2022 - Has COVID-19 Pushed DIGITAL

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
https://www.emerald.com/insight/1462-6004.htm
Has COVID-19 pushed Has COVID-19

pushed
digitalisation in SMEs? The role of digitalisation
in SMEs?
entrepreneurial orientation
Lara Penco and Giorgia Profumo
University of Genoa, Genoa, Italy, and
Received 22 October 2021
Francesca Serravalle and Milena Viassone Revised 23 December 2021
University of Turin, Turin, Italy Accepted 3 January 2022
Abstract
Purpose – The authors’ aim is to investigate if entrepreneurial orientation (EO) has a role in interpreting an
external crisis, such as COVID-19, as an opportunity for investing in digital transformation.
Design/methodology/approach – The authors undertook multiple case study research on the digital
transformation of seven “Made in Italy” SMEs and proposed a conceptual framework that sees an external
stimulus (e.g. the pandemic) as a driver of the digitalisation, filtered by the entrepreneurial orientation of SMEs.
Findings – The authors’ results show how EO deals with the changing environment and helps address the
market opportunities related to digitalisation.
Research limitations/implications – This study contributes to the existing literature on EO and digital
transformation of SMEs, creating a new model for forthcoming studies on this topic. In addition, interesting
insights are offered on the role of EO to promote the introduction of digital transformation in SMEs operating in
the “Made in Italy” sectors.
Practical implications – This study shows the role of EO as a reactive characteristic during a crisis. Thus,
the authors’ suggestion to SMEs is to develop their EO as a part of the strategic orientation. In addition, this
work encourages policymakers to invest in the promotion of specific interventions aimed at supporting
entrepreneurs in enhancing their capacity to effectively manage digital transformation.
Originality/value – Identifying the most important triggers of digitalisation in times of crisis remains an
underexplored area of research. Thus, this study adds value to both digital transformation and entrepreneurial
orientation topics.
Keywords Entrepreneurial orientation, COVID-19, Stimulus, SMEs, Digitalisation
Paper type Research paper
1. Introduction
Following the rise of the internet and new digital technologies (e.g. social networks,
smartphones and big data), many consumers have started to ask for a more engaging and
enhanced shopping experience (Labrecque et al., 2013), whereas companies have begun to
adapt their business models to compete in a more digitalised market (Rundh, 2003). This
economic development has created social changes, the most recent of which is characterised
by digital transformation (Cennamo et al., 2020; Denicolai et al., 2020; Piccoli et al., 2017; Zaoui
and Souissi, 2020). The literature has found that digitalisation modifies the entire structure of
business models (BM; Osterwalder and Pigneur, 2010; Saebi et al., 2017; Volberda et al., 2017),
revolutionising the way in which enterprises do business (Rothberg and Erickson, 2017) and
changing the value proposition and customer relationships (Arnold et al., 2016; Bouwman
et al., 2018).
The literature on digital transformation has depicted some important triggers of digitalisation,
which can be summed up as the changing customer behaviours and expectations, the digital shift
in the organisation’s industry and the change in the competitive landscape (Osmundsen
et al., 2018).
In this scenario, the COVID-19 outbreak may represent a disruptive external Journal of Small Business and
Enterprise Development
environmental stimulus towards digital transformation (Laato et al., 2020; Botti, 2020). © Emerald Publishing Limited
1462-6004
This pandemic has forced many businesses, especially small- and medium-size enterprises DOI 10.1108/JSBED-10-2021-0423
JSBED (SMEs) belonging to traditional industries with little or no digital experience to invest in
digital transformation (Soto-Acosta, 2020) to ensure business continuity, while avoiding the
problems of physical distance from customers and financial crisis.
From an entrepreneur’s point of view, “the spirit of determination and fortitude” is
considered to be more important than ever (Liguori and Pittz, 2020, p. 106). During times of
crisis and environmental uncertainty, the decision-making process for pursuing
opportunities and addressing emerging market needs has become crucial for SMEs if they
wish to survive and operate in a changing market (Beliaeva et al., 2020). In this scenario,
businesses need to develop entrepreneurial decisions, actions and methods to take advantage
of the changing scenario (Wales et al., 2021; Covin and Slevin, 1989). In this sense, a firm’s
entrepreneurial orientation (EO) has become relevant (Covin and Wales, 2019).
In the last five decades of research, EO has been studied and investigated by scholars
because of its versatility (Ferreira et al., 2019; Wales et al., 2021; Karami et al., 2020; Jocic et al.,
2021). However, despite this expanding body of knowledge in many different fields of
investigation, the role of EO in innovating, making bold decisions in risky situations and
identifying new opportunities from the context is still worthy of exploration. Therefore, our
interest in investigating the role of EO starts with the knowledge that this specific construct
may lead the decision-making process at the basis of the enterprise’s digital transformation,
helping companies to interpret the crisis as an opportunity; as stated in the management
literature (Covin and Wales, 2012; Wales et al., 2019). The main focus of established studies on
EO has been placed on stable economic environments (Parente et al., 2018, 2021), while studies
investigating the role of EO in the context of crisis can be dated to the 2008 financial crisis
(Bao et al., 2011; Soininen, 2013). In economic history, there has been no global crisis since the
subprime crisis of 2008. Thus, the role of EO during a health global crisis, in a turbulent, risky
and digitalised environment dominated by SMEs such as today’s (Çanako glu et al., 2018;
Duan et al., 2019; Levesque and Joglekar, 2018), has remained unexplored.
Therefore, this study aims to expand the knowledge on the role of EO, filling this literature
gap, by asking:
To what extent does EO have a role in interpreting an external crisis such as COVID-19 in terms of
opportunity for digital transformation?
We analyse digitalisation as a disruptive scenario, assuming that EO pushes and accelerates
the digital transformation in SMEs (Dess et al., 2003; Hitt et al., 2001; Zahra, 1996). We present a
multiple case study research on the digital transformation of seven SMEs operating in mature
industries, such as the 3F (i.e. fashion, furniture, food and beverage) of the “Made in Italy” brand
(Matarazzo et al., 2021; Penco et al., 2020). This helps us to create a conceptual framework on the
relationships among COVID-19 as a stimulus, digital transformation and EO.
This study makes several important contributions to the existing literature. First, by
focusing on the role of entrepreneurial orientation during a crisis (Bao et al., 2011; Laskovaia
et al., 2019; Soininen, 2013), we contribute to the entrepreneurship literature by highlighting
how EO enables SMEs to see the changing environment as an opportunity for renovation to
better survive in the challenging environment. In this vein, this disruptive crisis needs to be
managed more positively (Ratten, 2020). Second, we contribute to the digital transformation
literature by identifying the role of the external crisis as a stimulus for the adoption of digital
transformation and also by stressing the important role of EO in pursuing innovative
behaviours (Jocic et al., 2021). In addition to the theoretical implications, this study provides
some managerial implications to accomplish the digital transformation of “Made in Italy”
SMEs in the time of COVID-19 crisis.
The rest of this paper is structured as follows. In the second section, we investigate the
literature on digital transformation and EO in times of crisis to depict how EO pushes SMEs
towards specific actions (i.e. digitalise the business) during a crisis such as the COVID-19
outbreak. Section three explains the research design and the methodology that we have used. Has COVID-19
Section four describes the main empirical findings, while the fifth section is devoted to a pushed
discussion of the research results. Finally, the concluding section draws some theoretical and
practical implications stemming from EO and digitalisation during a crisis, along with the
digitalisation
emerging managerial practices. in SMEs?
2. Theoretical background
2.1 Digital transformation and the role of external stimuli
In general terms, digitalising a business could be a valid solution to maintain market position
and to improve a company’s performance by encouraging the innovation of products,
services and practices (Fidel et al., 2018; Gil-Gomez et al., 2020; Polese et al., 2021; Cannas,
2021). While technology (i.e. digital platform and digital infrastructures) can greatly aid
businesses in terms of performance, in shifting from the offline to online environment, and in
reducing costs for searching new market opportunities and speeding some processes (Jafari-
Sadeghi et al., 2021), some businesses are still not prepared to introduce innovation, in
particular SMEs. Traditionally, SMEs encounter many difficulties in reorganising their
existing businesses (Gallego et al., 2013) due to their limited resources (e.g. financial and
skilled human resources), which represent a barrier to digitalisation (Kim et al., 2013). Despite
these resource limits, some SMEs overcome these barriers, thus pushing the business to its
full technological potential. This is normally due to a higher technology readiness in EO,
which leads to efforts to invest in digitalisation (Jafari-Sadeghi et al., 2021).
SMEs that exploit their potential can be seen to be in a “renaissance” phase in which
enterprises are connecting with technology to create a “Human‒Machine” interaction (Daugherty
and Wilson, 2018). This aspect could open new opportunities to meet the digitalisation challenge,
especially for those enterprises that have invested abroad (Strange and Zucchella, 2017).
With respect to the COVID-19 outbreak, Soto-Acosta (2020, p. 265) stated that
“organisations are accelerating the adoption of digital transformation as the best way to
avoid a short-term economic collapse and combat the COVID-19 pandemic with resilience”.
From small start-ups to big corporations, no one has been spared from the impact of the
coronavirus pandemic (Amankwah-Amoah et al., 2020; Wenzel et al., 2020). This crisis has
forced all businesses to adapt and reinvent ways of marketing, thereby expediting the use of
technology; for example, many local grocery stores that banned customers from entering
have transformed into online stores (Forbes, 2021).
A recent article by McKinsey (2020) suggests that all companies that have suffered from
the advent of the COVID-19 outbreak should reimagine their BM and rebuild their
competitive advantages on the market rather than feeling lost by the scenario.
In the behavioural literature, this changing scenario is particularly interesting if analysed
as a new environmental stimulus (Amankwah-Amoah et al., 2020; Arora, 1982; Gao and Bai,
2014; Islam et al., 2020; Liu et al., 2016) which can directly affect corporate responses
(Mehrabian and Russell, 1974; Wenzel et al., 2020). In this vein, the Stimulus-Organism-
Response (SOR) framework investigates stimulus as an element that can affect individual
behaviours (Gao and Bai, 2014). This psychological model depicts the path of this changing
environment, investigating how an external stimulus, such as social cues, marketing
strategies and scarcity effect (Chang et al., 2011; Dennis et al., 2007; Ku et al., 2012; Suri et al.,
2007; Wu et al., 2020), that is processed by an organism produces a final response.
The SOR model is particularly useful for investigating environmental factors and an
individual’s reactions to external stimuli (Xu et al., 2014). However, studies in which this
framework is applied to explain organisational behaviours (Gotteland et al., 2020; Spanjol
et al., 2012), especially in entrepreneurship fields, are lacking. The literature presents only a
few studies that have investigated entrepreneurial reaction to external stimuli using this
JSBED framework of analysis (Bhushan, 2020; Chen et al., 2020; L€ uthje and Franke, 2003; Zhang
et al., 2014).
The COVID-19 pandemic was recently defined as an external stimulus that may be
interpreted and filtered by the decision-making process in a consumer-oriented perspective
(Laato et al., 2020). Therefore, EO poses the basis to interpret the received information in
terms of opportunities instead of threats, which will then be translated by the enterprise in a
specific response (i.e. the digitalisation process).
2.2 Entrepreneurial orientation in a time of crisis

