Home Entrepreneurial Bricolage and New Product Development Performance in New Ventures: The Contingent Effects of Founding Team Involvement
Article
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

Entrepreneurial Bricolage and New Product Development Performance in New Ventures: The Contingent Effects of Founding Team Involvement

  • Xinchun Wang , Xiaoyu Yu EMAIL logo and Xiaotong Meng
Published/Copyright: June 28, 2021
Entrepreneurship Research Journal
From the journal Entrepreneurship Research Journal Volume 13 Issue 4

Abstract

New product development (NPD) performance is a key determinant of a new venture’s success. However, compared with established firms, new ventures often suffer from resource constraints when developing new products. Entrepreneurial bricolage is reported in the literature as an alternative strategic option that enables managers to overcome resource constraints when developing new products. However, because new ventures are often founded by an entrepreneurial team, the effectiveness and efficiency of using bricolage to improve NPD performance might be contingent on how the founding team plays its roles in this process. Using data from 323 new ventures in China, we find support for the critical role of entrepreneurial bricolage in improving NPD success under resource constraints. More importantly, our results reveal that the bricolage strategy is more likely to benefit a venture when the founding team is composed of members with diverse functional backgrounds and is not heavily involved in strategic decision-making.

Keywords: entrepreneurial bricolage; new product development; new venture success; new venture founding team
Corresponding author: Xiaoyu Yu, School of Management, Shanghai University, 200444, Shanghai, China, E-mail:

Funding source: Natural Science Foundation of China

Award Identifier / Grant number: 71772117

Award Identifier / Grant number: 71972126

Funding source: Innovation Program of Shanghai Municipal Education Commission

Award Identifier / Grant number: 2019-01-07-00-09-E00078

Funding source: The National Key Research and Development Program

Award Identifier / Grant number: No. 2020YFB1708200

  1. Research funding: This research was funded by Natural Science Foundation of China (grant nos. 71772117 and 71972126), Innovation Program of Shanghai Municipal Education Commission (grant no. 2019-01-07-00-09-E00078) and The National Key Research and Development Program (grant no. 2020YFB1708200).

Appendix A: Sample profile (N = 323)

Characteristics Frequency Per cent (%)
Manager age (years) 29 or younger 71 22.0
30–39 208 64.4
40–49 39 12.1
50 or older 5 1.5
Gender Male 256 79.3
Female 67 20.7
Education Lower than Bachelor’s degree 59 18.3
Bachelor’s degree 192 59.4
Master’s degree 66 20.4
PhD 6 1.9
Industry Electronic information 64 19.8
Computer Services and Software 51 15.8
Equipment manufacturing 32 9.9
Others 176 54.5
Ownership Private firm 261 80.8
Joint firm 24 7.4
Foreign firm 25 7.7
State-owned enterprise 13 4.1
Firm age (years) 0–2 50 15.5
3–5 93 28.8
6–8 180 55.7
Firm size (employees) 1–50 209 64.7
50–100 24 7.4
101–200 24 7.4
200 or above 66 20.5

Appendix B: Measurement items and validity assessment

Items Factor loading
New product development performance (Atuahene-Gima and Li 2004) (CR = 0.94, AVE = 0.79)
Compared to our major competitors, this new product has helped us achieve better performance in:

