Journal of Multidisciplinary Approaches in Science 5, Issue 1 (2019) 16-23

Journal of Multidisciplinary Approaches

in Science (JMAS)
Journal homepage: https://jmas.biz/index.php
ISSN: 2652-144X

The Mediating Role of Entrepreneurial Leadership in the

Relationship between Entrepreneurial Orientation and Firm Open
Access

Performance of ICTs SMEs

Aamir Hayat1, Adiba Latif*,2, Asad Afzal Humayon3, Munir Ahmed4 & Muhammad Azeem5

1,2,3,4,5 Department of Management Sciences, Comsats University Islamabad, Vehari Campus 44000 Pakistan

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT

Article history: This study empirically examined the effect of entrepreneurial orientation on
Received 29 January 2019 performance of small and medium enterprises via mediating role of entrepreneurial
Received in revised form 19 March 2019 leadership. Target population was the owners/managers of information and
Accepted 9 May 2019 communication technologies (ICTs) of SMEs of Punjab, Pakistan. Sample size of
Available online 17 May 2019
current study was 350 but 311 questionnaires were useful for statistical analysis.
88% was our response rate. Quantitative approach was used to collect data through
structured questionnaires on five points Likert scale. Pilot testing was performed
with six owners/managers of ICTs SMEs. Structural equation modelling maximum
likelihood method was used to perform analysis on AMOS 16. Reliability has been
measured against Cronbach’s α whereas validity has been measured against
confirmatory factor analysis. Average variance extracted and composite reliability
was used to measure convergent validity. This research made theoretical
contribution in the literature by empirically investigating the influence of
entrepreneurial orientation on firm performance through entrepreneurial
leadership and made practical contribution for owners/managers of ICTs SMES by
providing insight how to augment firm performance.
Keywords:
Entrepreneurial Orientation,
Entrepreneurial Leadership and Firm
Performance Copyright © 2019 JMAS - All rights reserved

1. Introduction

Entrepreneurship paly vital role in the economic development of a country. According to SMEDA,
(an official regulatory body for SMEs in Pakistan), 90 % businesses in Pakistan are small and medium
enterprises (SMEs) and their contribution is 40% in gross domestic products. Entrepreneurship is
taking advantage from an opportunity and create value from it in the form of cultural, financial or
social values. Entrepreneurial orientation is one of the critical success factors of business which can
result in sustained competitive advantage. Entrepreneurial orientation is depicted as impetuses that
accelerate monetary development and improvement of an economy [24].

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: adibalatif@gmail.com (Adiba Latif)

16
Journal of Multidisciplinary Approaches in Science
Volume 5, Issue 1 (2019) 16-23

Entrepreneurial activities create jobs and helps business to maximize its wealth. Organizations
need to carry on business in entrepreneurial way to have a competitive edge over rivals in the
constantly vibrant and extremely competitive industry environs [25]. Entrepreneurial orientation
consists of innovativeness, proactiveness, and risk-taking, autonomy and competitive aggressiveness
while this study considers first three dimensions. Numerous studies have tested the association
between entrepreneurial orientation and firm performance [20, 2].
Previous studies affirm that experimental discoveries demonstrate that the connection between
entrepreneurial orientation and business performance is vague and uncertain. A few scientists
affirmed a positive connection between entrepreneurial orientation and organizational performance
[20,2], while some established a negative link with reference to proposed association [40,11].
Entrepreneurial leadership is a quite under researched area as compared to common leadership
theories. Earlier studies hypothesized that performance of business is dependent on stakeholder
theory which lets differentiating between performance predictors and consequences [38]. So
keeping in mind this proposition, entrepreneurial leadership is taken as mediating variable in the
association between entrepreneurial orientation and organizational performance. A scores of earlier
researches have studied equally direct and indirect connection amid entrepreneurial orientation and
business performance, but none of the studies empirically investigated the mediating impact of
entrepreneurial leadership in the affiliation concerning entrepreneurial orientation and
organizational performance.
Hence, the objective of current research is to empirically inspect the link between entrepreneurial
orientation and organizational performance and further to test the mediating link of entrepreneurial
leadership in the association amid entrepreneurial orientation and organizational performance in the
information and communication technologies (ICTs) SMEs of Punjab, Pakistan.

