Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-2lccl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T15:58:18.051Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Casting a wider performance net: The role of entrepreneurial orientation in boosting overall firm stakeholder value

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2015

Ali M Shahzad ,
William J Wales ,
Mark P Sharfman  and
Christopher M Stein
Ali M Shahzad*
Affiliation:
Department of Management, James Madison University, Harrisonburg, VA, USA
William J Wales
Affiliation:
School of Business, University at Albany, Albany, NY, USA
Mark P Sharfman
Affiliation:
Division of Management and Entrepreneurship, Price College of Business, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK, USA
Christopher M Stein
Affiliation:
Department of Management, College of Business Administration, University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL, USA
*
Corresponding author: shahzaam@jmu.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study offers a broader perspective on the effects of entrepreneurial orientation beyond its well-established implications for firm financial performance. Herein, it is suggested that through higher firm innovativeness, risk taking, and proactiveness entrepreneurial orientation contributes to an increase in the overall value accrued by the firm’s base of stakeholders. In doing so, we offer a broader perspective on the significance of an entrepreneurial orientation strategic posture for increasing stakeholder value beyond simply the financial value captured by firm shareholding stakeholders. Results from a comprehensive sample of 1,015 public US corporations indicate significant relationships between the three core dimensions of entrepreneurial orientation (innovativeness, risk taking, proactiveness) and stakeholder value, suggesting that how organizations behave entrepreneurially plays an important role in the firms generation of stakeholder value.

Keywords

entrepreneurial orientationstakeholder valuefirm performancelongitudinal research
Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Management & Organization , Volume 22 , Issue 2 , March 2016 , pp. 272 - 290
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press and Australian and New Zealand Academy of Management 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Agle, B. R., Mitchell, R. K., & Sonnenfeld, J. A. (1999). Who matters to CEOs? An investigation of stakeholder attributes and salience, corporate performance, and CEO values. Academy of Management Journal, 42(5), 507–525.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aguilera, R. V., Rupp, D. E., Williams, C. A., & Ganapathi, J. (2007). Putting the S back in corporate social responsibility: A multilevel theory of social change in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 32(3), 836–863.Google Scholar
Aguinis, H., & Glavas, A. (2012). What we know and don’t know about corporate social responsibility: A review and research agenda. Journal of Management, 38(4), 932–968.Google Scholar
Ahmed, H., Balzarova, M., & Cohen, D. A. (2014). To sell or not to sell; that is the question? Stakeholders’ supremacy in the New Zealand electricity industry. Journal of Management & Organization, 20(3), 410–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, B. S., Covin, J. G., & Slevin, D. P. (2009). Understanding the relationship between entrepreneurial orientation and strategic learning capability: An empirical investigation. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 3(3), 218–240.Google Scholar
Antoncic, B., & Hisrich, R. D. (2003). Clarifying the intrapreneurship concept. Journal of Small Business & Enterprise Development, 10(1), 7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arrow, K. (1974). Limited knowledge and economic analysis. American Economic Review, 64(1), 1–10.Google Scholar
Aupperle, K., Carroll, A., & Hatfield, J. (1985). An empirical examination of the relationship between corporate social responsibility and profitability. Academy of Management Journal, 28, 446–463.Google Scholar
Ayuso, S., Rodríguez, M. Á., & Ricart, J. E. (2006). Using stakeholder dialogue as a source for new ideas: a dynamic capability underlying sustainable innovation. Corporate Governance: The International Journal of Effective Board Performance, 6(4), 475–490.Google Scholar
Baird, I. S., & Thomas, H. (1985). Toward a contingency model of strategic risk taking. Academy of Management Review, 10(2), 230–243.Google Scholar
Barney, J. B., & Arikan, A. M. (2001). The resource-based view: Origins and implications. In M. A. Hitt, R. E. Freeman & J. S. Harrison (Eds.), Handbook of strategic management (pp. 124–188). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Belsley, D. A., Kuh, E., & Welsch, R. E. (1980). Regression diagnostics: Identifying influential data and sources of collinearity. New York, NY: Wiley.Google Scholar
