Purpose: Given the critical mass of literature on entrepreneurial risk-taking, the purpose of this paper is to assess the contribution to the knowledge so far by exploring important themes in the literature on entrepreneurial risk-taking.Design/methodology/approach: The review is organized around four themes: nature of entrepreneurial risk-taking; antecedents of entrepreneurial risk-taking; context of entrepreneurial risk-taking; and outcomes of entrepreneurial risk-taking. The author critically evaluates the literature on each theme and presents the pointers for future research.Findings: Literature does provide a holistic view encapsulating different dimensions of entrepreneurial risk-taking, but it has produced largely inconsistent findings in terms of risk and gender, risk propensity of entrepreneurs in comparison to non-entrepreneurs and the outcomes of entrepreneurial risk-taking. Organizational antecedents, non-financial measures and ethical- and health-related consequences of entrepreneurial risk are underexplored. Inconclusive literature also implies that the risk may not be a distinguishing or important factor for undertaking an entrepreneurial endeavor. Therefore, it is pertinent to explore the critical factors entrepreneurs consider (or not consider) while marshalling their resources to embark on an entrepreneurial journey. This posits the need to explore an entrepreneur’s informal approach toward risk-taking.Originality/value: Suggested pointers of future research will potentially enhance the theoretical understanding of entrepreneurial risk-taking.

Purpose: Drawing on the dynamic capability view (DCV), the current study aims to examine the mediating effects of entrepreneurial orientation (EO), in terms of innovativeness, proactiveness and risk taking, on the relationships between big data analytics (BDA) capability and sustainable supply chain performance (SSCP).Design/methodology/approach: Data were collected by questionnaire survey from 300 manufacturing organizations. Structural equation modeling (SEM) was used to test the hypotheses.Findings: The findings showed that innovativeness and proactiveness fully mediated the link between BDA capability and SSCP. However, risk taking only partially mediated the relationship between BDA capability and SSCP. There was also a negative relationship between BDA and risk taking.Research limitations/implications: Given that the current study focused on the manufacturing sector, future research is needed to compare different sectors and cultural contexts. Further exploration is also needed into the dimension of risk taking in terms of the role of risk taking in linking BDA capability with SSCP in different cultural settings.Practical implications: Technology may not increase the risk taking capability. Organizations may be creative and proactive but may remain risk averse despite having access to big data. Organizations need a more balanced approach to dynamically integrate and reconfigure the organizations' BDA and EO capabilities in order to enhance SSCP.Originality/value: The role of EO in mediating the relationship between BDA capability and SSCP has not been studied before. The current study aimed to address the gap and contribute to the existing debate on better understanding the factors that are needed by organizations to effectively employ technology to enhance SSCP. Untapped areas for future research are also identified.

Purpose: Using a dynamic capability view, this study examined the relationships between big data analytics capability (BDAC), entrepreneurial orientation (EO) and sustainable supply chain performance (SSCP) by exploring the moderating role of trust among supply chain partners.Design/methodology/approach: Questionnaires were collected from 300 manufacturing organizations using snow sampling. The moderating connections and direct relationships were examined using Hays' process macro and structural equation modeling.Findings: BDAC was positively related to EO and SSCP. When supply chain partners experienced low levels of trust, an increase in BDAC did not enhance SSCP. As trust increased, the relationship between BDAC and SSCP became more positive, underpinning the moderating effects of trust. Moreover, trust did not moderate the relationship between BDAC and EO. The moderating effect of trust on the relationship between EO and SSCP showed a positive relationship between EO and SSCP when trust was low; however, the relationship became negative when trust was high.Practical implications: Developing technology alone may not be sufficient, as supply chain managers need to establish a strong business relationship based on mutual trust. However, they also need to be aware of the dangers of high levels of trust because these may negatively affect performance. Therefore, supply chain managers need to achieve an optimal level of trust that is neither excessive nor insufficient.Originality/value: Advances in technology and entrepreneurial drive for supply chain sustainability make it pertinent to examine trust levels among supply chain partners and the varying impact on BDAC, EO and SSCP. The current study shows the negative aspects of too much trust among supply chain partners.