The phenomenon of EO has become a central focus of the entrepreneurship literature and it is
the subject of more than three decades of research (Chew et al., 2021; De˛ bicka et al., 2021;
Covin and Wales, 2012; Nakku et al., 2020; Wales et al., 2019; Parente et al., 2018, 2021). In
particular, EO is considered to be a driver of the competitive advantage and firm performance
of SMEs (Karami et al., 2020).
The typical conceptualisation of EO includes three dimensions (Covin and Slevin, 1989;
Miller, 1983): innovativeness, proactiveness and risk-taking (Covin and Slevin, 1989; Wiklund
and Shepherd, 2005; Zahra, 1996). Lumpkin and Dess (1996) formulated a definition of
innovativeness, bringing it back to the trend of a firm “to engage in and support new ideas,
novelty, experimentation, and creative processes that may result in new products, services, or
technological processes” (p. 142). Proactiveness is defined as the possibility for the
entrepreneur to shape the environment to their own advantage (Venkatraman, 1989).
Finally, the risk-taking dimension refers to “the degree to which managers are willing to make
large and risky resource commitments–i.e. those which have a reasonable chance of costly
failures” (Miller and Friesen, 1978, p. 923). If any of these dimensions are absent, then an
organisation would be considered less than entrepreneurial (Uusitalo and Lavikka, 2020;
Wales et al., 2019). In addition, in their study on EO, Lumpkin and Dess (1996) expanded the
number of dimensions that characterise this construct, identifying two additional dimensions
that are able to define the domain of EO, which are competitive aggressiveness and autonomy.
However, the number of studies in the EO literature using all of these five dimensions is very
limited (e.g. George et al., 2001) compared to the contributions using the three dimensions of
Covin and Slevin (1989) because these dimensions more properly refer to larger companies
than SMEs.
In SMEs, entrepreneurs, who are often chief executive officers (CEOs), have a substantive
effect on the overall performance of the enterprises that they lead, shaping the
entrepreneurial posture of these organisations (Pittino et al., 2017; Sciascia et al., 2013;
Matricano, 2018). In SMEs, the owner-manager is the arbiter of strategy (Stewart et al., 2021).
Thus, entrepreneurs have more and more of an effect on the businesses that they own, thanks
to the overlap between ownership, management and entrepreneurial roles, and the less formal
structure of these organisations. Given that entrepreneurs are a decisive source of imprinting
for the organisations that they lead, their characteristics and decision-making styles will
influence the actions of the organisations through the enterprise’s EO (Yusubova et al., 2020).
As shaped by entrepreneurs’ profiles, EO helps enterprises to address environmental and
technological challenges (Camelo-Ordaz et al., 2005; Certo et al., 2006; Wrede et al., 2020).
Consequently, it influences the strategic decision-making approach, including issue
identification, information seeking and information processing.
During a crisis, the role of EO is therefore essential when dealing with the rapid changes
and increased environmental uncertainty that may shape a firm’s decision-making processes,
in particular its decisions regarding how to follow entrepreneurial opportunities and address
market needs. Crises are ambiguous, unique, negative and very risky events for which
companies cannot follow the usual organisational procedures (Hale et al., 2016). EO may
shape the perceptions of the stimulus emerging from the external environment (Bao et al., Has COVID-19
2011) and represents an influencing factor on corporate responses. pushed
In general terms, scholars have addressed the relationship between the level of a firm’s EO
and the external environment conditions (Dess and Beard, 1984; Wiklund and Shepherd,
digitalisation
2005). With a focus on crises, Shirokova et al. (2016) found that firms achieve superior in SMEs?
performance when adopting EO in critical environments. In the same direction, Laskovaia
et al. (2019) argued that “during periods of economic crisis, firms with higher levels of EO are
more likely to take advantage of new business opportunities” (p. 5). The same conclusions were
drawn by Beliaeva et al. (2020) based on research of Russian SMEs during a period of
economic crisis in 2015–2016, which confirmed that EO enterprises are likely to identify new
ideas and innovations to explore new product-market domains (Bao et al., 2011; Soininen,
2013). For instance, following a temporary environmental shock, EO is positively related to an
enterprise’s strategic alliance intentions (Marino et al., 2008).
Indeed, a “crisis” could be interpreted as both a “threat” and an “opportunity”
(Chattopadhyay et al., 2001; Dutton and Jackson, 1987). The interpretation of the crisis
provides an opportunity, or a threat is influenced by the EO (Bao et al., 2011). EO can influence
judgements related to the three dimensions – namely, positive/negative, gain/loss and
controllable/uncontrollable – that underlie the threat/opportunity categorisation (Bao et al.,
2011; Jackson and Dutton, 1988). For instance, the opportunity depicts a positive situation in
which there is a possibility to obtain gain and control, while the threat implies “a negative
situation in which loss is likely and over which one has relatively little control” (Dutton and
Jackson, 1987, p. 80). According to Amankwah-Amoah et al. (2020), underestimating or
overestimating threats can lead to inappropriate strategic responses and actions.
In the present COVID-19 pandemic crisis, SMEs have tended to rely on EO, influenced by
the intrinsic profiles of the entrepreneurs (Levesque and Minniti, 2006; Lumpkin and Dess,
1996; Shane, 2000), to shape the perceptions of the stimulus emerging from the external
environment (Bao et al., 2011) in terms of opportunity (Bao et al., 2011; Chattopadhyay et al.,
2001) and respond to the stimulus by digitally transforming the firm.
3. Methodology
3.1 Procedure
To understand if COVID-19 represents an external stimulus of digital transformation and if
EO has a role in interpreting an external crisis in terms of opportunity for digital
transformation, a multiple case study approach has been developed (Cunningham, 1997;
Eisenhardt and Graebner, 2007; Eisenhardt, 1989; Pratt, 2009; Yin, 1994). The data were
collected via an interview protocol that was created according to the literature. The decision
to adopt this methodology emerged from two motivations: the research scope (digital
transformation and EO) and the moderate firm size (SMEs). Regarding the research scope, the
case study methodology is consistent with research questions based on “how” and “why”.
Qualitative research is appropriate when emphasis is placed on the development of a
conceptual framework, and the identification of critical factors and other key variables. More
specifically, Eisenhardt’s approach (1989) is based on theory building from the literature. In
this study, the aim is to expand and elaborate existing streams of literature (i.e. EO and digital
transformation) starting from real case studies (Eisenhardt, 1989; Eisenhardt and Graebner,
2007). Thus, the most appropriate approach is Eisenhardt’s (1989) because it gives the
possibility to combine different constructs, creating a bridge between them (Gehman
et al., 2018).
Regarding firm dimension, because SMEs tend not to disclose strategic and
organisational information, direct contact is essential to understand these profiles.
Moreover, multiple cases enable a more generalisable and robust theory than a single case
(Del Giudice et al., 2017; Dezi et al., 2018; Eisenhardt and Graebner, 2007). Therefore, this
JSBED research has been conducted according to the guidelines and suggestions for qualitative
methodologies that are provided by literature (Eisenhardt, 1989; Gehman et al., 2018).
Step 1: Selection of items
Data collection was primarily carried out using a semi-structured questionnaire. The semi-
structured questionnaire consists of 12 open ended questions, which are structured into five
sections: (1) company/association data (e.g. the history of the enterprise, the company
profile, the ownership structure, the company culture and vision): and entrepreneurial
features; (2) evaluation of EO; (3) identification of the principal digital transformation
actions implemented during the COVID-19 period; (4) a description of the useful processes
and resources; and (5) a description of some of the organisational characteristics (see
Annex). The identification of the items included in the questionnaire was based on the
literature review of digital transformation (Cennamo et al., 2020; Denicolai et al., 2020;
Piccoli et al., 2017; Zaoui and Souissi, 2020) and EO (Benevolo et al., 2020; Denicolai et al.,
2015; Koellinger, 2008; Levesque and Minniti, 2006; Lumpkin and Dess, 2001; Shane and
Venkataraman, 2000).
Step 2: Case selection
After validating our interview protocol with a small sample of PhD students, experts in the
field, and professionals, we gathered data via semi-structured interviews with the owners or
top managers of seven companies operating in one of the three “Fs” of the “Made in Italy”
brand (i.e. fashion, furniture and food, and beverage sectors). We decided to gather data in
these three specific sectors because they represented one-third of all Italian production in
2020 (IlSole24Ore, 2020). These sectors are characterised by a bipolar structure; namely, the
coexistence of a small number of big companies and a large number of micro-, small- and
medium-sized enterprises (Banterle et al., 2016), that are predominately family and/or
entrepreneurial businesses. Moreover, considering that the creation of consumer experiences
is increasingly important in the “Made in Italy” sectors (Penco et al., 2020), the digital
transformation of these companies has become extremely important because it can reinforce
the relationship with the final costumer, especially in a period of crisis.
In line with the exploratory research scope, the cases have been selected not because they
form a representative sample in statistical terms but because they provide significant
insights into digitalisation and EO in a time of crisis. We selected the companies following a
homogeneous approach: they are all based in the North-West area of Italy, are all considered
SMEs in terms of revenues and number of employees, and they all belong to the “Made in
Italy” brand. Moreover, all of the analysed cases were family businesses with entrepreneurs
in the leading role. Finally, according to Kumar Basu (2015), five cases or more are
appropriate to research the strategic applications of a new technology.
Step 3: Data collection
The semi-structured interviews were carried out from November 2020 to February 2021. We
arranged the appointments via email and telephone with the targeted firms. The
entrepreneur, the family member involved in the firm’s governance, or the top manager
were considered to be proper representatives. Considering the critical period (i.e.
corresponding to the second COVID-19 lockdown in Italy), we carried out the interviews
using virtual platforms, such as Skype or Teams.
Each interview lasted nearly 90 min and was conducted by at least two researchers to
eliminate subjective problems. The interviewers encouraged managers to freely report, and
no answer was forced if the informants had no recollection. To avoid confining respondents to
a set of pre-established answers, we introduced general and open questions to encourage the
interviewees to share information. We then continued with more specific questions to fine- Has COVID-19
tune the discussion into the areas of relevance to the study. pushed
The interviews were tape recorded and then transcribed verbatim. Each interview was
then translated from Italian into English by a professional translator. If necessary, a follow-
digitalisation
up with the firm was conducted via email and/or telephone. Brief profiles of interviewees and in SMEs?
entrepreneurs are summarised in Table 1.
Step 4: Data analysis and EO measurement
The data gathered that were during the interviews were analysed by performing an open-
coding practice. This method is suitable for the study of complex phenomena through the
coding of labels, concepts and words to produce theory from interviews rather than the mere
finding of facts (Ghezzi and Cavallo, 2020). The interviews were independently analysed by
each author and were discussed together to reduce subjectivity in interpretation of the data.
For example, following Zellweger and Sieger (2012), each of the four researchers
independently assessed the levels of the three EO dimensions for every company using a
nine-point scale, which formed three categories: low (rating 1–3), medium (rating 4–6) and
high (rating 7–9).
Referring to the three dimensions of EO, we assigned a rank from 1 to 2 when the company
lacks innovativeness and has absent or low proactiveness and risk-taking. When the
company has low innovativeness, moderate proactiveness and risk-taking, we assigned a
rank from 3 to 4. We assigned a rank from 5 to 6, when the company has moderate
innovativeness, proactiveness and risk-taking. When the company has moderate
innovativeness and high proactiveness and risk-taking, we assigned a rank from 7 to 8.
Finally, we assigned a rank of 9 when the company has high values in all the three
dimensions.
The interviews were archived using the software package NVivo 12 to discover the inner
meanings of the data and to develop a complete understanding of the cases. In addition to
primary data from interviews, secondary data from documents (e.g. business publications,
corporate presentations, Internet-based information and newspapers) were gathered. We
triangulated these data with the secondary sources from reports and the firm’s websites,
analysing the results and coherence, and reinforcing the knowledge of each company. The
analysis was carried out using an interpretative method (Eisenhardt and Graebner, 2007),
where we collected primary and secondary information from the previous 10 years
(2010–2021).
Figure 1 presents the research design and identifies the main steps.
3.2 The fieldwork

