Organizational ambidexterity and corporate entrepreneurship : the differential effects on venturing, innovation and renewal processes

Most corporate entrepreneurship studies have focused on either innovation, venturing or strategic renewal making comparison between the antecedents of all three aspects of corporate entrepreneurship difficult. Moreover, studies on corporate entrepreneurship hardly address organizational antecedents, while simultaneously managing and organizing CE and mainstream activities has been seen as a major challenge for incumbent firms. Our findings show that organizational ambidexterity has strong and differential effects on venturing, innovation and renewal. We find, for example, that innovation is affected by horizontal integration, while strategic renewal is significantly influenced by integration on top management team level.

Structural differentiation and corporate venturing : the moderating role of formal and informal integration mechanisms

Research has suggested that corporate venturing is crucial to strategic renewal and firm performance, yet scholars still debate the appropriate organizational configurations to facilitate the creation of new businesses in existing organizations. Our study investigates the effectiveness of combining structural differentiation with formal and informal organizational as well as top management team integration mechanisms in establishing an appropriate context for venturing activities. Our findings suggest that structural differentiation has a positive effect on corporate venturing. In addition, our study indicates that a shared vision has a positive effect on venturing in a structurally differentiated context. Socially integrated senior teams and cross-functional interfaces, however, are ineffective integration mechanisms for establishing linkages across differentiated units and for successfully pursuing corporate venturing.

Is the sum more than the corporate entrepreneurship parts? the different effects of social capital on innovation, venturing, and renewal processes

Principal Topic Although corporate entrepreneurship is of vital importance for long-term firm survival and growth (Zahra and Covin, 1995), researchers still struggle with understanding how to manage corporate entrepreneurship activities. Corporate entrepreneurship consists of three parts: innovation, venturing, and renewal processes (Guth and Ginsberg, 1990). Innovation refers to the development of new products, venturing to the creation of new businesses, and renewal to redefining existing businesses (Sharma, and Chrisman, 1999; Verbeke et al., 2007). Although there are many studies focusing on one of these aspects (cf. Burgelman, 1985; Huff et al., 1992), it is very difficult to compare the outcomes of these studies due to differences in contexts, measures, and methodologies. This is a significant lack in our understanding of CE, as firms engage in all three aspects of CE, making it important to compare managerial and organizational antecedents of innovation, venturing and renewal processes. Because factors that may enhance venturing activities may simultaneously inhibit renewal activities. The limited studies that did empirically compare the individual dimensions (cf. Zahra, 1996; Zahra et al., 2000; Yiu and Lau, 2008; Yiu et al., 2007) generally failed to provide a systematic explanation for potential different effects of organizational antecedents on innovation, venturing, and renewal. With this study we aim to investigate the different effects of structural separation and social capital on corporate entrepreneurship activities. The access to existing and the development of new knowledge has been deemed of critical importance in CE-activities (Floyd and Wooldridge, 1999; Covin and Miles, 2007; Katila and Ahuja, 2002). Developing new knowledge can be facilitated by structurally separating corporate entrepreneurial units from mainstream units (cf. Burgelman, 1983; Hill and Rothaermel, 2003; O'Reilly and Tushman, 2004). Existing knowledge and resources are available through networks of social relationships, defined as social capital (Nahapiet and Ghoshal, 1998; Yiu and Lau, 2008). Although social capital has primarily been studied at the organizational level, it might be equally important at top management level (Belliveau et al., 1996). However, little is known about the joint effects of structural separation and integrative mechanisms to provide access to social capital on corporate entrepreneurship. Could these integrative mechanisms for example connect the separated units to facilitate both knowledge creation and sharing? Do these effects differ for innovation, venturing, and renewal processes? Are the effects different for organizational versus top management team integration mechanisms? Corporate entrepreneurship activities have for example been suggested to take place at different levels. Whereas innovation is suggested to be a more bottom-up process, strategic renewal is a more top-down process (Floyd and Lane, 2000; Volberda et al., 2001). Corporate venturing is also a more bottom-up process, but due to the greater required resource commitments relative to innovation, it ventures need to be approved by top management (Burgelman, 1983). As such we will explore the following key research question in this paper: How do social capital and structural separation on organizational and TMT level differentially influence innovation, venturing, and renewal processes? Methodology/Key Propositions We investigated our hypotheses on a final sample of 240 companies in a variety of industries in the Netherlands. All our measures were validated in previous studies. We targeted a second respondent in each firm to reduce problems with single-rater data (James et al., 1984). We separated the measurement of the independent and the dependent variables in two surveys to create a one-year time lag and reduce potential common method bias (Podsakoff et al., 2003). Results and Implications Consistent with our hypotheses, our results show that configurations of structural separation and integrative mechanisms have different effects on the three aspects of corporate entrepreneurship. Innovation was affected by organizational level mechanisms, renewal by integrative mechanisms on top management team level and venturing by mechanisms on both levels. Surprisingly, our results indicated that integrative mechanisms on top management team level had negative effects on corporate entrepreneurship activities. We believe this paper makes two significant contributions. First, we provide more insight in what the effects of ambidextrous organizational forms (i.e. combinations of differentiation and integration mechanisms) are on venturing, innovation and renewal processes. Our findings show that more valuable insights can be gained by comparing the individual parts of corporate entrepreneurship instead of focusing on the whole. Second, we deliver insights in how management can create a facilitative organizational context for these corporate entrepreneurship activities.

