Entrepreneurship Orientation And Firm’s

Performance: An Evidence Of Selected Small And

Medium Scale Enterprises In Southeast Nigeria

Agu Okoro Agu ISSN: 1533 - 9211

Department of Business Management ; Evangel university Akaeze Ebonyi
State
Okocha, Ebere Rejoice Ph.D CORRESPONDING
AUTHOR:
Department of Marketing; Evangel University Akaeze Ebonyi State
Obiora-Okafo Chinedu
Obiora-Okafo Chinedu Afamefune Afamefune
Chinedu.Obioraokafo@unn.ed
Department of Management , University of Nigeria Enugu Campus u.ng.

Emerole Gideon A PhD KEYWORDS:

Department of Management ; College of Management Sciences , Micheal
Okpara University of Agriculture Umudike, Umuahia Abia State, Nigeria Entrepreneurship
Orientation, Risk-taking,
Innovativeness and
Dr Vitus Chinedu Ogbunuju
Proactiveness, Firms
Department of marketing Chukwuemeka Odumegwu Ojukwu University Performance
Igbariam Anambra State
Received: 16 November 2023
Accepted: 22 January 2024
Abstract Published: 16 February 2024
Purpose – This paper addresses entrepreneurship orientation and firm’s performance:
An evidence of selected small and medium scale enterprises in southeast Nigeria. It TO CITE THIS ARTICLE:
addresses the need to ensure that small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) are able
to overcome the inherent challenges in their external environment actively and, thus, Agu, O. A., Okocha, E.
contribute to economic growth through internal management variables R., Afamefune, O. C.
Design/methodology/approach – The study adopted a survey design, utilizing a O., Gideon, E. A., &
sample of 369 SMEs covering the southeast in Nigeria. A questionnaire was used for Ogbunuju, V. C. (2024).
data collection, and data analysis was conducted using simple linear regression with the
aid of SPSS Version 22.00.
Entrepreneurship
Findings – The study found that innovativeness , proactiveness, and Risk-taking Orientation And Firm’s
propensity as dimensions of EO, have a significant effect on firms performance. Performance: An
Practical implications – The paper provides practical implications for society, as Evidence Of Selected
managers and SMEs’ support agencies in emerging markets can be encouraged to focus Small And Medium
more on internal management activities to support knowledge sharing within the Scale Enterprises In
organisation, given its relevance to improving performance, rather than focusing only Southeast Nigeria.
on EO. Seybold Report Journal,
Originality/value – The study further strengthens and validates the self-determination 19(2), 74-95. DOI:
(SD) theory and contributes to expanding knowledge on the relevance of internal 10.5110/77. 1110
management variables (knowledge sharing) in managing small and medium-scale
enterprises. The study further advances theories regarding knowledge management’s
role, as a function of internal management system in the EO–performance relationship,
thus helping to close the research gap related to these relationships from an emerging-
economy perspective.

74
INTRODUCTION
In today’s energetic business environment, Entrepreneurial Orientation (EO) could be a center
fixing for triumphant trade. Business organizations, in this vicious business situation, compete to
trawl the modern business openings. The point of view concerning the understanding of EO has
different concerns. EO has gotten to be a central concept within the space of enterprise that has
gotten a significant sum of hypothetical and experimental consideration (Covin, et al., 2006). EO
refers to the strategy-making processes that provide organizations with a basis for entrepreneurial
decisions and actions ( Wiklund and Shepherd, 2005).
The improvement of the entrepreneurial orientation develop could be an appearance of a
conception of business as venture conduct (Lumpkin and Dess, 1996). The conception of business
as enterprise behavior has been a major advancement within entrepreneurial writing agreeing to
Coulthard (2007). Firm survival is most reduced when firms are little and young; in this way, the
improvement of compelling busines techniques is basic for the progression of business (Thornhill
and Amit, 2003). Strategic entrepreneurship deals with the creation of competitive advantage
through the distinguishing proof of unused openings (Ireland et al., 2003). Entrepreneurial
introduction (EO) is caught on as the strategy-making forms, structures, and practices of firms
characterized by innovativeness, proactiveness, risk-taking, competitive forcefulness, and
independence, encouraging the interest of openings (Lumpkin et al., 2009)
The Entrepreneurial Orientation build was at first created by Miller (1983) with three variables,
specifically innovation, risk taking and proactiveness. Covin et al. (2006) too famous that
entrepreneurial Orientation joins firm-level forms, practice and decision-making styles where
entrepreneurial behavioral designs are repeating. Researchers inside EO recommend that EO leads
to higher execution since firms got to improve performance whereas anticipating demand, taking
risks, aggressively position themselves, their products, and their services (Rauch, et al., 2009;
Hughes & Morgan, 2007; Wales, et al., 2013). An entrepreneurial orientation is a vital variable in
SMEs in developing economies. Such situations are characterized by modern rising openings
coming about from the free development of capital, merchandise, and innovations. This permits
business visionaries to abuse openings with the least boundary limitation. SMEs in this previously
secured environment frequently need an entrepreneurial orientation to recognize or seize
opportunities displayed (Le Roux & Bengesi, 2014).

The entrepreneurial orientation is emphatically connected to development, competitive advantage

and strong performance of SMEs. To compete within the cut throat competition at residential and
worldwide levels, SMEs must audit their techniques and adjust them concurring to the changing
and dynamic environment. Too, SMEs should continually look for other ways to work out
adaptability and progress their capacities to gotten to be imaginative and more competitive in
arrange to guarantee development and superior performance (Hussain et al., 2015).
Entrepreneurial orientation (EO) reflects an organization's forms, hones, and decision-making
styles particularly when it acts entrepreneurially. Any organization’s level of EO can be caught on
by analyzing how it stacks up with the connection to the five measurements. These measurements
incorporate autonomy, competitive aggressiveness, innovativeness, proactiveness, and risk taking
(Edwards et al., 2014) Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) have been considered as the
foundation of the commercial environment in each nation, a central driver of financial
improvement and advance (Qamruzzaman & Jianguo, 2018). All around, 99 percent of businesses
ordinarily falls into the category of SMEs undertaking portion (Gilmore et al., 2013) and SMEs
have encouraged the elements within the most commerce organizations within the developing
75
Seybold Report Journal Vol. 19. No. 02. 2024

nations because it contributes to form modern occupations and create supplementary money
related capital for businesses (Wang, 2016). Hasan & Almubarak (2016) expressed that businesses
might not work palatably unless they get sufficient buttress from little businesses. Since, business
firm’s entrepreneurial exercises are considered as their internal capabilities which may seemingly
upgrade the firm’s success within the challenging advertise condition (Laukkanen et al., 2013)
Concurring to Wiklund and Shepherd (2005), entrepreneurial orientation (EO) gives small
businesses the capacity to find modern business openings, and the revelation of modern openings
upgrades their separation from other firms (Omisakin et al. 2016). The appropriation of an
entrepreneurial orientation as a crucial variable to the development of situated small firms appears
germane (Ferreira and Azevedo 2008) since it could be a noteworthy donor to a firm’s victory
(Mahmood and Hanafi 2013). In truth, big EO among small business proprietors upgrades the
arrangement and enactment of individual procedures influencing business development and
performance (Omisakin et al. 2016).

