Entrepreneurial Orientation & Firm Performance-Free-Samples

Question: Discuss about the different elements of Entrepreneurial Orientation along with that of competitive strategy of the firms. Answer: Introduction Entrepreneurial orientation (EO) is indicative of a multidimensional construct that characterizes the entrepreneurial behavior of that of the firm that includes the three dimensions- risk-taking, being pro-active and that of innovations. Competitive strategy can help a company in getting competitive advantage over that of the competitors within the industry. This report analyzes how the entrepreneurial orientation along with that of competitive advantage can help in increasing the performance of an organization. Concept of Entrepreneurial Orientation Risk taking, pro-activeness and innovation are distinguishing characteristics of firms that are entrepreneurial. In relation to entrepreneurial orientation, risk-taking means venturing in the unfamiliar terrain by taking recourse to bold action. Substantial resources are committed in different ventures within ambiguous settings. According to Wales, Gupta and Mousa (2013), a pioneering outlook is indicative of the pro-active factor which introduces new services along with products in front of the competitor. Focusing on the aspect of Research and Development paves the path for innovation and a leader in the arena of technology can produce innovative products. It has been found that entrepreneurial orientation is contingent in relation to that of the context and exhibits different result on the basis of the context like that of strategy or that of environment. Entrepreneurial orientation would produce different effect on that of firm performance based on circumstances. Concept of Competitive Strategy Differentiation can help in meeting the demands of the customer in unique manner like that of product design, speed and that of flexibility. Cost leadership is mainly focused on getting low cost structure the products to be offered at low cost as compared to that of the competitors by taking recourse to economy of scale (Boso, Story and Cadogan 2013). Mixed strategy balances offering the traditional products with that of new products by imitating successful new products of that of the competitors. Impact of entrepreneurial orientation, competitive strategy and firm performance The originalizers are the firms that provide latest offering by the help of innovative products and services. Originalizers aim at meeting the demands in unique manner and differentiation will be the choice over that of cost leadership. The primary aim is to produce products that have value added benefits and cost is not much important in this case. The firms that are systematizers focus on the aspect of providing standard along with offerings of low cost to that of the customers. Cost leadership acts as the primary choice of strategy over that of differentiation as the systematizers focus on the aspect of cost reduction together with that of efficiency. It has been stated by Covin and Miller (2014) that cost leadership is integrally associated with that of upfront investment in arenas like that of technology along with that of equipment. The higher investments made compel the managers to show more of risk-taking behavior. The evaluators offer successful offerings to that of the customers. In order to achieve this, evaluation is carried out in relation to the products along with services that are offered to that of the customers. Mixed strategy that includes that of cost leadership along with that of differentiation along with that of differentiation can be achieved with the help of a balancing act. It has been argued by Lechner Gudmundsson (2014) that difference from that of systematizers along with originalizers is on account of risk aversion that can be received with the help of a mixed strategy. Evaluators that has a mixed strategy does not have similar demands like those that possess strategy of that of pure cost leadership. Configuration theory rests on the idea that organizations fall under a ambit of state of that of internal coherence within that of a collection of theoretical attributes. Firms should make fundamental changes so that it can steer clear of in-between states. Derived conclusion like that of typologies can help a researcher in organizing complex relationship into that of profound explanation (Boso, Story and Cadogan 2013). Examination in relation to entrepreneurial orientation profile along with competitive strategy produces a fine-grained view in relation to multi-dimensional linkage that can augment the performance of the firm. Previous research carried out has demonstrated empirical support for that of the configurational nature in relation to EO subdivision. It has been stated by Linton Kask (2017) that the subdivisions of that of Entrepreneurial Orientation have varied relationships with that of performance that is dependent on that of configurational setting within which the sub- divisions are located. The three subdivisions of Entrepreneurial Orientation have innovative interactions within the context of that of competitive strategy. It has been brought out with the help of research that combining the EO dimensions with that of the mixing of competitive strategies can prove to be fruitful for the firm. This opinion stands in contrast to the findings of Wales, Parida Patel (2013) who do not consider the possibility of mixing that of the competitive strategies. It has been brought out with the help of studies conducted that differentiation when combined with that of pro-activeness without the factor of risk-taking suggest that the EO sub-divisions can be present simultaneously when the other EO subdivision are absent. This points out to the fact that if the EO construct is perceived as that of a formative construct can provide a vast picture of the whole understanding of the understanding of that of the EO construct (Anderson and Eshima 2013). Combination of the EO postures of that of the firm with that of the best competitive strategy can help in the growth of an organization. Firms should not merely focus on the aspect of being more entrepreneurial but they should focus on certain dimensions of that of entrepreneurship that can perfectly fit with that of their strategy. The firms should adopt that of a competitive strategy that can match with that of the particular profile of EO. For the firms that are small differentiation can become a necessary strategy that can happen either on its own or after combination with that of cost leadership which depends on various entrepreneurial conditions. Conclusion The growth of an organization can be facilitated by combining the EO posture of that of the company with the best-suited competitive strategy. Merely focusing on the aspect of being entrepreneurial will not augment the performance but rather emphasis should be laid on certain elements in relation to entrepreneurship that best harmonizes with the strategy of the firm. References: Anderson, B.S. and Eshima, Y., 2013. The influence of firm age and intangible resources on the relationship between entrepreneurial orientation and firm growth among Japanese SMEs.Journal of Business Venturing,28(3), pp.413-429. Boso, N., Story, V.M. and Cadogan, J.W., 2013. Entrepreneurial orientation, market orientation, network ties, and performance: Study of entrepreneurial firms in a developing economy.Journal of Business Venturing,28(6), pp.708-727. Covin, J.G. and Miller, D., 2014. International entrepreneurial orientation: Conceptual considerations, research themes, measurement issues, and future research directions.Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice,38(1), pp.11-44. Lechner, C. and Gudmundsson, S.V., 2014. Entrepreneurial orientation, firm strategy and small firm performance.International Small Business Journal,32(1), pp.36-60. Linton, G. and Kask, J., 2017. Configurations of entrepreneurial orientation and competitive strategy for high performance.Journal of Business Research,70, pp.168-176. Wales, W.J., Gupta, V.K. and Mousa, F.T., 2013. Empirical research on entrepreneurial orientation: An assessment and suggestions for future research.International Small Business Journal,31(4), pp.357-383. Wales, W.J., Parida, V. and Patel, P.C., 2013. Too much of a good thing? Absorptive capacity, firm performance, and the moderating role of entrepreneurial orientation.Strategic Management Journal,34(5), pp.622-633.