Most entrepreneurial orientation (EO)–performance research focuses on identifying organizational–level contingent factors in developed countries. In this study, we advance EO research by examining how CEO self–enhancing and self–transcending values shape the relationship between EO and performance, differentially, in Chinese state–owned enterprises vs. nonstate–owned enterprises. Supporting self–concern and other–orientation theory, our sample of 148 manufacturing firms in the chemical industry in Eastern China indicates that the EO–performance relationship is stronger for high self–enhancing CEOs in state–owned enterprises, whereas the focal link is stronger for low self–enhancing CEOs in nonstate–owned enterprises.

No abstract

Purpose -This paper aims to address the link between the internationalization of the MNC and its location choices and the discovery of disruptive innovations among the dispersed network of subsidiaries. Design/methodology/approach -A recent categorization of innovation suggests that not all innovations can be treated the same. Distinguishing between the various innovation typologies, this paper focuses on disruptive innovation within an international context. Many researchers have found that large incumbent firms tend to have issues with developing disruptive innovation, and are often disrupted by new entrants. However, there are cases of MNEs being successful with disruptive innovation and this paper sets out to theoretically explain where MNEs find ideas for disruption to aid in the incumbent's curse. Specifically, this paper asks, where do disruptive innovations originate in a MNE? Findings -Using a transaction cost approach and resource-based view, along with other seminal pieces in international business, it is proposed that disruptive ideas start in subsidiaries. It further proposes the characteristics of these subsidiaries that should increase the likelihood of discovering disruption. Originality/value -This paper not only expands the boundary conditions of disruptive innovation, but also expands on the "where" question for knowledge acquisition and long-term performance in MNEs.

Purpose Many factors influence entrepreneurs, some of which influence the level of innovation (i.e. innovative or imitative) of new products or services pursued. The purpose of this paper is to explore the impact of the psychological motivations of the entrepreneurs and their institutional setting on the innovativeness of the new venture they pursue. Through this exploration, we can gain a better understanding of how innovative new ventures still occur in varying institutional environments. Design/methodology/approach In order to deliver the authors’ propositions as they pertain to innovation, the authors review the literature on entrepreneurs’ default regulatory focus (i.e. promotion or prevention seeking) and the strength of the institutions in which they are operating. Findings The authors theorize that promotion focus enhances innovativeness of ventures while prevention focus enhances imitativeness of ventures. The authors also provide a conceptual framework for the interplay among institutions and regulatory focus and provide a typology for how these varying combinations impact innovativeness or imitativeness of venture type. Originality/value In this study, the authors discuss and unpack the entrepreneurial mindset in order to bridge gaps between institutions and cognitive motivations of entrepreneurs as they pertain to innovativeness of venture type. By synthesizing several areas of research, the authors shed light on entrepreneurs’ innovativeness by proposing how these factors work together in determining whether an entrepreneur’s venture is more or less innovative based on regulatory disposition and in different institutional settings.

A large body of research has exhibited the positive effect of entrepreneurial orientation (EO) on firm performance. However, research that attempts to explore what happens to high EO firms when they mature is sorely needed. Every firm establishes a heritage over time that impacts future capabilities. In the current research, we build on the international business literature to examine how a firmʼs administrative heritage moderates the long-term effects of the EO-performance relationship, examined through the firmʼs asset specificity, founder tenure, and home culture embeddedness. From this, implications are derived for EO retention and the firmʼs awareness of administrative heritage and how to shape it to their advantage.