Refine
Year of publication
- 2020 (4) (remove)
Language
- English (4)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (4)
Keywords
- entrepreneurship (4) (remove)
Institute
The impact of traits in entrepreneurship has been subject to intense discussion. Apart from favorable traits fostering opportunity recognition, entrepreneurial orientation, venture performance, and other variables, a younger research stream also addresses the role of negative traits. Among them, the dark triad, comprising of narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy, have gained specific attention. This systematic literature review aims to structure the field, identify current research themes, and provide a better understanding of prior research outcomes. Our results show that dark triad research addresses entrepreneurial activity, opportunity recognition, entrepreneurial orientation, entrepreneurial leadership, the and entrepreneurial motives. Among the dark triad traits, narcissism is stressed most in research so far. It relates to firm performance, risk, and leadership behavior, whereas Machiavellianism and psychopathy relate to opportunity recognition and exploitation. We also identify several research gaps, which can be addressed in future research.
Strategic entrepreneurship
(2020)
Purpose:
Strategic entrepreneurship (SE) depicts the nexus of strategic management and entrepreneurship, suggesting that firms can create superior wealth when simultaneously pursuing advantage-seeking and opportunity-seeking behavior. As the rapid growth in SE research led to a multidisciplinary, scattered and fragmented literature landscape, the authors aim to structure this research field.
Design/methodology/approach:
The authors employ a bibliographic coupling and literature review of the strategic entrepreneurship research field.
Findings:
The authors identify and describe five major research streams with 15 sub-themes in recent SE research. Based on our findings, the authors propose an integrated research framework and research gaps for future research.
Originality/value:
To the authors' knowledge, this is the first review on SE based on a bibliographic coupling.
Institutional entrepreneurship comprises the activities of agents who disrupt existing social institutions or create new ones, often to enable diffusion, especially of radical innovations, in a market. The increased interest in institutional entrepreneurship has produced a large number of scholarly publications, especially in the last five years. As a consequence, the literature landscape is somewhat complex and scattered. We aim to compile a quantitative overview of the field within business and management research by conducting bibliometric performance analyses and science mappings. We identified the most productive and influential journals, authors, and articles with the highest impact. We found that institutional entrepreneurship has stronger ties to organization studies than to entrepreneurship research. Additionally, a large body of literature at the intersection of institutions and entrepreneurship does not refer to institutional entrepreneurship theory. The science mappings revealed a distinction between theoretical and conceptual research on one hand and applied and empirical research on the other hand. Research clusters reflect the structure–agency problem by focusing on the change agent’s goals and interests, strategies, and specific implementation mechanisms, as well as the relevance of public agents for existing institutions, and a more abstract process rather than agency view.
Institutional entrepreneurship comprises the activities of agents who disrupt existing social institutions or create new ones, often to enable diffusion, especially of radical innovations, in a market. The increased interest in institutional entrepreneurship has produced a large number of scholarly publications, especially in the last five years. As a consequence, the literature landscape is somewhat complex and scattered. We aim to compile a quantitative overview of the field within business and management research by conducting bibliometric performance analyses and science mappings. We identified the most productive and influential journals, authors, and articles with the highest impact. We found that institutional entrepreneurship has stronger ties to organization studies than to entrepreneurship research. Additionally, a large body of literature at the intersection of institutions and entrepreneurship does not refer to institutional entrepreneurship theory. The science mappings revealed a distinction between theoretical and conceptual research on one hand and applied and empirical research on the other hand. Research clusters reflect the structure–agency problem by focusing on the change agent’s goals and interests, strategies, and specific implementation mechanisms, as well as the relevance of public agents for existing institutions, and a more abstract process rather than agency view.