Corporate entrepreneurship, the discovery and pursuit of new opportunities through innovation and venturing, is an important source of competitive advantage. Corporate entrepreneurship involves a diverse set of activities such as innovation in products and processes; the development of internal and external corporate ventures; and the development of new business models, which require an array of roles, behaviors, and individual competencies. In this article, we define individual competencies and distinguish them from other individual difference constructs. We argue that given the unique requirements of corporate entrepreneurship, a competency‐based approach to assessing organizational human capital needs is superior to more traditional job‐analytic methods. Drawing on existing literature, we outline a competency framework for supporting corporate entrepreneurship and infer the underlying, measurable knowledge, skills, and abilities that contribute to these competencies. We conclude with a discussion of the implications of this framework for the staffing, training and development, and performance‐appraisal practices of firms seeking to promote corporate entrepreneurship. © 2006 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

This research examines the impact of internationalization on small and medium enterprise (SME) survival, and the direct and moderating effects of technology resources and research and development (R&D) alliances. Our survey examination of 1,612 Korean SMEs reveals that sales internationalization is associated with better survival prospects, suggesting that failure risk does not increase with cross-border sales. In addition, though technology resources provide no direct survival benefits, R&D intensity acts as a moderator in the internationalization-to-survival relationship. R&D alliances, on the other hand, are directly linked with survival but do not show a moderating effect. This supports the liabilities of newness and smallness view that external relationships can help counter survival threats but suggests that the accumulation of technology resources may be more important when firms seek international expansion.

No abstract

No abstract

The gap between a firm's reservoir of technical knowledge and the formation of a project to explore the commercial potential of a breakthrough technical insight or discovery is the first major discontinuity in the radical innovation lifecycle. The first step toward bridging that gap occurs when the researcher with the technical insight recognizes that it might have commercial potential and decides to alert a research manager. In our longitudinal study of eight radical innovation projects in six large, multi-national, R&D-intensive firms, the initiation of a radical innovation project was neither frequent nor routine. In fact the participants in the study indicated that the initiation of a project ± in their terminology, the`fuzzy front end of innovation' ± was the most challenging and uncertain part of the lifecycle. In this paper we explore the case data to illuminate the nature of the initiation gap. In addition we present an assessment framework that can help researchers decide whether or not to bring their technical idea to the attention of management. If the decision is positive, the assessment tool can help them prepare for the discussion with management and identify the strengths and weaknesses of the case to submitted for evaluation.

No abstract

While both the innovation literature and the dynamic capabilities perspective identify loose processes as most appropriate for high uncertainty domains, this produces little reassurance to organizations seeking to improve their ability to commercialize innovations. This paper takes the position that practices for managing innovation project leaders are a key component of an organization's dynamic capabilities for innovation. Our comparative case analysis of divisions of two established Korean organizations suggests that managerial practices include the deployment of entrepreneurial resources having particular skills, characteristics, and motivation. In addition, we identify the relational and decision support roles of managers. Building dynamic capabilities for innovation r 2008 The Authors Journal compilation r 2008 Blackwell Publishing Ltd R&D Management 38, 2, 2008 157 AnalysisThe analysis involved iterating between theory and data. We used two data approaches, drawing Building dynamic capabilities for innovation r

No abstract