Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

I-ENTRE-U: an individual entrepreneurial orientation scale for teachers and researchers in higher education institutions

  • Original Article
  • Published:
International Review on Public and Nonprofit Marketing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Nowadays, something essential in Higher Education Institutions (HEI) is seeking to be entrepreneurial, with human resources with entrepreneurial characteristics. The success of higher education institutions will depend on the performance of its human resources. The main objective of this paper is to propose the concept of individual entrepreneurial orientation (IEO), based on the construct Entrepreneurial Orientation, a concept from the strategy-making literature, composed of five entrepreneurial dimensions (autonomy, innovativeness, risk taking, proactiveness, and competitive aggressiveness) (Lumpkin and Dess Academy of Management Review, 21(3), 605–607, 1996a; 135–172, b). The paper also proposes a measurement scale with a set of items, which are to measure the IEO of Teachers and Researchers in HEI. The EO will be measured by the ENTRE-U scale developed by Todorovic, McNaughton, and Guild in (Technovation, 31, 128–137, 2011) and adapted in this study to the individual level (I-ENTRE-U). A set of items is reviewed from the ENTRE-U, and the proposal scale adaptation was validated by academic experts. To test, debug and validate this measuring instrument, we used the confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), Pearson’s correlations and Cronbach’s alphas, among other measures. This paper conceptualizes the EO strategy, taking into account higher education peculiarities and discusses the dimensions of the IEO concept in HEI.

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
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Atomic E-mail Hunter 3.5 (2006). Alexandria: AtomPark Software. Retrieved from http://www.massmailsoftware.com/extractweb/download/

References

  • Baker, W. E., & Sinkula, J. M. (2009). The complementary effects of market orientation and entrepreneurial orientation on profitability in small businesses. Journal of Small Business Management, 47(4), 443–464.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barrett, H. and Weinstein, A. (1998), “The effect of market orientation and organizational flexibility on corporate entrepreneurship”, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Vol. 23, N°.1, pp. 57–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barroso, C., Carrión, G. C., & Roldán, J. L. (2010). Applying Maximum Likelihood and PLS on Different Sample Sizes: Studies on SERVQUAL Model and Employee Behavior Model. In Handbook of Partial Least Squares, Springer Handbooks of Computational Statistics (pp. 427–447). London, United Kingdom: Springer-Verlag.

  • Becherer, R. C. and Maurer, J. C. (1997), “The moderating effect of environmental variables on the entrepreneurial and market orientation of entrepreneur-led firms”, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Vol. 22, N°.1, pp.47–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bonaccorsi, A., Brandt, T., Filippo, D. D., Lepori, B., Molinari, F., Schmoch, A. N. U., Schubert, T., et al. (2010). Feasibility Study for Creating a European University Data Collection. European Commission, Research Directorate-General Directorate C - European Research Area.

  • Box, R. C. (1999). Running government like a business: Implications for public administration theory and practice. American Review of Public Administration, 29(1), 19–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bugandwa-Mungu-Akonkwa, D. (2009). Is market orientation a relevant strategy for higher education institutions? Context analysis and research agenda. International Journal of Quality Service and Sciences, 1(3), 311–333.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cantillon, R. (1755). Essai sur la Nature du Commerce en General (Vol. 1). London: Fletcher Gyles.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caruana, A., Ewing, M. T., & Ramaseshan, B. (2002). Effects of some environmental challenges and centralization on the entrepreneurial orientation and performance of public sector entities. Service Industries Journal, 22(2), 43–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarysse, B., Wright, M., Lockett, A., Van de Velde, E., & Vohora, A. (2005). Spinning out new ventures: A typology of incubation strategies from European research institutions. Journal of Business Venturing, 20, 183–216.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarysse, B., Wright, M., Lockett, A., Mustar, P., & Knockaert, M. (2007). Academic spinoffs, formal technology transfer and capital raising. Industrial and Corporate Change, 16, 609–640.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coulthard, M. (2007). The role of entrepreneurship orientation on firm performance and the potential influence of relational dynamism. Journal of Global Business and Technology, 3(1), 29–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Covin, J. G. and, Miles, M.P. (1999), “Corporate entrepreneurship and the pursuit of competitive advantage”, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Vol. 23, No. 3, pp. 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 

