBM Corp.Google Scholar
  28. IBM Corp. (2011b). IBM SPSS Statistics Base 20 [Computer software]. Armonk, NY: IBM Corp.Google Scholar
  29. Jambulingam, T., Kathuria, R., & Doucette, W. R. (2005). Entrepreneurial orientation as a basis for classification within a service industry: The case of retail pharmacy industry. Journal of Operations Management, 23(1), 23–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Julien, P.-A., Joyal, A., Deshaies, L., & Ramangalahy, C. (1997). A typology of strategic behaviour among small and medium-sized exporting businesses. International Small Business Journal, 15(2), 33–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kaufman, L., & Rousseuw, P. J. (1990). Finding groups in data: An introduction to cluster analysis. New York: Wiley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Keats, B. W., & Hitt, M. A. (1988). A causal model of linkages among environmental dimensions, macro organizational characteristics, and performance. Academy of Management Journal, 31(3), 570–598.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Khandwalla, P. N. (1976). Some top management styles, their context and performance. Organization and Administrative Sciences, 7(4), 21–51.Google Scholar
  34. Kollmann, T., & Kuckertz, A. (2006). Venture archetypes and the entrepreneurial event: Cross-cultural empirical evidence. Journal of Enterprising Culture, 14(1), 27–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Langan-Fox, J., & Roth, S. (1995). Achievement motivation and female entrepreneurs. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 68(3), 209–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Lechner, C., & Dowling, M. (2003). Firm networks: External relationships as sources for the growth and competitiveness of entrepreneurial firms. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 15(1), 1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Lieberman, M. B., & Montgomery, D. B. (1988). First-mover advantage [Special issue]. Strategic Management Journal, 9, 41–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Lumpkin, G. T. (2011). From legitimacy to impact: Moving the field forward by asking how entrepreneurship informs life. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 5(1), 3–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 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
  40. Meyer, A. D., Tsui, A. S., & Hinings, C. R. (1993). Configurational approaches to organizational analysis. Academy of Management Journal, 36(6), 1175–1195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Miller, D. (1983). The correlates of entrepreneurship in three types of firms. Management Science, 29(7), 770–791.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Miller, D. (1987). The genesis of configuration. Academy of Management Review, 12(4), 686–701.Google Scholar
  43. Miller, D. (1996). Configurations revisited. Strategic Management Journal, 17(7), 505–512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Miller, D. (2011). Miller (1983) Revisited: A reflection on EO research and some suggestions for the future. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 35(5), 873–894.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Miller, D., & Friesen, P. H. (1977). Strategy-making in context: Ten empirical archetypes. Journal of Management Studies, 14(3), 253–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Miller, D., & Friesen, P. H. (1978). Archetypes of strategy formulation. Management Science, 24(9), 921–933.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Miller, D., & Le Breton-Miller, I. (1996). Priorities, practices and strategies in successful and failing family businesses: An elaboration and test of the configuration perspective. Strategic Organization, 4(4), 379–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Mintzberg, H. (1978). Patterns in strategy formation. Management Science, 24(9), 934–948.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Mintzberg, H. (1979). The structuring of organizations: A synthesis of the research. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  50. Mintzberg, H., Ahlstrand, B. W., & Lampel, J. (1999). Strategy Safari: Eine Reise durch die Wildnis des Strategischen Managements. Heidelberg: Redline Wirtschaft.Google Scholar
  51. Nicholson, N., Soane, E., Fenton-O’Creevy, M., & Willman, P. (2005). Personality and domain-specific risk-taking. Journal of Risk Research, 8(2), 157–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Ogbonna, E., & Harris, L. C. (2000). Leadership style, organizational culture and performance: Empirical evidence from UK companies. International Journal of Human Management, 11(4), 766–768.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Porter, M. E. (1985). Competitive advantage: Creating and sustaining superior performance. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  54. Raymond, L., & Croteau, A.‐. M. (2006). Enabling the strategic development of SMEs through advanced manufacturing systems: A configurational perspective. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 106(7), 1012–1032.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Rind Christensen, P., & Klyver, K. (2006). Management consultancy in small firms: How does interaction work? Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 13(3), 299–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Saleh, S. D., & Wang, C. K. (1993). The management of innovation: Strategy, structure, and organizational climate. IEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 40(1), 14–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Santos, F. M., & Eisenhardt, K. M. (2009). Constructing markets and shaping boundaries: Entrepreneurial power in nascent fields. Academy of Management Journal, 52(4), 643–671.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Schumpeter, J. A. (1912). Theorie der Wirtschaftlichen Entwicklung. Leipzig: Dunker & Humblot.Google Scholar
  59. Shane, S. A., & Venkataraman, P. (2000). The promise of entrepreneurship as a field of research. Academy of Management Review, 25(1), 217–226.Google Scholar
  60. Simerly, R. L., & Li, M. (2000). Environmental dynamism, capital structure and performance: A theoretical integration and an empirical test. Strategic Management Journal, 21(1), 31–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Statistisches Bundesamt. (2010). Statistisches Jahrbuch 2010 für die Bundesrepublik Deutschland mit Internationalen Übersichten. Wiesbaden: Statistisches Bundesamt.Google Scholar
  62. Swoboda, B., Meierer, M., Foscht, T., & Morschett, D. (2011). International SME alliances: The impact of alliance building and configurational fit on success. Long Range Planning, 44(4), 271–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Tan, J., Fischer, E., Mitchell, R., & Phan, P. (2009). At the center of the action: Innovation and technology strategy research in the small business setting. Journal of Small Business Management, 47(3), 233–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Timmons, J., & Spinelli, S., Jr. (2009). New venture creation: Entrepreneurship for the 21st Century (International ed.). Boston: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  65. Torrès, O., & Julien, P.-A. (2005). Specificity and denaturing of small business. International Small Business Journal, 23(4), 355–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Tushman, M. L., & Anderson, P. (1986). Technological discontinuities and organizational environments. Administrative Science Quarterly, 31(3), 439–465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Venkataraman, S., Van de Ven, A. H., Buckeye, J., & Hudson, R. (1990). Starting up in a turbulent environment: A process model of failure among firms with high customer dependence. Journal of Business Venturing, 5(5), 277–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Wiklund, J., & Shepherd, D. (2005). Entrepreneurial orientation and small business performance: A configurational approach. Journal of Business Venturing, 20(1), 71–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Zahra, S. A., & Covin, J. G. (1993). Business strategy, technology policy, and firm performance. Strategic Management Journal, 14(6), 451–478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.TU Chemnitz, Zentrum für Wissens- und TechnologietransferChemnitzGermany
  2. 2.Universität Regensburg, Lehrstuhl für BWL II, insb. Führung und OrganisationRegensburgGermany

Personalised recommendations