We began our data analyses with a detailed description of the seven Italian cases belonging to
the “Made in Italy” brand. Brief profiles of each selected firms, together with some key facts
and features, are summarised in Table 2.
4. Results
4.1 Digital transformation as a response to the COVID-19 crisis
The first finding of our analysis is that during COVID-19, all of the companies, independent of
their size and industry, accelerated their investments in web-based technologies, such as
websites, social media and e-commerce or information systems to develop customer
relationship management (CRM) activities. This is a natural consequence for business-to-
consumer (B2C) companies who want to strengthen their ties with the market during a period
of social distancing.
Table 1.
JSBED
and entrepreneurs
Profiles of interviewees
Position of the Age Education Is the interviewee also Entrepreneurial profile Entrepreneur(s)’
interviewee interviewee interviewee the entrepreneur? (individual/team level) background
FURNITURE CEO 51 Degree Yes No of founders: 1 Architect

DESIGN Family members: 1 4th generation
Entrepreneur(s) age: 51
WINE CMO (chief 52 Secondary Yes No of founders: 2 No background
marketing officer) school Family members: 2 5th generation
FOODMUSHROOMS Junior manager 30 Degree No No of founders: 1 No background
Family members: 4 5th generation
FASHIONSPORT Member of the board 41 Degree No No. of founders; 1 No background
of directors Family members: 4 1st generation
CFO Entrepreneur(s) age: 63
FOODCAKE CEO 55 Primary school Yes No of founders: 2 No background
Family members: 3 2nd generation
GARDENDESIGN CEO 54 Secondary Yes No of founders: 3 Athlete
school Family members: 2 2nd generation
ICECREAM CMO (chief 46 Degree No No of founders: 1 No background
marketing officer) Family members: 4 3rd generation
and 41
Step 1: QuesƟonnaire development Has COVID-19
Consistent with the Literature review on EO and SOR pushed
digitalisation
Step 2: Case selecƟon in SMEs?
4 companies in the Food and Beverage sector, 1 company
in the Fashion sector and 2 in the Furniture/Interior
Step 3: Data collecƟon using semi-structured depth

interviews
Step 4: Data analysis Step 4 bis: Content analysis (NVivo)
Results to RQ
Figure 1.
The research design
Source(s): Authors’ elaboration
While all of the companies had been forced to adopt smart working and new organisational
procedures aimed at preserving social distancing, only three of them had also invested in
digitalisation of their back-end processes (i.e. FASHIONSPORT, FOODCAKE and
ICECREAM). These firms are the largest and the most structured in terms of organisation
and processes. In these cases, the pandemic period has also been a period of reflection on how
to gain more operational efficiency.
Table 3 illustrates the most important digital transformation adopted during the last
months of the crisis, distinguishing if the digital tools are adopted: (1) to follow the trends and
overcome the COVID-19 restrictions from the perspective of a survival behaviour (“reactive
digitalisation”); (2) to accelerate the innovation paths of the company or innovate the entire
business model to become more competitive (“proactive digitalisation”).
4.2 Entrepreneurial orientation and the COVID-19 crisis

Table 4 provides the synoptic data, the entrepreneurial orientation and the solicitation of EO
due to the pandemic, together with the interpretation, made by the interviewees, of COVID-19
as an opportunity or a threat.
4.2.1 Entrepreneurial orientation. In the sample, all of the investigated enterprises are
family firms in which family entrepreneurs are directly involved in the strategic governance,
supported by external managers. The level of overall EO in all the analysed cases is medium/
high, especially in the larger companies. Our analysis found that the level of EO (Covin and
Wales, 2012; Wales et al., 2019) is mostly enhanced by innovativeness and proactiveness,
while risk-taking is more of an “enabling condition” that affects the previous constructs. This
is evident also from the examination of the cluster analysis by codes based on word similarity
that was provided by NVivo12 (Figure 2) in which “EO” presents stronger relationships with
“innovativeness” and “proactiveness”. The leadership of the entrepreneurs seems to influence
all of the constructs of the EO.
The prevalent dimension of EO is clear when analysing FASHIONSPORT and
FOODCAKE. In both cases, the data show how the degree of innovativeness in EO plays a
crucial role in pushing the entrepreneur in adopting innovative solutions in its business, as
can be seen in the following example:
Table 2.
JSBED
companies
Profiles of selected
Profiles/ Year of Position of
strategic foundation Size: revenues % Foreign Core business and strategic the
Companies business units and location and employees Generation sale options respondent Description
FURNITURE Prestigious 1933 3 million euros 4th Exports in -Focus on prestigious CEO FURNITUREDESIGN belongs to
DESIGN furniture Northwest 15 employees generation 1 country furniture the furniture sector. It was founded
of Italy 10 external -Made in Italy line in 1933 as a carpentery and little by
collaborators -Internationalisation little the business was enhanced.
Now, at the 4th generation, the
company is specialized in made in
Italy furniture to both business to
business (B2B) and business to
consumers (B2C) and it counts 15
employees and 10 external
collaborators. In the last five years,
the company opens a branch and
different touchpoints in piedmont
and a store in the new shopping
center “Green pea”. The company
has also international branches in
France
WINE Wine industry 1967 2,5 million euros 5th No foreign -Focus on producing quality CMO (chief WINE is a family business
(franciacorta) Northwest of 11 employees generation sales wines with organic farming, marketing operating in the wine industry since
Italy maximum respect for the officer) 1968. The business is at the 5th
environment, minimum generation, counting 11 employees,
environmental impact and it is recognized as one of the
-Made in Italy line pioneers of franciacorta.
Franciacorta is a beautiful region
south from lake Iseo (Northwest of
Italy), which extends among sweet
morainic hills. This company boasts
the control of the entire production
chain, from grapes to bottling and
before the coronavirus pandemic,
its main channel was the Horeca.
The principal market is the Italian
one, even if it is working to make
known the “franciacorta” brand
over the Alps
(continued )
FOODMUSHROOMS Food: 1901 2,5 million euros 5th 7% -Focus on promoting in Italy Junior In 1901 FOODMUSHROOMS was
Mushrooms Northwest of 20 employees generation and abroad unique and manager founded in the Northwest of Italy
and starters Italy delicious products with the aim of spreading in Italy
-Made in Italy and abroad unique products for
ingredients and genuineness. As a
matter of fact, this company works
in the food sector, more specifically
in developing the culture of
collecting, processing and
preserving mushrooms using
natural methods. Its main channels
are B2B (i.e. restaurants) and B2C
(i.e. local shops, consumers) and it
counts 20 employees
FOODMUSHROOMS is at the 5th
generation now and the core
business remains the focus on the
product and its genuineness, two
elements characterizing the made in
Italy brand
At the moment, its main market is
the North Italy, and it is still not well
known abroad due to its traditional
products
(continued )
Has COVID-19
pushed
in SMEs?
digitalisation
Table 2.
Table 2.
JSBED
FASHIONSPORT Fashion: 1976 45 million euros 1st 95% -Focus on a market niche: Member of FASHIONSPORT, established 1976
Dance and Northwest of 130 employees generation Apparel for dance and fitness the board of by the current entrepreneur, focuses
fitness Italy -Product innovation: Patents directors on dance and fitness apparel.
(shaping pants) CFO FASHIONSPORT’s strength is its
-High differentiation: Brand uniqueness or its philosophy: “The
image and new made in Italy Art of Movement.” its strategy is
line characterized by creativity and
-Contractual vertical product innovation, and in 2013,
integration with suppliers FASHIONSPORT launched the
-Internationalisation (FDI WR.UP® pants designed to sculpt
and export) the female body by redefining the
thighs and backside. In recent
years, other products have been
designed using technology and
have been patented by
FASHIONSPORT. The new 100%
made in Italy capsule collection,
entirely conceived, designed, and
manufactured in Italy, was
launched in 2017
(continued )
FOODCAKE Food: 1905 11,5 million euros 2nd Exports in -Focus on a specific market CEO FOODCAKE produces panettone
Panettone Northwest of 55 employees generation 28 niche: Panettone and festive leavened products in
Italy countries -Made in Italy line Italy since 1905. It distributes its
products in Italy and abroad, in
specialized shops, wine bars and the
best pastry shops. The corporate
mission is to pursue quality at 3608
by continuously investing in
research and innovation,
continuously improving its
products starting from the
ingredients, processing, and
packaging, always remaining
faithful to the great tradition, linked
to piedmont processing. In the 1999
the company was transformed in a
s.p.a and, always in 1999, two sons
decided to open a new plant
specialized only in the production of
panettone, that is its core business.
In 2016 FOODCAKE expanded the
existing plant and created a
department devoted to the
production of gluten-free biscuits
and food for people with
intolerances
(continued )
Has COVID-19
pushed
in SMEs?
digitalisation
Table 2.
Table 2.
JSBED
GARDENDESIGN Interior design 1975 1 million euro 2nd Exports in -Focus on garden design CEO DESIGNGARDEN was founded in
and furniture Northwest of 12 employees for generation two -Made in Italy line 1975 as a flower and fruits plants
Italy the snc branch countries shop. The business was enhanced in
and 8 employees 1990, when the two sons brought
for the garden new ideas and started to divide
shop tasks between employees. Thus,
little by little, in 2007 the company
was completely renewed, starting to
design garden environments with
high quality furniture from the
made in Italy brand. Today, the
SME counts 12 employees, and the
core business is become the garden
design with many collaborations
with important and famous
Architects, working both in North
of Italy and abroad, such as France
and Geneva
(continued )
ICECREAM Food: Ice 1939 9,25 million euro 3rd 40% -Focus on ice cream CMO (chief ICECREAM was founded in 1939 as
cream Northwest of 35 employees generation Exports in -Collaboration with top marketing a small artisan business in the
Italy more than European officer) Northwest of Italy. The son of the
20 Retailers (private labels) founder transitioned the company
countries -Internationalisation to the industrial scale, while the two
nephews took the product of the
family business at an international
level, remaining faithful to the
tradition of their origins
Its strategy is based on the respect
for raw materials and for the
original Italian ice cream
preparations, following four
principles: Authenticity, quality
excellence, sustainability and fast
innovation
The company, along with its
brands, collaborates with several
top European retailers, offering a
wide range of solutions related to
private-label products, which
represent 65% of sales
Has COVID-19
pushed
in SMEs?
digitalisation
Table 2.
JSBED Companies Reactive digitalisation/proactive digitalisation
FURNITURE Reactive digitalisation

