Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer

Vol. 10 No. 2 (2022)
June 2022

Articles - Entrepreneurship

Marketing determinants of innovation ambidexterity in small and medium‐sized manufacturers

https://doi.org/10.15678/EBER.2022.100210

Published 2022-06-16

Izabela Kowalik
Warsaw School of Economics

Agnieszka Pleśniak
Warsaw School of Economics

Abstract

Objective: The study aimed to identify the marketing determinants of SMEs’ innovation ambidexterity and explore this phenomenon in the firms from a post-transition Polish market. Specifically, market-sensing capability, entrepreneurial marketing orientation, and marketing strategies were considered the possible determinants of innovation ambidexterity. The comparative character of the study enabled examining if these relationships have changed comparing 2019 to the time of pandemic crisis in 2021.

Research Design & Methods: The study includes a sample of 240 Polish manufacturing SMEs contacted with the CATI/CAWI method in May 2019 and 219 firms selected and surveyed according to the same method between January-February 2021. The results were obtained with factor analysis and logistic regression.

Findings: Innovation ambidexterity was related to market sensing, opportunity focus, proactive orientation, and adaptation strategy applied by manufacturing SMEs in the B2B markets. However, during the pandemic crisis, the different determinants replaced those identified during the less turbulent time.

Implications & Recommendations: Entrepreneurial marketing accompanies innovation ambidexterity. Including employees in the sensing process and concentrating on market opportunities are especially stimulating for exploratory and exploitative innovations. The significant influence of firm size and high-tech industry on ambidexterity points to the role of SMEs’ strategic agility in a turbulent environment.

Contribution & Value Added: The study explored in detail the marketing determinants of an important SME capability: innovation ambidexterity. Comparing data from the span of two years enabled taking into account the pandemic crisis. In addition, the study verified the measurement tool for analyzing SME ambidexterity.

Keywords

ambidextrous innovation; determinants; entrepreneurial marketing; SME; comparative study.

(PDF) Save

Author Biography

Izabela Kowalik

Izabela Kowalik (dr hab. Associate professor, Department of International Marketing, Warsaw School of Economics, Poland). Her research interests include marketing, international entrepreneurship, public sector management.

Agnieszka Pleśniak

Agnieszka Pleśniak (PhD. Assistant professor, Department of International Marketing, Warsaw School of Economics, Poland). Her research interests include international entrepreneurship, structural equation modelling, measurement of latent constructs.