2. Literature Review
2.1 Entrepreneurial Orientation

Entrepreneurial behaviour of a business is measured by EO. [34], recommend that EO contains “risk-
taking, innovativeness, pro-activeness, autonomy, and competitive aggressiveness” aspects. This
study takes into account three dimensions of EO which are “risk-taking, innovativeness and pro-
activeness [22]. It also conducted a study in the banking industry of Nigeria with entrepreneurial
orientation as independent variable and firm performance as dependent variable while teamwork
was used as mediating variable, found entrepreneurial orientation accelerates performance of
banking industry which can further be augmented if human resources work as team [33]. Innovation
is viewed as critical in the process of EO which is about innovativeness and growing new thoughts
that can create value for stakeholders. Pro-activeness is another element of EO which allude to
considering and take advantage of fresh prospects inside and out of the business. Last but not the
least is risk-taking which is frequently used to depict the vulnerability that pursues from carrying on
Entrepreneurial behaviour [22].

2.2 Entrepreneurial Leadership

Previously it affirmed that entrepreneurial leadership (EL) generates idealistic situations which is
helpful in mobilizing the backing of members, who grow into devoted by the idea of the innovation
and taking advantage of deliberate value conception [14]. Hence, top notch business administrators
who demonstrate entrepreneurial conduct [5; 14; 41], embrace leadership positions for the growth
of their corporations [7; 14; 21], and concentrate on differences or resemblances concerning leaders

17
Journal of Multidisciplinary Approaches in Science
Volume 5, Issue 1 (2019) 16-23

and entrepreneurs [7; 44]. Entrepreneurial leadership depends on a leader making, recognizing and
taking advantage of prospects in an inventive and entrepreneurial fashion [6]. Entrepreneurial
leadership is simply defined as “leadership performed in entrepreneurial ventures” [26] which
indicates that entrepreneurial leadership is founded on numerous leadership styles. It is the vision of
entrepreneur which helps in deciding form of leadership employed in entrepreneurial venture [27].
Entrepreneurial leadership can be transformational or transactional but it is far more
transformational as compared to transactional in nature but with certain essential alterations [31].
Leadership literature indicates that creativity is an essential ingredient of entrepreneurial leadership
and this trait augments firm performance [19].

2.3 Firm Performance

Firm performance is viewed as a matter of concern for both profit and non-profit businesses [1].
Businesses are striving hard to accelerate firm performance. Literature on firm performance revealed
that some aspects that influence performance of business are culture of firm, business milieu and
policy, person and organizational learning [32]. Firm performance has been defined in numerous
ways but it has defined performance as “the ability of an organization to create outcomes and actions
at an acceptable level” [12]. Performance of a business can be evaluated by employing numerous
subjective and objective measures which is not an easy assignment. To measure firm performance in
an extensive manner both fiscal and non-fiscal measures should be used [43]. Operational and
financial performance indicators are used to measure firm performance as recommended by [44].
Operational performance alludes to “the performance related to organizations’ internal operation,
such as productivity, product quality and customer satisfactions” [9]. Likewise, it also defined
operational performance as “the ability to measure the outcomes of an organization’s processes”
[29]. Previously mentioned five aspects namely: “cost, quality, delivery, flexibility, and innovation”
[35]. Non-fiscal methods are widespread due to their quality of transforming business plan and vision
into an instrument which accelerates firm performance [10]. Financial performance has been defined
as “the extent to which the organization performs in relative profitability, return on investment, and
total sales growth” [18]. Some others denoted some popular indicators used to measure financial
performance which are “return on assets (ROA), return on equity (ROE), return on investment (ROI),
profit margin, earning per share, and value per employee” [16]. Some indicated that operational
performance is a sine qua non of financial performance which leads to greater financial performance
[13]. Keeping in view the above discussion, following hypotheses are proposed.

H1: Entrepreneurial orientation has positive impact on firm performance.

H2: Entrepreneurial orientation has positive impact on entrepreneurial leadership.
H3: Entrepreneurial leadership has positive impact on firm performance.
H4: Entrepreneurial leadership mediates between entrepreneurial orientation and firm
performance.

18
Journal of Multidisciplinary Approaches in Science
Volume 5, Issue 1 (2019) 16-23

Entrepreneurial
Leadership

Entrepreneurial Firm Performance

Orientation
Fig. 1 Conceptual Model

3. Methodology

This is a cross-sectional survey research. Entrepreneurial orientation has been measured against
three dimensions which are risk-taking, innovativeness and reactiveness by using adopted
questionnaire [8] and encompasses nine questions. Entrepreneurial leadership has been measured
by using adopted questionnaire [39] and entails eight questions.