DESIGN • Adoption of smart working
Proactive digitalisation
Acceleration
• Starting of the usage of virtual meetings with customers (before consciously
avoided for the type of sector)
WINE Reactive digitalisation
• Increase of the e-commerce channel
Acceleration
• Enhancement of their customer segments, both B2B and B2C
Innovation
• Organizing online guided tastings
FOODMUSHROOMS Reactive digitalisation
• Development of the e-commerce platform
• New shipping partnerships to delivery
FASHIONSPORT Reactive digitalisation
Acceleration
• Investment in digital marketing and CRM
• Adoption of smart working
Innovation
• New product development (a new pant)
• New investment in logistic and CRM digital system (back-end)
• New partnership with IT and cyber security firms
FOODCAKE Reactive digitalisation
• Improvement of e-commerce and improvement of service of the online shop
• Improvement in online communication with customers
Innovation
• New investment in logistic and CRM digital system (back-end)
GARDENDESIGN Reactive digitalisation
• Investments in more performing instrumentations
Acceleration
• Enhancement of online communication with customers (e.g. Youtube videos and
tutorials)
ICECREAM Reactive digitalisation
• Virtual fairs and virtual meetings with customers
Acceleration
• Strengthening of the investments in social media activities
Innovation
Table 3. • New investment in an ERP system for digitalizing all the operations processes
Digital transformation • Data driven actions (e.g. investment in CRM)
in the COVID-19 era Source(s): Author’s elaboration
The innovativeness is fixed at the maximum level. It is part of the entrepreneur’s nature . . . he has
always pushed to reach digital innovation. (CFO FASHIONSPORT)
In addition, ICECREAM presents a higher level of innovativeness:
Risk Solicitation of EO Covid has speeded up
Companies Innovativeness taking Proactiveness EO by COVID-19 Covid is . . . digitalisation
FURNITURE Medium Medium High Medium/ þProactiveness An opportunity to strength my No

DESIGN high business weakness
WINE Medium Low High Medium þ Proactiveness A stimulus! My dream is to sell Yes
80% of my products online
FOODMUSHROOMS Medium/low Low Medium Medium/ No A threat for businesses, which No
Low had enhanced uncertainty
FASHIONSPORT High Medium/ High High þ Proactiveness A terrible threat for economy Yes
High þ Innovativeness and society but an opportunity
to innovate
FOODCAKE High High High High þ Innovativeness In a first time it has been Yes, also if they have
þ Proactiveness perceives as a threat, now it has still developed a high
opened opportunities and forced level of automatization
them to do some choices before Covid-19
because we have had time to
reflect
GARDENDESIGN Medium Low/ Medium Medium þProactiveness An important engine for Yes
Medium accelerating evolution and
investment in new technologies
ICECREAM High High Medium/High High þProactiveness An important crisis, which in Yes, but the path was
the short term resulted more as already undertaken
a threat. In the long run, it
accelerated the reflections on the
growth path and the production
efficiency
Source(s): Author’s elaboration
Has COVID-19
pushed
in SMEs?
EO and the COVID-19

