MB1312136T

BB6603 CORPORATE ENTREPRENEURSHIP

1) Managers corporate entrepreneurial actions: Examining

perception and position. (Jeffrey S. Hornsby, Donald F.
Kuratko, Dean A. Shepherd & Jennifer P. Bott, 2009)
Introduction
Since the beginning of the Industrialization era, world
nowadays has been in rapid growth and expansion; critically in
business and industrial sectors. Corporations begin to focus more on
innovations and innovative products breakthrough in order to
maintain or better yet, gain extensive competitive advantage in the
market. In essence, this article conveys the intention of the authors
in justifying the current issues in the Corporate Entrepreneurship
(CE) literatures; mainly the relationship between entrepreneurial
actions and managers in organization, and whether managerial
levels affect the effectiveness of such entrepreneurial actions taken
or will be taken by the managers (Senior, Middle and Lower-level).
Basically, the article explains that managers perceptions on the
organizations supports (top management support, work discretion,
rewards

and

reinforcement,

time

availability

and

flexible

organizational boundaries) will affect the performance of any

entrepreneurial actions taken by the managers (referred as the
number of ideas implemented by the managers). Many past
researchers argued that lower level managers are the ones with the
more structural ability to engage in entrepreneurial actions
(ideas

implemented)

rather

than

the

senior-level

managers.

Nevertheless, the authors determined the otherwise. Moreover,

most past researches have all assumed homogeneity in the
managers and thus may jeopardize the findings of the research in
trying

to

relate

managers

entrepreneurial

actions

with

the

organizational performance; as it is generally accepted that CE plays

a vital part towards high-level organizations performance. Thus, the
authors further explain their research question; whether different
1

MB1312136T
BB6603 CORPORATE ENTREPRENEURSHIP

managerial levels would have different structural ability to capitalize

or maximize results in any entrepreneurial actions taken with the
support of the organization itself.
Hypotheses Development
During the course of the study, the authors have developed
five (5) hypotheses which relate to the purpose of the study; to find
whether managers at different levels will have different perceptions
on the organizational antecedents (top management support, work
discretion, rewards and reinforcements, time availability and flexible
organizational boundaries) of which may affect their desire to
engage more in entrepreneurial actions:
Hypothesis

1.

The

number

of

entrepreneurial

ideas

implemented increases with perceived top management support but

at a faster rate for (a) middle and (b) senior-level managers than for
first-level managers. The top management support refers to the
perceptions of the managers towards the support by their top
management in the pursuit of entrepreneurial actions which include
promoting entrepreneurial behavior and innovative ideas. Due to
middle

and

senior-level

managers

are

closer

with

the

top

management in the structure of the organization, it is deemed to be

more effective and faster compared to lower-level managers.
Hypothesis

2.

The

number

of

entrepreneurial

ideas

implemented increases with perceived work discretion but at a

faster rate for (a) middle and (b) senior-level managers than for
first-level managers. Mainly, discretion of work is used by managers
to enhance the performance of the workflow or process. In this case,
since middle and senior-level managers focus are more towards
larger

scope

(internal

and

external

environment)

of

the

organization compared to lower-level managers (narrow, direct

process or procedures), thus it is expected that the effect would be
much faster on them.

MB1312136T
BB6603 CORPORATE ENTREPRENEURSHIP

Hypothesis

3.

The

number

of

entrepreneurial

ideas

implemented increases with perceived rewards and reinforcements

for entrepreneurial activity but at a faster rate for first-level
managers than (a) middle and (b) senior managers. This here is the
opposite of the first two hypotheses mainly because first-level
managers are deemed to be more risk-averse; hence their efforts
towards entrepreneurial actions can be positively encouraged with
the rewards based system proposed by the organization. With the
rewards, lower-level managers may be brave enough to take up any
entrepreneurial activity they deem suitable for the organization.
Hypothesis

4.