Entrepreneurial orientation (EO) may be a ‘strategic posture’ of firms that demonstrates their
entrepreneurial pose to the sustainment of firm practicality (Gürbüz and Aykol, 2009, Covin and
Lumpkin, 2011). In certain ecosystems, EO may be a valuable build to get it the capability of
certain firms that are able to preserve their performance directions whereas other firms fall flat
(Covin and Lumpkin, 2011). The entrepreneurial introduction is illustrated by the degree to which
management slanted to require business-related dangers to support changes and development, in
arrange to get a competitive advantage for the business (Andendorff, 2004).

Theoretical background and hypotheses development

Self Determination Theory

The self-determination theory recommends that individuals are propelled to develop and change
by three natural and universal psychological needs . Self-determination theory (SDT; Ryan and
Deci 2000) may be a meta hypothesis of human inspiration and personality development. It is
thought of as a meta hypothesis within the sense that it is made up of a few “mini-theories” which
combine together to offer a comprehensive understanding of human inspiration and working.SDT
is based on the basic humanistic presumption that people actually and effectively situate
themselves toward development and self-organization. In other words, individuals endeavor to
grow and get it themselves by coordinating unused encounters; developing their needs, wants, and
interface; and interfacing with others and the exterior world. In any case, SDT moreover states that
this normal development tendency should not be accepted which individuals can end up controlled,
divided, and estranged in case their essential mental needs for independence, competence, and
relatedness are undermined by a lacking social environment.

In other words, SDT rests on the idea that the person is included ceaselessly in a energetic
interaction with the social world – at once endeavoring for require fulfillment conjointly reacting
to the conditions of the environment that either back or obstruct needs. As a result of this individual
environment interaction, individuals gotten to be either locked in, inquisitive, associated, and
entirety, or demotivated, incapable, and confined.

The most qualification in SDT theory is between Inherent Inspiration, or goal-oriented behavior
that includes “doing something since it is intrinsically curiously or enjoyable,” and Outward
76
Seybold Report Journal Vol. 19. No. 02. 2024

Inspiration, which is goal-oriented behavior characterized by “doing something that leads to a

distinguishable outcome” (Ryan & Deci, 2000, p. 55) Agreeing to SDT, in arrange to make and
maintain an imaginative, proactive and upbeat workforce, businesses got to receive organizational
plans that develop employees’ independent (vs. controlled) work inspiration. This paper applies
this theory to get it EO, Risk-taking, innovation and Proactive and SMEs’ execution relationship.
In case SMEs can saddle their assets towards distinguishing innovation, being proactive, and
taking chance there may be progressed execution for SMEs, in spite of challenges inborn in their
outside environment. This paper assist looks to supply any clarification for the instrument by which
assets contribute to firm’s performance.

Entrepreneurial orientation (EO)

Agreeing to Grains et al. (2013) and Covin et al. (2006), the entrepreneurial orientation has been
one of the foremost conspicuous and widely acknowledged developments within the extant writing
on the corporate enterprise.EO drives inside forms and permits directors, particularly in little
businesses, to be inventive in arrange to pick up advertising advantage. It is relevant to show here
that SMEs EO exercises can be internal or outward (Yildiz, 2014).
Entrepreneurial orientation (EO) could be a firm’s capacity to enhance, take dangers, and
proactively seek after opportunities (Rauch et al. 2009; Wiklund and Shepherd 2005). Jinpei
(2009) expressed that Entrepreneurial orientation is characterized as an individual’s state of mind
towards locks in in entrepreneurial exercises, be it inside an existing firm or making a modern
wander. On the other hand, the term “entrepreneurial orientation” has been utilized to allude to the
procedure making forms and styles of firms locked in in entrepreneurial exercises (Lumpkin and
Dess 2001).
It captures the entrepreneurial viewpoints of a firm’s decision-making styles, strategies, and hones
of ( Wiklund and Shepherd 2005). Rauch et al. (2009) conclude that EO speaks to the approaches
and practice that give a premise for entrepreneurial choices and activities Covin et al. (2006)
moreover famous that entrepreneurial orientation joins firm-level forms, hones and decision-
making styles where entrepreneurial behavioral designs are repeating. Rauch et al. (2009) too
detailed that EO could be a energetic and strong show that has been broadly researched as a build
of experimental intrigued within the extant writin It was advance refined by Covin and Slevin
(1989) who held the ‘three-factor show. Lumpkin and Dess (1996) afterward included two more
measurements, specifically competitive forcefulness and independence. Covin and Ribs (2012),
have treated EO as an all-inclusive development and centered on finding connections between EO
and firm execution utilizing these measurements, which are briefly clarified underneath.

Innovativeness: Innovation is considered to be one of the foremost vital measurements among the
five measurements of EO (Parkman et al., 2012). Innovativeness alludes to an eagerness to bolster
inventiveness and experimentation to present unused items or administrations, innovative
administration, and investigate and advancement in creating modern forms (Lumpkin and Dess,
2001). Schumpeter (2002: 299), the “purest sort of business visionary genus” is “the business
person who limits himself almost entirely to the characteristic entrepreneurial work, the carrying
out of unused combinations”, in a word: advancement. Concurring to Lumpkin and Dess (1996:
142) innovativeness reflects a propensity for an undertaking “to lock in in and back modern
thoughts, oddity, experimentation, and inventive forms which will result in modern items,
administrations, or innovative processes”. Advancement is an vital implies of seeking after
openings and so is an vital component of an entrepreneurial orientation (Lumpkin and Dess, 1996).
77
Seybold Report Journal Vol. 19. No. 02. 2024

Past ponders have not clearly characterized whether innovation inside EO is an input or yield figure
(Baregheh et al., 2009).
Analysts such as Vasconcellos and Marx (2011), Forsman (2011) and Sebora, and Theerapatvong
(2010) have clarified that advancement isn't an isolated phenomenon and maybe a handle
comprising input and yield variables. Wang and Ahmed (2004) contended on comparative lines
expressing that certain developments, like item and advertise development, center on result based
measures, whereas handle and behavioral development highlights the basic components that
encourage item and showcase development, all of which give a total picture of development in a
firm.

Lumpkin and Dess (1996) watched that without innovations, the other measurements of EO have
small or no esteem. Proactiveness would be of no esteem in case the opportunity isn't accessible
through development, and hazard taking without development would moreover be a pointless
procedure. Sebora, and Theerapatvong (2010) have explained that development isn't a
disconnected marvel and maybe a handle comprising input and yield components. Wang and
Ahmed (2004) contended on comparative lines expressing that certain innovations s, like item and
showcase innovations, center on result based measures, whereas prepare and behavioral
development highlights the basic variables that encourage item and market innovation, all of which
give a total picture of development in a firm.