digitalisation
Table 4.
stimulus
JSBED
Figure 2.
Codes clustered by
word similarity
We have a high pace of innovation . . . not only new products every year, but also innovation in the
way of working, in the channels and the customers . . . we are always challenging what we are doing.
(CMO ICECREAM)
The company also aims to be at the forefront of industry development, even if some big global
players are present in the market:
We are very agile, as we move quickly from thoughts to actions. (CMO ICECREAM)
According to our results, the SME’s EO is also related to their level of proactiveness, which
depends on the ability of enterprises in anticipating competitors with high involving ideas for
consumers, enhancing the service and line offering:
Our business has always anticipated the competitors with new ideas related to concepts, lines and
services. (CFO FASHIONSPORT)
For FURNITUREDESIGN, the level of proactiveness is high and EO is medium-high.
Having the vision is one thing and not having it is another. (CEO FURNITUREDESIGN)
Referring to the last dimension of EO, risk-taking is almost high in all of the investigated
enterprises. For instance, the attitude to assume risk is high in FASHIONSPORT, and is the
prerequisite for innovativeness and proactiveness, whereas FOODCAKE tends to act
earlier than competitors to reduce risk-taking. Thanks to the high level of risk-taking,
FOODCAKE has invested considerably in the development of new products, even in
uncertain situations:
We are oriented to produce every year a “panettone” good at least as the “panettone” of the previous
year. (CEO FOODCAKE)
In contrast, for FURNITURESDESIGN, innovativeness is reduced by the low level of risk-
taking. In fact, this enterprise invests in new solutions only if they are considered to be
functional by the referring market. An example can be seen in the analysis conducted by Has COVID-19
this SME on the application of virtual reality in the sale of furniture. When they pushed
understood that their costs would be higher than perspective revenues, they abandoned
this path:
digitalisation
in SMEs?
I tried to understand if virtual reality applied a few years ago through glasses was an interesting tool
(. . .). I would do it right away, but it’s too expensive. (CEO FURNITUREDESIGN)
The other three SMEs present a medium/low level of EO. These enterprises present a
medium/low level of risk-taking, preferring a conservative approach towards a high-risk
assumption:
We are cautious and conservative enough to have minimal risk. (CMO WINE)
We opt for cautious actions, even though some opportunities might be missed following this path.
(CEO GARDENDESIGN)
FOODMUSHROOMS presents the lowest level of EO. Their action plan is to minimise risk
due to the high uncertainty of the core products of this enterprise (i.e. mushrooms). For this
company, innovation is difficult due to the industry in which it operates (food-antipasti). The
interviewee stated that not innovating is an innovation in itself:
Tradition is the real innovation. (Junior Manager FOODMUSHROOMS)
Therefore, our analysis indicates that after COVID-19, the higher the EO, the greater the
stimulus in terms of innovativeness and proactiveness; whereas the companies that showed
less EO were only interested in innovativeness when adopting and imitating new processes
and procedures. When EO was very low, the external stimuli did not create any relevant
change in the three constructs. In some cases, the innovativeness and proactiveness were
already high, but the pandemic helped to accelerate these processes. For instance,
FASHIONSPORT launched a new patented pant during the pandemic. This product was
derived from the principles of pranotherapy: with the support of the pranotherapists during
the R&D process, FASHIONSPORT inserted little spheres into the tissue of sport pants aimed
at stimulating the “energy” meridians. This product is especially promoted by social media
marketing messages:
It was already an embryonic idea in the entrepreneur’s mind. During the lockdown period, the
product innovation process accelerated. It is the result of innovation, and it demonstrates how
important it is to be innovative. We never stopped. The projects are carried out the same, even more!
(CFO FASHIONSPORT)
We have experienced a moment of rethinking during the COVID-19 pandemic: the period
accelerated some transformational processes that have been already imagined. We found new
dynamics, new environmental forces and tried to equip ourselves for the future. (CMO
ICECREAM)
Moreover, none of these enterprises have changed their approach towards risk-taking.
This insight supports previous studies conducted on SMEs, which show risk-taking is
strictly linked to an entrepreneur’s orientation and attitude (Crovini et al., 2020;
Wright, 2018).
4.2.2 COVID-19 as an opportunity to speed up digitalisation. Our analysis indicates that
COVID-19 is mostly interpreted as an opportunity to speed up digital transformation.
Considering the cluster analysis performed with NVivo 12 on all of the codes which emerged
from the coding of the interviews (Figure 2), COVID-19 represents not only a crisis but also a
stimulus for investment in digital transformation. In particular, the SMEs that were analysed
appear to have invested in e-commerce to deepen their relationships with consumers or have
JSBED invested in other technologies (e.g. CRM and social media) that are useful for customer
engagement. In contrast, there is a lower relationship with the digitalisation of the back-end
activities or virtual reality technologies.
It is important to underline here that the companies that showed the greatest EO
and those that were stimulated both in innovativeness and proactiveness after the
initial crisis were the most persuaded to increase digitalisation. This is clear if we look
at FASHIONSPORT and FOODCAKE. In particular, FASHIONSPORT, despite a
30% loss in core business, interprets the pandemic as an opportunity to digitalise the
business:
Entrepreneurs are very often optimistic. That’s the way it is for us. Let’s try to see it in a positive way.
Many of these changes in terms of digitalisation, of online sales channels, of relationship with the
consumer are giving us a lot of satisfaction. New opportunities have opened up. (CFO
FASHIONSPORT)
For FOODCAKE, COVID-19 has opened opportunities in terms of rethinking the business
and enhancing the attractiveness of their advertising campaign:
This situation allowed us to reflect, discovering that we had to sell ourselves better in terms of
marketing. (CEO FOODCAKE)
In line with FOODCAKE, WINE also took up the challenge launched by this crisis to enhance
investments in digitalisation, especially related to e-commerce:
My dream would be to make and sell 80% of products online, both to consumers and business-to-
business (B2B) customers. (CMO WINE)
Referring to GARDENDESIGN, this enterprise benefited from the pandemic crisis, which
pushed the entrepreneur to hire people with digital skills, introducing new processes and
services to simplify working procedures:
COVID-19 represented an opportunity since it is an important engine for accelerating the evolution
and investment in new technologies. (CEO GARDENDESIGN)
The beneficial effect of the pandemic as a catalyst towards new digital investments also
affected ICECREAM. This enterprise, after an initial period of difficulty and suffering,
benefited from the COVID-19 crisis in terms of acceleration of the digitalisation
transformation process made by new investments in social media and an ERP system to
digitalise all of the operation’s processes, together with a CRM system to develop future data-
driven actions.
For FURNITUREDESIGN, the COVID-19 outbreak was a moderate stimulus to enhance
digital transformation. Thanks to this firm’s high level of proactiveness, the main digital tools
were already implemented before the start of the epidemic, but some investments have been
pursued also during the pandemic:
I firmly believe that in this time of great difficulty, we need to lay a healthy and solid foundation for a
restart, and so I invest. (CEO FURNITUREDESIGN)
Finally, FOODMUSHROOMS does not perceive COVID-19 as a digital catalyst and an
opportunity to digitalise, even if this enterprise stated it had worked more on the website
during the pandemic.
We woke up a bit with Covid-19 in terms of e-commerce . . . therefore, the pandemic has accelerated
digitalisation, switching some channels from offline to online. (Junior Manager
FOODMUSHROOMS)
Thus, our data show that for many of the enterprises of our sample, the COVID-19 pandemic Has COVID-19
represented an opportunity to improve the business, offering an enhanced service in term of pushed
digitalisation to consumers.
digitalisation
in SMEs?
5. Discussion
Based on previous results and after carefully examining the current literature, this study
develops some research propositions that link the analysed constructs (i.e. COVID-19
crisis, digital transformation and EO). To illustrate the development of the task, we will
use the circle graph built with NVivo 12 (Figure 3) in which the codes are represented as
points on the perimeter and the similarity between the items – in terms of words – is
indicated by connecting lines of varying thickness, with thicker lines indicating a stronger
similarity.
In the behavioural field, a changing scenario is particularly interesting if analysed as a
new environmental stimulus (Arora, 1982; Gao and Bai, 2014; Islam et al., 2020; Parente
et al., 2021; Liu et al., 2016) that can directly affect responses (Mehrabian and Russell, 1974).
In this vein, the SOR framework investigates the stimulus as an element that can affect an
individual’s behaviours (Gao and Bai, 2014). In this case, COVID-19 presents a strong
connection not only with the code “crisis” but also with “stimulus” (thicker lines in the
circle). It could, therefore, represent the stimulus towards the digital transformation of a
firm. However, the response of a company is related to its EO, which in SMEs is shaped by
the role of the entrepreneur and their leadership style. In Figure 3, COVID-19 is also
Figure 3.
Codes clustered by
word similarity –
circle graph
JSBED connected to EO and, in particular, to its construct of innovativeness. Thus, the following
proposition arises:
P1. The existence of an external stimulus (e.g. the COVID-19 outbreak) pushes
enterprises with a high level of EO to adopt digital transformation. Thus,
EO works as a mediator between an external stimulus and the response in
digitalisation.
We can observe how enterprises with a high or medium EO consider COVID-19 not only as a
danger but also as an opportunity to strengthen their business’s weaknesses, to increase
online sales, to innovate, and to accelerate evolution and investments in new technologies,
while enterprises with a medium/low EO mainly consider the COVID-19 crisis as a threat.
Thus, the following propositions arise:
P2a. During a crisis, such as COVID-19, a high EO (due to a high level of innovativeness
embedded) leads to interpret the crisis in terms of an opportunity that generates a
“proactive” digital transformation, in which the investments in new technologies are
not only a solution to compete in a changing scenario but also an opportunity to
innovate.
P2b. During a crisis, such as COVID-19, a low EO (due to a low level of embedded
innovativeness) leads the company to interpret the crisis in terms of a threat, which
generates a “reactive” digital transformation, in which the investments in new
technologies are only a solution to compete in a changing scenario.
The willingness to engage in and support new ideas and creative processes may result
in new products, services or technological processes (Lumpkin and Dess, 1996). This
shapes EO in such a way that a company becomes more inclined to develop digital
transformation paths, even in a time of crisis. Firms that present a high level of
innovativeness are more inclined to consider the crisis as an opportunity and are therefore
more willing to innovate in digital solutions during the negative event. Thus, the following
proposition arises:
P3. The leadership of the entrepreneurs shapes all the dimensions of EO and in particular
innovativeness.
In entrepreneurial companies, the entrepreneur’s leadership determines the level of EO and
the interpretation of a crisis as an opportunity to innovate. Thus, the following proposition
arises:
P4. During a crisis, such as COVID-19, with restrictions on physical interactions, digital
transformation is forced to survive, and it is mostly oriented to e-commerce and social
media presence.
The COVID-19 pandemic, and its resulting lockdown and social distancing, have disrupted
the consumer’s habits of buying as well as shopping (Sheth, 2020; Botti, 2020). In such a
changing scenario, these firms have been forced to invest in digital transformation related
to e-commerce and social media. This has been particularly seen in the case of SMEs, for
which these two technologies are considered to be the most important means of
communication and a way to interact with consumers. This forced adaptation gives these
firm’s an opportunity to experiment with these digital functionalities and advantages,
therefore convincing organisational resistance of the benefits of digital technologies in
daily business.
Based on our results, we have developed the conceptual framework depicted in Figure 4.
This framework can be used together with the theoretical constructs that we have illustrated
“ReacƟve” Digital Has COVID-19
transformaƟon
pushed
P2b
P4 E-commerce and digitalisation
social media
in SMEs?
SƟmuli (crisis: P1 Entrepreneurial P2a “ProacƟve” Digital
Covid-19 orientaƟon (EO) transformaƟon
Pandemic)
P3
Entrepreneur’s
Leadership
Figure 4.
The conceptual model
Source(s): Authors’ elaboration
to respond to our research question, with the aim of further developing the understanding
and theorising about the role of EO and external stimuli in shaping the dynamics of the digital
transformation of SMEs.
6. Conclusions
To investigate the role of external stimuli on the digital transformation of enterprises, this
study has analysed the role of the EO in interpreting an external crisis, such as the COVID-19
pandemic, in terms of an opportunity for digital transformation. The context of analysis is
represented by seven SMEs that operate in the “Made in Italy” sectors.
Using the multi-case study methodology (Eisenhardt, 1989), this analysis has investigated
how these SMEs have adopted digital instruments during the COVID-19 pandemic. It has also
examined the role played by EO in both catching digital opportunities emerging from the
COVID-19 outbreak and finding digital solutions to cover this crisis.
From the analysis of the case studies (belonging to the fashion, food and furniture sectors),
this study finds that the investigated SMEs not only focused their attention on the survival
phase, in which different kinds of limitations and new rules were given to decrease COVID-19
infections (e.g. working from home and closure of many activities), but they also searched for
new solutions to foster innovation and networking on social media. In addition, this study
points to the crucial role played by EO inside an SME. Depending on the level (i.e. high,
medium, low) of this variable, we observed a different enhancement in the stimulation to
innovate and in being proactive towards the external stimuli.
These results offer several interesting implications for both practitioners and scholars.
First, this study expands the literature focused on EO in a time of crisis, creating a model that
is anchored to the SOR framework (Gao and Bai, 2014) and was applied to explain
organisational behaviours (Gotteland et al., 2020; Spanjol et al., 2012). Only few studies have
applied this model to interpret organisational behaviours in time of crisis. Second, this
research underlines the crucial role that was played by EO during the pandemic. This fills an
academic gap because the academic contributions on EO during a crisis are very limited and
refer to the past global financial crisis (e.g. 2008) or to a national‒regional crisis (Bao et al.,
2011). Our analysis demonstrates that EO helps to interpret the crisis in terms of opportunity.
This is due to the direct relationship between EO, entrepreneurial attitude and crisis
perception. Specifically, when EO is high, the entrepreneurial attitude to “think positive” and
have a positive mindset towards negative events is greater and thus the crisis is perceived as
a point of renaissance by entrepreneurs. Third, this paper provides some reflections about the
JSBED role of EO in promoting digital transformation for SMEs, which remains a neglected area of
research. Addressing the EO literature, this work underlines the crucial role of
innovativeness in adopting new digital tools as a response to a crisis.
This research also has significant managerial implications. Digital technologies have
often helped SMEs to face the current crisis. Neglecting these digital instruments is risky and
may seriously compromise the survival of a firm in a crisis such as the COVID-19 pandemic.
The framework that this study has developed helps SMEs to identify the most important
“internal” drivers of digital transformation. The role of EO is diriment, in particular in terms
of innovativeness. Consequently, nurturing EO is important because it can help a company to
be more reactive against a crisis. For this reason, firms should evaluate and develop their EO
as part of their strategic orientation. This attitude is also significant for human resource
management to help align personnel to EO. It is crucial to implement an efficient and good
communication flow on the relevance of EO for creating and shaping a strategic intent
towards digital transformation. Moreover, understanding the resource and competency gaps
in a general assessment may be useful for increasing the digital transformation of a company.
From a broader perspective, this work encourages policymakers to invest in the
promotion of specific interventions to support entrepreneurs when enhancing their capacity
to effectively manage the digital transformation, such as research programmes, training
courses, the creation of agencies that help identify the most important opportunities for
SMEs, and identification of the supporting levers.
This study has observed several limitations. First, this paper is built on a case study
methodology, focused on seven SMEs that operate in the “Made in Italy” sectors. As a result,
our findings may not be generalised to other business and to firms in different industries. The
time period that is covered is also relatively short. Therefore, it would be interesting to study
the evolution of digital transformation in a longitudinal way. In addition, the number of
included variables seems limited. The extension to other aspects regarding the personal traits
of the entrepreneur could be a suitable subject for future research. For example, the role of the
entrepreneur’s cultural background when defining and implementing digital transformation
calls for more attention. From this perspective, we suggest that an in-depth analysis should
be used to test the role of the training paths followed by the entrepreneurs. In addition, an
evaluation of the entrepreneur’s previous experiences in enterprise creation could be useful
for evaluating their entrepreneurial inclination. Moreover, a specific focus on the emotional
dimensions could offer interesting conclusions. The proposed model could be validated by
enhancing the number of variables and with the help of further research based on an
extensive survey, thus reaching more robust results.
References
Amankwah-Amoah, J., Khan, Z. and Wood, G. (2020), “COVID-19 and business failures: the paradoxes
of experience, scale, and scope for theory and practice”, European Management Journal, Vol. 39
No. 2, pp. 179-184, doi: 10.1016/j.emj.2020.09.002.
Arnold, D., Arntz, M., Gregory, T., Steffes, S. and Zierahn, U. (2016), “Herausforderungen der
Digitalisierung f€
ur die Zukunft der Arbeitswelt”, ZEW Policy Brief, Vol. 08, pp. 1-9.
Arora, R. (1982), “Validation of an SOR model for situation, enduring, and response components of
involvement”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 19 No. 4, pp. 505-516.
Banterle, A., Cavaliere, A. and De Marchi, E. (2016), “The Italian food industry in the era of the TTIP
negotiate”, British Food Journal, Vol. 118 No. 8, pp. 1930-1945.
Bao, Y., Olson, B. and Yuan, W. (2011), “Defensive and expansion responses to environmental shocks
in China: interpreting the 2008 economic crisis”, Thunderbird International Business Review,
Vol. 53 No. 2, pp. 225-245.
Beliaeva, T., Shirokova, G., Wales, W. and Gafforova, E. (2020), “Benefiting from economic crisis? Has COVID-19
Strategic orientation effects, trade-offs, and configurations with resource availability on SME
performance”, International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 165-194. pushed
Benevolo, C., Penco, L. and Torre, T. (2020), “Entrepreneurial decision-making for global strategies: a
digitalisation
‘Heart–head’ approach”, Management Decision, Vol. 59 No. 5, pp. 1132-1157, doi: 10.1108/MD- in SMEs?
10-2019-1495.
Bhushan, B. (2020), “Motivational model of social entrepreneurship: exploring the shaping of
engagement of social entrepreneur”, in Majumdar, S. and Reji, E. (Eds), Methodological Issues in
Social Entrepreneurship Knowledge and Practice, Springer, Singapore, pp. 111-136.
Botti, A. (2020), “L’emergenza Covid-19: possibili lezioni per gli studiosi di management”, Mecosan:
Management Ed Economia Sanitaria, Vol. 113 No. 1, pp. 39-46.
Bouwman, H., Nikou, S., Molina-Castillo, F.J. and de Reuver, M. (2018), “The impact of digitalization on
business models”, Digital Policy, Regulation and Governance, Vol. 20 No. 2, pp. 105-124, doi: 10.
1108/DPRG-07-2017-0039.
Camelo-Ordaz, C., Hernandez-Lara, A.B. and Valle-Cabrera, R. (2005), “The relationship between top
management teams and innovative capacity in companies”, Journal of Management
Development, Vol. 24 No. 8, pp. 683-705.
glu, E., Erzurumlu, S.S. and Erzurumlu, Y.O. (2018), “How data-driven entrepreneur analyzes
Çanako
imperfect information for business opportunity evaluation”, IEEE Transactions on Engineering
Management, Vol. 65 No. 4, pp. 604-617.
Cannas, R. (2021), “Exploring digital transformation and dynamic capabilities in agrifood SMEs”,
Journal of Small Business Management, Vol. 55 No. 2, pp. 1-27.
Cennamo, C., Dagnino, G.B., Di Minin, A. and Lanzolla, G. (2020), “Managing digital transformation:
scope of transformation and modalities of value Co-generation and delivery”, California
Management Review, Vol. 62 No. 4, pp. 5-16.
Certo, S.T., Lester, R.H., Dalton, C.M. and Dalton, D.R. (2006), “Top management teams, strategy and
financial performance: a meta-analytic examination”, Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 43
No. 4, pp. 813-839.
Chang, H.J., Eckman, M. and Yan, R.N. (2011), “Application of the Stimulus-Organism-Response model to
the retail environment: the role of hedonic motivation in impulse buying behavior”, The
International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research, Vol. 21 No. 3, pp. 233-249.
Chattopadhyay, P., Glick, W.H. and Huber, G.P. (2001), “Organizational actions in response to threats
and opportunities”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 44 No. 5, pp. 937-955.
Chen, Q., Li, X., Wang, J., Liu, K. and Li, L. (2020), “Psychological perception-based analysis on the
influence of entrepreneurship education on entrepreneurial intention”, Revista Argentina de
Clınica Psicologica, Vol. 29 No. 1, p. 117.
Chew, T.C., Tang, Y.K. and Buck, T. (2021), “The interactive effect of cultural values and government
