AİLE İŞLETMELERİNDE İÇ GİRİŞİMCİLİK FİNANSAL PERFORMANS İLİŞKİSİ: AFYONKARAHİSAR’DA BİR ARAŞTIRMA

Year 2008, Volume: 10 Issue: 3, 209 - 230, 01.12.2008

Veysel Ağca Tuğrul Kandemir

Abstract

Bu çalışmanın amacı Afyonkarahisar ilinde imalat sektöründe faaliyet gösteren aile işletmelerindeki iç girişimcilik davranışları, dışsal çevre faktörleri ve işletme performansı arasındaki ilişkileri incelemektedir. Çok boyutlu bir yapı olarak, iç girişimcilik literatürde var olan bir organizasyondaki girişimsel faaliyetleri açıklamak için kullanılmaktadır. Bu çalışmada belirgin iç girişimcilik boyutları olarak yenilikçilik, risk alma ve proaktiflik boyutları yer almaktadır. Çevresel faktörler iç girişimcilik yapısı üzerinde belirleyici faktörler olarak ele alınmaktadır. İşletme performansı büyüme, karlılık ve verimlilik gibi ekonomik göstergeleri içermektedir. 206 aile işletmesinden elde edilen verilere göre büyüme, karlılık ve verimlilik göstergeleriyle sadece iç girişimcilik boyutlarından yenilik arasında pozitif ve anlamlı ilişki ortaya çıkmıştır. Proaktiflik boyutuyla sadece verimlilik göstergesi arasında pozitif ve anlamı ilişki görülmektedir. Diğer taraftan risk alma boyutuyla her hangi bir performans göstergesi arasında anlamlı ilişki çıkmamıştır. Son olarak iç girişimcilikle çevresel elverişlilikler arasında pozitif ve anlamlı bir ilişki ortaya çıkarken, çevresel elverişsizliliklcrle bir ilişki çıkmamıştır.


The aim of this study is to examine relationships among the external environment, entrepreneurship, and business performance at family owned manufacturing business in the city of Afyonkarahisar in Turkey. As a multidimensional structure, entrepreneurship is the concept used to explain entrepreneurship activities in an existing organization in the literature. In this study entrepreneurship structure includes three distinct dimensions: innovativeness, risk taking, proactivencss. The environmental factors were examined as the determinants of entrepreneurship structure. Business performance is considered as a dependent variable that covers only economics measures: growth, profitability and productivity. Based on the data from 206 family owned manufacturing business, empirical results showed that innovation was the only dimension that positively and significantly associated with business growth, profitability and productivity. Proactiveness was found to be significantly and positively correlated with only productivity. There wasn’t found any relationship between risk taking and entrepreneurship dimensions. Environmental factors have statistically significant impact on the performance of the family business. Finally, while environmental munificence was positively and significantly related with entrepreneurship, environmental hostility was not.

Keywords

Aile işletmeleri , İç girişimcilik , Çevresel belirleyiciler , İşletme performansı , Family owned business , Entrepreneurship , Environmental determinants , Business performance