Berman, E. M., & West, J. P. (1998). Responsible risk-taking. Public Administration Review, 58(4), 346–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berman, S. L., Wicks, A. C., Kotha, S., & Jones, T. M. (1999). Does stakeholder orientation matter? The relationship between stakeholder management models and firm financial performance. Academy of Management Journal, 42(5), 488–506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berrone, P., & Gomez-Mejia, L. R. (2009). Environmental performance and executive compensation: An integrated agency-institutional perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 52(1), 103–126.Google Scholar
Boyd, B. K., Dees, G. G., & Rasheed, A. M. A. (1993). Divergence between archival and perceptual measures of the environment: Causes and consequences. Academy of Management Review, 18(2), 204–226.Google Scholar
Breusch, T. S., & Pagan, A. R. (1980). The lagrange multiplier test and its applications to model specification in econometrics. Review of Economic Studies, 47(1), 239–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buysse, K., & Verbeke, A. (2003). Proactive environmental strategies: A stakeholder management perspective. Strategic Management Journal, 24(5), 453–470.Google Scholar
Cambra-Fierro, J., Wilson, A., Polo-Redondo, Y., Fuster-Mur, A., & Lopez-Perez, M. E. (2013). When do firms implement corporate social responsibility? A study of the Spanish construction and real-estate sector. Journal of Management & Organization, 19(2), 150–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, J. L. (2007). Why would corporations behave in socially responsible ways? An institutional theory of corporate social responsibility. Academy of Management Review, 32, 946–967.Google Scholar
Certo, S. T., & Semadeni, M. (2006). Strategy research and panel data: Evidence and implications. Journal of Management, 32(3), 449–471.Google Scholar
Chatterji, A. K., Levine, D. I., & Toffel, M. W. (2009). How well do social ratings actually measure corporate social responsibility? Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, 18(1), 125–169.Google Scholar
Chiu, S.-C., & Sharfman, M. (2011). Legitimacy, Visibility, and the Antecedents of Corporate Social Performance: An Investigation of the Instrumental Perspective. Journal of Management, 37(6), 1558–1585.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clarkson, M. (1995). A stakeholder framework for analyzing and evaluating corporate social performance. Academy of Management Review, 20(1), 92–117.Google Scholar
Coffey, B. S., & Wang, J. (1998). Board diversity and managerial control as predictors of corporate social performance. Journal of Business Ethics, 17(14), 1595–1603.Google Scholar
Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112(1), 155–159.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S. G., & Aiken, L. S. (2003). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences (3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. (1989). Innovation and learning: The two faces of R&D. Economic Journal, 99, 569–596.Google Scholar
Covin, J. G., Green, K. M., & Slevin, D. P. (2006). Strategic process effects on the entrepreneurial orientation-sales growth rate relationship. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 30(1), 57–81.Google Scholar
Covin, J. G., & Lumpkin, G. T. (2011). Entrepreneurial orientation theory and research: Reflections on a needed construct. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 35(5), 855–872.Google Scholar
Covin, J. G., & Miles, M. P. (1999). Corporate entrepreneurship and the pursuit of competitive advantage. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 23(3), 47–63.Google Scholar
Covin, J. G., & Slevin, D. P. (1988). The influence of organization structure on the utility of an entrepreneurial top management style. Journal of Management Studies, 25(3), 217–234.Google Scholar
Covin, J. G., & Slevin, D. P. (1989). Strategic management of small firms in hostile and benign environments. Strategic Management Journal, 10(1), 75–87.Google Scholar
Covin, J. G., & Slevin, D. P. (1991). A conceptual model of entrepreneurship as firm behavior. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 16(1), 7–25.Google Scholar
Cronbach, L. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16(3), 297–334.Google Scholar
Davidson, R., & MacKinnon, J. G. (1993). Estimation and inference in econometrics. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Deeds, D. L., DeCarolis, D., & Coombs, J. E. (1998). Firm-specific resources and wealth creation in high-technology ventures: Evidence from newly public biotechnology firms. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 22(3), 55–73.Google Scholar
Dess, G. G., Ireland, R. D., Zahra, S. A., Floyd, S. W., Janney, J. J., & Lane, P. J. (2003). Emerging issues in corporate entrepreneurship. Journal of Management, 29, 351–378.Google Scholar
DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48, 147–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Boston, MA: Pitman Press.Google Scholar
Freeman, R. E., Wicks, A. C., & Parmar, B. (2004). Stakeholder theory and “the corporate objective revisited”. Organization Science, 15(3), 364–369.Google Scholar