References

  1. Ahmadi, M., Mohd Osman, M. H., & Aghdam, M. M. (2020). Integrated exploratory factor analysis and Data Envelopment Analysis to evaluate balanced ambidexterity fostering innovation in manufacturing SMEs. Asia Pacific Management Review, 25(3), 142-155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmrv.2020.06.003
  2. Al-Aali, A., & Teece, D. J. (2014). International Entrepreneurship and the Theory of the (Long-Lived) Interna-tional Firm: A Capabilities Perspective. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 38(1), 95-116. https://doi.org/10.1111/etap.12077
  3. Alcalde-Heras, H., Iturrioz-Landart, C., & Aragon-Amonarriz, C. (2019). SME ambidexterity during economic recessions: the role of managerial external capabilities. Management Decision, 57(1), 21-40. https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-03-2016-0170
  4. Andersson, S., & Evers, N. (2015). International opportunity recognition in international new ventures-a dynamic managerial capabilities perspective. Journal of International Entrepreneurship, 13(3), 260-276. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10843-015-0149-5
  5. Ardyan, E. (2016). Market Sensing Capability and SMEs Performance: The Mediating Role of Product Innova-tiveness Success. DLSU Business & Economics Review, 25(2), 79-97.
  6. Atuahene-Gima, K., & Ko, A. (2001). An Empirical Investigation of the Effect of Market Orientation and En-trepreneurship Orientation Alignment on Product Innovation. Organization Science, 12(1), 54-74. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.12.1.54.10121
  7. Bagozzi, R. P. (1981). Attitudes, intentions, and behavior: A test of some key hypotheses. Journal of Personal-ity and Social Psychology, 41(4), 607-627. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.41.4.607
  8. Baranowska-Prokop, E., & Sikora, T. (2014). Relationship Between Competitive Strategies and the Success Perception of Polish Born Globals. International Journal of Management and Economics, 43(1), 94-113. https://doi.org/10.1515/ijme-2015-0005
  9. Benner, M. J., & Tushman, M. L. (2003). Exploitation, Exploration, and Process Management: The Productivi-ty Dilemma Revisited. Academy of Management Review, 28(2), 238. https://doi.org/10.2307/30040711
  10. Bhattacharya, A., Misra, S., & Sardashti, H. (2019). Strategic orientation and firm risk. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 36(4), 509-527. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijresmar.2019.01.004
  11. Boso, N., Story, V. M., Cadogan, J. W., Micevski, M., & Kadić-Maglajlić, S. (2013). Firm Innovativeness and Export Performance: Environmental, Networking, and Structural Contingencies. Journal of International Marketing, 21(4), 62-87. https://doi.org/10.1509/jim.13.0052
  12. Brouthers, K. D., Nakos, G., & Dimitratos, P. (2015). SME Entrepreneurial Orientation, International Perfor-mance, and the Moderating Role of Strategic Alliances. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 39(5), 1161-1187. https://doi.org/10.1111/etap.12101
  13. Bruneel, J., Yli-Renko, H., & Clarysse, B. (2010). Learning from experience and learning from others: how congenital and inter-organizational learning substitute for experiential learning in young firm interna-tionalization. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 4(2), 164-182. https://doi.org/10.1002/sej.89
  14. Cabeza-Pullés, D., Fernández-Pérez, V., & Roldán-Bravo, M. I. (2020). Internal networking and innovation ambidexterity: The mediating role of knowledge management processes in university research. Europe-an Management Journal, 38(3), 450-461. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2019.12.008
  15. Cantarello, S., Martini, A., & Nosella, A. (2012). A Multi-Level Model for Organizational Ambidexterity in the Search Phase of the Innovation Process. Creativity and Innovation Management, 21(1), 28-48. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8691.2012.00624.x
  16. Cao, Q., Gedajlovic, E., & Zhang, H. (2009). Unpacking Organizational Ambidexterity: Dimensions, Contingen-cies, and Synergistic Effects. Organization Science, 20(4), 781-796. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1090.0426