  • Cvijić, M., Tatarski, J., Katić, I., Aleksandar, V., & Borocki, J. (2019). Entrepreneurial orientation of public universities in republic of Serbia-empirical study. Sustainability, 2019(11), 1509. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11061509.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dahlqvist, J., Davidsson, P., & Wiklund, J. (2000). Initial conditions as predictors of new venture performance: A replication and extension of the Cooper et al. study. Enterprise & Innovation Management Studies, 1(1), 1–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davey, T., Rossano, S., & van der Sijde, P. (2016). Does context matter in academic entrepreneurship? The role of barriers and drivers in the regional and national context. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 41(6), 1457–1482. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-015-9450-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davidsson, P., & Klofsten, M. (2003). The business platform: Developing an instrument to gauge and to assist the development of young firms. Journal of Small Business Management, 41(1), 1–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Di Gregorio, D., & Shane, S. (2003). Why do some universities generate more startups than others? Research Policy, 32(2), 209–227.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dickson, P. H. and Weaver, K. M. (1997), “Environmental determinants and individual-level moderators of Alliance use”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 40, N°. 2, pp. 404–425.

    Google Scholar 

  • Etzkowitz, H., Asplund, P., & Nordman, N. (2001). Beyond Humboldt: Emergence of academic entrepreneurship in the U. Cerum Working Paper: S. and Sweden.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission (2006), Entrepreneurship education in Europe: fostering entrepreneurial mindsets through education and learning (Oslo, 26–27 October 2006, final proceedings), Brussels: European Commission, DG Enterprise and Industry, 2006. Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/policies/sme/files/support_measures/training_education/oslo/plen_th_b_00_weinberger_en.pdf. Accessed May 2018.

  • European Commission (2012), Rethinking education: Investing in skills for better socio-economic outcomes. Communication from the commission to the European Parliament, the council, The European Economic and Social Committee and The Committee of the Regions, Strasbourg. Retrieved from https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52012DC0669&from=FR. Accessed May 2018.

  • Ferreira, J. J. M. (2003). Estudo do Crescimento e Desempenho da Pequena Empresa: A Influência da Orientação Estratégica Empreendedora. Unpublished Doctoral Thesis, Covilhã, PT: Universidade da Beira Interior.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guerrero, M., & Urbano, D. (2012). The development of an entrepreneurial university. Journal of Technology Transfer, 37(1), 43–74. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-010-9171-x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hair, J. F., Black, B., Babin, B.J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (2010). Multivariate Data Analysis (7th Ed.). London, United Kingdom: Pearson Prentice Hall.

  • Hallam, C., Novick, D., Gilbert, D. J., Frankwick, G. L., Wenker, O., & Zanella, G. (2017). Academic entrepreneurship and the entrepreneurial ecosystem: The UT transform project. Academy of Entrepreneurship Journal, 23(1), 77–90.

  • Hardesty, D. M., & Bearden, W. O. (2004). The use of expert judges in scale development: Implications for improving face validity of measures of un observable constructs. Journal of Business Research, 57, 98–107.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(1), 115–135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hornsby, J. S., Kuratko, D. F., & Zahra, S. A. (2002). Middle manager’s perception of the internal for corporate entrepreneurship: Assessing a measurement scale. Journal of Business Venturing, 171, 253–273.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hulland, J. (1999). Use of Partial Least Squares (PLS) in Strategic Management Research: a review of four recent studies. Strategic Management Journal, 20, 195–204.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jorge, F. F. G. (2009). Inovação, Tecnologia e Competitividade na Indústria Alimentar em Portugal, Tese Mestrado em Economia e Gestão de Ciência, Tecnologia e Inovação. Lisboa: Universidade Técnica de Lisboa.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jorgensen, T. D., Pornprasertmanit, S., Schoemann, A. M., & Rosseel, Y. (2018). semTools: Useful tools for structural equation modeling. R package version 0.5-1. Retrieved from https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=semTools on Accessed 6 Jun 2019.

  • Khandwalla, P. (1977). The design of organizations. New York: Harcourt Brace Javanovich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirp, D. (2003). Shakespeare, Einstein and the Button Line: The Marketing of Higher Education. Cambridge: Harvard University press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knight, G. A. (1997). Cross-cultural reliability and validity of a scale to measure firm entrepreneurial orientation. Journal of Business Venturing, 12(3), 213–225.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kreiser, P. M., Marino, L. D. and Weaver, K. M. (2002), “Assessing the psychometric properties of the entrepreneurial orientation scale: A multi-country analysis”, Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, Vol. 26, N°. 4, pp. 71–94.

  • Lumpkin, G.T. and Dess, G. G. (1996a), "Enriching the entrepreneurial orientation construct - a reply to entrepreneurial orientation or Pioneer advantage", Academy of Management Review, Vol. 21(3; July), pp. 605-607.