Proactiveness : The Proactiveness measurement is a vital measurement of EO and is connected

to performance since it gives the first-mover advantage to firms within the showcase put (Wang
et al., 2015). The proactiveness measurement portrays the characteristic of entrepreneurial
activities in the interest of modern openings for future development, both in terms of items or
innovations; in terms of existing and rising markets; and shopper request that goes with by
advancement. Proactiveness is related to activity and first-mover points of interest, and to “taking
activity by expecting and seeking after modern opportunities” (Lumpkin and Dess, 1996: 146).
Proactiveness is related with authority, and not taking after, as a proactive venture “has the will
and premonition to seize new opportunities , indeed on the off chance that it isn't continuously the
primary to do so”, concurring to Lumpkin and Dess (1996: 147). In any case, being a, to begin
with a participant in an advertisement isn't fundamentally a ensure of a strong competitive pioneer
advantage, concurring to Cahill (1996), but is related with blended comes about. Concurring to the
conception of Cahill (1996), expanded profit might not fundamentally be typically related to higher
levels of proactiveness.

This would depend on whether this particular setting is fitting to proactiveness as a measurement
of entrepreneurial orientation (Lumpkin and Dess, 1996). Typically alluded to as proactiveness, it
is an opportunity looking for, forward-looking point of view which includes the presentation of
modern items or administrations ahead of the competition and acting in expectation of future
requests to form alter and shape the environment (Lumpkin and Dess, 2001). Nieto et al. (2013)
found the proactiveness measurement to be essentially related with prevalent firm performance.
Without proactiveness, organizations would not be able to successfully compete within the
showcase and misuse development. Inside the setting of EO, proactiveness is conceptualized as
forward-looking and opportunity-seeking conduct that's went with by unused section and
development (Ardichvili et al., 2003). Proactiveness is accomplishment arranged, emphasizing
activities taking, expecting, making alter, and anticipating advancement towards a basic
78
Seybold Report Journal Vol. 19. No. 02. 2024

circumstance and early planning earlier to the event of a blocking vulnerability of hazard
(Boohene, Marfo – Yiadom & Yeboah, 2012).

Risk Taking Propensity: Risk taking may be a measurement that has been customarily related
with business and closely related to advancement (Hoonsopon and Ruenrom, 2012). Risk taking
alludes to a propensity to require strong activities, such as entering obscure modern markets,
committing a huge parcel of assets to wanders with dubious results or borrowing intensely
(Lumpkin and Dess, 2001). Strategies or styles of administration related with hazard taking are a
sign of an entrepreneurial introduction (Lumpkin and Dess, 1996). In terms of the owner-manager
being the unit of investigation in terms of the sign of entrepreneurial orientation within the road
dealer venture, cognitive orientation in terms of entrepreneurial conduct is considered with respect
to Risk taking.

A cognitive orientation that limits conceptions of lament and reflection may be shown by business
visionaries more so than non-entrepreneurial people, agreeing to Noble (1999). The mental
speculations of locus of control and require for accomplishment both hypothetically invest the
business visionary with a direct degree of chance resistance, however, the seen hazard from the
vantage point of a sure person may well be lower than the degree of risk seen by others (Brockhaus
and Horwitz, 1986). Tang et al. (2014) observed that firms that take risks are known to attain
prevalent organizational performance. Hazardous recommendations, either inner or outside,
included wandering into modern and obscure markets and drawing expansive borrowings to
upgrade returns (Pastry specialist and Sinkula, 2009). Eggers et al. (2013) relate risk-taking to
methodologies that include the commitment of tall sums of assets, both human and budgetary, to
ventures that have a tall likelihood of disappointment. . Hughes and Morgan (2007) contended that
firms that have tall EO take dangers in arrange to guarantee prevalent organizational performance.
Eggers et al. (2013) relate risk-taking to techniques that incorporate the commitment of tall
entireties of resources, both human and budgetary, to wander that have a tall probability of
disillusionment. . Hughes and Morgan (2007) fought that firms that have tall EO take threats in
orchestrate to ensure predominant organizational performance.

Firm Performance
In today’s business world it is exceedingly emphasized on firm execution. Be that as it may, there
is a parcel of criteria utilized in thinks about and deciding the execution. Agreeing to Venkatraman
and Ramanujam (1986), execution can be measured with budgetary and operational (non-
financial) markers. Money related measures are related to financial components such as
productivity and sales growth (e.g. return on a venture, return on sales, and return on value) and
operational measures are related to non-financial victory components such as quality, market
share, fulfillment, new product improvement, and market adequacy. Too, they classified
performance information in two measurements; essential or auxiliary information. Essential
information are straightforwardly collected from organizations and auxiliary information is
collected from freely accessible sources. Another classification within the performance degree
incorporates objective and subjective measures. Objective execution measures allude to evaluated
pointers. They are for the most part budgetary pointers and gotten from organizations. On the other
hand, subjective measures depend on judgmental evaluations of respondents and these pointers
cover both monetary and non-financial pointers (Gonzalez-Benito, and Gonzalez-Benito, 2005).

79
Seybold Report Journal Vol. 19. No. 02. 2024

Conceptual Framework

Innovativeness

Firms Performance
Proactiveness

Risk-Taking propensity

Model of entrepreneurial orientation & firm’s performance

SMEs in Nigeria

Small and medium enterprises (SMEs) play a key part in activating and supporting financial
development and evenhanded improvement in both created and creating nations in Africa. Amoafo
(2012) demonstrates that nations that have centered on the SME area and have guaranteed its
development have finished up succeeding in improving the quality and standard of living of its
citizenry, expanding its per capita wage and getting a charge out of a fast development within the
Net Residential Item (GDP) among other social-economic impacts.. Khan and Dalu (2015) opine
that small and medium scale undertakings have long been catalysts for both industrial development
and financial development of the country for both in created and creating nations, and they play a
vital part for the business era, facilitator of economic recovery and national advancement Nigerian
Bank for Commerce and Industrial (NBCI) received a definition of small - scale business as one
with add up to Capital not more prominent than N750,000 (exempting fetched of arriving but
counting working capital). Concurring to the Government Service of Industry rules to NBCI
characterized small - scale endeavor as an enterprise with an add up to take a toll of not more
prominent than N500,000 (exempting fetched of arriving but including working capital).