Galbraith, J. K. (1967). The new industrial state. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
Greene, W. (2008). Econometric analysis (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Griffin, J., & Mahon, J. (1997). The corporate social performance and corporate financial performance debate: 25 years of incomparable research. Business and Society, 36, 5–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, B., & Reenen, J. V. (2000). How effective are fiscal incentives for R&D? A review of the evidence. Research Policy, 29, 449–469.Google Scholar
Hamel, G., & Prahalad, C. K. (1994). Competing for the future. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
Hanlon, M., Rajgopal, S., & Shevlin, T. (2003). Are executive stock options associated with future earnings? Journal of Accounting and Economics, 36, 3–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harrison, J. S., Bosse, D. A., & Phillips, R. A. (2010). Managing for stakeholders, stakeholder utility functions, and competitive advantage. Strategic Management Journal, 31(1), 58–74.Google Scholar
Hart, T. A., & Sharfman, M. (2015). Assessing the concurrent validity of the revised Kinder, Lydenberg, and Domini corporate social performance indicators. Business & Society, 54(5), 575–598.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hausman, J. A. (1978). Specification tests in econometrics. Econometrica, 46(6), 1251–1271.Google Scholar
Heath, R. L., & Palenchar, M. J. (2009). Strategic issues management: Organizations and public policy challenges. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Hillman, A. J., & Keim, G. D. (2001). Shareholder value, stakeholder management, and social issues: What’s the bottom line? Strategic Management Journal, 22(2), 125–139.Google Scholar
Hsiao, C. (2003). Analysis of panel data. Cambridge, New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hughes, M., & Morgan, R. E. (2007). Deconstructing the relationship between entrepreneurial orientation and business performance at the embryonic stage of firm growth. Industrial Marketing Management, 36(5), 651–661.Google Scholar
Jennings, D. F., & Young, D. M. (1990). An empirical comparison between objective and subjective measures of the product innovation. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 15(1), 53–66.Google Scholar
Johnson, R. A., & Greening, D. W. (1999). The effects of corporate governance and institutional ownership types on corporate social performance. Academy of Management Journal, 42, 564–576.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, T. M. (1995). Instrumental stakeholder theory: A synthesis of ethics and economics. Academy of Management Review, 20(2), 404–437.Google Scholar
Jones, T. M., & Wicks, A. C. (1999). Convergent stakeholder theory. Academy of Management Review, 24(2), 206–221.Google Scholar
Kacperczyk, A. (2009). With greater power comes greater responsibility? Takeover protection and corporate attention to stakeholders. Strategic Management Journal, 30(3), 261–285.Google Scholar
Kennedy, P. (2003). A guide to econometrics (5th ed.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Kinder, P. D. (2007). KLD stats (pp. 1–6), Boston, MA: KLD Research & Analytics.Google Scholar
KLD (2008). KLD Indexes: KLD Select Social Index Methodology. Retrieved August 20, 2015, from https://web.archive.org/web/20090907130612/http://www.kld.com/research/methodology.html.Google Scholar
KLD Web Page (2009). The KLD team. Retrieved from https://web.archive.org/web/20091003013439/http://www.kld.com/about/team/index.html.Google Scholar
Knight, F. H. (1921). Risk, uncertainty, and profit. Boston, MA: Hart, Schaffner & Marx.Google Scholar
Kollmann, T., & Stöckmann, C. (2014). Filling the entrepreneurial orientation-performance gap: The mediating effects of exploratory and exploitative innovations. Entrepreneurship: Theory & Practice, 38(5), 1001–1026.Google Scholar
Kreiser, P. M., & Davis, J. (2010). Entrepreneurial orientation and firm performance: The unique impact of innovativeness, proactiveness, and risk-taking. Journal of Small Business & Entrepreneurship, 23(1), 39–51.Google Scholar
Lee, T., & Chu, W. (2013). How entrepreneurial orientation, environmental dynamism, and resource rareness influence firm performance. Journal of Management & Organization, 19(2), 167–187.Google Scholar
Li, J., & Tang, Y. I. (2010). CEO hubris and firm risk taking in China: The moderating role of managerial discretion. Academy of Management Journal, 53(1), 45–68.Google Scholar
Logsdon, J. M., & Yuthas, K. (1997). Corporate social performance, stakeholder orientation, and organizational moral development. Journal of Business Ethics, 16(12), 1213–1226.Google Scholar
Lumpkin, G. T., & Dess, G. G. (1996). Clarifying the entrepreneurial orientation construct and linking it to performance. Academy of Management Review, 21(1), 135–172.Google Scholar