The impact of corporate venturing on a firm's competence modes

In this conceptual paper we investigate how corporate venturing influences an organization's competences. The impact of various types of corporate ventures on the portfolio of strategic options of a firm's competence modes (Sanchez, 2004a; Sanchez & Heene, 2002) will be assessed by distinguishing two fundamentally different dimensions of corporate venturing: technology and product (Block & MacMillan, 1993). We argue that the level of product and factor market dynamism mediates the effect of corporate venturing on a firm's competence modes. Corporate ventures that significantly increase the level of product or factor market dynamics will increase the flexibility in all five competence modes. These ventures have a direct effect on the lower-order competence modes and an indirect, lagged effect on higher-order competence modes through feedback loops. The developed framework and the propositions contribute to managing the ability of a firm to change its coordination, resource, and operating flexibility in order to sustain value creation.

Pull the plug or take the plunge: Multiple opportunities and the speed of venturing decisions in the Australian mining industry

Effectively capturing opportunities requires rapid decision-making. We investigate the speed of opportunity evaluation decisions by focusing on firms' venture termination and venture advancement decisions. Experience, standard operating procedures, and confidence allow firms to make opportunity evaluation decisions faster; we propose that a firm's attentional orientation, as reflected in its project portfolio, limits the number of domains in which these speed-enhancing mechanisms can be developed. Hence firms' decision speed is likely to vary between different types of decisions. Using unique data on 3,269 mineral exploration ventures in the Australian mining industry, we find that firms with a higher degree of attention toward earlier-stage exploration activities are quicker to abandon potential opportunities in early development but slower to do so later, and that such firms are also slower to advance on potential opportunities at all stages compared to firms that focus their attention differently. Market dynamism moderates these relationships, but only with regard to initial evaluation decisions. Our study extends research on decision speed by showing that firms are not necessarily fast or slow regarding all the decisions they make, and by offering an opportunity evaluation framework that recognizes that decision makers can, in fact often do, pursue multiple potential opportunities simultaneously.

Asset specificity and behavioural uncertainty as moderators of the sales growth : employment growth relationship in emerging ventures

Sales growth and employment growth are the two most widely used growth indicators for new ventures; yet, sales growth and employment growth are not interchangeable measures of new venture growth. Rather, they are related, but somewhat independent constructs that respond differently to a variety of criteria. Most of the literature treats this as a methodological technicality. However, sales growth with or without accompanying employment growth has very different implications for managers and policy makers. A better understanding of what drives these different growth metrics has the potential to lead to better decision making. To improve that understanding we apply transaction cost economics reasoning to predict when sales growth will be or will not be accompanied by employment growth. Our results indicate that our predictions are borne out consistently in resource-constrained contexts but not in resource-munificent contexts.