  17. Caputo, A., Pellegrini, M. M., Dabic, M., & Paul Dana, L. (2016). Internationalisation of firms from Central and Eastern Europe. European Business Review, 28(6), 630-651. https://doi.org/10.1108/EBR-01-2016-0004
  18. Carter, W. R. (2015). Ambidexterity deconstructed: a hierarchy of capabilities perspective. Management Research Review, 38(8), 794-812. https://doi.org/10.1108/MRR-05-2014-0116
  19. Chang, Y.‑Y., & Hughes, M. (2012). Drivers of innovation ambidexterity in small- to medium-sized firms. European Management Journal, 30(1), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2011.08.003
  20. Ciszewska-Mlinarič, M., Wójcik, P., & Obłój, K. (2020). Learning dynamics of rapidly internationalizing ven-ture: Beyond the early stage of international growth in a CEE context. Journal of Business Research, 108, 450-465. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.03.002
  21. Clercq, D. de, Thongpapanl, N., & Dimov, D. (2014). Contextual ambidexterity in SMEs: the roles of internal and external rivalry. Small Business Economics, 42(1), 191-205. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-013-9471-2
  22. Cui, A. P., Walsh, M. F., & Zou, S. (2014). The Importance of Strategic Fit between Host-Home Country Simi-larity and Exploration Exploitation Strategies on Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises’ Performance: A Contingency Perspective. Journal of International Marketing, 22(4), 67-85. https://doi.org/10.1509/jim.14.0045
  23. Danik, L., & Kowalik, I. (2015). Success factors and development barriers perceived by the Polish born global companies. Empirical study results. Journal of East European Management Studies, 20(3), 360-390. https://doi.org/10.5771/0949-6181-2015-3-360
  24. Day, G. S. (1994). The Capabilities of Market-Driven Organizations. Journal of Marketing, 58(4), 37-52. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224299405800404
  25. Day, G. S. (2002). Managing the market learning process. Journal of Business Venturing, 17(4), 240-252. https://doi.org/10.1108/08858620210431651
  26. Efrat, K., Hughes, P., Nemkova, E., Souchon, A. L., & Sy-Changco, J. (2018). Leveraging of Dynamic export capabilities for competitive advantage and performance consequences: Evidence from China. Journal of Business Research, 84, 114-124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2017.11.018
  27. Eggers, F., & Kraus, S. (2011). Growing Young SMEs in Hard Economic Times: The Impact of Entrepreneurial and Customer Orientations — A Qualitative Study from Silicon Valley. Journal of Small Business & Entre-preneurship, 24(1), 99-111. https://doi.org/10.1080/08276331.2011.10593528
  28. Eggers, F., Niemand, T., Kraus, S., & Breier, M. (2020). Developing a scale for entrepreneurial marketing: Revealing its inner frame and prediction of performance. Journal of Business Research, 113, 72-82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.11.051
  29. Europe and Central Asia Economic Update, Fall 2021: Competition and Firm Recovery post COVID-19. (2021). The World Bank. Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.1596/978-1-4648-1802-8 on September 15, 2021
  30. Eurostat. (2018). Glossary: High-tech classification of manufacturing industries. Glossary:High-tech classifica-tion of manufacturing industries
  31. Fiore, A. M., Niehm, L. S., Hurst, J. L., Son, J., & Sadachar, A. (2013). Entrepreneurial Marketing: Scale Valida-tion with Small. Independently-Owned Businesses. Journal of Marketing Development and Competitive-ness(7(4)), 63-86.
  32. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39. https://doi.org/10.2307/3151312
  33. Frączyk J. (2021, August 16). Niemcy i Francja kupują w Polsce na potęgę. Business Insider. Retrieved from: https://businessinsider.com.pl/finanse/makroekonomia/eksport-polski-w-czerwcu-2021-r-niemcy-i-francja-kupuja-w-polsce-na-potege/fyfj6zz on September 15,2021.
  34. Gabrielsson, P., Gabrielsson, M., & Seppälä, T. (2012). Marketing Strategies for Foreign Expansion of Com-panies Originating in Small and Open Economies: The Consequences of Strategic Fit and Performance. Journal of International Marketing, 20(2), 25-48. https://doi.org/10.1509/jim.11.0068
  35. Gibson, C. B., & Birkinshaw, J [J.] (2004). THE ANTECEDENTS, CONSEQUENCES, AND MEDIATING ROLE OF ORGANIZATIONAL AMBIDEXTERITY. Academy of Management Journal, 47(2), 209-226. https://doi.org/10.2307/20159573
