Refine
Language
- English (4) (remove)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (4)
Keywords
- entrepreneurship (4) (remove)
Both entrepreneurship and innovation play a key role for business growth and economic development and are conceptually highly intertwined. Both fields have received extensive attention that has resulted in a large number of publications. The aim of this work is to provide an overview on the coevolution of entrepreneurship and innovation over the last decades, with particular attention to recent research trends. To track the evolution at the intersection of both fields, we employ a bibliometric analysis, which allowed us to identify the key concepts, the backbone of research, and to provide a systematic classification of main research themes diagnosed including: 1) entrepreneurial innovation and digital transformation, 2) sustainable innovation and entrepreneurship, 3) product innovation and knowledge, 4) entrepreneurial orientation and leadership, and 5) regional entrepreneurship and innovation (innovative entrepreneurship and historical roots). The findings of this bibliometric review are reported in the form of a knowledge graph that represents the results obtained in terms of the knowledge base (key terms), knowledge domains, and knowledge evolution (themes and bursts), based on which themes for future research are suggested.
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.