Author:
Chandra Balodi Krishna,Prabhu Jaideep
Abstract
Purpose
– The purpose of this paper is to explore and compare causal recipes for high performance among young Indian and UK firms in high-tech industries.
Design/methodology/approach
– The traditional configuration approach suggests using the leadership, strategy, structure, and environment domains to identify configurations. In response to calls to improve causal linkages, and drawing on work on start-ups’ configurations, entrepreneurial orientation is used with these four domains to identify configurations. Fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis is used to analyze data collected via questionnaires from 70 Indian and 21 UK young firms.
Findings
– In all five configurations identified in UK context, firms adopt high external integration, and employ inorganic development strategies, exhibit high internal integration, or do not operate in a highly competitive industry. These firms carve out niches, enjoy strong linkages with supply chain partners, and have strong enough reputations that their environment is not highly competitive. Although employees are told what to do, autonomy is provided on how to do it. Among the nine Indian configurations, a large number of managers with high-growth experience is absent in eight, high internal integration is lacking in six, and high external integration is missing in five. These firms employ alternative recipes for success, as discussed in the paper.
Originality/value
– Comparing configurations in the Indian and UK contexts, the paper highlights similarities and differences across configurations, and that founders devise alternate pathways to achieve high performance. It also notes changes in relationships among variables across configurations.
Subject
Business, Management and Accounting (miscellaneous)
Reference71 articles.
1. Bantel, K.A.
(1998), “Technology-based, ‘adolescent’ firm configurations: strategy identification, context, and performance”, Journal of Business Venturing, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 205-230.
2. Braunscheidel, M.J.
and
Suresh, N.C.
(2009), “The organizational antecedents of a firm's supply chain agility for risk mitigation and response”, Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 27 No. 2, pp. 119-140.
3. Cockburn, I.M.
,
Henderson, R.M.
and
Stern, S.
(2000), “Untangling the origins of competitive advantage”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 21 Nos 10/11, pp. 1123-1145.
4. 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.
5. Covin, J.G.
and
Wales, W.J.
(2012), “The measurement of entrepreneurial orientation”, Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, Vol. 36 No. 4, pp. 677-702.
Cited by
8 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献