  36. Gilmore, A. (2011). Entrepreneurial and SME marketing. Journal of Research in Marketing and Entrepreneur-ship, 13(2), 137-145. https://doi.org/10.1108/14715201111176426
  37. Głodowska, A., Maciejewski, M [Marek], & Wach, K [Krzysztof] (2019). How Entrepreneurial Orientation Stimulates Different Types of Knowledge in the Internationalisation Process of Firms from Poland? En-trepreneurial Business and Economics Review, 7(1), 61-73. https://doi.org/10.15678/EBER.2019.070104
  38. Główny Urząd Statystyczny (2022). Retrieved from: https://stat.gov.pl/obszary-tematyczne/rachunki-narodowe/roczne-rachunki-narodowe/produkt-krajowy-brutto-w-2021-roku-szacunek-wstepny,2,11.html?msclkid=f65b1d87a9c811ec862eb188ff3ae2d on March 2, 2022.
  39. Govindarajan, V., Kopalle, P. K., & Danneels, E. (2011). The Effects of Mainstream and Emerging Customer Orientations on Radical and Disruptive Innovations. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 28(s1), 121-132. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5885.2011.00865.x
  40. Hage J. and Meeus M. (Ed.). (2006). Innovation, Science, and Institutional Change: A Research Handbook (1st ed.). Oxford University Press.
  41. Hagen, B., Zucchella, A., & Ghauri, P. N. (2019). From fragile to agile: marketing as a key driver of entrepre-neurial internationalization. International Marketing Review, 36(2), 260-288. https://doi.org/10.1108/IMR-01-2018-0023
  42. Hakala, H. (2011). Strategic Orientations in Management Literature: Three Approaches to Understanding the Interaction between Market, Technology, Entrepreneurial and Learning Orientations. International Jour-nal of Management Reviews, 13(2), 199-217. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2370.2010.00292.x
  43. Hallbäck, J., & Gabrielsson, P. (2013). Entrepreneurial marketing strategies during the growth of internation-al new ventures originating in small and open economies. International Business Review, 22(6), 1008-1020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibusrev.2013.02.006
  44. He, Z.‑L., & Wong, P.‑K. (2004). Exploration vs. Exploitation: An Empirical Test of the Ambidexterity Hypoth-esis. Organization Science, 15(4), 481-494. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1040.0078
  45. Hughes M., Martin, S., Morgan, R., & Robson, M. (2010). Realizing product-market advantage in high-technology international new ventures: The mediating role of ambidextrous innovation. Journal of In-ternational Marketing(18(4)), 1-21.
  46. Hult, G. M., Hurley, R. F., & Knight, G. A. (2004). Innovativeness: Its antecedents and impact on business performance. Industrial Marketing Management, 33(5), 429-438. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2003.08.015
  47. Jansen, J. J. P., van den Bosch, F. A. J., & Volberda, H. W. (2005). Exploratory Innovation, Exploitative Innova-tion, and Ambidexterity: The Impact of Environmental and Organizational Antecedents. Schmalenbach Business Review, 57(4), 351-363. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03396721
  48. Jansen, J. J. P., van den Bosch, F. A. J., & Volberda, H. W. (2006). Exploratory Innovation, Exploitative Innova-tion, and Performance: Effects of Organizational Antecedents and Environmental Moderators. Manage-ment Science, 52(11), 1661-1674. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1060.0576
  49. Jaworski, B., Kohli, A. K., & Sahay, A. (2000). Market-Driven Versus Driving Markets. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 28(1), 45-54. https://doi.org/10.1177/0092070300281005
  50. Jin, B., & Cho, H. J. (2018). Examining the role of international entrepreneurial orientation, domestic market competition, and technological and marketing capabilities on SME’s export performance. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 33(5), 585-598. https://doi.org/10.1108/JBIM-02-2017-0043
  51. Jones, R., & Rowley, J. (2011). Entrepreneurial marketing in small businesses: A conceptual exploration. International Small Business Journal: Researching Entrepreneurship, 29(1), 25-36. https://doi.org/10.1177/0266242610369743
  52. Junni, P., Sarala, R. M., Taras, V., & Tarba, S. Y. (2013). Organizational Ambidexterity and Performance: A Meta-Analysis. Academy of Management Perspectives, 27(4), 299-312. https://doi.org/10.5465/amp.2012.0015