Firm performance has been measured by using two aspects which are operational and financial
performance. Instrument used to measure firm performance has been adopted from [46] which
contains four questions on operational performance and three questions on financial performance.
Five points Likert scale has been used to record respondent’s opinion. Managers/owners of ICTs SMEs
are the population of the study. Convenient sampling approach was used to gather data from Multan,
Bahawalpur and Vehari districts of Punjab, Pakistan. 350 questionnaires were disseminated by using
“Google doc”. 323 questionnaire returned out of which 311 were complete in all respect. So, 88% is
our response rate which is thought to be a good response rate. Validity of research tool was gauged
by confirmatory factor analysis and only those items were considered for final analysis which have
eigenvalue of > 1 and factor loading of .5 [37]. Structural equation modelling (SEM) Maximum
Likelihood (M.L.) estimation method has been used to test the conceptual model. AMOS 16 and SPSS
20 was used to run analysis.

4. Results

Table I indicates the demographic characteristics of participants. Out of 311, 281 (90.36%)
respondents are male and 30 (9.64%) are females. Out of 311, 171 (54.98%) participants have less
than 5 or equal to 5 years’ experience, 48 (15.43%) participants have 6 to 10 years’ experience and
92 (29.59%) participants have 11 years or more than 11 years’ experience. From the sample of 311,
142 (45.65%) respondents fall in the range of 18-35 years, 96 (30.87%) are within age bracket of 36-
50 years and 73 (23.48%) are more than 50 years old. From total sample size, 67 (21.54%) participants
have passed intermediate, 151 (48.57%) participants have passed graduation, 77 (24.75%) have
passed masters and 16 (5.14%) have passed MS/M.Phil.
19
Journal of Multidisciplinary Approaches in Science
Volume 5, Issue 1 (2019) 16-23

Table I: Demographic Profile of Respondents

Gender Male 281 90.36% Age 18-35 142 45.65%

Female 30 9.64% 36-50 96 30.87%
Total 311 >50 73 23.48%
Experience ≤ 5 years 171 54.98% Qualification Intermediate 67 21.54%
6-10 years 48 15.43% Graduation 151 48.57%
≥ 11 years 92 29.59% Masters 77 24.75%
MS/M.Phil. 16 5.14%

Table II depicts the outcomes of descriptive statistics and correlation of variables among them. All
the variables are correlated with one another. The strongest correlation exists between
entrepreneurial orientation and entrepreneurial leadership, which is .732, the weakest correlation
exists between entrepreneurial orientation and firm performance which is .568. The moderate
correlation is found between entrepreneurial leadership and firm performance which is .691.

Table II: Descriptive Statistics and Correlation Analysis

Sr. # Scale Mean SD 1 2 3

1 EO 3.521 .634 1
2 EL 3.634 .945 .732** 1
3 FP 4.032 .860 .568** .691** 1
**p, 0.01 (two tailed)

Table III display the outcomes of path analysis, direct and indirect model. Approach and standard
regression weights are used to detect the presence of mediation [31]. The value of direct mediation
from EO→FP is .87. The value of indirect model from EO→EL is .69. The value of EL→FP is .78.The
results indicates that entrepreneurial leadership has a partial mediating role in the relationship
between entrepreneurial orientation and firm performance. 50.1% variation in this model is
explained directly by entrepreneurial orientation on firm performance while 43.7% variation. R2 for
direct model is .52 and .46 for indirect model which represents that 52% variation in firm
performance is directly due to entrepreneurial orientation and 46% variation in firm performance is
indirectly due to the model of current research.

Table III: Results of Mediation Model

Sr. # IV Path DV Mediation Direct Indirect

Model Model Model
1 EO → FP .58 .87 .00
2 EO → EL .53 .00 .69
3 EL → FP .47 .00 .78
4 Mediation EO→EL→FP EL & OP .51
5 R2 .52 .46
6 Adjusted R2 .49 .45
7 Results Partial
Mediation
Statistically Significant at p≤0.05.

