Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Corporate entrepreneurship in a dispersed setting: actors, behaviors, and process

  • Published:
International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Although conceptual models of the corporate entrepreneurship process are numerous, our current empirical knowledge regarding it remains fragmented, especially concerning the contributions of individual employees to corporate entrepreneurship. Thus, two important questions remain unanswered: How do employees from different managerial ranks of an organization contribute to the corporate entrepreneurship process, and how do these contributions change as the project unfolds over time? In the current research, we aim to answer these questions and offer an integrative framework for the corporate entrepreneurship process that would account for dynamic contributions of multiple actors through their activities and behaviors. We approach these questions in a specific context by studying three cases within a large company in a dispersed corporate setting.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. In Entrepreneurship research, micro level can be understood as both firm and individual. (Davidsson and Wiklund 2001). In this paper micro level is understood as individual.

  2. USD 9.3 to 17.3 billion

  3. The privacy agreement signed by the authors precludes disclosure of specific details concerning the projects and the company. Therefore, the names of the people, products and entities have been disguised.

References

  • Antoncic, B., & Hisrich, R. D. (2001). Intrapreneurship: construct refinement and cross-cultural validation. Journal of Business Venturing, 16, 495–527.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Antoncic, B., & Hisrich, R. D. (2003). Clarifying the intrapreneurship concept. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 10, 7–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bhave, M. P. (1994). A process model of entrepreneurial venture creation. Journal of Business Venturing, 8, 228–224.

    Google Scholar 

  • Biggadike, E. R. (1979). The risky business of diversification. Harvard Business Review, 57(3), 103–111.

    Google Scholar 

  • Birkinshaw, J. (1997). Entrepreneurship in multinational corporations: the characteristics of subsidiary initiatives. Strategic Management Journal, 18(3), 207–229.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burgelman, R. A. (1983a). Corporate entrepreneurship and strategic management: insights from a process study. Management Science, 29(12), 1349–1364.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burgelman, R. A. (1983b). A process model of internal corporate venturing in the diversified major firm. Administrative Science Quarterly, 28(2), 223–244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carpenter, M. A., Geletkanycz, M. A., & Sanders, W. G. (2004). Upper echelons research revisited: antecedents, elements, and consequences of top management team composition. Journal of Management, 30(6), 749–778.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carrier, C. (1996). Intrapreneurship in small businesses: an exploratory study. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 21(1), 5–20.

    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 

  • Damanpour, F. (1991). Organizational innovation: a meta-analysis of effects of determinants and moderators. Academy of Management Journal, 34(3), 555–590.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davidsson, P., & Wiklund, J. (2001). Levels of analysis in entrepreneurship research: current research practice and suggestions for the future. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 25(4), 81–99.

    Google Scholar 

  • Day, D. L. (1994). Raising radicals: different processes for championing innovative corporate ventures. Organization Science, 5(2), 148–172.

    Article  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(3), 351–378.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dutton, J. E., & Ashford, S. J. (1993). Selling issues to top management. Academy of Management Review, 18(3), 397–428.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhardt, K. M., Kahwajy, J. L., & Bourgeois, L. J., III. (1997). How management teams can have a good fight. Harvard Business Review, 75(4), 77–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Floyd, S. W., & Lane, P. J. (2000). Strategizing throughout the organization: managing role conflict in strategic renewal. Academy of Management Review, 25(1), 154–177.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garud, R., & Rappa, M. (1994). A socio-cognitive model of technology evolution. Organization Science, 5(3), 344–362.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garud, R., & Van de Ven, A. (1992). An empirical evaluation of the internal corporate venturing process. Strategic Management Journal, 13(1), 93–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • George, R., & MacMillan, I. C. (1985). Corporate venturing: venture management challenges. Journal of Business Strategy, 6(2), 85–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greene, P. O., Brush, C. G., & Hart, M. M. (1999). The corporate venture champion: a resource-based approach to role and process. Entrepreneurship: Theory & Practice, 23(3), 103–122.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hornsby, J. S., Naffziger, D. W., Kuratko, D. F., & Montagno, R. V. (1993). An interactive model of the corporate entrepreneurship process. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 17(2), 29–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hornsby, J. S., Kuratko, D. F., & Montagno, R. V. (1999). Perception of internal factors for corporate entrepreneurship: a comparison of Canadian and US managers. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 24(2), 11–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hornsby, J. S., Kuratko, D. F., & Zahra, S. A. (2002). Middle managers’ perception of the internal environment for corporate entrepreneurship: assessing a measurement scale. Journal of Business Venturing, 17(3), 253–273.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hornsby, J. S., Kuratko, D. F., Shepherd, D. A., & Bott, J. P. (2009). Managers’ corporate entrepreneurial actions: examining perception and position. Journal of Business Venturing, 24(3), 236–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howell, J. M., & Boies, K. (2004). Champions of technological innovation: The influence of contextual knowledge, role orientation, idea generation, and idea promotion on champion emergence. The Leadership Quarterly, 15(1), 123–143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howell, J. M., Shea, C. M., & Higgins, C. A. (2005). Champions of product innovations: defining, developing, and validating a measure of champion behavior. Journal of Business Venturing, 20(5), 641–661.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kanter, R. M. (2004). The middle manager as innovator. Harvard Business Review, 82(7/8), 150–161.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kor, Y. Y. (2003). Experience-based top management team competence and sustained growth. Organization Science, 14(6), 707–719.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuratko, D. F. (2007). Corporate entrepreneurship. Foundations and trends in entrepreneurship, 3(2), 151–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuratko, D. F., Ireland, R. D., Covin, J. G., & Hornsby, J. S. (2005). A model of middle-level managers’ entrepreneurial behavior. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 29(6), 699–716.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuratko, D. F., Morris, M. H., & Covin, J. G. (2011). Corporate Entrepreneurship & Innovation. South-Western: Cengage Learning.