  53. Junni, P., Sarala, R. M., Tarba, S. Y., Liu, Y., & Cooper, C. L. (2015). Guest Editors’ Introduction: The Role of Human Resources and Organizational Factors in Ambidexterity. Human Resource Management, 54(S1), s1-s28. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.21772
  54. Kaleka, A. (2011). When Exporting Manufacturers Compete on the Basis of Service: Resources and Marketing Capabilities Driving Service Advantage and Performance. Journal of International Marketing, 19(1), 40-58. https://doi.org/10.1509/jimk.19.1.40
  55. Kaleka, A., & Morgan, N. A. (2019). How marketing capabilities and current performance drive strategic in-tentions in international markets. Industrial Marketing Management, 78, 108-121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2017.02.001
  56. Kang, S., & Hwang, J. (2019). An Investigation into the Performance of an Ambidextrously Balanced Innova-tor and Its Relatedness to Open Innovation. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Com-plexity, 5(2), 23. https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc5020023
  57. Kauppila, O-P. (2010). Creating ambidexterity by integrating and balancing structurally separate interorgani-zational partnerships. Strategic Organization, 8(4), 283-312. https://doi.org/10.1177/1476127010387409
  58. Kowalik, I., Baranowska Prokop, E., & Pieniak, M. (2021). Market sensing of the international new ventures: strategies and determinants. European J. Of International Management, online-first https://doi.org/10.1504/ejim.2021.10037145
  59. Kowalik, I., Danik, L., & Francioni, B. (2020). Specialized marketing capabilities and foreign expansion of the international new ventures. Journal of Small Business Management, 0(0), 1-39. https://doi.org/10.1080/00472778.2020.1750621
  60. Kowalik, I., Danik, L., & Sikora, T. (2017). Entrepreneurial orientation elements in the Polish international new ventures. Baltic Journal of Management, 12(2), 194-213. https://doi.org/10.1108/BJM-03-2016-0070
  61. Kowalik, I., & Pleśniak, A. (2020). Entrepreneurial Marketing Orientation and International New Ventures. In I. Kowalik (ed.), Routledge studies in entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurial marketing and international new ventures: Antecedents, elements and outcomes (pp. 81-104). London: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.
  62. Kozlenkova, I. V., Samaha, S. A., & Palmatier, R. W. (2014). Resource-based theory in marketing. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 42(1), 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-013-0336-7
  63. Kumar, N., & Yakhlef, A. (2011). The Effects of Entrepreneurial Marketing Strategies on the Long-Term Com-petitive Sustenance of Born Global Firms: Examples from the Indian Knowledge-Intensive Services Indus-try. In S. Zou & H. Fu (eds.), Advances in International Marketing. International Marketing (Vol. 25, pp. 45-72). Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1108/S1474-797920140000025003
  64. Kyriakopoulos, K., & Moorman, C. (2004). Tradeoffs in marketing exploitation and exploration strategies: The overlooked role of market orientation. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 21(3), 219-240. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijresmar.2004.01.001
  65. Lin, H.‑E., & McDonough, E. F. (2011). Investigating the Role of Leadership and Organizational Culture in Fostering Innovation Ambidexterity. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 58(3), 497-509. https://doi.org/10.1109/TEM.2010.2092781
  66. Lin, S., & Si, S. (2019). The influence of exploration and exploitation on born globals’ speed of international-ization. Management Decision, 57(1), 193-210. https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-08-2017-0735
  67. Maciejewski, M., & Wach, K. (2019). International Startups from Poland: Born Global or Born Regional? Jour-nal of Management and Business Administration. Central Europe, 27(2), 60-84.
  68. Martin, S. L., Javalgi, R. G., & Cavusgil, E. (2017). Marketing capabilities, positional advantage, and perfor-mance of born global firms: Contingent effect of ambidextrous innovation. International Business Re-view, 26(3), 527-543. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibusrev.2016.11.006
