2007
DOI: 10.1016/j.indmarman.2006.04.003
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Deconstructing the relationship between entrepreneurial orientation and business performance at the embryonic stage of firm growth

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

48
782
7
33

Year Published

2014
2014
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 787 publications
(900 citation statements)
references
References 69 publications
48
782
7
33
Order By: Relevance
“…This finding draws attention to the importance of understanding how SMEs might manipulate the IEO dimensions to enhance scope of international expansion. This evidence is consistent with entrepreneurship theory that argues that EO's sub-dimensions might vary independently in relation to organizational outcomes (Lumpkin et al, 2010;;Casillas & Moreno, 2010), and recent empirical findings that show variations in the effects of the dimensions on firm performance (e.g., Hughes & Morgan, 2007;Grande et al, 2011) and international scope (Dai et al, 2014).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 87%
“…This finding draws attention to the importance of understanding how SMEs might manipulate the IEO dimensions to enhance scope of international expansion. This evidence is consistent with entrepreneurship theory that argues that EO's sub-dimensions might vary independently in relation to organizational outcomes (Lumpkin et al, 2010;;Casillas & Moreno, 2010), and recent empirical findings that show variations in the effects of the dimensions on firm performance (e.g., Hughes & Morgan, 2007;Grande et al, 2011) and international scope (Dai et al, 2014).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 87%
“…Several studies in, among other places, Sweden Shepherd, 2003 and, Slovenia (Antoncic and Hisrich, 2004;Antoncic, 2006), South Africa (Goosen et al, 2002), China (Chen et al, 2005), Greece (Dimitratos et al, 2004), Finland (Jantunen et al, 2005), Germany (Walter et al, 2006), Vietnam and Thailand (Swierczek and Ha, 2003), Netherlands (Kemelgor, 2002;Stam and Elfring, 2008), United Kingdom (Hughes and Morgan, 2007) and Turkey (Kaya, 2006) identify a positive relationship between EO and business performance. Rauch et al (2009) in their study, which covers 51 journals, conclude that the entrepreneurial orientation of the owner/manager has a significant impact on business success.…”
Section: Entrepreneurial Orientationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Pro-activeness is a strategy to achieve business success of an organization characterized by confidently seeking for opportunities where they introduce new products, services or market ahead of other competitors and acting in anticipation of future change in demand and emerging uncertainty in the firm's internal and external environment, (Hughes and Morgan, 2007).Thus, it refers to organization attitude that facilitates the introduction of new products, services, understanding customers' demands and reacting to the market ahead of competitors because of their constant monitoring, alertness and identification of customer's needs and current environmental trends. Pro-activeness involves anticipatory, change-oriented and self-initiated behavior in the market place by managers where they exhibit boldness, competitive aggressiveness and adventurous characteristics relative to rival competitors (Antoncic and Hisrich, 2001).…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%