Venture idea newness, relatedness and performance in nascent ventures

Principal Topic The study of the origin and characteristics of venture ideas - or ''opportunities'' as they are often called - and their contextual fit are key research goals in entrepreneurship (Davidsson, 2004). We define venture idea as ''the core ideas of an entrepreneur about what to sell, how to sell, whom to sell and how an entrepreneur acquire or produce the product or service which he/she sells'' for the purpose of this study. When realized the venture idea becomes a ''business model''. Even though venture ideas are central to entrepreneurship yet its characteristics and their effect to the entrepreneurial process is mysterious. According to Schumpeter (1934) entrepreneurs could creatively destruct the existing market condition by introducing new product/service, new production methods, new markets, and new sources of supply and reorganization of industries. The introduction, development and use of new ideas are generally called as ''innovation'' (Damanpour & Wischnevsky, 2006) and ''newness'' is a property of innovation and is a relative term which means that the degree of unfamiliarity of venture idea either to a firm or to a market. However Schumpeter's (1934) discusses five different types of newness, indicating that type of newness is an important issue. More recently, Shane and Venkataraman (2000) called for research taking into consideration not only the variation of characteristics of individuals but also heterogeneity of venture ideas, Empirically, Samuelson (2001, 2004) investigated process differences between innovative venture ideas and imitative venture ideas. However, he used only a crude dichotomy regarding the venture idea newness. According to Davidsson, (2004) as entrepreneurs could introduce new economic activities ranging from pure imitation to being new to the entire world market, highlighting that newness is a matter of degree. Dahlqvist (2007) examined the venture idea newness and made and attempt at more refined assessment of the degree and type of newness of venture idea. Building on these predecessors our study refines the assessment of venture idea newness by measuring the degree of venture idea newness (new to the world, new to the market, substantially improved while not entirely new, and imitation) for four different types of newness (product/service, method of production, method of promotion, and customer/target market). We then related type and degree of newness to the pace of progress in nascent venturing process. We hypothesize that newness will slow down the business creation process. Shane & Venkataraman (2000) introduced entrepreneurship as the nexus of opportunities and individuals. In line with this some scholars has investigated the relationship between individuals and opportunities. For example Shane (2000) investigates the relatedness between individuals' prior knowledge and identification of opportunities. Shepherd & DeTinne (2005) identified that there is a positive relationship between potential financial reward and the identification of innovative venture ideas. Sarasvathy's 'Effectuation Theory'' assumes high degree of relatedness with founders' skills, knowledge and resources in the selection of venture ideas. However entrepreneurship literature is scant with analyses of how this relatedness affects to the progress of venturing process. Therefore, we assess the venture ideas' degree of relatedness to prior knowledge and resources, and relate these, too, to the pace of progress in nascent venturing process. We hypothesize that relatedness will increase the speed of business creation. Methodology For this study we will compare early findings from data collected through the Comprehensive Australian Study of Entrepreneurial Emergence (CAUSEE). CAUSEE is a longitudinal study whose primary objective is to uncover the factors that initiate, hinder and facilitate the process of emergence and development of new firms. Data were collected from a representative sample of some 30,000 households in Australia using random digit dialing (RDD) telephone survey interviews. Through the first round of data collection identified 600 entrepreneurs who are currently involved in the business start-up process. The unit of the analysis is the emerging venture, with the respondent acting as its spokesperson. The study methodology allows researchers to identify ventures in early stages of creation and to longitudinally follow their progression through data collection periods over time. Our measures of newness build on previous work by Dahlqvist (2007). Our adapted version was developed over two pre-tests with about 80 participants in each. The measures of relatedness were developed through the two rounds of pre-testing. The pace of progress in the venture creation process is assessed with the help of time-stamped gestation activities; a technique developed in the Panel Study of Entrepreneurial Dynamics (PSED). Results and Implications We hypothesized that venture idea newness slows down the venturing process whereas relatedness facilitates the venturing process. Results of 600 nascent entrepreneurs in Australia indicated that there is marginal support for the hypothesis that relatedness assists the gestation progress. Newness is significant but is the opposite sign to the hypothesized. The results give number of implications for researchers, business founders, consultants and policy makers in terms of better knowledge of the venture creation process.

Creativity, design and entrepreneurship : management education and development for innovation

Creativity, design and entrepreneurship, have been recognized as important contributors to a firm’s innovation and to the nation’s economic growth. Creativity and design play important roles in the fuzzy front end of a firm’s innovation process and also in corporate venturing processes, but the relationship between creativity, design and entrepreneurship to a large extent has not explicitly been examined. This exploratory conceptual paper briefly reviews the separate bodies of research on creativity, design and entrepreneurship, identifying similarities and differences in constructs and applications and identifying implications for business and for management education.