Nigerian Industrial Development Bank (NIDB) characterized Small Scale endeavor as an

undertaking with the venture and working capital not surpassing N750,000, whereas Medium
Scale enterprises as those working inside the run of N750,000 to N3,000,000 in 1979. The unused
Industrial Policy characterizes Nigeria Small Scale Businesses as an industry with an add-up to
venture between N100,000 and N2,000,000. Central Bank of Nigeria, in its credit rules to banks,
states that within the case of Commercial Banks, small scale undertakings are those with yearly
turnover not over N500,000, for Shipper Banks, they are endeavors with capital venture not over
N2,000,000 {separated from fetched of arrive} or with most extreme turnover, not more than
N5,000,000 (CBN 1993). SMEDAN (2017) characterized SMEs based on the taking after criteria:
80
Seybold Report Journal Vol. 19. No. 02. 2024

small scale enterprises are businesses with ten to forty-nine individuals with a yearly turnover of
five to forty-nine million nairas, whereas a medium scale endeavor has fifty to one hundred and
ninety-nine workers with a yearly turnover of fifty to four hundred and ninety-nine million Naira.
Agreeing to Kaayanula and Quartey (2000), SMEs don't as it contributed to progressed living
measures, they too bring almost nearby capital arrangement and offer assistance accomplish tall
levels of efficiency and by contributing to a more indeed conveyance of financial exercises thus
abating the stream of movement to large cities. Diverse individuals, associations,s, and
administrators have progressed different reasons as to why SMEs have not been able to live up to
desire. The issues that appear to be of concern to most of these SMEs incorporate need of getting
to reserves, unseemly administration aptitudes, trouble in getting to worldwide markets, need for
entrepreneurial skills and knowhow, low customer request, need of support of locally created
products, conflicting government arrangements, an assortment of charges and demands, and
organization bottlenecks. The circumstance shows up more exasperating when compared with
what other nations have been able to realize with their SMEs.

Innovativeness and firms performance

It has been broadly acknowledged in writing that innovativeness, as a measurement of EO, is basic
to driving moved forward performance which a number of diverse factors stimulate advancement
within the organization. Murat, Nilgun and Fulya (2013) illustrated that innovative development
(item and prepare development) has a noteworthy and positive effect on firm execution. Gurhan ,
Gunduz , Kemal and , Lutfihak (2011) uncover that there are positive impacts of innovations on
firm performance in fabricating businesses. Nham, Nguyen, Pham, and Nguyen (2016) conduced
on the Impacts of Innovation on Firm Performance of Supporting Businesses in Hanoi – Vietnam.
The result illustrated there are positive impacts of prepare, promoting, and organizational
developments on firm performance in supporting firms.

Eugenie, John Laura (2016) considered Information management and business performance:
interceding impact of innovation. The think about comes about uncovered that innovation had a
positive impact on commerce execution. In any case, there was no coordinated impact of
information administration on trade execution. The Relationship between Development and Firm
Execution: A Writing Audit. The considered finding showed that coordinated impact of innovation
on enterprise performance, the directing impact of innovation on firm performance, the interceding
impacts between innovation and firm performance Thus, the taking after theory is proposed:
i: The extent of SMEs innovativeness has a significant effect on firm’s performance

Proactiveness and performance

Proactiveness and innovativeness are basic vital stances for firms to flourish in quickly changing
and competitive showcase situations (Covin & Mill operator, 2014; Covin & Grains, 2012). Rosli
and Saad (2018) did consider proactiveness, innovativeness, and Firm Performance: The
interceding part of organizational capability. The discoveries illustrate that organizational
capability could be a vital instrument through which proactiveness and innovativeness by
implication impact SME performance. Additionally, Angeline, Robert, Kenneth, and Joseph
(2015) found that proactiveness was a critical indicator of the firm performance of agro-handling
SMEs in Kenya. Emmanuel (2012) appeared that the endeavor on tall entrepreneurial
proactiveness reacted emphatically to performance measures with reliable increment in measure
and business of qualified and competent personnel. in the meantime Adefulu, Asikhia and Aroyeun
81
Seybold Report Journal Vol. 19. No. 02. 2024

(2018) found that Pro-activeness has positive noteworthy impact on development (β=0.527; R2=
0.358; t(385) = 14.622; p<0.05). Pro-activeness is successful in making competitive advantage
since a company that's an initiator is able to enter the showcase, to begin with, and its competitors
are constrained to reply to the initiator's activities instead of starting their possess (Lumpkin
&Dess, 1996) . this paper thus proposes:
Hi: SMEs proactiveness significantly and positively affect firm’s performance

Risk Taking Propensity and performance

Risk-taking penchant, a component of the individual properties of entrepreneurs, may be
significant for the choice to enter an enterprise career or to found a modern startup firm and for
the small firms’ improvement and victory (Antoncic et al., 2012; Gantar et al., 2013) . Risk-taking,
among SMEs’ directors, may be a challenge, as they regularly need the correct capacity and assets
to induce subjective data that will help decision-making (Agu et al., 2018). Albert, Samuel, John,
and Moshfique (2016) conducted a think about Risk-taking Affinity, Managerial Organize Ties
and Firm Performance in a Developing Economy, findings demonstrate that high levels of
entrepreneurs’ risk-taking affinity upgrade firm performance.
Atikur, Kaniz , Zhao Mohammad , and Mobarak (2021)did think about on Do risk-taking,
Innovativeness, and proactivity influence the business performance of SMEs? A Case Think about
in Bangladesh, it found that the age of commerce, risk-taking, innovativeness, and proactiveness
has a vital effect on SME execution in Bangladesh. Angeline, Robert, Kenneth, and Joseph (2015)
uncovered that risk incorporates a positive effect on firm performance of agro preparing SMEs in
Kenya. Obioma, Miebaka, and John (2020) did think about Risk Taking and Performance of Little
and Medium Undertakings in Streams and Bayelsa States of Nigeria, it found that there was a
positive and noteworthy relationship between risk and measures of small and medium endeavors
performance. Beatrice (2017)Found that there's a solid positive relationship between risk-taking
and business performance of SMEs in Eldoret town. Thus, the following hypothesis is proposed:
Hi: SMEs risk taking propensity significantly affect firm’s performance

Materials and Methods

The study adopted survey research design. The choice of the plan was based on the spread of SMEs
in Nigeria and they have to accomplish wide scope for cooperation within the consider. The
populace of the study comprises SMEs in Nigeria; in any case, due to the inability to cover the
complete nation, this ponder chosen east south Locale within the nation, which comprise of Abia
State (1084) , Imo state (649), Ebonyi State(669) and Enugu State (511) and Anambra State(1842)
which ended up a add up to Number of (4755).
Choice of SMEs was based on their working for a least of five a long time and having enrolled
with the corporate undertakings commission Auxiliary information were sourced from books,
Diaries, and web. A test estimate of 369 was realized utilizing Taro Yamane’s equation at a 5%
error to resistance and 95% level of certainty. . In other to ensure that each state got the right
number of questionnaire, Proportion allocation sample size was used to assigned the
questionnaire: Abia State (84); Imo State (50); Ebonyi state (52); Anambra State (143) and Enugu
state (40). The overall number of 369 duplicates of the survey were dispersed whereas 340
duplicates were returned and 29 duplicates were not returned. The instrument utilized for
information collection was a survey organized in 5-point Likert scale: Strongly Agree (SA), Agree
(A), Undecided (UN), Disagree (D) and Strongly Disagree (SD) and approved with the substance
legitimacy of confronting to confront approach by giving the instrument to experts Management
82
 Seybold Report Journal Vol. 19. No. 02. 2024

who made the vital rectification for the instrument to a degree what it got to the degree. . The
reliability test was done utilizing Cronbach’s alpha strategy. The result gave a reliability
coefficient of 0.967, showing a tall degree of consistency. The three speculations defined were
tested at 0.05 level of noteworthiness. Simple Linear Regression was utilized to test speculations.
A computer helped Microsoft uncommon package for social science (SPSS) was utilized to help
analyses
Table 1 Reliability Statistics
Dimensions of Measure Cronbach's Alpha Number of
items
innovativeness 0.815 4
Proactiveness 0.867 4
Risk taking propensity 0.865 4
Firms Performance 0.857 4
All the items 0.967 16
Source. Authors’ estimate from Pilot Study, 2021

