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.

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 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.

International corporate entrepreneurship among SMEs : a test of Stevenson's notion of entrepreneurial management

Geographical market expansion is included in various definitions of entrepreneurship as it entails the opening up of new markets (for example, Davidsson 2003). Expansion into new international markets and launch of new products in international markets are also consistent with definitions of entrepreneurship which center on the pursuit of opportunities {e.g.\Stevenson, 1983 #922;Gartner, 1993 #931}. Accordingly, the decision by managers of small, internationally active businesses to continue to internationalize can be viewed as an entrepreneurial act. In spite of the fact that both start-ups and existing firms can behave entrepreneurially by expanding into new international markets, the attention of entrepreneurship researchers interested in international activities has largely focused on international new ventures (INVs); that is, business organizations that internationalize from inception (Oviatt, and McDougall 1994; Oviatt, and McDougall 1997). Consequently, pursuit of international opportunities by established small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) lacks theoretical understanding and empirical investigation through an entrepreneurship lens. This paper contributes to the body of knowledge at the entrepreneurship-internationalization interface by testing whether Stevenson’s opportunity-based conceptualization of entrepreneurial management (Stevenson 1983; Stevenson and Gumpert 1985; Stevenson and Jarillo 1990) can explain the attainment of continued entrepreneurial outcomes by SMEs operating in foreign markets. We choose Stevenson’s conceptualization as it gauges firm-level characteristics that are theorized to facilitate the pursuit of entrepreneurial opportunities, which arguably is at the heart of SMEs’ continued venturing into international markets.

Capable but not able : the effect of institutional context and search breadth on the absorptive capacity-corporate entrepreneurship relationship

This study investigates how the interaction of institutional market orientation and external search breadth influence the ability to use absorptive capacity to raise the level of corporate entrepreneurship. The findings of a sample of 331 supplier companies providing products and services to the mining industry of Australia and Iran indicate that the positive association between absorptive capacity and corporate entrepreneurship is stronger for companies with greater external knowledge search breadth. Moreover, operating in a less market-oriented institutional context such as, Iran diminishes the ability to utilise a firm’s absorptive capacity to raise their level of corporate entrepreneurship. Yet, firms operating in such contexts are able to overcome these disadvantages posed by their institutional context by engaging in broader external search of knowledge.

The moderating role of entrepreneurial management in the relationship between absorptive capacity and corporate entrepreneurship : an attention-based view

Building on the attention-based view, we argue that companies need a challenging mechanism to focus their absorptive capacity attention on corporate entrepreneurship versus mainstream activities or other purposes. We suggest entrepreneurial management as the attential driver for deploying absorptive capacity towards corporate entrepreneurship. From our analysis of a sample of 331 supplier companies providing products and services to the mining industry of Australia and Iran, we observe that absorptive capacity positively affects corporate entrepreneurship. The data also demonstrate that the effect of absorptive on corporate entrepreneurship increases when firms adopt the entrepreneurial culture and reward systems. However, the entrepreneurial growth and resource orientations negatively moderate the relationship between absorptive capacity and corporate entrepreneurship.

Externally oriented capabilities and corporate entrepreneurship : institutional and managerial contingencies

This research adopts three different theoretical lenses- the attention-based view, institutional perspective and network theory- to investigate the effect of externally oriented capabilities (absorptive capacity and networking capabilities) on corporate entrepreneurship. Based on an Australian and Iranian sample of mining equipment, technology and service providers, this thesis provides new understanding of why some firms are able to generate higher levels of corporate entrepreneurship than others and opens new directions for more capabilities-oriented research in corporate entrepreneurship. In particular, this research provides new insight into how entrepreneurial management, institutional context and external knowledge search breadth shape the relationship between externally oriented capabilities and corporate entrepreneurship.

The contingent effects of differentiation and integration on corporate entrepreneurship

This paper develops a contingency view regarding the effects of structural differentiation and integration on levels of corporate entrepreneurship. Integrating notions of benefits and costs resulting from integration with structural contingency theory, we argue that the joint effects of structural differentiation and integration on corporate entrepreneurship levels are moderated by organizational size and environmental dynamism. Our findings from a time-separated sample demonstrate that in smaller organizations and more dynamic environments, the positive effects of integration on the structural differentiation-corporate entrepreneurship relationship strongly diminish. As such, with this research we begin to identify contingencies that influence the corporate entrepreneurship levels observed among firms striving to balance the needs for structural differentiation and integration.

ACE research vignette 040: Three steps towards more corporate entrepreneurship within an organisation

This series of research vignettes is aimed at sharing current and interesting research findings from our team of international Entrepreneurship researchers. In this vignette, Henri Burgers investigates what managers can do to make their firm more entrepreneurial.

Evolving corporate entrepreneurship strategy: Technology incubation at Philips

Established firms tend to pursue incremental innovation by modifying and refining their existing products and processes rather than developing radical innovations. In the face of resistance to change and incumbent inertia, which prevent the generation of novelty, established firms have turned towards corporate entrepreneurship as a means of exploiting knowledge accumulated within its own boundaries and exploring external markets. This paper focuses on one mode of corporate entrepreneurship, corporate incubation, informed by a study of a Technology Incubator at Philips. An account of the history of the incubator traces its progress from its inception in 2002-2006 when further incubators were formed, building on this experience and focusing on lifestyle and healthcare technologies. We identify ways in which the Philips incubator represents an alternative selection environment that effectively simulated the venture capitalist model of entrepreneurial innovation. © 2009 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.