Knowledge that Transforms

Abstract Research summary Despite knowledge about the importance of intermediaries in filling institutional voids, we do not understand how intermediaries facilitate institutional change. This research demonstrates how intermediaries use six rhetorical legitimation strategies—logos, ethos, pathos, autopoiesis, teleological, and anthropos appeals—to influence institutional change in Abia, Nigeria, that facilitate small‐to‐medium‐enterprise (SME) development in the region. While the first five rhetorical legitimation strategies are used in both developed and emerging economies, the sixth strategy—anthropos appeals, which reflect the communal character of many African cultures—seems to be unique in this context. Our findings contribute to the literature by extending our understanding of the role of rhetorical legitimation strategies in bringing about institutional change, use of rhetoric to communicate entrepreneurial opportunities, and significance of nonmarket strategies for SMEs. Managerial summary SMEs influence economic development in emerging economies but face many constraints. This research examines how intermediaries help reduce constraints SMEs in Nigeria encounter by facilitating institutional changes, through the use of six legitimation strategies (logos, pathos, ethos, autopoiesis, teleological, and anthropos). Also, this research explains how the institutional changes encourage the government to fill voids that generate beneficial outcomes to SMEs, emergent local intermediaries, the general public, and the government itself. Finally, this research finds that market actors in Nigeria use an Anthropos legitimation strategy when appealing to individuals in the local market to help with SME development. This strategy, which taps into the communal character of many African cultures and interestingly has some parallels with Confucianism philosophy, seems to be unique in emerging economies.

Abstract Research Summary This study focuses on a salient challenge for entrepreneurs in emerging economies: government expropriation. Drawing on signaling arguments, we propose that an owner's high socioeconomic status (SES) attracts government attention to her start‐up by conveying information about its resource endowments. The empirical tests based on start‐ups in China support that an owner's high SES increases government expropriation. The effect is stronger for start‐ups in regions with greater income inequality or in those where the legal system is less developed. High‐SES entrepreneurs can mitigate the risk of government expropriation by building political connections. Managerial Summary Institutional voids in emerging economies pose a major threat to start‐ups in the form of government expropriation. This research finds that the threat is more severe for start‐ups with high‐SES entrepreneurs because they have strong resource‐mobilization capabilities and easily become expropriation targets. Further, this research suggests that two measures help protect high‐SES entrepreneurs from government expropriation: locating their start‐ups in regions with low income inequality or a well‐developed legal system, and building connections with the government in order to exchange favors with government officials.

Abstract Research Summary Whether differences among accelerators explain differences in the performance of member ventures is an important and underexplored question. Conversely, are the effects of accelerators so isomorphic, because they copy each other, that ventures from different accelerators report little performance differences? We use variance decomposition analysis to test whether variations in characteristics of accelerators explain performance differences in the ventures that belong to them. Using a sample of 1,442 ventures from 117 accelerator programs across 22 countries, we find that 11.13–14.18% variance of venture performance can be attributed to accelerator membership. Accelerator membership also accounted for 3.00, 5.15, and 16.65% in the variance for employee growth, employee costs, and revenue change, respectively. Our findings suggest that between accelerator differences can make a significant economic difference to venture performance. Managerial summary For accelerator managers and policymakers assessing if differences between accelerators explain the differences in outcomes of member ventures is important. This article advances our understanding of differences among accelerators driving differences in performance among their ventures. Using a sample of 1,442 ventures from 117 accelerator programs across 22 countries, about 11% variance of venture performance can be attributed to accelerator membership. Overall, differences among accelerators seem to explain meaningful differences in performance among member ventures.

Abstract Research Summary The economic center of gravity is shifting from mature markets to emerging regions. This shift provides a good opportunity to broaden and deepen our theoretical base of concepts and frameworks because emerging and mature regions differ significantly in their institutional regimes. Hence entrepreneurial resource mobilization in emerging regions could differ significantly because of theoretical differences in actors' action logics and resource governance. The eight papers in this special issue provide new empirical evidence on antecedents and consequences of entrepreneurial resource mobilization efforts in emerging regions. Here, we briefly summarize the state of the field, introduce the articles by situating them in a novel theoretical framework on entrepreneurial resource mobilization, and finally using our framework, we suggest opportunities for future research on entrepreneurship in emerging regions. Managerial Summary Entrepreneurship research has advanced mainly using empirical data from the developed economies of North America and Western Europe. Because emerging economies differ markedly in their institutional development from developed economies, this prior research is less likely to be useful to understand entrepreneurship in emerging regions ‐ which are increasingly crucial components of the global economy. This special issue contains eight articles addressing different aspects of the entrepreneurial resource mobilization process using diverse research methods on empirical data drawn from a broad range of emerging economies. This introduction describes the state of the field prior to the special issue, introduces the special issue articles and identifies topics that still need further investigation. We distill the current state of knowledge and offer a roadmap for future scholarship.