  • Lumpkin, G. T., & Dess, G. G. (1996b). Clarifying the entrepreneurial orientation construct and linking it to performance. Academy of Management Review, 21(1), 135–172.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lumpkin, G. T., & 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lyon, D., Lumpkin, G., & Dess, G. (2000). Enhancing entrepreneurial orientation research: Operationalizing and measuring a key strategic decision making process. Journal of Management, 26, 1055–1085.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maringe, F., & Gibbs, P. (2009). Marketing higher education: Theory and practice. England: Open University Press. McGraw-Hill Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mentoor, E. R., & Friedrich, C. (2007). Is entrepreneurial education at south African universities successful? An empirical example. Industry & Higher Education, 21(3), 221–232.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miles, R. E., & Snow, C. C. (1978). Organizational strategy, Structure and Process. New York: McGraw Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, D. (1983). The correlates of entrepreneurship in three types of firms. Management Science, 29, 770–791.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, D., & Friesen, P. (1978). Archetypes of strategy formulation. Management Science, 24, 921–933.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, D., & Friesen, P. (1982). Innovation in conservative and entrepreneurial firms: Two models of strategic momentum. Strategic Management Journal, 3(Jan-mar), 1–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mintzberg, H. (1973). Strategy – Making in three modes. California Management Review, 16(2), 44–53.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morris, M. H., & Jones, F. F. (1999). Entrepreneurship in established organizations: The case of the public sector. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 24(1), 71–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mowery, D. C., & Shane, S. (2002). Introduction to the special issue on university entrepreneurship and technology transfer. Management Science, 48(1), V–IX.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norton, W. I., Jr., & Moore, W. T. (2002). Entrepreneurial risk: Have we been asking the wrong question? Small Business Economics, 18(4), 281–287.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Shea, R. P., et al. (2005). Entrepreneurial orientation, technology transfer and spinoff performance of U.S. Universities. Research Policy, 34(7), 994–1009.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Shea, R. P., et al. (2007). Delineating the anatomy of an entrepreneurial university: The Massachusetts institute of technology experience. R&D Management, 37(1), 1–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Palich, L., & Bagby, D. (1995). Using cognitive theory to explain entrepreneurial risk-taking: Challenging conventional wisdom. Journal of Business Venturing, 10, 425–438.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peris-Ortiz, M., Gómez, J. A., Merigó-Lindahl, J. M., & Rueda-Armengot, C. (2016). Entrepreneurial universities: Exploring the academic and innovative dimensions of entrepreneurship in higher education. Springer International Publishing.

  • Phan, P., Siegel, D., & Wright, M. (2005). Science parks and incubators: Observations, synthesis and future research. Journal of Business Venturing, 20, 165–182.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pohlmann, M. (2005). The evolution of innovation: Cultural backgrounds and the use of innovation models. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management, 17(1), 9–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prahalad, C. K., & Hamel, G. (1994). Competindo pelo Futuro. Harvard Business School Press – Editora Campus.

  • R Core Team. (2019). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing Retrieved from https://www.r-project.org/. Accessed June 2019.

  • Ripsas, S. (1998). Towards an interdisciplinary theory of entrepreneurship. Small Business Economics, 10, 103–115.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rodrigues, R. (2004). Orientação para o Mercado, Orientação Empreendedora e Desempenho nas PME Industriais Portuguesas: Exploração da Relação entre Marketing e Empreendedorismo. Tese de Doutoramento, Covilhã: Universidade da Beira Interior.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rutherford, M. W. (2007). Corporate entrepreneurship: An empirical look at the innovativeness dimension and its antecedents. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 20(3), 429–446.

    Google Scholar 

  • Say, J.-B. (1840). Cours complet d'economie politique pratique. In P. L. Reynaud & L. Dalloz (Eds.), Textes Choisis (Vol. 1953).

    Google Scholar 

  • Schumpeter, J. A. (1934). Theory of economic development: Na inquiry into profits, capital, interest and business cycle. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schumpeter, E. B. (1938). English prices and public finances, 1660-1822. Review of Economics and Statistics, 20(1), 21–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schumpeter, J. A. (1939). Business cycles. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scillitoe, J., & Chakrabarti, A. (2010). The role of incubator interactions in assisting new ventures. Technovation, 30(3), 155–167.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seguí-Mas, E., Oltra, V., Tormo-Carbó, G., & Sarrión-Viñes, F. (2018). Rowing against the wind: How do times of austerity shape academic entrepreneurship in unfriendly environments? International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 14(3), 725–766. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-017-0478-z.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siegel, D., Westhead, P., & Wright, M. (2003). Science parks and the performance of new technology-based firms: A review of recent U.K. evidence and an agenda for future research. Small Business Economics, 20(2), 177–184.

