"Entrepreneurial Management" as a Strategic Choice in Firm Behavior: Linking it with Performance

Birte Kuhn, S. P. Saßmannshausen, Roxanne Zollin
{"title":"\"Entrepreneurial Management\" as a Strategic Choice in Firm Behavior: Linking it with Performance","authors":"Birte Kuhn, S. P. Saßmannshausen, Roxanne Zollin","doi":"10.3990/1.268474933","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Establishing the core principals of “entrepreneurial management” within an organization describes a certain strategic choice that affects a company in six dimensions, according to Stevenson (1983). Our aim is to empirically measure entrepreneurial management (it’s existence and degree) and to link this measured strategic choice (for or against) entrepreneurial management with firm performance. Our argument here is that companies that follow core principals of entrepreneurial management should outperform other more administrative firms in certain measures of strategic performance. This paper builds on an empirical investigation published by Brown, Davidson & Wiklund (2001), who have developed and tested a reliable measurement instrument for Stevenson’s definition of “entrepreneurial management” (Stevenson 1983, Stevenson & Jarillo 1990). In the first part of our paper we aim to replicate and to some extent improve this study. In the second part we link the measured degree of “entrepreneurial management” with firm performance. To our knowledge, even so Stevenson’s definition of entrepreneurial management is commonly acknowledged and Brown et al. (2001) developed a reliable instrument to empirically capture this behavioral approach to management, the construct of entrepreneurial management never before has been linked to firm performance in an empirical study. Since most papers on corporate entrepreneurship and firm performance are based on Covin & Slevin’s (1991) or Miller’s (1983) concept of entrepreneurial orientation, we contribute to the literature on corporate entrepreneurship in a novel way, given the fact that the entrepreneurial management dimensions measured in our study can theoretically and empirically be clearly distinguished from the construct of entrepreneurial orientation as defined by Covin & Selvin (1991).","PeriodicalId":350992,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 18th Annual High Technology Small Firms Conference","volume":"97 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"21","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the 18th Annual High Technology Small Firms Conference","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3990/1.268474933","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 21

Abstract

Establishing the core principals of “entrepreneurial management” within an organization describes a certain strategic choice that affects a company in six dimensions, according to Stevenson (1983). Our aim is to empirically measure entrepreneurial management (it’s existence and degree) and to link this measured strategic choice (for or against) entrepreneurial management with firm performance. Our argument here is that companies that follow core principals of entrepreneurial management should outperform other more administrative firms in certain measures of strategic performance. This paper builds on an empirical investigation published by Brown, Davidson & Wiklund (2001), who have developed and tested a reliable measurement instrument for Stevenson’s definition of “entrepreneurial management” (Stevenson 1983, Stevenson & Jarillo 1990). In the first part of our paper we aim to replicate and to some extent improve this study. In the second part we link the measured degree of “entrepreneurial management” with firm performance. To our knowledge, even so Stevenson’s definition of entrepreneurial management is commonly acknowledged and Brown et al. (2001) developed a reliable instrument to empirically capture this behavioral approach to management, the construct of entrepreneurial management never before has been linked to firm performance in an empirical study. Since most papers on corporate entrepreneurship and firm performance are based on Covin & Slevin’s (1991) or Miller’s (1983) concept of entrepreneurial orientation, we contribute to the literature on corporate entrepreneurship in a novel way, given the fact that the entrepreneurial management dimensions measured in our study can theoretically and empirically be clearly distinguished from the construct of entrepreneurial orientation as defined by Covin & Selvin (1991).
“创业管理”作为企业行为的战略选择:与绩效的联系
Stevenson(1983)认为,在组织内部建立“创业管理”的核心原则,从六个维度描述了影响公司的某种战略选择。我们的目标是实证地衡量创业管理(它的存在和程度),并将这种衡量的战略选择(支持或反对)创业管理与企业绩效联系起来。我们在这里的论点是,遵循创业管理核心原则的公司,在某些战略绩效指标上,应该比其他更具行政性的公司表现得更好。本文以Brown、Davidson和Wiklund(2001)发表的实证调查为基础,他们为Stevenson的“创业管理”定义(Stevenson 1983, Stevenson & Jarillo 1990)开发并测试了一个可靠的测量工具。在本文的第一部分,我们的目标是复制并在一定程度上改进这项研究。第二部分将“创业管理”的测度程度与企业绩效联系起来。据我们所知,即使史蒂文森对创业管理的定义得到了普遍认可,布朗等人(2001)也开发了一种可靠的工具来实证地捕捉这种行为管理方法,但在实证研究中,创业管理的构建从未与公司绩效联系起来。由于大多数关于企业创业和企业绩效的论文都是基于Covin & Slevin(1991)或Miller(1983)的创业导向概念,鉴于我们研究中测量的创业管理维度可以在理论上和经验上与Covin & Selvin(1991)定义的创业导向结构明显区分开来,我们以一种新颖的方式为企业创业的文献做出贡献。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信