20
Journal of Multidisciplinary Approaches in Science
Volume 5, Issue 1 (2019) 16-23

Table IV demonstrates the outcomes of reliability, convergent validity, coefficients, significance and
T value. A study indicates that Cronbach’s α is the most common measure of testing reliability and
the standard value for Cronbach’s α is .70 [43]. The value of Cronbach’s α for all the construct is
higher than the benchmark value of .70 which indicates that all the constructs were reliable. The cut-
off value for assessing CR and AVE is .70 and .50 respectively [18]. The value of CR and AVE for all
constructs is greater than the reference value of .70 and .50 respectively which indicates that all the
constructs are valid. P and T values are used to test significance of hypotheses. The significance level
for P value is .05 and 1.96 for T value. A hypothesis is statistically significant if its p value is less than
.05 and t value is more than 1.96. All the constructs of entrepreneurial orientation, entrepreneurial
leadership and firm performance are statistically significant. The outcomes offer support to H1 (β .58,
T 2.210), H2 (β .53, T 3.207), H3 (β .47, T 2.792) and H4 (β .51, T 2.143).

Table IV: Reliability, Validity and Coefficients

Sr. # Variables α CR AVE Hypotheses Β Sig. T value

1 EO .753 .714 .623 H1 .58 .000 2.210
2 EL .727 .792 .781 H2 .53 .000 3.207
3 FP .869 .853 .644 H3 .47 .000 2.792
4 EO→EL→FP .708 .759 .581 H4 .51 .000 2.143
P< 0.05, T ≥ 1.96

The value of χ2/df is 2.103 which is less than the standard value of < 5.00. Standard value for RMSEA
is ≤ 0.08 and for CFI, GFI, AGFI and NNFI is ≤ 0.90. The value for RMSEA, CFI, GFI, AGFI and NNFI is
.061, .924, .943, .972 and .905 respectively. The values of fit indices are statistically significant which
indicates that model is valid and fit.

Table V: Model Fit Indices

Sr. # Indices Standard Value Results Value Decision

1 χ2/df, < 5.00 2.103 Accepted
2 RMSEA ≤ 0.08 .061 Accepted
3 CFI, ≤ 0.90 .924 Accepted
4 GFI, ≤ 0.90 .943 Accepted
5 AGFI ≤ 0.90 .972 Accepted
6 NNFI ≤ 0.90 .905 Accepted

5. Conclusions
The outcomes of the current research stipulate that entrepreneurial orientation has direct
impact on firm performance which is in line with [8] and indirect impact on firm performance through
entrepreneurial leadership. Data was collected from owners/managers of 311 SMEs of ICTs industry
from Punjab, Pakistan. Entrepreneurial orientation is vital to attain superior firm performance which
leads to sustained competitive advantage. Three dimensions of entrepreneurial orientation are Risk-
taking, proactiveness and innovativeness which has been used in the current study. Opportunity
seeking is the heart of entrepreneurial leadership.

The current research made a theoretical contribution in the existing literature by empirically
investigating the mediating role of entrepreneurial leadership in the relationship between
entrepreneurial orientation and firm performance in ICTs SMEs of Punjab, Pakistan. The practical
21
Journal of Multidisciplinary Approaches in Science
Volume 5, Issue 1 (2019) 16-23

implication is that entrepreneurial leadership plays a key role in the entrepreneurial orientation
processes and owners/managers must be mindful of this bond and willing to offer support to build
up this relationship. Finally, the current research provides valuable comprehensions into
entrepreneurial orientation, entrepreneurial leadership and firm performance linkage.

References
[1] Abu-Jarad, Ismael Younis, Nor'Aini Yusof, and Davoud Nikbin. "A review paper on organizational culture and
organizational performance." International Journal of Business and Social Science 1, no. 3 (2010).
[2] Arief, Mohammad, Armanu Thoyib, Achmad Sudiro, and Fatchur Rohman. "The effect of entrepreneurial
orientation on the firm performance through strategic flexibility: A study on the SMEs cluster in Malang." Journal
of Management Research 5, no. 3 (2013): 44.
[3] Bhatti, Waheed Akbar, Sidra Waris, and Arshad Zaheer. "THE EFFECT OF COMMITMENT AND MOTIVATION ON
HUMAN TALENT AND ITS CONTRIBUTION TO ORGANIZATIONAL PERFORMANCE." Management & Marketing 6,
no. 3 (2011).
[4] Covin, Jeffrey G., and Danny Miller. "International entrepreneurial orientation: Conceptual considerations,
research themes, measurement issues, and future research directions." Entrepreneurship Theory and
Practice 38, no. 1 (2014): 11-44.
[5] Covin, Jeffrey G., and Dennis P. Slevin. "The entrepreneurial imperatives of strategic leadership." Strategic
entrepreneurship: Creating a new mindset (2017): 307-327.
[6] Currie, Graeme, Mike Humphreys, Deniz Ucbasaran, and Steve McManus. "Entrepreneurial leadership in the
English public sector: paradox or possibility?." Public Administration86, no. 4 (2008): 987-1008.
[7] Ensley, Michael D., Craig L. Pearce, and Keith M. Hmieleski. "The moderating effect of environmental dynamism
on the relationship between entrepreneur leadership behavior and new venture performance." Journal of
Business Venturing 21, no. 2 (2006): 243-263.
[8] Farman Ullah, Muhammad Israr Khan, Sabiha Rehman, and Zahid Ullah. “Measurement of entrepreneurial
orientation.”Journal of Multidisciplinary Approaches in Science 3, no.1 (2019): 31-38.
[9] Feng, Mei, Milé Terziovski, and Danny Samson. "Relationship of ISO 9001: 2000 quality system certification with
operational and business performance: A survey in Australia and New Zealand-based manufacturing and service
companies." Journal of manufacturing technology management 19, no. 1 (2007): 22-37.
[10] Fullerton, Rosemary R., and William F. Wempe. "Lean manufacturing, non-financial performance measures,
and financial performance." International Journal of Operations & Production Management 29, no. 3 (2009):
214-240.
[11] George, Gerard, D. Robley Wood Jr, and Raihan Khan. "Networking strategy of boards: Implications for small and
medium-sized enterprises." Entrepreneurship & Regional Development 13, no. 3 (2001): 269-285.
[12] Gharakhani, Davood, and Morteza Mousakhani. "Knowledge management capabilities and SMEs' organizational
performance." Journal of Chinese Entrepreneurship 4, no. 1 (2012): 35-49.
[13] Gruian, Claudiu-Marian. "THE INFLUENCE OF INTELLECTUAL CAPITAL ON ROMANIAN COMPANIES'FINANCIAL
PERFORMANCE." Annales Universitatis Apulensis-Series Oeconomica 13, no. 2 (2011).
[14] Gupta, Vipin, Ian C. MacMillan, and Gita Surie. "Entrepreneurial leadership: developing and measuring a cross-
cultural construct." Journal of business venturing 19, no. 2 (2004): 241-260.
[15] Hair, Joseph F., Rolph E. Anderson, Barry J. Babin, and William C. Black. "Multivariate data analysis: A global
perspective (Vol. 7): Pearson Upper Saddle River." (2010).
[16] Hernaus, Tomislav, Mirjana Pejić Bach, and Vesna Bosilj Vukšić. "Influence of strategic approach to BPM on
financial and non-financial performance." Baltic Journal of Management7, no. 4 (2012): 376-396.
[17] Ho, Ching-Wei. "Identify with community or company? An investigation on the consumer behavior in Facebook
brand community." Telematics and Informatics 32, no. 4 (2015): 930-939.
[18] Ho, Li-An. "Meditation, learning, organizational innovation and performance." Industrial Management & Data
Systems 111, no. 1 (2011): 113-131.
[19] Horth, David Magellan, and Jonathan Vehar. "Becoming a leader who fosters innovation." (2012).
[20] Jia, Jianfeng, Guofeng Wang, Xi’nan Zhao, and Xifeng Yu. "Exploring the relationship between entrepreneurial
orientation and corporate performance: The role of competency of executives in entrepreneurial-oriented
corporations." Nankai Business Review International 5, no. 3 (2014): 326-344.