    Google Scholar 

  • Siegel, D., Waldman, D., Atwater, L., & Link, A. (2004). Toward a model of the effective transfer of scientific knowledge from academicians to practitioners: Qualitative evidence from the commercialization of university technologies. Journal of Engineering & Technology Management, 21(1–2), 115–142.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simeone, L., Secundo, G., & Schiuma, G. (2018). Arts and design as translational mechanisms for academic entrepreneurship: The metaLAB at Harvard case study. Journal of Business Research, 85(October 2017), 434–443. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.10.021.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slater, S. F. and Narver, J. C. (2000), "The Positive Effect of a Market Orientation on Business Profitability: A Balanced Replication", Journal of Business Research, Vol.48, No.1, April, pp. 69–73.

  • Stevenson and Jarillo (1990), “A Paradigm of Entrepreneurship: Entrepreneurial Management”, Strategic Management Journal, No. 11 (Summer Special Issue), pp. 17–27.

  • Todorovic, Z. W., McNaughton, R. B., Guild, P. (2011), "ENTRE-U: An entrepreneurial orientation scale for universities", Technovation, no.31, pp. 128-137.

  • Van Auken, H. (1999). Obstacles to business launch. Journal of Developmental Entrepreneurship, 4(2), 175–187.

    Google Scholar 

  • Venkatraman, N. (1989). Strategic orientation of business enterprises: The construct, dimensionality and measurement. Management Science, 35, 942–962.

    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, 43–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zahra, S. A., & Neubaum, D. O. (1998). Environmental adversity and the entrepreneurial activities of the new ventures. Journal of Developmental Entrepreneurship, 3(2), 123–140.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The Foundation for Science and Technology supported this work, through the Ministry of Education and Science, UDI (Research Unit for Inland Development), Polytechnic Institute of Guarda, Portugal, under the Grant PEst-OE/EGE/UI4056/2014 and NECE-UBI, R&D unit funded by the FCT – Portuguese Foundation for the Development of Science and Technology, Ministry of Education and Science, University of Beira Interior, Management and Economics Department, Estrada do Sineiro, 6200-209 Covilhã, Portugal.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. UDI-Research Unit for Inland Development, IPG-Polytechnic of Guarda, Av. Dr. Francisco Sá Carneiro n°50, 5300-559, Guarda, Portugal

    Teresa Felgueira

  2. NECE -UBI –Research Center in Business Sciences, University of Beira Interior, Estrada do Sineiro, Edificio Ernesto Cruz, s/n, 6200-209, Covilhã, Portugal

    Ricardo Gouveia Rodrigues

Authors
  1. Teresa Felgueira
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ricardo Gouveia Rodrigues
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ricardo Gouveia Rodrigues.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix

Appendix

Research Mobilization (RM)

1.

I encourage our graduate students to engage in research with significant implications for industry or society

2.

I encourage students to seek practical applications for their research

3.

I emphasize applied research

4.

Compared to other researchers, I tend to make a contribution to industry or society

5.

I conduct research in partnership with non-academic professionals

6.

I expected to make substantial contributions to industry or society

Unconventionality (UC)

1.

Cooperation with organizations outside my Institution significantly improves my research activities

2.

I often seek research opportunities outside the traditional higher education environment

3.

I seek significant funding from sources other than the Government Agency (financial policy to support research and scholarships in Higher Educations Institutions), in my country

4.

I try to generate off-campus benefits from research projects

5.

Compared to other similar researchers in this province, I am good at identifying new opportunities

6.

I support our faculty members collaborating with non-academic professionals

Industry Collaboration (IC)

1.

I encourage industry involvement in my research activities

2.

My research is highly regarded by industry

3.

I am recognized by industry or society for my flexibility and innovativeness

4.

My graduate students often secure high quality industry positions

University Policies (UP)

1.

I feel that Institutional-wide policies at my Institution contribute substantially to wards my department achieving its goals and objectives

2.

My institution’s policies are best described as developed “bottom-up” using feedback from all levels of the Institution

3.

Compared to most other Higher Education Institutions, mine is very responsive to new ideas and innovative approaches

4.

My department is given significant latitude when evaluating faculty members performance

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Felgueira, T., Rodrigues, R.G. I-ENTRE-U: an individual entrepreneurial orientation scale for teachers and researchers in higher education institutions. Int Rev Public Nonprofit Mark 17, 1–21 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12208-019-00226-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12208-019-00226-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation