Entrepreneurial Orientation vs. Innovativeness of Small and Medium Size Enterprises

Abstract

This study aims to examine the role of entrepreneurial orientation (entrepreneurship orientation) in innovation level among Small and Medium Size Enterprises (SMEs). A questionnaire survey was conducted among 137 firms in the Podlaskie Region. Three hypotheses related to entrepreneurial orientation and innovativeness level were examined by Structural Equation Modeling (SEM). The relation between two constructs of entrepreneurial orientation and innovativeness, that is proactiveness and risk taking were analyzed. The research results show that proactiveness has a significant positive total effect on improving innovativeness. The findings suggest, in contrast to the strategic orientation literature, that risk taking deters enterprises from organizational innovation. The results confirmed the significantly higher impact of the risk taking as an intermediate variable on the innovation through the mediator of proactivity. This work examines the relations between entrepreneurial orientation and innovativeness, thus contributes to the strategic orientation literature.

Intellectual capital, entrepreneurial orientation, and technical innovation in small and medium‐sized enterprises

“…In turn, all EO dimensions were found to significantly and positively affect TI, which is in line with the extant literature (e.g., Ergün et al, ; Dess & Lumpkin, ; Rauch et al, ; Vora et al, ; Ejdys, ; Yu et al, ). Essentially, EO refers to a behavior that is aimed at focusing on identifying, creating, seizing, and exploiting unique business opportunities, through capitalizing on enhanced knowledge and experience (Dess & Lumpkin, ; Simsek & Heavey, ).…”

Reviewing the Mediating Role of Organizational Learning Capability on the Effect of Transformational Leadership on Entrepreneurial Orientation

“…Entrepreneurial orientation can be defined as a multidimensional construct used at organizational or entrepreneur's level, although there is ongoing academic debate about the precise nature of those dimensions. Miller (1983) stated that the three dimensions of innovativeness, proactiveness and risk taking are the key aspects of entrepreneurship orientation, and this view is shared by many researchers (Covin and Slevin, 1989;Kreiser et al, 2013;Ejdys, 2016;Fellnhofer et al, 2016). To these, Lumpkin and Dess (1996) added two further dimensions to the construct: autonomy and competitive aggressiveness (see also Dess and Lumpkin, 2005;Maura et al, 2015).…”

The antecedents of innovativeness in small and medium manufacturing enterprises in Kenya: A critical review of literature

“…Bearing in mind that innovativeness tends to be incremental overtime, there is a need for further investigations for causal relationships that are longitudinal in nature so as to evaluate the impact of afore-mentioned factors on innovativeness. In a cross sectional study, Ejdys (2016) confirmed proactivity affected innovativeness in SMEs. This study however did not explore other factors that could have jointly or singularly affected innovativeness in SMEs in Poland.…”

“…In addition to this, other studies have shown that there are other variables beyond, entrepreneurial orientation that affect innovativeness of firms (Neely and Hii, 2012). Entrepreneurial orientation has been found to be a prerequisite for innovativeness (Hult et al, 2004;Renko et al, 2009;Perez-Luno et al, 2010;Laforet, 2011;Ruiz-Ortega et al, 2013;Ejdys, 2016). Innovativeness has been defined as "the firm's tendency or willingness to participate in support of new ideas, creativity and experimentation as well as to develop creative processes of technological and R&D leadership which result in new products, services or technological processes" (Ruiz-Ortega et al, 2013).…”

“…Moreover, there is an emerging view that innovation and its antecedents as a key dimension of entrepreneurship orientation has not been adequately conceptualized (Perez-Luno et al, 2010). Some studies have shown that entrepreneurial orientation cannot be treated as a uni-dimensional construct but rather as a multidimensional construct since the key dimensions interact differently and with different outcomes (Lumpkin and Dess, 1996;Kreiser et al, 2013, Ejdys, 2016. It is evident that the construct of entrepreneurial orientation remains incomplete.…”