Lyon, D. W., Lumpkin, G. T., & Dess, G. G. (2000). Enhancing entrepreneurial orientation research: Operationalizing and measuring a key strategic decision making process. Journal of Management, 26(5), 1055–1085.Google Scholar
March, J. G., & Sharpira, Z. (1987). Managerial perspectives on risk and risk taking. Management Science, 33, 1404–1418.Google Scholar
March, J. G., & Shapira, Z. (1992). Variable risk preferences and the focus of attention. Psychological Review, 99(1), 172–183.Google Scholar
Marques, C. E., Ferreira, J. M., Ferreira, F. F., & Lages, M. S. (2013). Entrepreneurial orientation and motivation to start up a business: Evidence from the health service industry. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 9(1), 77–94.Google Scholar
McGuire, J. B., Sundgren, A., & Schneeweis, T. (1988). Corporate social responsibility and firm financial performance. Academy of Management Journal, 31(4), 854–872.Google Scholar
McMullen, J. S., & Shepherd, D. A. (2006). Entrepreneurial Action and the Role of Uncertainty in the Theory of the Entrepreneur. Academy of Management Review, 31(1), 132–152, doi: 10.5465/AMR.2006.19379628 Google Scholar
McWilliams, A., & Siegel, D. S. (2011). Creating and capturing value: Strategic corporate social responsibility, resource-based theory, and sustainable competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 37(5), 1480–1495.Google Scholar
Miller, D. (1983). The correlates of entrepreneurship in three types of firms. Management Science, 29(7), 770–791.Google Scholar
Miller, D. (2011). Miller (1983) revisited: A reflection on EO research and some suggestions for the future. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 35(5), 873–894.Google Scholar
Miller, D., & Friesen, P. H. (1978). Archetypes of strategy formulation. Management Science, 24(9), 921–933.Google Scholar
Miller, D., & Le Breton-Miller, I. (2011). Governance, social identity, and entrepreneurial orientation in closely held public companies. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 35(5), 1051–1076.Google Scholar
Mitchell, M. L., & Jolley, J. M. (1988). Research design explained. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
Mitchell, R. K., Agle, B. R., & Wood, D. J. (1997). Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the principle of who and what really counts. Academy of Management Review, 22(4), 853–886.Google Scholar
Morris, M. H., Webb, J. W., & Franklin, R. J. (2011). Understanding the manifestation of entrepreneurial orientation in the nonprofit context. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 35(5), 947–971.Google Scholar
Neter, J., Wasserman, W., & Kutner, M. (1996). Applied linear statistical models. Chicago, IL: Irwin.Google Scholar
Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Oliver, C., & Holzinger, I. (2008). The effectiveness of strategic political management: A dynamic capabilities framework. Academy of Management Review, 33(2), 496–520.Google Scholar
Orlitzky, M. (2001). Does firm size confound the relationship between corporate social performance and firm financial performance? Journal of Business Ethics, 33(2), 167–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pavelin, S., & Porter, L. (2008). The corporate social performance content of innovation in the U.K. Journal of Business Ethics, 80(4), 711–725.Google Scholar
Pearce, J. A., Fritz, D. A., & Davis, P. S. (2010). Entrepreneurial orientation and the performance of religious congregations as predicted by rational choice theory. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 34(1), 219–248.Google Scholar
Porter, M. E., & van der Linde, C. (1995). Green and competitive: Ending the stalemate. Harvard Business Review, 73(5), 120–134.Google Scholar
Portney, P. R. (2008). The (not so) new corporate social responsibility: An empirical perspective. Review of Environmental Economics & Policy, 2(2), 261–275.Google Scholar
Rauch, A., Wiklund, J., Lumpkin, G. T., & Frese, M. (2009). Entrepreneurial orientation and business performance: An assessment of past research and suggestions for the future. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 33(3), 761–787.Google Scholar
Rehbein, K., Waddock, S., & Graves, S. B. (2004). Understanding shareholder activism: Which corporations are targeted? Business and Society, 43, 239–268.Google Scholar
Ruf, B., Muralidhar, K., & Paul, K. (1998). The development of a systematic, aggregate measure of corporate social performance. Journal of Management, 24(1), 119–133.Google Scholar
Rupp, D. E., Williams, C., & Aguilera, R. V. (2011). Increasing corporate social responsibility through stakeholder value internalization (and the catalyzing effect of new governance): An application of organizational justice, self-determination, and social influence theories. In M. Shchminke (Ed.), Managerial ethics: Managing the psychology of morality (pp. 69–88). New York, NY: Routledge/Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Russo, M. V., & Fouts, P. A. (1997). A resource-based perspective on corporate environmental performance and profitability. Academy of Management Journal, 40(3), 534–559.Google Scholar
