Social scientists often estimate models from correlational data, where the independent variable has not been exogenously manipulated; they also make implicit or explicit causal claims based on these models. When can these claims be made? We answer this question by first discussing design and estimation conditions under which model estimates can be interpreted, using the randomized experiment as the gold standard. We show how endogeneity – which includes omitted variables, omitted selection, simultaneity, common-method variance, and measurement error – renders estimates causally uninterpretable. Second, we present methods that allow researchers to test causal claims in situations where randomization is not possible or when causal interpretation could be confounded; these methods include fixed-effects panel, sample selection, instrumental variable, regression discontinuity, and difference-in-differences models. Third, we take stock of the methodological rigor with which causal claims are being made in a social sciences discipline by reviewing a representative sample of 110 articles on leadership published in the previous 10 years in top-tier journals. Our key finding is that researchers fail to address at least 66% and up to 90% of design and estimation conditions that make causal claims invalid. We conclude by offering 10 suggestions on how to improve non-experimental research.

On making causal claims : A review and recommendations

This review article analyzes and synthesizes key research on the topic of entrepreneurial orientation (EO) in a scholarly effort to provide an integrative guide which enables researchers to more readily assimilate influential works on EO and thereby more productively contribute to the ever-evolving EO conversation in the literature. The article reviews and synthesizes promising directions in the EO research domain from a variety of perspectives, including how EO is manifest, how building on the Miller/Covin and Slevin conceptualization facilitates knowledge accumulation, which theories have been suggested as relevant to advancing the EO conversation, EO model building directions including the demand for longitudinal research, measurement considerations and implications, and the enduring unanswered call for qualitative research.

Entrepreneurial orientation: A review and synthesis of promising research directions

Franchisees’ affective organizational commitment refers to the degree to which franchisees experience an emotional attachment to their franchise organization. Using a social exchange theory perspective, this research reports four studies that explore the relationship between franchisee’s affective commitment and franchisee outcomes. We found that affective com- mitment to the franchise organization was positively related to franchisee objective perfor- mance (Study 1) and intent to acquire additional units (Study 2), and negatively related to franchisee opportunism (Study 3) and intent to leave the franchise organization, particularly when continuance commitment (i.e., commitment based on the cost associated with mem- bership to the franchise) was low (Study 4). The implications of these ﬁndings are discussed.

Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice

In the summer of 2008, the Jonkoping International Business School invited a selection of prominent (and not yet past-zenith) scholars of our field to a workshop at which they were asked to present their visions about where the future of entrepreneurship research is headed. An important inspiration for this initiative was a similar gathering in Jonkoping 10 years earlier, which led to a special issue of Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice that has become one of the most cited in the history of the journal (see Davidsson, Low, &Wright, 2001). Similarly, the current special issue is based on the ideas that were first presented at the 2008 workshop, although they have since been thoroughly discussed and developed through extensive commentary and revisions.

The future of entrepreneurship research

This article examines two potential causal mechanisms underlying the observed entrepreneurial orientation (EO)–performance relationship. We find empirical support for the notion that EO might be a performance–variance-enhancing strategic orientation rather than a performance–mean-enhancing orientation. With such a conceptualization, performance variance (along with, or instead of, mean performance) and failure take center stage. To address the question of “where to from here,” we discuss a number of research opportunities that we believe are going to make important contributions to the entrepreneurship and strategy literature.

Where to from here? : EO-as-experimentation, failure, and distribution of outcomes

Entrepreneurial orientation (EO)—a firm's strategic posture towards entrepreneurship—has become the predominant construct of interest in strategic entrepreneurship research. Despite the ever-increasing volume of nomological research on EO, there remain ongoing conversations regarding its ontology. Drawing from measurement theory, we outline an EO reconceptualization addressing the likely prevalence of Type II nomological error in the EO literature stemming from measurement model misspecification. Focusing on the question of whether EO is an attitudinal construct, a behavioral construct, or both, we propose a formative construction of EO viewing the exhibition of entrepreneurial behaviors and of managerial attitude towards risk as jointly necessary dimensions that collectively form the higher-order EO construct. We present an empirical illustration of our reconceptualization followed by a discussion of future research opportunities

Reconceptualizing entrepreneurial orientation

The influence of firm age and intangible resources on the relationship between entrepreneurial orientation and firm growth among Japanese SMEs

Research summary: This paper posits adaptive capability as a mechanism through which a firm's prior growth influences the exhibition of future entrepreneurial action. Defined as the firm's proficiency in altering its understanding of market expectations, increased adaptive capability is a consequence of the new resource combinations that result from expanding organizational boundaries. Increased adaptive capability in turn corresponds to expansion of entrepreneurial activity, as firms increase their entrepreneurial orientation as the strategic mechanism to capitalize on their improved understanding of market conditions. We find support for our research model in a two-study series conducted in South Korea and the United Kingdom.

Managerial summary: Most would agree that entrepreneurially oriented firms—being innovative, entering new markets, and taking risk—grow faster. But how a firm becomes entrepreneurial is a complicated question. In this study, we flipped the growth relationship around and found support for growth contributing to a firm's entrepreneurial orientation. But between growth and being more entrepreneurial is the firm's ability to recognize changes in market expectations. We argue that as a firm grows, it acquires new resources and new knowledge of how to use those resources. These new resource combinations increase its ability to recognize changes in market expectations—its adaptive capability. This capability uncovers new entrepreneurial opportunities for value creation. To capture this potential value, firms expand their entrepreneurial orientation. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Firm growth, adaptive capability, and entrepreneurial orientation

Research Summary Delineating between conservative and entrepreneurial firms to discern the causes, consequences, and benefits of entrepreneurial behavior is a key conversation in strategic entrepreneurship research. We introduce to this conversation a new construct, Strategic Entrepreneurship Behaviors, which we argue provides several theoretical and practical benefits to scholars exploring strategic entrepreneurship phenomenon. We develop and validate a measurement model for the Strategic Entrepreneurship Behaviors construct using a three-study design in Japan and in the United States. To facilitate reproducibility and replication of our results, we posted all data, R code, and Supporting Information on the Open Science Framework website available at . Managerial Summary The driving question in strategic entrepreneurship research is the impact of an organization's entrepreneurial activity on its performance. Answering this and related questions requires careful measurement of entrepreneurial activity. Existing measures and scales served the field well, but to answer questions establishing causal relationships, we need new constructs and measures robust to causal research designs. We introduce a new construct and scale, Strategic Entrepreneurial Behaviors, to capture the firm's exploitation of new product-market opportunities through the intended commercialization of its product innovations. We hope this new measure for a firm's entrepreneurial activity allows researchers to build more predictive theory, and to ask-and answer-new research questions that move the strategic entrepreneurship conversation forward.

Yoshihiro Eshima

Papers

Reconceptualizing entrepreneurial orientation

The influence of firm age and intangible resources on the relationship between entrepreneurial orientation and firm growth among Japanese SMEs

Firm growth, adaptive capability, and entrepreneurial orientation

Strategic entrepreneurial behaviors: Construct and scale development