Green Innovation, Self-Efficacy, Entrepreneurial Orientation and Economic Performance: Interactions among Saudi Small Enterprises

Abstract

The stiff competition in the market, and continuous pressures from various stakeholders such as customers, business owners, environmental authorities, and society, in general, to produce unique products and services, protect the environment, and obtain competitive advantage continue to challenge the sustainability of enterprises in the market, especially the small ones. Accordingly, to minimize the effect of these challenges and pressures, small enterprises can improve their performance by directing their practices and processes towards developing innovative products and services that can help obtain a competitive advantage, protect the environment and better market share. Accordingly, this study aimed to explore the necessary antecedents contributing to developing innovative green products and services among small enterprises in Saudi Arabia. The study targeted a sample of 284 small entrepreneurs across various regions of Saudi Arabia. The responses were collected with a convenience sample through an online questionnaire. The data were analyzed using partial least squares structural equation modelling (PLS-SEM). The findings revealed that both green entrepreneurial self-efficacy (GESE) and green entrepreneurial orientation (GEO) have a positive relationship with green innovation (GI). The findings also reported that GI mediates the relationship between GESE, GEO and economic performance (EP).

Green entrepreneurial orientation and technological green innovation: does resources orchestration capability matter?

“…Interestingly, we found that GEO’s effect on GPROCI is higher than on GPRODI. These results reflect the importance of GEO for promoting sustainability, for example, in thinking, creation, innovations, motivations and operations, which bring superior competitive advantages in emerging economies (Alshebami, 2023; Asadi et al , 2020; Guo et al , 2020; Majali et al , 2022; Jiang et al , 2018), and developed economies (Skordoulis et al , 2022).…”

“…Furthermore, while some studies have empirically explored the GEO–GI link (e.g. Alshebami, 2023; Muangmee et al , 2021), their attention has mostly been on the direct effect of GEO on GI, without delving into the conditions under which GEO affects GI, particularly GPRODI and GPROCI. On the other hand, our study extends the work of Guo et al (2020), who investigated the mechanisms through which GI can be fostered in green entrepreneurship-oriented firms by revealing that ROC moderates the GEO–GPRODI link.…”

“…GEO is a strategic approach that empowers enterprises to cultivate an internal organisational drive to produce more innovative green products. Although the primary objective of firms with GEO is to attain economic advantages (Al-Swidi et al, 2024), they perceive pursuing GI as more viable in comparison with those exclusively concentrated on economic interests (Alshebami, 2023). In other words, although GEO is centred around enhancing technology and minimising costs, it can intentionally or inadvertently stimulate the GI of products and processes (Bos-Brouwers, 2010).…”

“…In addition, past research outcomes regarding the GEO–GI correlation have yielded inconsistent findings. Some researchers (Alshebami, 2023; Wang et al , 2023) contend that there is a positive link between GEO and GI, but others (e.g. Majali et al , 2022) found it to be statistically insignificant.…”

Impact of green technology and regional market orientation on innovation performance of SMEs in China: Contextual analysis of structural and relational embeddedness

“…Most literature emphasizes that enterprises with high relational abilities could have superior advantages. Mainly, the literature shows that a specific competitive advantage is developed via connections with business associates and could only be obtained and continued if enterprises establish vibrant abilities to sustain such network relations concerning environmental changes (Alshebami, 2023; Novitasari et al, 2021; Rodríguez‐Díaz & Espino‐Rodríguez, 2006; Wei et al, 2023; Yin & Shi, 2019). In relationship disbanding, relational embeddedness is hard to redevelop and lose.…”