regulations on firms’ entrepreneurial orientation”, Journal of Small Business and Enterprise
Development, doi: 10.1108/JSBED-06-2021-0228, (In press).
Covin, J.G. and Slevin, D.P. (1989), “Strategic management of small firms in hostile and benign
environments”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 75-87.
Covin, J.G. and Wales, W.J. (2012), “The measurement of entrepreneurial orientation”,
Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Vol. 36 No. 4, pp. 677-702.
Covin, J.G. and Wales, W.J. (2019), “Crafting high-impact entrepreneurial orientation research: some
suggested guidelines”, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Vol. 43 No. 1, pp. 3-18.
Crovini, C., Santoro, G. and Ossola, G. (2020), “Rethinking risk management in entrepreneurial SMEs:
towards the integration with the decision-making process”, Management Decision. doi: 10.1108/
MD-10-2019-1402.
JSBED Cunningham, J.B. (1997), “Case study principles for different types of cases”, Quality and Quantity,
Vol. 31 No. 4, pp. 401-423.
Daugherty, P.R. and Wilson, H.J. (2018), Humanþ Machine: Reimagining Work in the Age of AI,
Harvard Business Press, Boston.
De˛ bicka, A., Olejniczak, K. and Ska˛ pska, J. (2021), “Enterprises’ perception and practice of humane
entrepreneurship”, Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, Vol. 29 No. 1, pp. 127-
146, doi: 10.1108/JSBED-01-2021-0028.
Del Giudice, M., Khan, Z., De Silva, M., Scuotto, V., Caputo, F. and Carayannis, E. (2017), “The
microlevel actions undertaken by owner-managers in improving the sustainability practices of
cultural and creative small and medium enterprises: a United Kingdom-Italy comparison”,
Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 38 No. 9, pp. 1396-1414.
Denicolai, S., Hagen, B. and Pisoni, A. (2015), “Be international or be innovative? Be both? The role of
the entrepreneurial profile”, Journal of International Entrepreneurship, Vol. 13 No. 4, pp. 390-417.
Denicolai, S., Magnani, G. and Vidal, J.A. (2020), “Competitive renaissance through digital
transformation”, European Management Journal, Vol. 38 No. 6, pp. 827-828.
Dennis, C., King, T., Fiore, A.M. and Kim, J. (2007), “An integrative framework capturing experiential
and utilitarian shopping experience”, International Journal of Retail and Distribution
Dess, G.G. and Beard, D.W. (1984), “Dimensions of organizational task environments”, Administrative
Science Quarterly, Vol. 29 No. 1, pp. 52-73.
Dess, G.G., Ireland, R.D., Zahra, S.A., Floyd, S.W., Janney, J.J. and Lane, P.J. (2003), “Emerging issues in
corporate entrepreneurship”, Journal of Management, Vol. 29 No. 3, pp. 351-378.
Dezi, L., Santoro, G., Gabteni, H. and Pellicelli, A.C. (2018), “The role of big data in shaping
ambidextrous business process management”, Business Process Management Journal, Vol. 24
No. 5, pp. 1163-1175.
Duan, Y., Edwards, J.S. and Dwivedi, Y.K. (2019), “Artificial intelligence for decision making in the era
of Big Data–evolution, challenges and research agenda”, International Journal of Information
Management, Vol. 48, pp. 63-71.
Dutton, J.E. and Jackson, S.E. (1987), “Categorizing strategic issues: links to organizational action”,
Academy of Management Review, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 76-90.
Eisenhardt, K.M. (1989), “Building theories from case study research”, Academy of Management
Review, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 532-550.
Eisenhardt, K.M. and Graebner, M.E. (2007), “Theory building from cases: opportunities and
challenges”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 50 No. 1, pp. 25-32.
Ferreira, J.J., Fernandes, C.I. and Kraus, S. (2019), “Entrepreneurship research: mapping intellectual
structures and research trends”, Review of Managerial Science, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 181-205.
Fidel, P., Schlesinger, W. and Esposito, E. (2018), “Effects of customer knowledge management and
customer orientation on innovation capacity and marketing results in SMES: the mediating role
of innovation orientation”, International Journal of Innovation Management, Vol. 22 No. 7,
pp. 1850026-1850055.
Forbes (2021), “10 examples of how COVID-19 forced business transformation”, available at: https://
www.forbes.com/sites/blakemorgan/2020/05/01/10-examples-of-how-covid-19-forced-business-
transformation/?sh52959b81c1be3 (accessed 25January 2021).
Gallego, J., Rubalcaba, L. and Hipp, C. (2013), “Organizational innovation in small European firms: a
multidimensional approach”, International Small Business Journal, Vol. 31 No. 5, pp. 563-579.
Gao, L. and Bai, X. (2014), “Online consumer behaviour and its relationship to website atmospheric
induced flow: insights into online travel agencies in China”, Journal of Retailing and Consumer
Services, Vol. 21 No. 4, pp. 653-665.
Gehman, J., Glaser, V.L., Eisenhardt, K.M., Gioia, D., Langley, A. and Corley, K.G. (2018), “Finding Has COVID-19
theory–method fit: a comparison of three qualitative approaches to theory building”, Journal of
Management Inquiry, Vol. 27 No. 3, pp. 284-300. pushed
George, G., Wood, R.D. Jr and Khan, R. (2001), “Networking strategy of boards: implications for small and
digitalisation
medium-sized enterprises”, Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 269-285. in SMEs?
Ghezzi, A. and Cavallo, A. (2020), “Agile business model innovation in digital entrepreneurship: lean
startup approaches”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 110, pp. 519-537.
Gil-Gomez, H., Guerola-Navarro, V., Oltra-Badenes, R. and Lozano-Quilis, J.A. (2020), “Customer
relationship management: digital transformation and sustainable business model innovation”,
Economic Research-Ekonomska Istrazivanja, Vol. 33 No. 1, pp. 2733-2750.
Gotteland, D., Shock, J. and Sarin, S. (2020), “Strategic orientations, marketing proactivity and firm
market performance”, Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 91, pp. 610-620.
Hale, G., Kapan, M.T. and Minoiu, M.C. (2016), Crisis Transmission in the Global Banking Network,
International Monetary Fund.
Hitt, M.A., Ireland, R.D., Camp, S.M. and Sexton, D.L. (2001), “Strategic entrepreneurship: entrepreneurial
strategies for wealth creation”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 22 Nos 6-7, pp. 479-491.
IlSole24Ore (2020), available at: https://www.ilsole24ore.com/art/le-tre-f-che-fanno-grandi-italia-
fashion-furniture-food-AD1042t (accessed 26 January 2021).
Islam, T., Pitafi, A.H., Arya, V., Wang, Y., Akhtar, N., Mubarik, S. and Xiaobei, L. (2020), “Panic
buying in the COVID-19 pandemic: a multi-country examination”, Journal of Retailing and
Consumer Services, Vol. 59, p. 102357.
Jackson, S.E. and Dutton, J.E. (1988), “Discerning threats and opportunities”, Administrative Science
Quarterly, Vol. 33 No. 3, pp. 370-387.
Jafari-Sadeghi, V., Garcia-Perez, A., Candelo, E. and Couturier, J. (2021), “Exploring the impact of
digital transformation on technology entrepreneurship and technological market expansion: the
role of technology readiness, exploration and exploitation”, Journal of Business Research,
Vol. 124, pp. 100-111.
Jocic, M.R., Morris, M.H. and Kuratko, D.F. (2021), “Familiness and innovation outcomes in family
firms: the mediating role of entrepreneurial orientation”, Journal of Small Business
Management, pp. 1-33, (In press).
Karami, M., Ojala, A. and Saarenketo, S. (2020), “Entrepreneurial orientation and international
opportunity development by SMEs: the mediating role of decision-making logic”, Journal of
Small Business Management, pp. 1-29, doi: 10.1080/00472778.2020.1824529, (In press).
Kim, N., Choi, J., Yi, J., Choi, S., Park, S., Chang, Y. and Seo, J.B. (2013), “An engineering view on
megatrends in radiology: digitization to quantitative tools of medicine”, Korean Journal of
Radiology, Vol. 14 No. 2, p. 139.
Koellinger, P. (2008), “Why are some entrepreneurs more innovative than others?”, Small Business
Economics, Vol. 31 No. 1, pp. 21-37.
Ku, H.H., Kuo, C.C. and Kuo, T.W. (2012), “The effect of scarcity on the purchase intentions of
prevention and promotion motivated consumers”, Psychology and Marketing, Vol. 29 No. 8,
pp. 541-548.
Kumar Basu, K. (2015), “The leader’s role in managing change: five cases of technology-enabled
business transformation”, Global Business and Organizational Excellence, Vol. 34 No. 3, pp. 28-42.
Laato, S., Islam, A.N., Farooq, A. and Dhir, A. (2020), “Unusual purchasing behavior during the early
stages of the COVID-19 pandemic: the stimulus-organism-response approach”, Journal of
Retailing and Consumer Services, Vol. 57, p. 102224.
Labrecque, L.I., Vor dem Esche, J., Mathwick, C., Novak, T.P. and Hofacker, C.F. (2013), “Consumer
power: evolution in the digital age”, Journal of Interactive Marketing, Vol. 27 No. 4, pp. 257-269.
JSBED Laskovaia, A., Marino, L., Shirokova, G. and Wales, W. (2019), “Expect the unexpected: examining the
shaping role of entrepreneurial orientation on causal and effectual decision-making logic during
economic crisis”, Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, Vol. 31 Nos 5-6, pp. 456-475.
Levesque, M. and Joglekar, N. (2018), “Guest editorial resource, routine, reputation, or regulation
shortages: can data-and analytics-driven capabilities inform tech entrepreneur decisions”, IEEE
Transactions on Engineering Management, Vol. 65 No. 4, pp. 537-544.
Levesque, M. and Minniti, M. (2006), “The effect of aging on entrepreneurial behavior”, Journal of
Business Venturing, Vol. 21 No. 2, pp. 177-194.
Liguori, E.W. and Pittz, T.G. (2020), “Strategies for small business: surviving and thriving in the era of
COVID-19”, Journal of the International Council for Small Business, Vol. 1 No. 2, pp. 106-110.
Liu, H., Chu, H., Huang, Q. and Chen, X. (2016), “Enhancing the flow experience of consumers in China
through interpersonal interaction in social commerce”, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 58,
pp. 306-314.
uthje, C. and Franke, N. (2003), “The ‘making’ of an entrepreneur: testing a model of entrepreneurial
L€
intent among engineering students at MIT”, R&D Management, Vol. 33 No. 2, pp. 135-147.
Lumpkin, G.T. and Dess, G.G. (1996), “Clarifying the entrepreneurial orientation construct and linking
it to performance”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 21 No. 1, pp. 135-172.
Lumpkin, G.T. and 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, Vol. 16 No. 5, pp. 429-451.
Marino, L.D., Lohrke, F.T., Hill, J.S., Weaver, K.M. and Tambunan, T. (2008), “Environmental shocks
and SME alliance formation intentions in an emerging economy: evidence from the Asian
financial crisis in Indonesia”, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Vol. 32 No. 1, pp. 157-183.
Matarazzo, M., Penco, L., Profumo, G. and Quaglia, R. (2021), “Digital transformation and customer
value creation in Made in Italy SMEs: a dynamic capabilities perspective”, Journal of Business
Research, Vol. 123, pp. 642-656.
Matricano, D. (2018), “Grey vs young entrepreneurs: are they really that different in terms of
entrepreneurial intentions? Empirical evidence from Italy”, International Journal of Business
and Management, Vol. 13 No. 2, p. 76.
McKinsey (2020), “From surviving to thriving: reimagining the post-COVID-19 return”, available at:
https://www.mckinsey.com/featured-insights/future-of-work/from-surviving-to-thriving-
reimagining-the-post-covid-19-return.
Mehrabian, A. and Russell, J.A. (1974), An Approach to Environmental Psychology, The MIT Press,
Cambridge MA.
Miller, D. (1983), “The correlates of entrepreneurship in three types of firms”, Management Science,
Vol. 29 No. 7, pp. 770-791.
Miller, D. and Friesen, P.H. (1978), “Archetypes of strategy formulation”, Management Science, Vol. 24
No. 9, pp. 921-933.
Nakku, V.B., Agbola, F.W., Miles, M.P. and Mahmood, A. (2020), “The interrelationship between SME
government support programs, entrepreneurial orientation, and performance: a developing
economy perspective”, Journal of Small Business Management, Vol. 58 No. 1, pp. 2-31.
Osmundsen, K., Iden, J. and Bygstad, B. (2018), “Digital transformation: drivers, success factors, and
implications”, Proocedings of the 12th Mediterranean Conference on Information Systems
(MCIS), Korfu, Greece.
Osterwalder, A. and Pigneur, Y. (2010), Business Model Generation: A Handbook for Visionaries, Game
Changers, and Challengers, John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, NJ.
Parente, R., El Tarabishy, A., Vesci, M. and Botti, A. (2018), “The epistemology of humane
entrepreneurship: theory and proposal for future research agenda”, Journal of Small Business
Management, Vol. 56, pp. 30-52.
Parente, R., El Tarabishy, A., Botti, A., Vesci, M. and Feola, R. (2021), “Humane entrepreneurship: Has COVID-19
some steps in the development of a measurement scale”, Journal of Small Business
Management, Vol. 59 No. 3, pp. 509-533. pushed
Penco, L., Serravalle, F., Profumo, G. and Viassone, M. (2020), “Mobile augmented reality as an
digitalisation
internationalization tool in the ‘Made in Italy’ food and beverage industry”, Journal of in SMEs?
Management and Governance, Vol. 25 No. 4, pp. 1179-1209.
Piccoli, G., Rodriguez, J.A., Palese, B. and Bartosiak, M. (2017), “The dark side of digital
transformation: the case of information systems education”, Proocedings Thirty eighth
International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS), Seoul.
Pittino, D., Visintin, F. and Lauto, G. (2017), “A configurational analysis of the antecedents of
entrepreneurial orientation”, European Management Journal, Vol. 35 No. 2, pp. 224-237.
Polese, F., Payne, A., Frow, P., Sarno, D. and Nenonen, S. (2021), “Emergence and phase transitions in
service ecosystems”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 127, pp. 25-34.
Pratt, M.G. (2009), “From the editors: for the lack of a boilerplate: tips on writing up (and reviewing)
qualitative research.”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 52 No. 5, pp. 856-862.
Ratten, V. (2020), “Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) and sport entrepreneurship”, International Journal
of Entrepreneurial Behavior and Research, Vol. 26 No. 6, pp. 1379-1388.
Rothberg, H.N. and Erickson, G.S. (2017), “Big data systems: knowledge transfer or intelligence
insights?”, Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 21 No. 1, pp. 92-112.
Rundh, B. (2003), “Rethinking the international marketing strategy: new dimensions in a competitive
market”, Marketing Intelligence and Planning, Vol. 21 No. 4, pp. 249-257.
Saebi, T., Lien, L. and Foss, N.J. (2017), “What drives business model adaptation? The impact of
opportunities, threats and strategic orientation”, Long Range Planning, Vol. 50 No. 5,
pp. 567-581.
Sciascia, S., Mazzola, P. and Chirico, F. (2013), “Generational involvement in the top management team
of family firms: exploring nonlinear effects on entrepreneurial orientation”, Entrepreneurship
Theory and Practice, Vol. 37 No. 1, pp. 69-85.
Shane, S. (2000), “Prior knowledge and the discovery of entrepreneurial opportunities”, Organization
Science, Vol. 11 No. 4, pp. 448-469.
Shane, S. and Venkataraman, S. (2000), “The promise of entrepreneurship as a field of research”,
Academy of Management Review, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 217-226.
Sheth, J. (2020), “Impact of Covid-19 on consumer behavior: will the old habits return or die?”, Journal
of Business Research, Vol. 117, pp. 280-283.
Shirokova, G., Bogatyreva, K., Beliaeva, T. and Puffer, S. (2016), “Entrepreneurial orientation and firm
performance in different environmental settings: contingency and configurational approaches”,
Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, Vol. 23 No. 3, pp. 703-727.
Soininen, J. (2013), Entrepreneurial Orientation in Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises during
Economic Crisis, Lappeenranta University of Technology, Lappeenranta.
Soto-Acosta, P. (2020), “COVID-19 pandemic: shifting digital transformation to a high-speed gear”,
Information Systems Management, Vol. 37 No. 4, pp. 260-266.
uhlmeier, S. and Tomczak, T. (2012), “Strategic orientation and product innovation:
Spanjol, J., M€
exploring a decompositional approach”, Journal of Product Innovation Management, Vol. 29
No. 6, pp. 967-985.
Stewart, W.H., Jr., Peake, W.O. and Ingram, A.E. (2021), “The interplay of core self-evaluation and
entrepreneurial self-efficacy in predicting entrepreneurial orientation”, Journal of Small Business
Management, pp. 1-29, doi: 10.1080/00472778.2021.1951279, (In press).
Strange, R. and Zucchella, A. (2017), “Industry 4.0, global value chains and international business”,
Multinational Business Review, Vol. 25 No. 3, pp. 174-184.
JSBED Suri, R., Kohli, C. and Monroe, K.B. (2007), “The effects of perceived scarcity on consumers’ processing
of price information”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 35 No. 1, pp. 89-100.
Uusitalo, P. and Lavikka, R. (2020), “Overcoming path dependency in an industrialised house-building
company through entrepreneurial orientation”, Buildings, Vol. 10 No. 3, p. 45.
Venkatraman, N. (1989), “Strategic orientation of business enterprises: the construct, dimensionality,
and measurement”, Management Science, Vol. 35 No. 8, pp. 942-962.
Volberda, H., Mihalache, O., Fey, C. and Lewin, A.Y. (2017), “Management and organization review
special issue ‘Business model innovation in transforming economies’”, Management and
Organization Review, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 689-692.
Wales, W., Gupta, V.K., Marino, L. and Shirokova, G. (2019), “Entrepreneurial orientation:
international, global and cross-cultural research”, International Small Business Journal,
Vol. 37 No. 2, pp. 95-104.
Wales, W.J., Kraus, S., Filser, M., St€ockmann, C. and Covin, J.G. (2021), “The status quo of research on
entrepreneurial orientation: conversational landmarks and theoretical scaffolding”, Journal of
Business Research, Vol. 128, pp. 564-577.
Wenzel, M., Stanske, S. and Lieberman, M.B. (2020), “Strategic responses to crisis”, Strategic
Management Journal, Vol. 42 No. 2, pp. V7-V18.
Wiklund, J. and Shepherd, D. (2005), “Entrepreneurial orientation and small business performance: a
configurational approach”, Journal of Business Venturing, Vol. 20 No. 1, pp. 71-91.
Wrede, M., Velamuri, V.K. and Dauth, T. (2020), “Top managers in the digital age: exploring the role
and practices of top managers in firms’ digital transformation”, Managerial and Decision
Economics, Vol. 41 No. 8, pp. 1549-1567.
Wright, J.F. (2018), “Risk management; a behavioural perspective”, Journal of Risk Research, Vol. 21
No. 6, pp. 710-724.
Wu, Y., Xin, L., Li, D., Yu, J. and Guo, J. (2020), “How does scarcity promotion lead to impulse purchase
in the online market? A field experiment”, Information and Management, Vol. 58 No. 1, p.
103283.
Xu, J., Benbasat, I. and Cenfetelli, R.T. (2014), “The nature and consequences of trade-off transparency
in the context of recommendation agents”, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 38 No. 2, pp. 379-406.
Yin, R.K. (1994), “Discovering the future of the case study. Method in evaluation research”, Evaluation
Practice, Vol. 15 No. 3, pp. 283-290.
Yusubova, A., Andries, P. and Clarysse, B. (2020), “Entrepreneurial team formation and evolution in
technology ventures: looking beyond the top management team”, Journal of Small Business
Zahra, S.A. (1996), “Governance, ownership, and corporate entrepreneurship: the moderating impact
of industry technological opportunities”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 39 No. 6,
pp. 1713-1735.
Zaoui, F. and Souissi, N. (2020), “Roadmap for digital transformation: a literature review”, Procedia
Computer Science, Vol. 175, pp. 621-628.
Zellweger, T. and Sieger, P. (2012), “Entrepreneurial orientation in long-lived family firms”, Small
Business Economics, Vol. 38 No. 1, pp. 67-84.
Zhang, H., Lu, Y., Gao, P. and Chen, Z. (2014), “Social shopping communities as an emerging business
model of youth entrepreneurship: exploring the effects of website characteristics”, International
Journal of Technology Management, Vol. 66 No. 4, pp. 319-345.
Appendix
The Appendix is available online for this article.
About the authors Has COVID-19
Lara Penco is the full professor of Business Strategy and Strategic Management and Corporate Strategy
in the University of Genoa, Department of Economics and Business Studies. She holds a PhD in “Service pushed
Management” from the same University. She is Member of C.I.E.L.I., the Italian Center of Excellence on digitalisation
Logistics Transports and Infrastructures. Her research interests lie in strategic management, corporate in SMEs?
strategy and governance. She is Track Chair of Euram Conference – SIG “Entrepreneurship” and
member of the Editorial Board of several international journals and author of books and papers
published on academic national and international Journals.
Giorgia Profumo is Associate Professor of Management, Department of Economics and Business
Studies, University of Genoa, where she teaches “Management” and “Advanced Marketing”. She holds a
PhD in “Service Management” from the same University and she has been Assistant Professor of
Management in the Faculty of Economics, University of Naples “Parthenope”. Her main research
interests are: corporate communication, consumer empowerment and corporate governance, with a
focus on service industries. She is member of the Editorial Board of “Corporate Governance and
Organizational Behavior Review”, “Corporate Board: Role, Duties and Composition” and “Corporate
Governance and Research and Development Studies–CGR&D” and author of several books and papers
on qualified national and international Journals.
Francesca Serravalle is Assistant Professor in Business Management-University of Turin. She
holds her PhD with Honour in Business and Management at University of Turin (Italy) in cooperation
with the Institut d’Administration des Entreprises (IAE business school) at the University of Lyon-
Magellan (France). Her research activities mainly relate to new technologies in retailing, with
emphasis on augmented reality in an omnichannel retailing. She published in international journals
such as British Food Journal and Tourism Management Perspectives. She also served as ad hoc
reviewer in many marketing journals. Francesca Serravalle is the corresponding author and can be
contacted at: francesca.serravalle@unito.it
Milena Viassone, ESCP Europe PhD, Paris and PhD in Business Management-University of Cassino;
Full Professor of Business Management-University of Turin, Cuneo Branch; Member of the Aidea
(Italian Academy of Business Administration) Research Group (GSA) on the topic “Management for the
sustainability of touristic development and the destinations competitiveness”; Member of EuroMed
International Group of Research on Tourism; Member of the International ESCP Europe Group of
Research on “International Development”. Member of the Editorial Board of several international
journals and author of numerous books and papers on qualified national and international reviews.
For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com

2022 - Has COVID-19 Pushed DIGITAL

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

2022 - Has COVID-19 Pushed DIGITAL

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:

Has COVID-19 pushed Has COVID-19

2.2 Entrepreneurial orientation in a time of crisis

3.2 The fieldwork

FURNITURE CEO 51 Degree Yes No of founders: 1 Architect

Step 3: Data collecƟon using semi-structured depth

Step 4: Data analysis Step 4 bis: Content analysis (NVivo)

4.2 Entrepreneurial orientation and the COVID-19 crisis

FURNITURE Reactive digitalisation

FURNITURE Medium Medium High Medium/ þProactiveness An opportunity to strength my No

EO and the COVID-19

You might also like