Saeed, S., Yousafzai, S. Y., & Engelen, A. (2014). On cultural and macroeconomic contingencies of the entrepreneurial orientation-performance relationship. Entrepreneurship: Theory & Practice, 38(2), 255–290.Google Scholar
Sanders, G., & Carpenter, M. A. (2003). Strategic satisficing? A behavioral–agency theory perspective on stock repurchase program announcements. Academy of Management Journal, 46(2), 160–178.Google Scholar
Sanders, W. G., & Hambrick, D. C. (2007). Swinging for the fences: The effects of CEO stock options on company risk taking and performance. Academy of Management Journal, 50(5), 1055–1078.Google Scholar
Schumpeter, J. (1934). The theory of economic development: An inquiry into profit, capital, credit, interest, and the business cycle. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Selznick, P. (1957). Leadership in administration: A sociological interpretation. New York, NY: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Shane, S., & Stuart, T. E. (2002). Organizational endowments and the performance of university start-ups. Management Science, 48(1), 154–170.Google Scholar
Shane, S., & Venkataraman, S. (2000). The promise of entrepreneurship as a field of research. Academy of Management Review, 25(1), 217–226.Google Scholar
Short, J. C., Broberg, J. C., Cogliser, C. C., & Brigham, K. H. (2010). Construct validation using computer-aided text analysis (CATA): An illustration using entrepreneurial orientation. Organizational Research Methods, 13(2), 320–347.Google Scholar
Simon, H. A. (1947). Administrative behavior. New York, NY: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Singh, J. V., Tucker, D. J., & House, R. J. (1986). Organizational legitimacy and the liability of newness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 31, 171–193.Google Scholar
Stevenson, H. H., & Gumpert, D. E. (1985). The heart of entrepreneurship. Harvard Business Review, 63(2), 85–94.Google Scholar
Stopford, J. M., & Baden-Fuller, C. W. F. (1994). Creating corporate entrepreneurship. Strategic Management Journal, 15(7), 521–536.Google Scholar
Tang, J., Tang, Z., Marino, L. D., Zhang, Y., & Li, Q. (2008). Exploring an inverted U-Shape relationship between entrepreneurial orientation and performance in Chinese ventures. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 32(1), 219–239.Google Scholar
Tang, Z., Kreiser, P., Marino, L., Dickson, P., & Weaver, K. M. (2009). A hierarchical perspective of the dimensions of entrepreneurial orientation. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 5(2), 181–201.Google Scholar
Unsworth, K., Sawang, S., Murray, J., Norman, P., & Sorbello, T. (2012). Understanding innovation adoption: Effects of orientation, pressure and control on adoption intentions. International Journal of Innovation Management, 16(1), 1–35.Google Scholar
Van de Ven, A. H., & Drazin, R. (1985). The concept of fit in contingency theory. Research in Organizational Behavior, 7, 333–365.Google Scholar
Van de Ven, A. H., & Ferry, D. L. (1980). Measuring and assessing organizations. New York, NY: Wiley.Google Scholar
Waddock, S. (2001). Integrity and mindfulness. Journal of Corporate Citizenship, 2001(1), 25–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waddock, S. A., & Graves, S. B. (1997). The corporate social performance – Financial performance link. Strategic Management Journal, 18, 303–319.Google Scholar
Wadhwa, A., & Kotha, S. (2006). Knowledge creation through external venturing: Evidence from the telecommunications equipment manufacturing industry. Academy of Management Journal, 49(4), 819–835.Google Scholar
Wales, W. J., Gupta, V. K., & Mousa, F.-T. (2013). Empirical research on entrepreneurial orientation: An assessment and suggestions for future research. International Small Business Journal, 31(4), 357–383. doi: 10.1177/0266242611418261.Google Scholar
Walls, J. L., Berrone, P., & Phan, P. H. (2012). Corporate governance and environmental performance: Is there really a link? Strategic Management Journal, 33(8), 885–913.Google Scholar
White, H. (1980). A heteroskedasticity-consistent covariance matrix estimator and a direct test for heteroskedasticity. Econometrica, 48(4), 817–838.Google Scholar
Wiklund, J. (1999). The sustainability of the entrepreneurial orientation-performance relationship. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 24(1), 37–48.Google Scholar
Williams, C., & Lee, S. H. (2009). Resource allocations, knowledge network characteristics and entrepreneurial orientation of multinational corporations. Research Policy, 38, 1376–1387.Google Scholar
Wood, D. J. (1991). Corporate social performance revisited. Academy of Management Review, 16, 691–718.Google Scholar
Wooldridge, J. (2002). Econometric analysis of cross section and panel data (2nd ed.). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Zahra, S. A., & Covin, J. G. (1995). Contextual influences on the corporate entrepreneurship-performance relationship: A longitudinal analysis. Journal of Business Venturing, 10(1), 43–58.Google Scholar