The

number

of

entrepreneurial

ideas

implemented increases with perceived time availability but at a

faster rate for (a) middle and (b) senior-level managers than firstlevel managers. Time availability here is similar to the earlier
mentioned work discretion whereby managers are expected to have
more free time for planning and decision making by which may
lead to positive entrepreneurial activities being pursued and achieve
positive outcomes. Senior-level and middle level managers are
deemed to be able to utilize the time for entrepreneurial actions
better compared to lower-level managers because of their scope of
work is larger, more towards planning for the organization rather
than smaller, efficient-based processes of the lower-level managers.
Hypothesis
implemented

5.

The

increases

number

with

of

perceived

entrepreneurial
flexible

ideas

organizational

boundaries but at a slower rate for first-level managers than (a)

middle and (b) senior-level managers. Flexible organizational
boundaries refer to the extent by which the information is being
circulated from external environment to the organization as well as
within the organization. Hence, any entrepreneurial activity may be
enforced with the help from the availability of information useful for
such actions. In this case, middle and senior-level managers would
be able to gain more due to their larger job scope compared to

MB1312136T
BB6603 CORPORATE ENTREPRENEURSHIP

lower-level managers; decision makings are larger in respect to the

effects toward the organization.
Research Method and Measures
The research has been conducted by the authors using a total
sample of 530 managers of different positions (levels) in their
organizations. The authors used a quantitative approach; using
surveys or questionnaires and sample size and error sampling
procedures. Specifically, since the research framework involved
dependent variable (number of ideas implemented), independent
variables

(the

organizational

antecedents

of

Corporate

Entrepreneurship - top management support, work discretion,

rewards

and

reinforcement,

time

availability

and

flexible

organizational boundaries), controlled variables (age, years in

organization, years in job) and moderators (managerial level), the
authors used moderated Poisson regression analysis to find the
results of the surveys. This moderated Poisson analysis is used
mainly due to the fact that the researchs dependent variable is
based

on

surveys

count
were

data.

circulated

The

no-incentive-upon-completion-

among

the

managers

during

their

participations in an executive education programs focusing on

general development management of which conducted by a large
Midwestern public university. Given that all of the participants were
managers from different levels and industries in an established
managerial

program,

the

researchs

surveys

were

deemed

appropriate. In fact, the response rate was recorded to be

approximately 80% and this is actually considered to be high; hence
the authors did not engage in the testing for non-respondent biases.
From the total of 530 respondents, only 458 sample data were
deemed to be reliable for the analysis. With respect to the approach
to measure the perceptions of managers towards the organizational
antecedents of corporate entrepreneurship, the research used the
4

MB1312136T
BB6603 CORPORATE ENTREPRENEURSHIP

Corporate Entrepreneurship Assessment Instrument-CEAI;

however this was not the central focus of the study. Moreover, this
study used a 5 point Likert scale to collect the data from the
participants; ranging from Strongly Disagree to Strongly Agree.
Results/Findings
As mentioned earlier, the authors have used a series of
Poisson regression analyses in order to test the hypotheses of the
study. Based from the study, Table 2 shows the seven-step model to
explain the number of ideas implemented. Specifically, Step 1
conveys the control variables of the research. From what the
research table conveys, based on Step 2 of the table, it can be
interpreted that the number of ideas implemented is greatly related
to top management support (coeff=.410; p<.01), followed by
greater

rewards/reinforcements

(coeff=.186;

p<.01),

time

availability (coeff=-.099; p<.05). These findings are related with the

middle manager rather than lower-level managers (coeff=.241;
p<.01). Similarly, senior level manager rather than first-line
manager (coeff=.232; p<.01). From these, it can be interpreted that
there is significant relationship between the antecedents to number
of ideas implemented given the structural ability of the managers.
However, it is evident that two of the factors which are significant in
the earlier steps are not significant throughout the whole model.
Consequently, the study could not find any significant relationships
for rewards and managerial level between senior and lower-level
managers as well as time availability between senior and lower-level
managers. This finding rejects the two hypotheses H3b and 4b,
respectively as there is no support found in the research.
Meanwhile, the Organizational boundaries flexibility has been
dropped from the research due to unforeseen circumstances hence
there is no support provided for H5a and H5b.