Presentation and Analysis of Data

This segment display examination and translates the information collected for the consider.
Information was collected in a frequency table and percentages were utilized for information
examination. From an add up to a number of three hundred and sixty-nine (369) survey sent to the
respondents. Three hundred and forty (340) respondents 92.14% were every day completed and
returned, whereas twenty-nine (29) speaking to 7.86% duplicates were not returned.
Table 2 Questionnaire Distribution
S/No SME No % No % No %
Distributed Returned Not
Returned
369 100 340 92.14 29 7.86
OWNERS
Total 369 100 340 92.14 29 7.86
Source: Field survey 2021

Data Analysis and Discussion

The data obtained from the field were presented and analysed with descriptive statistics to provide
answers to the research questions while the corresponding hypotheses were tested with Simple
linear regression at 0.05 alpha level

83
Seybold Report Journal Vol. 19. No. 02. 2024

Table 3: The extent of SMEs innovativeness has a significant effect on firm’s performance
Descriptive Statistics
N Minimu Maximu Mean Std.
m m Deviation
Firms that support
creativity promote 340 1.00 5.00 4.4442 .90854
firms performance
Developing new
process of making
340 1.00 5.00 4.4000 .92746
products enhance firms
performance
Technological
leadership produce new
340 1.00 5.00 4.2852 .91496
product which promote
performance
Innovation can enhance
Firms profitability
340 1.00 5.00 4.5588 .82673
through product
modification
Valid N (listwise) 340

Hi: The extent of SMEs innovativeness has a significant effect on firm’s performance
Table 3a Model Summaryb
Mode R R Square Adjusted R Std. Error of Durbin-
l Square the Estimate Watson
1 .863a .744 .744 .39364 .100
a. Predictors: (Constant), innovativeness
b. Dependent Variable: Firms performance

Table 3b ANOVAa
Model Sum of df Mean F Sig.
Squares Square
Regression 152.578 1 152.578 984.666 .000b
1 Residual 52.375 338 .155
Total 204.953 339
a. Dependent Variable: Firms performance
b. Predictors: (Constant), innovativeness

Table 3c Coefficientsa
Model Unstandardized Standardized t Sig.
Coefficients Coefficients
B Std. Error Beta

84
Seybold Report Journal Vol. 19. No. 02. 2024

(Constant) .386 .047 8.269 .000

1 innovativenes
.855 .027 .863 31.379 .000
s
a. Dependent Variable: Firms performance
R = .863
R2 = .744
F = 984.666
T = 31.379
DW = .100
The regression sum of squares (152.758) is greater than the residual sum of squares (52.375) and
this indicates that more of the variation in the dependent variable is explained by the model. The
significance value of the F statistics (0.000) is less than 0.05, which means that the variation
explained by the model is not due to chance. The significance of the F value indicates that the
model statistically significantly predicts the outcome variable.

The correlation coefficient R has a value of 0.863 and this indicates that there is positive
relationship between innovativeness and firm’s performance. R square, the coefficient of
determination, shows that 74.4% of the variation in firm’s performance is explained by the model.
In the linear regression model, a low error of estimate with a value of .39364 is indicated. A value
of .100 for the Durbin Watson statistics which is less than 2 indicates that there is no auto
correlation.

The innovativeness coefficient of 0.863 indicates a positive significance innovativeness and firms
performance which is statistically significant (t = 31.379). Therefore, the null hypothesis should
be rejected and the alternative hypothesis accordingly accepted thus

Table 4 SMEs proactiveness significantly and positively affect firm’s performance.

Descriptive Statistics
N Minimu Maximu Mean Std.
m m Deviation
Firms that pursue new
opportunities enhance 340 1.00 5.00 4.4882 .77356
firms performance
Firm that act in
anticipation of future
340 1.00 5.00 4.1117 .87376
demand create change
promote firm goal
Firms that introduce a
new product ahead of
340 1.00 5.00 4.5294 1.05610
their competitors gains
market advantage

85
Seybold Report Journal Vol. 19. No. 02. 2024

Firms proactiveness
promote firms 340 1.00 5.00 4.3823 .89516
productivity
Valid N (listwise) 340

Hi: SMEs proactiveness significantly and positively affect firm’s performance

Table 4a Model Summaryb
Mode R R Square Adjusted R Std. Error of Durbin-
l Square the Estimate Watson
a
1 .807 .652 .651 .45967 .088
a. Predictors: (Constant), Proactiveness
b. Dependent Variable: Firms performance

Table 4b ANOVAa
Model Sum of df Mean F Sig.
Squares Square
Regression 133.533 1 133.533 631.958 .000b
1 Residual 71.420 338 .211
Total 204.953 339
a. Dependent Variable: Firms performance
b. Predictors: (Constant), Proactiveness

Table 4c Coefficientsa
Model Unstandardized Standardized t Sig.
Coefficients Coefficients
B Std. Error Beta
(Constant) .613 .049 12.391 .000
1
Proactiveness .754 .030 .807 25.139 .000
a. Dependent Variable: Firms performance

R = .807
2
R = .652
F = 631.958
T = 25.139
DW = .088
The regression sum of squares (133.533) is greater than the residual sum of squares (71.420) and
this indicates that more of the variation in the dependent variable is explained by the model. The
significance value of the F statistics (0.000) is less than 0.05, which means that the variation
explained by the model is not due to chance. The significance of the F value indicates that the
model statistically significantly predicts the outcome variable.

86
Seybold Report Journal Vol. 19. No. 02. 2024

The correlation coefficient R has a value of 0.807 and this indicates that there is positive
relationship between proactiveness and firm’s performance. R square, the coefficient of
determination, shows that 65.2% of the variation in firm’s performance is explained by the model.
In the linear regression model, a low error of estimate with a value of .45967 is indicated. A value
of .088 for the Durbin Watson statistics which is less than 2 indicates that there is no auto
correlation.