  69. Mayasari I., Maharani A., & Wladi I. (2009). Entrepreneurial Marketing for Small and Medium Entreprises Business: An Exploratory Study on Entrepreneurial Performance. Integritas - Jurnal Manajemen Bisnis, 2(1), 1-12. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/264855959
  70. Mehrabi, H., Coviello, N., & Ranaweera, C. (2019). Ambidextrous marketing capabilities and performance: How and when entrepreneurial orientation makes a difference. Industrial Marketing Management, 77, 129-142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2018.11.014
  71. Miocevic, D., & Morgan, R. E. (2018). Operational capabilities and entrepreneurial opportunities in emerging market firms. International Marketing Review, 35(2), 320-341. https://doi.org/10.1108/IMR-12-2015-0270
  72. Monferrer, D., Moliner, M. Á., Irún, B., & Estrada, M. (2021). Network market and entrepreneurial orienta-tions as facilitators of international performance in born globals. The mediating role of ambidextrous dynamic capabilities. Journal of Business Research, 137, 430-443. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.08.058
  73. Morris, M. H., Schindehutte, M., & LaForge, R. W. (2002). Entrepreneurial Marketing: A Construct for Inte-grating Emerging Entrepreneurship and Marketing Perspectives. Journal of Marketing Theory and Prac-tice, 10(4), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1080/10696679.2002.11501922
  74. Mort, G. S., Weerawardena, J., & Liesch, P. W. (2012). Advancing entrepreneurial marketing: Evidence from born global firms. European Journal of Marketing, 46(3/4), 542-561.
  75. Niazi, M. A. K., Ghani, U., & Aziz, S. (2019). Effect of Export Market Environment Turbulence on Firm’s Export Performance: The Mediating Role of Firm’s Strategic Orientation Capabilities. City University Research Journal, 9(2), 220-242. https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/effect-export-market-environment-turbulence-on/docview/2414857978/se-2?accountid=45618
  76. Nosella, A., Cantarello, S., & Filippini, R. (2012). The intellectual structure of organizational ambidexterity: A bibliographic investigation into the state of the art. Strategic Organization, 10(4), 450-465. https://doi.org/10.1177/1476127012457979
  77. Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (2008). Psychometric theory (3. ed. [Nachdr.]. McGraw-Hill series in psychol-ogy. New York: McGraw-Hill.
  78. O’Reilly, C. A., & Tushman, M. L. (2004). The ambidextrous organization. Harvard Business Review, 82(4), 74-81, 140.
  79. Oslo Manual 2018. (2019). OECD. Retrieved from: https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264304604-en, on September 15, 2021
  80. Pellegrino, J. M., & McNaughton, R. B. (2015). The Co-evolution of Learning and Internationalization Strategy in International New Ventures. Management International Review, 55(4), 457-483. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11575-015-0246-7
  81. Polska Agencja Rozwoju Przedsiębiorczości. (2021). Raport o stanie sektora małych i średnich przedsiębiorstw w Polsce. Polska Agencja Rozwoju Przedsiębiorczości. Retrieved from: parp.gov.pl on September 15, 2021
  82. Raisch, S., & Birkinshaw, J [Julian] (2008). Organizational Ambidexterity: Antecedents, Outcomes, and Mod-erators. Journal of Management, 34(3), 375-409. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206308316058
  83. Robbins, P., O’Gorman, C., Huff, A., & Moeslein, K. (2021). Multidexterity-A New Metaphor for Open Innovation. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 7(1), 99. https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc7010099
  84. Sadiku-Dushi, N., Dana, L.‑P., & Ramadani, V. (2019). Entrepreneurial marketing dimensions and SMEs per-formance. Journal of Business Research, 100, 86-99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.03.025
  85. Salojärvi, H., Tarkiainen, A., Ritala, P., & Sainio, L.‑M. (Eds.) (2015). Antecedents and consequences of business model innovation capability.
  86. Santos, G. M. C., Marques, C. S., Ratten, V., Joã, N. A., & Ferreira, o. J. (2021). The impact of knowledge crea-tion and acquisition on innovation, coopetition and international opportunity development. European J. Of International Management, 16(3), Article 117511, 450. https://doi.org/10.1504/EJIM.2021.117511