The differential effects of organizational antecedents on dimensions of corporate entrepreneurship

This study seeks to further delineate how organizational antecedents differentially influence the three components of corporate entrepreneurship: innovation, venturing or strategic renewal. We argue that structural differentiation may help organizations to maintain multiple and often conflicting demands of entrepreneurial and mainstream activities. Taking a social capital perspective, our study further examines two contingencies in the form of informal integration mechanisms (i.e. connectedness and TMT social integration). Our findings show structural differentiation has a positive effect on all three components of corporate entrepreneurship, yet the effect is moderated by integration mechanisms. Interunit connectedness has a positive moderation effect regarding innovation and venturing, and TMT social integration has a negative moderation effect regarding strategic renewal. This reveals that innovation is influenced by informal integration mechanisms on the organizational level, strategic renewal on top management team level, while venturing is influenced by integration mechanisms on both levels.

Managing a portfolio of corporate venture units : challenges in achieving within-unit focus and between-unit coordination

Principal Topic: There is increasing recognition that the organizational configurations of corporate venture units should depend on the types of ventures the unit seeks to develop (Burgelman, 1984; Hill and Birkinshaw, 2008). Distinction have been made between internal and external as well as exploitative versus explorative ventures (Hill and Birkinshaw, 2008; Narayan et al., 2009; Schildt et al., 2005). Assuming that firms do not want to limit themselves to a single type of venture, but rather employ a portfolio of ventures, the logical consequence is that firms should employ multiple corporate venture units. Each venture unit tailor-made for the type of venture it seeks to develop. Surprisingly, there is limited attention in the literature for the challenges of managing multiple corporate venture units in a single firm. Maintaining multiple venture units within one firm provides easier access to funding for new ideas (Hamel, 1999). It allows for freedom and flexibility to tie the organizational systems (Rice et al., 2000), autonomy (Hill and Rothaermel, 2003), and involvement of management (Day, 1994; Wadwha and Kotha, 2006) to the requirements of the individual ventures. Yet, the strategic objectives of a venture may change when uncertainty around the venture is resolved (Burgelman, 1984). For example, firms may decide to spin-in external ventures (Chesbrough, 2002) or spun-out ventures that prove strategically unimportant (Burgelman, 1984). This suggests that ventures might need to be transferred between venture units, e.g. from a more internally-driven corporate venture division to a corporate venture capital unit. Several studies suggested that ventures require different managerial skills across their phase of development (Desouza et al., 2007; O'Connor and Ayers, 2005; Kazanjian and Drazin, 1990; Westerman et al., 2006). To facilitate effective transfer between venture units and manage the overall venturing process, it is important that firms set up and manage integrative linkages. Integrative linkages provide synergies and coordination between differentiated units (Lawrence and Lorsch, 1967). Prior findings pointed to the important role of senior management (Westerman et al., 2006; Gilbert, 2006) and a shared organizational vision (Burgers et al., 2009) to coordinate venture units with mainstream businesses. We will draw on these literatures to investigate the key question of how to integratively manage multiple venture units. ---------- Methodology/Key Propositions: In order to seek an answer to the research question, we employ a case study approach that provides unique insights into how firms can break up their venturing process. We selected three Fortune 500 companies that employ multiple venturing units, IBM, Royal Dutch/ Shell and Nokia, and investigated and compared their approaches. It was important that the case companies somewhat differed in the type of venture units they employed as well as the way they integrate and coordinate their venture units. The data are based on extensive interviews and a variety of internal and external company documents to triangulate our findings (Eisenhardt, 1989). The key proposition of the article is that firms can best manage their multiple venture units through an ambidextrous design of loosely coupled units. This provides venture units with sufficient flexibility to employ organizational configurations that best support the type of venture they seek to develop, as well as provides sufficient integration to facilitate smooth transfer of ventures between venture units. Based on the case findings, we develop a generic framework for a new way of managing the venturing process through multiple corporate venture units. ---------- Results and Implications: One of our main findings is that these firms tend to organize their venture units according to phases in the venture development process. That is, they tend to have venture units aimed at incubation of venture ideas as well as units aimed more at the commercialization of ventures into a new business unit for the firm or a start-up. The companies in our case studies tended to coordinate venture units through integrative management skills or a coordinative venture unit that spanned multiple phases. We believe this paper makes two significant contributions. First, we extend prior venturing literature by addressing how firms manage a portfolio of venture units, each achieving different strategic objectives. Second, our framework provides recommendations on how firms should manage such an approach towards venturing. This helps to increase the likelihood of success of their venturing programs.

Toward a better understanding of family enterprising

By integrating stewardship theory and entrepreneurial orientation perspectives we contribute to the understanding of the concept of family enterprising. Using excerpts from a single case study we provide insight into how a third generation Australian family has evolved and transformed by embracing the notion of family enterprising, which, we suggest, places them in a strong position for sustainability across generations.