The proactiveness coefficient of 0.863 indicates a positive significance proactiveness and firms
performance which is statistically significant (t = 25.139). Therefore, the null hypothesis should
be rejected and the alternative hypothesis accordingly accepted thus

Table 5: Hi: SMEs risk taking propensity significantly affect firms performance
Descriptive Statistics
N Minimu Maximu Mean Std.
m m Deviation
Business that belief
that risk is part of
340 1.00 5.00 4.5941 .83205
business process have
access to a new market
Risk taking involve the
tendency to take bold
action in launching a
340 1.00 5.00 4.7941 .67747
new product that will
place the firm at
limelight of the market
A good calculated risk
boost firms 340 1.00 5.00 4.5852 .87383
productivity
Firm that are risk taker
become leaders in the 340 1.00 5.00 4.7617 .69065
market
Valid N (listwise) 340

Hi: SMEs risk taking propensity significantly affect firm’s performance

Table 5a Model Summaryb
Mode R R Square Adjusted R Std. Error of Durbin-
l Square the Estimate Watson
a
1 .793 .629 .628 .47430 .077
a. Predictors: (Constant), Risk-taking propensity
b. Dependent Variable: Firms performance

87
Seybold Report Journal Vol. 19. No. 02. 2024

Table 5b ANOVAa
Model Sum of df Mean F Sig.
Squares Square
Regression 128.917 1 128.917 573.069 .000b
1 Residual 76.036 338 .225
Total 204.953 339
a. Dependent Variable: Firms performance
b. Predictors: (Constant), Risk-taking propensity

Table 5c Coefficientsa
Model Unstandardized Standardized t Sig.
Coefficients Coefficients
B Std. Error Beta
(Constant) .621 .051 12.062 .000
1 Risk-taking
.686 .029 .793 23.939 .000
propensity
a. Dependent Variable: Firms performance

R = .793
R2 = .629
F = 573.069
T = 23.939
DW = .077
The regression sum of squares (128.917) is greater than the residual sum of squares (78.036) and
this indicates that more of the variation in the dependent variable is explained by the model. The
significance value of the F statistics (0.000) is less than 0.05, which means that the variation
explained by the model is not due to chance. The significance of the F value indicates that the
model statistically significantly predicts the outcome variable.

The correlation coefficient R has a value of 0.793 and this indicates that there is positive
relationship between risk taking propensity and firm’s performance. R square, the coefficient of
determination, shows that 62.9% of the variation in firm’s performance is explained by the model.
In the linear regression model, a low error of estimate with a value of .47430 is indicated. A value
of .088 for the Durbin Watson statistics which is less than 2 indicates that there is no auto
correlation.

The risk taking propensity coefficient of 0.793 indicates a positive significance risk taking
propensity and firms performance which is statistically significant (t = 23.939). Therefore, the
null hypothesis should be rejected and the alternative hypothesis accordingly accepted thus.

88
Seybold Report Journal Vol. 19. No. 02. 2024

Discussion of Results

This paper aimed to examine the effect of entrepreunship orientation (Innovativeness,

proactiveness and Risk taking propensity )and firms performance , in predicting the relationship
between EO and SMEs’ performance. The analysis of the survey instruments retrieved and found
that SMEs innovativeness has a significant effect on firm’s performance. This finding is in line
with previous studies (Murat, Nilgun and Fulya 2013; Gurhan , Gunduz , Kemal and , Lutfihak
2011; Nham, Nguyen, Pham and Nguyen ,2016; and Eugenie, John Laura , 2016)
The study also found that proactiveness has a significant and positive effect on SMEs’
performance. This finding also supports many previous findings (Rosli and Saad, 2018; Angeline,
Robert, Kenneth, and Joseph, 2015; Emmanuel, 2012; Adefulu, Asikhia and Aroyeun ,2018 and
Lumpkin &Dess, 1996).

Finally, this study found that SMEs risk-taking propensity significantly affect firms performance
of SMEs, in line with several previous studies (Albert, Samuel, John and Moshfique, 2016; Atikur,
Kaniz , Zhao Mohammad , and Mobarak , 2021; Angeline, Robert, Kenneth, and Joseph, 2015;
Obioma, Miebaka and John, 2020 and Beatrice, 2017).

Conclusion and recommendations

This paper assessed Entrepreneurial orientation (EO), and firms’ performance in South east
Nigeria
First, the study concludes that innovativeness has a significant effect on SMEs’ performance in
southeast Nigeria,. Second, the study concludes that proactive significantly affect SMEs’
performance, and finally the study concludes that risk-taking had effect on SMEs’ performance,
The study makes an important contribution to the field by concluding that the Self-determination
theory is sufficient to explain EO and performance
Based on the findings of this study and the conclusions drawn there- from, the following
recommendations were made
i. Firms should create a forum and workshop that will equip their employees with necessary
skills that will make them to be creative and innovative in order to promote organizational
effectiveness
ii. All small and medium scale enterprises should be proactive in order to adjust and adopt in
the turbulent nature of business environment for the survival of the business activities
iii. In business, risk is indispensable, so firms should conduct a good feasibility study in order
to know projects that have minimum risk attached it, and also know how to execute the
project in order to attain organizational goal.

Limitations of the study

This study was limited by the survey design. The use of a questionnaire was another limitation, as
was the selection of only registered SMEs. Thus, a generalisation of the findings should be made
with caution

89
Seybold Report Journal Vol. 19. No. 02. 2024

COMPETING INTERESTS
The authors have no compting interest to declare.

Author’s Affiliation

Agu Okoro Agu

Department of Business Management ; Evangel university Akaeze Ebonyi State
Okocha, Ebere Rejoice Ph.D
Department of Marketing; Evangel University Akaeze Ebonyi State

Obiora-Okafo Chinedu Afamefune

Department of Management , University of Nigeria Enugu Campus

Emerole Gideon A PhD

Department of Management ; College of Management Sciences , Micheal Okpara University of
Agriculture Umudike, Umuahia Abia State, Nigeria

Dr Vitus Chinedu Ogbunuju

Department of marketing Chukwuemeka Odumegwu Ojukwu University Igbariam Anambra State

COPYRIGHT:
© 2024 The Author(s). This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative
Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC-BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use,
distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. See
http://creativecommons.org/ licenses/by/4.0/. Seybold Report is a peer-reviewed journal published by
Seybold Publications.

HOW TO CITE THIS ARTICLE:

Agu, O. A., Okocha, E. R., Afamefune, O. C. O., Gideon, E. A., & Ogbunuju, V. C. (2024).
Entrepreneurship Orientation And Firm’s Performance: An Evidence Of Selected Small And
Medium Scale Enterprises In Southeast Nigeria. Seybold Report Journal, 19(2), 74-95. DOI:
10.5110/77. 1110

90
 Seybold Report Journal Vol. 19. No. 02. 2024

REFERENCES

Abdella K, Idris M and Dereje A (2018) Entrepreneurial orientation and venture performance in
Ethiopia: the moderating role of business sector and enterprise location. Journal of Global
Entrepreneurship Research, 4(3)9
Abdullah K.S & Asma A (2012) effect of entrepreneurial orientation on the organizational
performance of the Islamic banks in Yemen, Arabian Journal of Business and
Management Review Vol. 2, No.1
Adefulu, A. D., Asikhia, O.U. and Aroyeun, T. F. (2018)The effect of pro-activeness on growth of
selected small and medium scale Enterprises in Ogun State Nigeria, IOSR Journal of
Business and Management, Volume 20, Issue 12. Ver. V PP 14-21
Agu, M., Isichei, E.E. and Olabosinde, T.M. (2018), “Infrastructural development and growth of micro,
small and medium scale enterprises (MSME)”, Academic Journal of Economic Studies,
Vol. 4 No. 4, pp. 71-77
Albert D, Samuel A, John O and Moshfique, U (2016) Risk-taking propensity, Managerial network ties
and firm performance in an Emerging Economy, The Journal of Entrepreneurship 25(2)
1–29
Amoafo, S. O. (2012). Characteristics of SMEs in developing countries. Daily Graphic, January 31,
2012 pp. 53.
Andendorff, C.M. (2004). The development of a cultural family business model of good governance for
Greek family business in South Africa. Doctoral thesis in Business Management, Rhodes
University, Grahamstown.
Angeline, W. Robert G, Kenneth N, and Joseph, M (2015) The relationship between proactiveness and
performance of small and medium Agro Processing Enterprises In Kenya, International
Journal of Economics, Commerce and Management Vol. III, Issue 12
Antoncic, B., Auer Antoncic, J. and Gantar, M. (2012). risk-taking propensity of entrepreneurs and their
non-persistence in entrepreneurship. In Antoncic, B. (Ed.). Advances in Business-Related
Scientific Research Conference — ABSRC 2012, Olbia, Italy, September 5–7, 2012.
Conference Proceedings. Koper: Edukator
Ardichvili, A. Cardozo, R. and Ray, S. (2003) A theory of entrepreneurial opportunity identification and
development. Journal of Business Venturing, 18, 105-123
Atikur R , Kaniz F L, Zhao L P, Mohammad S.I , and Mobarak K (2012) Do risk-taking, innovativeness,
and proactivity affect business performance of SMEs? A Case Study in Bangladesh, Journal of
Asian Finance, Economics and Business Vol 8 No 5 , 0689–069
Baker, W.E. and Sinkula, J.M. (2009) The Complementary effects of market orientation and
entrepreneurial orientation on profitability in small businesses. Journal of Small Business
Management, 47(4), 443-464.
Baregheh, A., Rowley, J. and Sambrook, S. (2009) Towards a multidisciplinary definition of innovation.
Management Decision, 47(8), 1323–1339.
Baron, R. A., (1999). Counterfactual thinking and venture formation: the potential effects of
thinking about ‘what might have been.’ Journal of Business Venturing, 15,(8) 79–91
Beatrice K (2017)Relationship between risk-taking and business performance among small and medium
enterprises In Eldoret Town, Kenya. International Journal of Business and Management
Review Vol.5, No.7, pp.52-59
Boohene, R., Marfo-Yiadom, E., & Yeboah, M.A. (2012). An empirical analysis of the effect of
91
 Seybold Report Journal Vol. 19. No. 02. 2024

entrepreneurial orientation on firm performance of auto artisans in the Cape Coast

Metropolis, Developing County Studies, 2(9), 77- 88
Brockhaus, R. H. and Horwitz, P. S., (1986). The psychology of the entrepreneur. In: D. L. Sexton
and R. W. Smilor, eds. The Art and Science of Entrepreneurship. Cambridge, MA:
Ballinger
Cahill, D., (1996). Entrepreneurial orientation or pioneer advantage. Academy of Management. The
Academy of Management Review, 21 (3), 603–60
Coulthard, M.,( 2007). The role of entrepreneurial orientation on firm performance and the
potential influence of relational dynamism. Journal of Global Business and Technology, 3
(1), 29–39.
Covin, J.G. and Slevin, D.P. (1989) Strategic management of small firms in hostile and benign
environments. Strategic Management Journal, 10, 75-87.
Covin, J.G., Green, K.M. and Slevin, D.P. (2006) Strategic process effects on the entrepreneurial
orientation - sales growth rate relationships. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 30(1), 57-
81.
Covin,J and Lumpkin, G (2011)_Entrepreneurial orientation theory and research: reflections on a
needed construct Entrepreneursh. Theory Pract., 36 (4) , pp. 677-702
Edwards, J., Try, D., Ketchen, D., & Short, J. (2014). Mastering strategic management-1st Canadian
Edition
Eggers, F., Kraus, S., Hughes, M., Laraway, S. and Syncerksi, S. (2013) Implications of customer and
entrepreneurial orientations for SME growth. Management Decision, 51(3), 524-546
Emmanuel, O.O (2012)Relevance of entrepreneurial proactiveness on business performance: Nigerian
Companies Experience, Kuwait Chapter of Arabian Journal of Business and Management
Review Vol. 1, No.6
,
Eugenie B , John M, Laura O (2016)Knowledge management and business performance:
mediating effect of innovation, Journal of Business and Management Sciences. Vol.
4 No. 4, 82-92
Ferreira, J., & Azevedo, S. G. (2008). Entrepreneurial orientation and growth of firms: Key lessons
for managers and business professionals, Problems and Perspectives in Management.6(1),
82-88.
Forsman, H. (2011) Innovation capacity and innovation development in small enterprises: a comparison
between the manufacturing and service sectors. Research Policy, 40, 739-750
Gagne, M. and Deci, E. L., (2005). Self-determination theory and work motivation. Journal of
Organizational Behavior, 26, 331–362.
Gonzalez-Benito, O. and Gonzalez-Benito, J. (2005), Cultural vs. operational market orientation and
objective vs. subjective performance: Perspective of production and operations,
Industrial Marketing Management, 34, pp.797-829
Gürbüz, S & . Aykol G (2009)Entrepreneurial management, entrepreneurial orientation and
Turkish small firm growth Manag. Res. News, 32 (4) , pp. 321-336
Gurhan GUNDAYa , Gunduz ULUSOYa,*, Kemal KILICa , Lutfihak ALPKAN, (2011) International
Journal of Production Economic,
Hasan, F.S.M.A., & Almubarak, M.M.S. (2016). Factors influencing women entrepreneurs’
performance in SMEs. World Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Sustainable
Development, 12(2), 82-101
Hoonsopon, D. and Ruenrom, G. (2012) The impact of organizational capabilities on the development of
radical and incremental product innovation and product innovation performance. Journal
92
 Seybold Report Journal Vol. 19. No. 02. 2024

of Managerial Issues, 24(3), 250- 276

Hughes, M. & Morgan, R. E., 2007. Deconstructing the relationship between entrepreneurial orientation
and business performance at the embryonic stage of firm growth. Industrial Marketing
Management, Volym 36, pp. 651-661.
humpeter, J., (2002). Entrepreneurial profit. In N. F. Krueger, ed. Entrepreneurship: Critical
perspectives on business and management. London: Routledge. pp. 293– 314.
Hussain, J., Ismail, K., & Akhtar, C. S. (2015). Linking entrepreneurial orientation with organizational
performance of small and medium sized enterprises: A conceptual approach. Asian Social
Science, 11(7), pp.1-10.
Jinpei Wu. (2009). Entrepreneurial orientation, entrepreneurial intent and new venture creation:
Test of a framework in a Chinese context, PHD dissertation, Blacksburg, Virginia.
http://hdl.handle.net/10919/28298.
Kayanula and Quartey (2000). The management of business and public organizations. McGraw-Hill,
Tokyo.
Khan, J. G. & Dalu, R. S. (2015). Role of Small & Medium Enterprises in Industrial Development of
Vidarbha Region. International Journal of Engineering Technology, Management and
Applied Sciences, 3 (7).
Laukkanen, T., Nagy, G., Hirvonen, S., Reijonen, H., & Pasanen, M. (2013). The effect of strategic
orientations on business performance in SMEs. International Marketing Review, 30(6),
510-535
Lumpkin GT, Cogliser C and Schneider D (2009) Understanding and measuring autonomy: An
entrepreneurial orientation perspective. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice 33(3): 47–6
Lumpkin, G. T., & Dess, G. G. (2001). Linking two dimensions of entrepreneurial orientation to firm
performance: The moderating role of environment and industry life cycle. Journal of
Business Venturing, 16, 429–451.
Lumpkin, G. T., &Dess, G. G. (1996). Clarifying the entrepreneurial orientation construct and linking it
to performance. Academy of Management Review, 21(1), 135-172
Mahmood, R., & Hanafi, N. (2013). Entrepreneurial orientation and business performance of
women-owned small and medium Enterprises in Malaysia: Competitive advantage as a
mediator. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 4(1).
Md Uzzal H (2019)The role of entrepreneurial orientation to SME performance in Bangladesh,
International Journal of Entrepreneurship 23(1)121
Memili, E., Eddleston, K., Kellermanns, F.W., Zellweger, T.M. and Barnett, T. (2010) The critical path
to family firm success through entrepreneurial risk taking and image. Journal of Family
Business Strategy, 1(4), 200-209.
Miller, D., (1983). The correlates of entrepreneurship in three types of firms. Management Science, 29(7),
pp. 770-791.
Morris, M.H. and Sexton, D.L. (1996), The concept of entrepreneurial intensity: Implications for
company performance. Journal of Business Research, 36(1): 5-14
Murat A, Nilgun, A and Fulya, S (2013) The relationship between innovation and firm performance: An
empirical evidence from Turkish automotive supplier industry, Procedia - Social and
Behavioral Sciences 75, 226 – 235
Nham T, Nguyen N, Pham G ,and Nguyen N (2016)The effects of innovation on firm performance of
supporting industries in Hanoi – Vietnam, Journal of Industrial Engineering and
Management, 9(2): 413-431
Nieto, M.J., Santamaria, L. and Fernandez, Z. (2013) Understanding the innovation behaviour of family
93
 Seybold Report Journal Vol. 19. No. 02. 2024

firms. Journal of Small Business Management, 53(2), 382-399. DOI: 10.1111/jsbm.12075

Obioma U, Miebaka D and John, M (2020) Risk taking and performance of small and medium enterprises
in Rivers and Bayelsa States of Nigeria, International Journal of Latest Research in
Humanities and Social Science (IJLRHSS) Volume 03 - Issue 09
Omisakin, O. M., Nakhid, C., Littrell, R., Verbitsky, J., Omisakin, et al. (2016). Entrepreneurial
orientation among migrants and small and medium enterprises. Journal of Business
Administration Research, 5(1) 6
Prabin, R (2016)Entrepreneurial orientation and business performance of Handicraft Industry: A
study of Nepalese Handicraft Enterprises, International Journal of Small Business and
Entrepreneurship Research Vol.4, No.2, pp.48-63,
Qamruzzaman, M., & Jianguo, W. (2018). SME financing innovation and SME development in
Bangladesh: An application of ARDL. Journal of Small Business &
Entrepreneurship,2(38)
Rauch, A. & Frese, M. (2009), Entrepreneurial orientation. In: A. Bausch& B. Schwenker (Eds.).
Handbook of Utility Management (pp. 89-104). Berlin: Springer
Rauch, A., Wiklund, J., Lumpkin, G. T. & Frese, M., 2009. Entrepreneurial orientation and business
performance: an assessment of past research and suggestions for the future.
Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 33(3), pp. 761-787
Rauch, A., Wiklund, J., Lumpkin, G. T., & Frese, M. (2009). Entrepreneurial orientation and
business performance: An assessment of past research and suggestions for the future.
Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 33(3), 761e787
Rosli,N, A and Saad, S (2018) Proactiveness, innovativeness and firm performance: The mediating role
of organizational capability, Academy of Strategic Management Journal Volume 17, Issue 5
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation,
social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68
Sebora, T.C. and Theerapatvong, T. (2010) Corporate entrepreneurship: a test of external and internal
influences on managers' idea generation, risk taking, and proactiveness. International
Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 6(3), 331-350
Shouyu, C (2017)The Relationship between Innovation and Firm Performance: A Literature Review,
Advances in Computer Science Research, volume 82
Tang, J., Tang, Z. and Katz, J.A. (2014) Proactiveness, Stakeholder-Firm power difference, and product
safety and quality of Chinese SMEs. Entrepreneurship: Theory & Practice, 38(5), 1129-
1157
Thornhill S and Amit R (2003) Learning about failure: Bankruptcy, firm age and the resource- based
view. Organization Science 14(5): 497–509

Timotius F. C. (2019) Relationship between entrepreneurial orientation and business performance ,

International Journal Of Scientific & Technology Research 8(11)8-12
Vasconcellos, L.H.R. and Marx, R. (2011) Como ocorrem as inovações em serviços? Um estudo
exploratório de empresas no Brasil. Gestão & Produção, 18(3), 443-460.
Venkatraman, N. and Ramanujam, V. (1986), Measurement of business performance in strategy
research: A comparison of approaches, Academy of Management Review, 1(4), pp.801-80
Wales, W.J., Gupta, V.K. and Mousa, F. (2013) Empirical research on entrepreneurial orientation: an
assessment and suggestions for future research. International Small Business Journal,
31(4), 357- 383.
Wang, C.L. and Ahmed, P.K. (2004) The development and validation of the organizational innovativeness
94
 Seybold Report Journal Vol. 19. No. 02. 2024

construct using confirmatory factor analysis. European Journal of Innovation Management,

7(4), 303-13.
Wang, H., Wuebker, R.J., Han, S. and Ensley, M.D. (2012) Strategic alliances by venture capital backed
firms: an empirical examination. Small Business Economics, 38(2), 179-196
Wang, Y. (2016). What are the biggest obstacles to growth of SMEs in developing countries? An
empirical evidence from an enterprise survey. Borsa Istanbul Review, 16(3), 167-176
Wiklund, J., & Shepherd, D. (2005). Entrepreneurial orientation and small business performance:
A configurational approach. Journal of Business Venturing, 20, 71–91.
Yildiz, M.L. (2014), “The effects of organizational culture on corporate entrepreneurship”, International
Journal of Business and Social Science, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 35-44

95