22
Journal of Multidisciplinary Approaches in Science
Volume 5, Issue 1 (2019) 16-23

[21] Jensen, Susan M., and Fred Luthans. "Entrepreneurs as authentic leaders: Impact on employees'
attitudes." Leadership & Organization Development Journal 27, no. 8 (2006): 646-666.
[22] Karacaoglu, Korhan, Ali Bayrakdaroglu, and Firat Botan San. "The impact of corporate entrepreneurship on firms'
financial performance: Evidence from Istanbul Stock Exchange Firms." International Business Research 6, no. 1
(2013): 163.
[23] Kline, Rex B. "Principles and practice of structural equation modeling 3 rd ed." (2011).
[24] Kuratko, Donald F. "Introduction to Entrepreneurship, Eight Edition." Canada: South-Western Cengage
Learning (2009).
[25] Kuratko, D. F., Morris, M. H., and Covin, J. G. Corporate innovation & entrepreneurship. Canada: South-Western
Cengage Learning (2011).
[26] Leitch, Claire M., Christel McMullan, and Richard T. Harrison. "The development of entrepreneurial leadership:
The role of human, social and institutional capital." British Journal of Management 24, no. 3 (2013): 347-366.
[27] Li, Chengyan, Lili Bao, and Qiang Jiang. "Leadership styles of entrepreneurial women in eastern China:
Characteristics and differences." Social Behavior and Personality: an international journal 41, no. 3 (2013): 421-
431.
[28] Luo, Yadong, Ying Huang, and Stephanie Lu Wang. "Guanxi and organizational performance: A meta-
analysis." Management and Organization Review 8, no. 1 (2012): 139-172.
[29] Manikas, Ioannis, and Leon A. Terry. "A case study assessment of the operational performance of a multiple
fresh produce distribution centre in the UK." British Food Journal112, no. 6 (2010): 653-667.
[30] Mathieu, John E., and Scott R. Taylor. "Clarifying conditions and decision points for mediational type inferences
in organizational behavior." Journal of Organizational Behavior: The International Journal of Industrial,
Occupational and Organizational Psychology and Behavior 27, no. 8 (2006): 1031-1056.
[31] Mgeni, Tresphory O., and Parameswar Nayak. "Impact of Transactional Leadership Style on Business
Performance of SMEs in Tanzania." Amity Business Review 17, no. 1 (2016).
[32] Molina, Carlos, and Jamie L. Callahan. "Fostering organizational performance: The role of learning and
intrapreneurship." Journal of European Industrial Training 33, no. 5 (2009): 388-400.
[33] Otache, Innocent, and Rosli Mahmood. "Entrepreneurial orientation and performance of Nigerian banks: The
mediating effect of teamwork." Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences6, no. 3 (2015): 406.
[34] Pearce, John A., David A. Fritz, and Peter S. Davis. "Entrepreneurial orientation and the performance of religious
congregations as predicted by rational choice theory." Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice 34, no. 1 (2010):
219-248.
[35] Peng, David Xiaosong, Roger G. Schroeder, and Rachna Shah. "Competitive priorities, plant improvement and
innovation capabilities, and operational performance: A test of two forms of fit." International Journal of
Operations & Production Management 31, no. 5 (2011): 484-510.
[36] Potthast, Margaret J. "Confirmatory factor analysis of ordered categorical variables with large models." British
Journal of mathematical and statistical psychology 46, no. 2 (1993): 273-286.
[37] Rauch, Andreas, Johan Wiklund, George T. Lumpkin, and Michael Frese. "Entrepreneurial orientation and
business performance: An assessment of past research and suggestions for the future." Entrepreneurship theory
and practice 33, no. 3 (2009): 761-787.
[38] Röschke, Arik. "Entrepreneurial Leadership." PhD diss., University of St. Gallen, 2018.
[39] Santos, Juliana Bonomi, and Luiz Artur Ledur Brito. "Toward a subjective measurement model for firm
performance." BAR-Brazilian Administration Review 9, no. SPE (2012): 95-117.
[40] Shamsuddin, Sofian, Jaizah Othman, Mohamad Asmady Shahadan, and Zukarnain Zakaria. "The dimensions of
corporate entrepreneurship and the performance of established organization." ACRN Journal of
entrepreneurship perspectives 1, no. 2 (2012): 111-131.
[41] Thornberry, Neal. Lead like an entrepreneur. McGraw Hill Professional, 2006.
[42] Tsai, Ming-Chih, Kee-Hung Lai, and Wei-Che Hsu. "A study of the institutional forces influencing the adoption
intention of RFID by suppliers." Information & Management 50, no. 1 (2013): 59-65.
[43] Tseng, Shu-Mei. "The correlation between organizational culture and knowledge conversion on corporate
performance." Journal of knowledge management 14, no. 2 (2010): 269-284.
[44] Vecchio, Robert P. "Entrepreneurship and leadership: common trends and common threads." Human resource
management review 13, no. 2 (2003): 303-327.
[45] Wang, Zhining, Nianxin Wang, and Huigang Liang. "Knowledge sharing, intellectual capital and firm
performance." Management decision 52, no. 2 (2014): 230-258.p

23