  • Lumpkin, G. T. (2007). Intrapreneurship and innovation. In J. R. Baum, M. Frese, & R. Baron (Eds.), The psychology of entrepreneurship (pp. 237–264). Mahwa: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacMillan, I. C., Block, Z., & Narasimha, P. N. S. (1986). Corporate venturing: alternatives, obstacles encountered, and experience effects. Journal of Business Venturing, 1, 177–191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Markham, S. K. (1998). A longitudinal examination of how champions influence others to support their projects. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 15(6), 490–504.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Markham, S. K. (2000). Corporate championing and antagonism as forms of political behavior: an R&D perspective. Organization Science, 11(4), 429–447.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Markham, S. K., & Griffin, A. (1998). The breakfast of champions: associations between champions and product development environments, practices, and performance. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 15(5).

  • Miles, M. P., & Covin, J. G. (2002). Exploring the practice of corporate venturing: some common forms and their organizational implications. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 26(3), 21–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mintzberg, H. (1983). Structure in fives: Designing effective organizations. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mumford, M. D., Scott, G. M., Gaddis, B., & Strange, J. M. (2002). Leading creative people: orchestrating expertise and relationships. The Leadership Quarterly, 13(6), 705–750.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Connor, G. C., & Veryzer, R. W. (2001). The nature of market visioning for technology-based radical innovation. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 18(4), 231–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phan, P. H., Wright, M., Ucbasaran, D., & Tan, W.-L. (2009). Corporate entrepreneurship: current research and future directions. Journal of Business Venturing, 24(3), 197–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pinchot, G. H. (1985). Intrapreneuring: Why you don’t have to leave the corporation to become an entrepreneur. New York: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prasad, L. (1993). The etiology of organizational politics: implications for the intrapreneur. SAM Advanced Management Journal, 58(3), 35–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Russell, R. D. (1999). Developing a process model of intrapreneurial systems: a cognitive mapping approach. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 23(3), 65–84.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sayeed, O. B., & Gazdar, M. K. (2003). Intrapreneurship: assessing and defining attributes of intrapreneurs. Journal of Entrepreneurship, 12(1), 75–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shane, S., & Venkataraman, S. (2000). The promise of entrepreneurship as a field of research. Academy of Management Review, 25(1), 217–228.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shrader, R. C., & Simon, M. (1997). Corporate versus independent new ventures: resource, strategy and performance differences. Journal of Business Venturing, 12(1), 47–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stopford, J. M., & Baden-Fuller, C. W. F. (1994). Creating corporate entrepreneurship. Strategic Management Journal, 15(1), 521–536.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suchman, M. C. (1995). Managing Legitimacy: strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 571–610.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sykes, H. B. (1986). The anatomy of a corporate venturing program. Journal of Business Venturing, 1(3), 275–293.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van de Ven, A. H., & Poole, M. S. (1990). Methods for studying innovation development in the Minnesota innovation research program. Organization Science, 1(3), 313–335.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van de Ven, A. H., & Poole, M. S. (1995). Explaining development and change in organizations. The Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 510–540.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Dijk, S.J. (2008). Realizing radical innovation in established high-tech companies: a micro-institutional perspective Technische Universiteit Eindhoven, Eindhoven.

  • Vesper, K. H. (1984). Three faces of corporate entrepreneurship: A Pilot Study. In J. A. Hornaday, F. J. Tarpley, J. A. Timmons, & K. H. Vesper (Eds.), Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research. Wellesley: Babson College.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wooldridge, B., Schmid, T., & Floyd, S. W. (2008). The middle management perspective on strategy process: contributions, synthesis, and future research. Journal of Management, 34(6), 1190–1221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yin, R. K. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods. Beverly Hills: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zahra, S. A. (1991). Predictors and financial outcomes of corporate entrepreneurship: an exploratory study. Journal of Business Venturing, 6(4), 259–285.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Innovation Management and Strategy Department, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands

    Olga Belousova

  2. Louvain School of Management, Université catholique de Louvain, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium

    Benoît Gailly

Authors
  1. Olga Belousova
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Benoît Gailly
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Olga Belousova.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Belousova, O., Gailly, B. Corporate entrepreneurship in a dispersed setting: actors, behaviors, and process. Int Entrep Manag J 9, 361–377 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-013-0259-2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-013-0259-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation