Journal of Enterprising Culture

In this paper entrepreneurship is presented as decision making. Mintzberg and Westley's (2001) decision making typology is adapted to the case of entrepreneurial decision making. These authors complemented the rational, step-by-step mode of decision making, with the intuitive and improvisational modes, Complementing the rational view of decision making with the analysis of entrepreneurship as intuitive or improvisational decision making, a richer and more integrated understanding of entrepreneurial behavior is obtained. To make the implications of the three decision making approaches to entrepreneurship clear, the entrepreneurial process under each of the three modes, will be considered. Ireland, Hitt and Sirmon's (2003) model of strategic entrepreneurship is used as a framework. With this framework, the three resulting theoretical representations of the entrepreneurial process will be discussed. Ireland et al,'s model of strategic entrepreneurship suggests that to understand how entrepreneurial activity leads to competitive advantage and wealth creation, four building blocks of entrepreneurial activity should be considered: entrepreneurial mindset, entrepreneurial culture and leadership, strategic management of resources and application of creativity and development of innovation.

Over the past decade, research efforts to address a lack of knowledge concerning the process of firm formation have intensified. Surprisingly, though, measurement of the primary dependent variable has been ignored. In aiming to establish a basis for measuring firm creation, we identify and address three critical deficiencies in the literature: a lack of definition, inappropriate theoretical underpinnings, and, weaknesses in the research design. Beginning with a general meaning of the term 'new firm,' we use a process-oriented event-driven theoretical perspective to propose an operational definition consisting of three key dimensions: recency or newness, a form of organization, and sales. The appropriateness of our proposed multidimensional measure (that also assesses a firm's sustainability) is explored as part of a larger research project studying Canadian nascent entrepreneurs. As members of the Entrepreneurial Research Consortium (ERC) we use standardized methods to identify and track these nascent entrepreneurs over a four year period. Since the research was designed with a capacity to test different theoretical perspectives, the instruments contain a range of items that have been used as indicators of start-up. A comparison of the proposed measure to selected single item measures indicates, among other things, that making the transition from becoming to 'being' a new firm involves meeting two key criteria: being newly operational and being sustainable. Implications, limitations, and suggestions for future research are discussed.

In this paper, I examine the optimal approach to internationalization. Drawing from the ambidexterity literature, I build on the concept of structural ambidexterity and suggest that the optimal approach occurs when firms pursue 'strategic ambidexterity,' which is characterized by simultaneously executing paradoxical strategies of pro-profit and pro-growth. I examine this approach through empirical study based on in-depth field research of two cases: Merrill Lynch, a multinational enterprise and Comdirect Bank, an international new venture. I find that a) firms that pursue strategic ambidexterity in their internationalization effort achieve above-average internationalization performance in the short term; and b) firms that pursue strategic ambidexterity in their internationalization effort also achieve above-average firm-level performance in the long term. I conclude that strategic ambidexterity is the optimal strategy by which to achieve superior performance.

Purpose: The purpose of this research paper is to explore what constitutes being "born global." We approach the born global phenomenon by applying ideas presented in existing international entrepreneurship, business, and marketing literatures. In addition, the paper illustrates how market orientation is a relevant construct for understanding the existence of born global firms. Market orientation is contrasted with science driven strategies in young, technology based firms and in both domains. In markets as well as in science, both global and local forces influence the behavior of new biotechnology based companies. Methodology: This paper uses mixed methods including interviews and multiple industry cluster surveys. Qualitative data is analyzed by categorizing and combining data (thematic interviews). Numeric (quantitative) survey data is summarized by using non-parametric statistics. Findings: Young ventures in a global biotechnology based industry simultaneously face forces that drive them towards localization and other forces that require a more global approach. Even though both the markets of biotechnology products as well as the science base are increasingly global, this paper suggests that true born globals must do more than passively adapt to this global scene. Born global firms should pursue active, market oriented strategies in their internationalization. Since our sample firms typically perceive international market orientation as less valuable that international scientific reputation, we conclude that they do not always fulfill the "born global" criteria.