Studies of entrepreneurial orientation tend to examine its three most common features only (risk-taking, innovativeness, and proactiveness), merging these into a Gestalt construct of entrepreneurial orientation and then analyzing its effect on business performance. This is in contrast to Lumpkin and Dess who stressed an entrepreneurial orientation is best characterized by five dimensions which can vary independently and may not be equally valuable across performance metrics or at different stages of development. We rectify these problems by examining the independent impact of risk-taking, innovativeness, proactiveness, competitive aggressiveness, and autonomy on performance of young high-technology firms at an embryonic stage of development. Our results support the concerns of Lumpkin and Dess. Only proactiveness and innovativeness have a positive influence on business performance while risk-taking has a negative relationship. Competitive aggressiveness and autonomy appear to hold no business performance value at this stage of firm growth. From these results, we offer implications for managers in addition to guidance for future research

Entrepreneurial Orientation (EO) is often mentioned as an antecedent of growth, competitive advantage and superior performance, and prior empirical research has often shown a positive relationship between EO and performance appears to exist. However, an important question that remains unanswered is what effect EO might have on firm performance during periods of economic crisis, and the severe environmental turbulence that accompany such crises. This research is a first investigation towards the effects of EO on the performance of small and medium sized firms during the current global economic crisis. In this study we use the multidimensional model of EO and test a series of hypotheses pertaining to its performance effects using survey data gathered from 164 Dutch SMEs. The present research shows that proactive firm behavior positively contributes to SME performance during the economic crisis. We further show that innovative SMEs do perform better in turbulent environments, but those innovative SMEs should minimize the level of risk and should take action to avoid projects that are too risky.

A concern with the mitigation of climate change cuts a transversal line across economic agents, epitomized by two contradictory viewpoints. Some defend that green growth can be achieved without harming economic growth; others argue that it is not possible to respect sustainability if intensive consumption of goods continues to foster economic growth. Our research aims to analyze the role that sustainable technology transfer and sustainable innovations play in green growth and ascertain the impact of green growth on economic growth. We use aggregated country‐level data provided by the OECD, including national accounts, population, and environment statistics (including patents) between 1990 and 2013 for 32 countries, corresponding to an unbalanced panel of 591 observations. We estimate econometric models based on dynamic panel methodologies to capture differences that exist over time. The results show that sustainable technology transfer and sustainable innovation promote green growth, which in turn positively impacts economic growth. We contribute new insight to the green growth versus economic growth debate and provide several political and management implications.

Balancing explorative and exploitative innovation ambidextrously has emerged as one of the foremost questions in management research. While a firm's ability to jointly pursue both exploitative and explorative innovation has been conceived as having positive performance effects, scholarly efforts to resolve the ambidexterity question have left a disproportionate gap in our understanding of how innovation ambidexterity can be achieved, particularly so in small-to-medium-sized firms (SMEs). The state of the debate is such that SMEs must largely rely on prescriptions tested with large firms to inform their ambidexterity initiatives. This study focuses on the characteristics of top managers and features of organizational structure and context in facilitating the appearance of ambidexterity in SMEs, and the mediation effect of innovation ambidexterity between structural, contextual, and leadership characteristics on SME performance. Results indicated that SMEs could achieve a close balance of explorative and exploitative innovations (BD) through shaping right international organizational structures and adopting appropriate leadership styles. Further, BD mediates the relationship between the structural, contextual, and leadership characteristics on SME performance. SMEs could benefit from BD with relatively resources available

Purpose: – This paper aims to explore what factors motivate consumers to engage in co-creation innovation activities. The authors propose that motivations differ across types of activities, whether working independently, as part of a community or directly with the firm. They offer theoretical explanations as to why this might be the case.Design/methodology/approach: – Adopting an exploratory research design, the study consists of a series of online interviews with participants in the gaming and video games industry.Findings: – Motivations appear to differ across types of co-creation efforts. Innovating independently of the firm appears to be driven by egocentric motives; innovating as part of a community appears to be driven by altruistic motives; and innovating directly in collaboration with the firm appears to be driven by opportunity- (or goal-)related motives.Practical implications: – Understanding the factors that motivate consumers to engage in co-creation activities enables firms to strategically manage their co-creation relationships and innovation processes.Originality/value: – The study shows that although motivations diverge across types of co-creation activities, a set of common motivators exist that underpin engagement regardless of the form of co-creation. However, these overarching motivators differ in how they can be successfully used towards co-creation. The study draws on theories of extrinsic and intrinsic motivation, tension-reducing, self-efficacy and expectancy theories, to explain why differences persist. This enables researchers to consider how value might be optimised across varying forms of co-creation, and build better studies into the management and performance implications of consumer value co-creation.

Radical technological advancements and the relentless progression of climate change compel organisations to ensure their workforce consistently exercise their creativity toward innovative green initiatives. These endeavours are essential to achieve the United Nations' (UN) sustainable development goals (SDGs). To do so, organisations require competencies fundamental to smart technologies, artificial intelligence, robotics and algorithms (STARA). STARA competencies are relevant for leaders to bolster green organisational innovative evidence (GOIE). GOIE can help to attract potential investors keen on advancing the UN's SDG agenda on environmental sustainability. However, eclipsed by a volatile environment, and despite the green innovation potential of several manufacturing organisations, investors are reluctant to invest and commit funds without evidence of green innovation. We therefore, investigate how leader STARA competence (LSC), green creativity components (task motivation, creativity skills and expertise) and environmental dynamism can aid organisations to boost their GOIE. Our key findings are as follows: (a) though green task motivation shows a stronger association with green creativity skills, LSC has a large influence on green creativity skills; (b) green creativity skills exert a strong influence on GOIE while also playing a competitive and complimentary mediating role in our model and (c) environmental dynamism is negatively associated with green creativity skills and GOIE. Furthermore, to validate indirect (v) effects size in mediation analysis, we propose a new and more approachable benchmark for v effect size estimations. Organisational and environmental policy implications are discussed.