MB1312136T
BB6603 CORPORATE ENTREPRENEURSHIP

Discussion
For the sake of a discussion, it is essential for the purpose of
the study to be restated here; the relationship between the
perceived organizational antecedents to entrepreneurial actions
taken

by

managers

entrepreneurship

of

different

performance

that

levels
is

(structural)

the

number

with
of

the

ideas

eventually implemented by those managers. This is because ideas

resemble the innovations by which CE is reflecting to for the
organization. Based on the findings of the study, only two out of five
hypotheses were found acceptable in the effort of understanding
whether the structural level of managers moderates the number of
ideas implemented with perceived CE antecedents employed by or
in the organizations. Eventually, the findings have evidently
concluded that there is a positive relationship between the
perceptions of middle and senior-level managers towards top
management support (H1) and work discretion (H2) with the
number of ideas implemented however for lower-level managers,
the outcomes were negative for both antecedents. This means that
given high levels of top management support in an organization
would likely trigger only middle and senior-level managers to
implement entrepreneurial ideas. Similarly, work discretion does not
play positive role towards lower-level managers implementation of
entrepreneurial ideas due to their natively smaller scope of job and
activities of which those managers may not be able to link with the
organization as a whole. For the rest of the hypotheses (H3 and H4),
based on the full regression model of the study, it found no
significant

relationships

between

the

moderator

(levels

of

managers) with the said rewards/reinforcement (H3) and time

availability (H4) towards the number of ideas generated and
implemented by the managers. This is perhaps given that most
lower-level managers will tend to be risk-averse, they are reluctant
to implement innovative ideas regardless the existence of perceived
6

MB1312136T
BB6603 CORPORATE ENTREPRENEURSHIP

rewards from the organization. Simply, this means that the

organization is actually still struggling to implement sound formal
rewards system that is effective and efficient in compensating its
corporate entrepreneurs.
Conclusion: Comments & Insights
The following journal article/research is being reviewed with
the objective of better understandings on the field of Corporate,
Entrepreneurship, Corporate Entrepreneurship and its relationship
with the organization; mainly the managers, their perceptions and
positions in the organization. Consequently, research methods,
interpretations and data findings and others found in the article can
be examined and eventually gain knowledge and experience in the
implementation of research methodology.
The topic of interest of this article is mainly related with the
homogeneity issue in past CE researches; management levels
assumed to be homogeneous, all managers will have the same
effect towards the perceived antecedents of entrepreneurship in the
organization. The findings of this study explain that the perceived
organizational
discretion

and

entrepreneurial

antecedents

(top

management

rewards/reinforcement)
activities

(ideas

are

support,
related

implemented)

but

to

work
the
more

importantly, to the degree that managerial levels have certain

significant positive moderation effects on certain antecedents for
instance the senior and middle-level managers are more positively
perceived top management support and work discretion towards
their entrepreneurial activity (ideas implemented). Nevertheless, the
study has not come by without critical limitations and with such
limitations; it suggests improvements for future research on this
particular field of study. Firstly, the sample of the study would not be
viable for generalization since all the samples were collected from
innovative education training; participants may already prone for
7

MB1312136T
BB6603 CORPORATE ENTREPRENEURSHIP

entrepreneurial activities in their organization. Next, the data was

collected using single-item dependent variables and self-report data
collection methods of which may limit the relevance of the data due
to self-improvements or dishonest among participants in answering
the surveys. Future research should take note and improve these
limitations in order to gain reliable and consistent data; multiple
sources of data and use of multiple measures of implementation of
idea.