Girişimsel Yönelimin Firma Performansına Etkileri

Öz

Girişimsel yönelim yeni işlere girmeye öncülük eden ve yenilikçilik, risk alma, proaktif olmak üzere üç temel özelliği içeren firma düzeyinde bir olgudur. Girişimcilik alanında boyutları hakkında tartışmalar olsa da, girişimsel yönelim kavramı birçok araştırmacının ilgisini çekmiştir. Bu yüksek düzeydeki ilgi, girişimcilik faaliyetlerinin ekonomi üzerindeki etkilerinden kaynaklanır. Firmaların hayatta kalma ve performansları üzerinde girişimsel yönelimin önemi üzerinde duran birçok araştırma mevcuttur. Yapılan araştırmalardan elde edilen ampirik bulgular girişimsel yönelimin performans üzerindeki pozitif etkisinin zaman içerisinde arttığını göstermiştir. Bu çalışma, girişimsel yönelimin firma performansı üzerindeki etkilerini incelemeyi ve elde edilen ampirik bulguları tartışmaya açarak farklı bir bakış açısı getirmeyi amaçlamaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Girişimcilik, Girişimsel Yönelim, Girişimcilik Teorileri, Firma Performansı

Impact of Entrepreneurial Orientation on Company Performance

Öz

The entrepreneurial orientation is a company-level phenomenon that leads getting to new jobs and includes three key features: innovation, risk taking and being proactive. Although there are discussions about the dimensions of entrepreneurship, the concept of entrepreneurial orientation has attracted the attention of many researchers. This high level of interest derives from the economic impact of entrepreneurial activities. There are many researches on the importance of entrepreneurial orientation on the survival and performance of companies. Empirical findings from the conducted researches indicated that the positive impact of the entrepreneurial orientation on performance has increased over time. This study aims to examine the effects of entrepreneurial orientation on firm performance and to discuss the empirical findings obtained and to develop a different perspective.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Entrepreneurship, Entrepreneurial Orientation, Entrepreneurial Theories, Company Performance

Kaynakça

1. Alegre, J., ve Chiva, R. (2008). Assessing the impact of organiza- tional learning capability on product innovation perfor- mance: An empirical test. Technovation, 28(6), 315.
2. Alegre, J., ve Chiva, R. (2013). Linking Entrepreneurial Orienta- tion and Firm Performance: The Role of Organizational Learning Capability and Innovation Performance. Jour- nal of Small Business Management, 51(4), 491-507.
3. trepreneurship Education (Vol. 3, pp. 194-208). Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing Inc.
4. Knight, G. A. (1997). Cross-cultural reliability and validity of a scale to measure firm entrepreneurial orientation. Journal of Business Venturing, 12, 213-225.
5. Kreiser, P. M., Marino, L. D., Dickson, P., ve Weaver, K. M. (2010). Cultural influences on entrepreneurial orienta- tion: The impact of national culture on risk taking and proactiveness in SMEs. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 34(5), 959-983.
6. Kreiser, P. M., Marino, L. D., ve Weaver, M. K. (2002). Assessing the psycometric properties of the entrepreneurial orienta- tion scale: A multi-country analysis. Entrepreneurship: Theory & Practice, 26, 71-93.
7. Li, Y. H., Huang, J. W., ve Tsai, M. T. (2009). Entrepreneurial orientation and firm performance: The role of knowledge creation process. Industrial Marketing Management, 38(4), 440-449.
8. Lumpkin, G. T., ve Dess, G. G. (1996). Clarifying the entrepre- neurial orientation construct and linking it to perfor- mance. The Academy of Management Review, 21, 135- 172.

9. Lumpkin, G. T., ve Dess, G. G. (2001). Linking two dimensions of entrepreneurial orientation to firm performance: The moderating role of environment and industry life cycle. Journal of Business Venturing, 16(5), 429-451.
10. Lyon, D. W., Lumpkin, G. T., ve Dess, G. G. (2000). Enhancing entrepreneurial orientation research: Operationalizing and measuring a key strategic decision making process. Journal of Management, 26, 1055-1085.
11. Sandberg, B. (2002). Creating the market for disruptive innova- tion: market proactiveness at the launch stage. Journal of Targeting, Measurement and Analysis for Marketing, 11, 184-96.
12. Sawhney, M., Wolcott, R. C., ve Arroniz, I. (2006). The 12 differ- ent ways for companies to innovate. MIT Sloan Manage- ment Review. 47, 75-81.
13. Varadarajan, R. (2009). Fortune at the bottom of the innovation pyramid: The strategic logic of incremental innovations. Business Horizons, 52(1), 21-29.
14. Walter, A. (2003). Relationship-specific factors influencing sup- plier involvement in customer new product develop- ment. Journal of Business Research, 56(9), 721-733.
15. Walter, A., Auer, M., ve Ritter, T. (2006). The impact of network capabilities and entrepreneurial orientation on university spin-off performance. Journal of Business Venturing, 21(4), 541-567.
16. Wiklund, J., ve Shepherd, D. (2003). Knowledge-Based Re- sources, Entrepreneurial Orientation, and the Perfor- mance of Small and Medium-Sized Businesses, Strategic Management Journal 24, 1307-1314.
17. Wiklund, J., ve Shepherd, D. (2005). Entrepreneurial orientation and small business performance: a configurational ap- proach. Journal of Business Venturing, 20(1), 71-91.
18. Worthington, W. J., Collins, J. D., ve Hitt, M. A. (2009). Beyond risk mitigation: Enhancing corporate innovation with scenario planning. Business Horizons, 52(5), 441.
19. Zahra, S. A., ve Garvis, D. M. (2000). International corporate entrepreneurship and firm performance: The moderating effect of international environmental hostility. Journal of Business Venturing, 15(5–6), 469-492.