Experiencing higher degree research supervision as teaching

This article describes research higher degree supervisors’ experiences of supervision as a teaching and learning practice. While research education is considered central to the HDR experience, comparatively little is known to date of the pedagogical lenses adopted by supervisors as they go about their supervision. We worked with 35 supervisors engaged in discipline-specific and interdisciplinary research across architectural design, science, engineering, computer science, information systems and librarianship. Several of these supervisors conducted projects which interfaced with the social sciences and humanities. The pedagogies, constructed through the discussions and phenomenographic analysis, offer a picture of supervisors’ collective awareness of supervision as a teaching and learning practice. Supervision as a teaching and learning practice was experienced as: Promoting the supervisor’s development, Imparting academic expertise, Upholding academic standards, Promoting learning to research, Drawing upon student expertise, Enabling student development, Venturing into unexplored territory, Forming productive communities, and Contributing to society.

The role of idea novelty and relatedness in nascent ventures

The study of venture idea characteristics and the contextual fit between venture ideas and individuals are key research goals in entrepreneurship (Davidsson, 2004). However, to date there has been limited scholarly attention given to these phenomena. Accordingly, this study aims to help fill the gap by investigating the importance of novelty and relatedness of venture ideas in entrepreneurial firms. On the premise that new venture creation is a process and that research should be focused on the early stages of the venturing process, this study primarily focuses its attention on examining how venture idea novelty and relatedness affect the performance in the venture creation process. Different types and degrees of novelty are considered here. Relatedness is shown to be based on individuals’ prior knowledge and resource endowment. Performance in the venture creation process is evaluated according to four possible outcomes: making progress, getting operational, being terminated and achieving positive cash flow. A theoretical model is developed demonstrating the relationship between these variables along with the investment of time and money. Several hypotheses are developed to be tested. Among them, it is hypothesised that novelty hinders short term performance in the venture creation process. On the other hand knowledge and resource relatedness are hypothesised to promote performance. An experimental study was required in order to understand how different types and degrees of novelty and relatedness of venture ideas affect the attractiveness of venture ideas in the eyes of experienced entrepreneurs. Thus, the empirical work in this thesis was based on two separate studies. In the first one, a conjoint analysis experiment was conducted on 32 experienced entrepreneurs in order to ascertain attitudinal preferences regarding venture idea attractiveness based on novelty, relatedness and potential financial gains. This helped to estimate utility values for different levels of different attributes of venture ideas and their relative importance in the attractiveness. The second study was a longitudinal investigation of how venture idea novelty and relatedness affect the performance in the venture creation process. The data for this study is from the Comprehensive Australian Study for Entrepreneurial Emergence (CAUSEE) project that has been established in order to explore the new venture creation process in Australia. CAUSEE collects data from a representative sample of over 30,000 households in Australia using random digit dialling (RDD) telephone interviews. From these cases, data was collected at two points in time during a 12 month period from 493 firms, who are currently involved in the start-up process. Hypotheses were tested and inferences were derived through descriptive statistics, confirmatory factor analysis and structural equation modelling. Results of study 1 indicate that venture idea characteristics have a role in the attractiveness and entrepreneurs prefer to introduce a moderate degree of novelty across all types of venture ideas concerned. Knowledge relatedness is demonstrated to be a more significant factor in attractiveness than resource relatedness. Results of study 2 show that the novelty hinders nascent venture performance. On the other hand, resource relatedness has a positive impact on performance unlike knowledge relatedness which has none. The results of these studies have important implications for potential entrepreneurs, investors, researchers, consultants etc. by developing a better understanding in the venture creation process and its success factors in terms of both theory and practice.

Project-based organization as adaptation to risk and opportunity in small firms

Recent years have seen a rapid increase in SMEs working collaboratively in inter-organizational projects. But what drives the emergence of such projects, and what types of industries breed them the most? To address these questions, this paper extends the long running literature on the firm and industry antecedents of new venturing and alliance formation to the domain of project-based organization by SMEs. Based on survey data collected among 1,725 small and medium sized organizations and longitudinal industry data, we find an overall pattern that indicates that IOPV participation is primarily determined by a focal SME’s scope of innovative activities, and the munificence, dynamism and complexity of its environment. Unexpectedly, these variables have different effects on whether SMEs are likely to engage in IOPVs, compared to with how many there are in their portfolio at a time. Implications for theory development are discussed.