?
Entrepreneurial orientation and firm performance in different environmental settings: contingency and configurational approaches
Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to explore the relationship between entrepreneurial orientation (EO) and firm performance across different levels of environmental hostility and market growth. The contingency approach of two-way interactions of EO with each environmental variable is contrasted with the configurational approach of three-way interactions of EO simultaneously with different levels of both environmental variables.
Design/methodology/approach
Hierarchical regression analysis is applied for the pooled data set of 163 Finnish and Russian small- and medium-sized enterprises, and supplemented with post hoc analysis of the differences in regression slopes across environmental configurations.
Findings
Results show that EO is directly and positively associated with firm performance. However, the strength and direction of this relationship varies by configurations of the external environment variables. Firms achieve superior performance when adopting EO in environments with high levels of both hostility and market growth. In contrast, in favorable environments with low hostility and high market growth, EO adoption leads to lower firm performance.
Research limitations/implications
The study contributes to the EO literature by demonstrating different effects of EO on firm performance across various environmental configurations. It uses cross-sectional data from two countries. Replication studies using different samples may further corroborate the results.
Practical implications
In order to take advantage of opportunities and achieve better performance, managers of firms should analyze multiple elements of the environment concurrently and align EO to those conditions.
Originality/value
The configurations of environmental hostility and market growth, representing both favorable and unfavorable elements of business context, have not been previously investigated together in one model of the EO-performance relationship.