  87. Sanz Valle, R., Jiménez Jiménez, D., & Perez Caballero, J. A. (2020). Entrepreneurial orientation and innova-tion success in family firms. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business, 40(1), Article 10028725, 114. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJESB.2020.10028725
  88. Schwens, C. & Kabst, R. (2011). Internationalization of young technology firms: a complementary perspective on antecedents of foreign market familiarity. International Business Review, 20(2), 60-74.
  89. Shanmugathas, S. (2022). Entrepreneurial Marketing Dimensions: Evidence from Women-Owned SMEs in Sri Lanka. Sri Lanka Journal of Marketing, 7(3), 181. https://doi.org/10.4038/sljmuok.v7i3.79
  90. Sinkula, J. M., Baker, W. E., & Noordewier, T. (1997). A Framework for Market-Based Organizational Learning: Linking Values, Knowledge, and Behavior. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 25(4), 305-318. https://doi.org/10.1177/0092070397254003
  91. Smith, W. K., & Lewis, M. W. (2011). Toward a Theory of Paradox: A Dynamic Equilibrium Model of Organiz-ing. Academy of Management Review, 36(2), 381-403. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.2011.59330958
  92. Sundqvist, S., Kyläheiko, K., Kuivalainen, O., & Cadogan, J. W. (2012). Kirznerian and Schumpeterian entre-preneurial‐oriented behavior in turbulent export markets. International Marketing Review, 29(2), 203-219. https://doi.org/10.1108/02651331211216989
  93. Turner, N., Swart, J., & Maylor, H. (2013). Mechanisms for Managing Ambidexterity: A Review and Research Agenda. International Journal of Management Reviews, 15(3), 317-332. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2370.2012.00343.x
  94. Wedziuk, S. (2020, September 29). Kryzys jest szansą dla polskich eksporterów. Puls Biznesu, 2020. https://www.pb.pl/kryzys-jest-szansa-dla-polskich-eksporterow-1003883
  95. Whalen, P., Uslay, C., Pascal, V. J., Omura, G., McAuley, A., Kasouf, C. J., Jones, R., Hultman, C. M., Hills, G. E., Hansen, D. J., Gilmore, A., Giglierano, J., Eggers, F., & Deacon, J. (2016). Anatomy of competitive ad-vantage: towards a contingency theory of entrepreneurial marketing. Journal of Strategic Marketing, 24(1), 5-19. https://doi.org/10.1080/0965254X.2015.1035036
  96. Whalen, P. S., & Akaka, M. A. (2016). A dynamic market conceptualization for entrepreneurial marketing: the co-creation of opportunities. Journal of Strategic Marketing, 24(1), 61-75. https://doi.org/10.1080/0965254X.2015.1035040
  97. Wu, H., & Chen, J. (2020). International ambidexterity in firms’ innovation of multinational enterprises from emerging economies: an investigation of TMT attributes. Baltic Journal of Management, 15(3), 431-451. https://doi.org/10.1108/BJM-07-2019-0267
  98. Yan, J., Tsinopoulos, C., & Xiong, Y. (2021). Unpacking the impact of innovation ambidexterity on export performance: Microfoundations and infrastructure investment. International Business Review, 30(1), 101766. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibusrev.2020.101766
  99. Yang, M. (2018). International entrepreneurial marketing strategies of MNCs: Bricolage as practiced by mar-keting managers. International Business Review, 27(5), 1045-1056. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibusrev.2018.03.004
  100. Zhou, L., Barnes, B. R., & Lu, Y. (2010). Entrepreneurial proclivity, capability upgrading and performance advantage of newness among international new ventures. Journal of International Business Studies, 41(5), 882-905. https://doi.org/10.1057/jibs.2009.87
  101. Zortea-Johnston, E., Darroch, J., & Matear, S. (2012). Business orientations and innovation in small and me-dium sized enterprises. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 8(2), 145-164. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-011-0170-7
  102. Związek Przedsiębiorców i Pracodawców Lubelskie. (2021). Niemal połowę PKB generują MŚP! Retrieved from: http://zpplubelskie.pl/niemal-polowe-pkb-generuja-msp/ on November 11.2021

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Similar Articles

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 > >> 

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.