Abstract Research Summary We articulate the value of historical methods and reasoning in strategic entrepreneurship research and theory. We begin by introducing the papers in the special issue, contextualizing each within one of five broader methodological approaches, and elaborating on the applicability of each to other topics in entrepreneurship research. Next, we use the papers to induce a framework for integrating history into entrepreneurship theory. The framework demonstrates how historical assumptions play a formative role in operationalizing time and context in entrepreneurship research. We then show how variations in these treatments of time and context shape theoretical claims about entrepreneurial opportunities, actions, and processes of change. We conclude by discussing why this may be a particularly opportune time for strategic entrepreneurship research to develop a deeper historical sensibility. Managerial Summary History can serve as an especially important guide to understanding entrepreneurship during moments of change. We draw on articles from the special issue on “Historical Approaches to Entrepreneurship Research” to illustrate different forms of historical reasoning and research about entrepreneurship. Moreover, we use the articles to develop a framework for understanding how historical context and time shape entrepreneurial opportunities, actions, and processes of change. We emphasize, in particular, the value of history in understanding variations in entrepreneurial practices.

Abstract Research Summary An original and clarifying conceptualization of entrepreneurial orientation (EO) is advanced based upon three fundamental ways in which entrepreneurship can be manifest as an organizational attribute: as top management style, organizational configuration, and new entry initiatives. We leverage this conceptualization to examine the presumed state of irreconcilable differences between the Miller (1983)/Covin and Slevin (1989) and Lumpkin and Dess (1996) conceptualizations of EO. This research proposes that these conceptualizations are reconcilable when the problem is reframed to consider how EO is manifest as an organizational attribute at and across multiple levels of analysis. Like the blind men and the elephant, these works have drawn attention to different aspects of a broader phenomenon. How EO as a multifaceted organizational attribute shapes future scholarly dialogue is discussed. Managerial Summary The concept of entrepreneurial orientation (EO) has been proposed as a way of envisioning what it means for organizations to “be entrepreneurial.” There is more than one answer to this question. This paper describes three principal ways entrepreneurship‐as‐an‐organizational attribute has been discussed, including illustrative examples from real‐world businesses. One perspective recognizes the entrepreneurial aspect of organizations by considering top management style; a second perspective recognizes that organizations manifest entrepreneurship through a configuration of key organizational elements; and a third perspective looks to evidence of the organization's entry into new offerings and domains of operation as indicative of entrepreneurship. All three manifestations of “being entrepreneurial” are part of the current conversation on EO. This paper recognizes the conceptual legitimacy and practical interdependence of these distinct perspectives.

Abstract Research Summary What type of firms are more likely to survive or even thrive in disaster events such as earthquakes, wildfires, and the COVID‐19 pandemic? We investigate whether family ownership and industry positioning affect firms' ability to capture opportunities for business recovery after a natural disaster. We analyze the performance of Italian family and nonfamily firms around a disastrous earthquake in 2009. Following the earthquake, family firms performed better than nonfamily firms, especially when multiple family members were involved as owners. Moreover, family ownership is beneficial in industries highly dependent on the public sector. Our findings provide evidence on the superior resilience of family firms by illustrating the characteristics that allow firms hit by disaster events to seize posttraumatic entrepreneurial opportunities for recovery and growth. Managerial Summary The purpose of this study was to understand whether a possible explanation of family firms' superior longevity is their resilience to mass emergencies and their ability to transform post‐crisis threats into entrepreneurial opportunities. We found that family firms performed better than their nonfamily peers after the earthquake that hit Central Italy, and especially the area around L'Aquila, in 2009. During disaster events, family ownership resources—focused on the long term and the desire to transfer the business to future generations—provide the firm with the social and emotional capital needed to address the hardship. Moreover, family firms that operated in industries closer to the public demand leveraged the family proximity to politics, further enhancing the processes of recovery and opportunity identification.