References

• ALTUNISIK, R., Coşkun, R., Bayraktaroglu, S., & Yildirim, E. (2004). Sosyal Bilimlerde araştırma Yöntemleri. Adapazarı: Sakarya Kitabevi.
• ANTONCIC, B. (2000), Intrapreneurship: Construct Refinement and An Integrative Model Development, Thesis for The Degree of Doctor of Philosophy, Department of Marketing and Policy Studies Weatherhead School of Management, School of Graduate Studies, Case Western Reserve University.
• ANTONCIC, B., & Hisrich, R.D. (2001), Intrapreneurship: Construct Refinement and Cross-Cultural Validation. Journal of Business Venturing, 16: 495-527.
• ANTONCIC, B., & Hisrich, R.D. (2003), Clarifying The Intrapreneurship Concept. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development. 10(1): 7-24.
• BARNEY, J.B., Clark, D., & Alvarez, S. (2003 Where does entrepreneurship come from? Network models ofopportunity recognition and resource acquisition with application to the family firm. Paper presented at theTheories of the Family Enterprise Conference, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, (December).
• CARNEY, M. (2005). Corporate governance and competitive advantage in family- controlled firms. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 29(3), 249-266.
• COVIN, J.G., & Slevin, D.P. (1991), A Conceptual Model of Entrepreneurship As Firm Behavior. Entrepreneurship Theon' & Practice, 16(1): 7-25.
• DESS, G.G., Lumpkin, G.T., & Covin, J.G. (1997), Entrepreneurial Strategy Making and Firm Performance: Tests of Contingency and Configurational Models. Strategic Management Journal. 18 (9): 677-695.
• ERDOGMUŞ, Nihat. (2007). Aile İşletmeleri Yönetimi: Yönetim Devri ve İkinci Kuşağın Yetiştirilmesi, İGİAD Yayınları, İstanbul.
• GUTH, W. D., & Ginsberg, A. (1990), Guest Editors’ Introduction: Coıporate Entrepreneurship. Strategic Management Journal, II (5): 5-15.
• HISRICH, R. D., & Peters. M. P. (2002), Entrepreneurship (fifth edition). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill/Irwin.
• KARPUZOGLU, E. (2002). Büyüyen ve Gelişen Aile Şirketlerinde Kurumsallaşma, Hayat yayınları.
• KELLERMANNS FW, Eddleston K. (2006), Corporate entrepreneurship in family firms: A family perspective. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice 30(6): 809- 830.
• KETS DE VRİES, M. F. R. (1993) The Dynamics of Family Controlled Firms: The Good and Bad News. Organizational Dynamics, 21 (3): 59-71.
• KNIGHT, G. (1997), Cross-Cultural reliability and validity of a scale to measure firm entrepreneurial orientation. Journal of Business Venturing, 12 (3): 213- 225
• KOCEL, T. (1995),Business Management (fifth edition). Istanbul: Beta Publication.
• KURATKO, D. F., & Hodgetts, R. M. (2001),Entrepreneurship: A contemporary approach. Mason, OH: South-Western Thomson Learning.
• KURATKO, D. F., & Welsch, H. P. (1994). Entrepreneurial strategy text and cases. Fort Worth, TX: Dryden Press.
• 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.
• MİLLER, D., & Friesen, P. H. (1982),Innovation in conservative and entrepreneurial firms: Two models of strategic momentum. StrategicManagement Journal, 3(1): 1-25.
• MILLER, D., & Friesen, P.H. (1983). Strategy-making and environment: The third link. Strategic Management Journal, 4 (3): 221-235.
• MORRIS, M.H., & Kuratko, D.F. (2002), Corporate entrepreneurship: Entrepreneurial development within organizations. Orlando, FL: Harcourt College Publishers.
• NAKTIYOK, A. (2004). İç Girişimcilik. Istanbul: Beta Basım Yayın.
• PEARCE, J.W., & Carland, J.W. (1996),Intrapreneurship and innovation in manufacturing firms:An empirical study of performance implications. Academy of Entrepreneurship Journal, 1 (2): 87-96.
• RUSSELL. R.D. (1999). Developing a process model of intrapreneurial systems: A cognitive mapping approach, Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 23 (3): 65-84.
• SİRMON, D.G. & Hitt, M.A. (2003),Managing resources: Linking unique resources, management and wealth creation in family firms. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 27(A), 339-358
• STOPFORD, J.M., & Baden-Fuller, C.W.F. (1994), Creating Corporate Entrepreneurship. Strategic Management Journal. 15 (7): 521-536.
• W1KLUND, J. (1999). The sustainability of the entrepreneurial orientation¬performance Relationship. Entrepreneurship Theory &. Practice, 24 (1): 37- 48.
• WIKLUND, .1.. & Shepherd, D. (2005), Entrepreneurial orientation and small business performance: a configurational approach. Journal of Business Venturing, 20 (1 ):71 -91.
• ZAHRA, S.A, (1991). Predictors and financial outcomes of corporate entrepreneurship: An exploratory study. Journal of Business Venturuing, 6 (4): 259-285.
• ZAHRA, S.A. (1993), Environment, corporate entrepreneurship, and financial performance: A taxonomic approach. Journal of Business Venturing, 8 (4): 319-340.
• ZAHRA, S.A. (1995), Corporate entrepreneurship and financial performance: The case of management leveraged buyouts. Journal of Business Venturing, 10 (3): 225-247.
• ZAHRA, S.A., & Covin, J.G. (1995),Contextual influences on the corporate entrepreneurship prerformance relationship: A longitudinal analysis. Journal of Business Venturing, 10(1): 43-58.
• ZAHRA, S.A. (1996), Governance, ownership, and corporate entrepreneurship: The moderating impact of industry technological opportunities. Academy of Management Journal, 39(6), 1713-1735
• ZAHRA, S.A., & Garvis, D.M. (2000), International Corporate Entrepreneurship and Firm Performance: The moderating effect of international environmental hostility. Journal of Business VenturingAS (5-6): 469-492.
• ZAHRA, S.A., Hayton, J.C., & Salvato, C. (2004), Entrepreneurship in family vs. non-family firms: A resourcebased analysis of the effect of organizational culture. Entrepreneurship Theoiy and Practice, 28(4), 363-381.