  1. Sales growth

 0.904

  1. Market share growth

 0.908

  1. Profit growth

 0.866

  1. Return on investment

 0.871
Entrepreneurial bricolage (Senyard, Baker, and Davidsson 2009) (CR = 0.92, AVE = 0.61)

  1. When faced with new challenges, we are confident in our ability to use existing resources to find workable solutions.

 0.827

  1. We can take more challenges with our existing resources than our competitors.

 0.759

  1. We can effectively use existing resources to handle new problems or opportunities.

 0.778

  1. We can face new challenges by combining existing resources and other resources available at a lower cost.

 0.792

  1. When faced with new problems, we usually assume that we can find solutions and take action accordingly.

 0.757

  1. By recombining our existing resources, we can handle multiple new challenges.

 0.823

  1. When faced with new challenges, we can use existing resources to achieve viable solutions.

 0.808

  1. We can combine existing resources originally planned for other purposes to meet new challenges.

 0.675
Team functional diversity (Heyden et al. 2013) (CR = 0.94, AVE = 0.83)

  1. The members of the founding team have divergent areas of expertise.

 0.918

  1. The founding team members have a great variety of backgrounds.

 0.935

  1. The founding team is composed of members with diverse experiences.

 0.886
Team participation in decision-making (Campion, Medsker, and Higgs 1993) (CR = 0.92, AVE = 0.80)

  1. The founding team members have a real say in how the team carries out its work.

 0.919

  1. The founding team members get a chance to participate in decision-making.

 0.905

  1. The founding team is designed to let everyone participate in decision-making.

 0.862
Demand uncertainty (Atuahene-Gima and Li 2004) (CR = 0.87, AVE = 0.70)

  1. Customer demand and product preferences change quite rapidly.

 0.814

  1. Customers tend to look for new products all the time.

 0.876

  1. We witness demand for our products from customers who had never bought from us before.

 0.814
Technology turbulence (Atuahene-Gima and Li 2004) (CR = 0.94, AVE = 0.80)

  1. In our industry, technology is changing quite rapidly.

 0.847

  1. In our industry, technological changes can create big opportunities.

 0.917

  1. In our industry, technological breakthroughs have turned many new ideas into real products.

 0.918

  1. In our industry, technology has been greatly developed and improved.

 0.896
Risk propensity (Sitkin and Weingart 1995) (CR = 0.88, AVE = 0.70)
To achieve NPD success, I may choose risky strategic options even if faced with the following conditions:

  1. This risky strategy may not align with our original strategic goals.

 0.789

  1. This strategy may have the potential to backfire.

 0.925

  1. The information related to this strategy is not comprehensive enough.

 0.793

  1. CA, Cronbach’s alpha; CR, composite reliability; AVE, average variance extracted.

References

An, W., C. C. Rüling, X. Zheng, and J. Zhang. 2020. “Configurations of Effectuation, Causation, and Bricolage: Implications for Firm Growth Paths.” Small Business Economics 54 (3): 843–64, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-019-00155-8.Search in Google Scholar

An, W., X. Zhao, Z. Cao, J. Zhang, and H. Liu. 2018. “How Bricolage Drives Corporate Entrepreneurship: The Roles of Opportunity Identification and Learning Orientation.” Journal of Product Innovation Management 35 (1): 49–65, https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12377.Search in Google Scholar

Andersén, J., and T. Ljungkvist. 2021. “Resource Orchestration for Team-Based Innovation: A Case Study of the Interplay Between Teams, Customers, and Top Management.” R&D Management 51 (1): 147–60, https://doi.org/10.1111/radm.12442.Search in Google Scholar

Anderson, J. C., and D. W. Gerbing. 1982. “Some Methods for Respecifying Measurement Models to Obtain Unidimensional Construct Measurement.” Journal of Marketing Research 19 (4): 453–60, https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378201900407.Search in Google Scholar

Atuahene-Gima, K., and H. Y. Li. 2004. “Strategic Decision Comprehensiveness and New Product Development Outcomes in New Technology Ventures.” Academy of Management Journal 47 (4): 583–97, https://doi.org/10.5465/20159603.Search in Google Scholar

Baker, T., and R. E. Nelson. 2005. “Creating Something from Nothing: Resource Construction through Entrepreneurial Bricolage.” Administrative Science Quarterly 50 (3): 329–66, https://doi.org/10.2189/asqu.2005.50.3.329.Search in Google Scholar

Barney, J. 1991. “Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage.” Journal of Management 17 (1): 99–120, https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639101700108.Search in Google Scholar

Baron, R. M., and D. A. Kenny. 1986. “The Moderator-Mediator Variable Distinction in Social Psychological Research: Conceptual, Strategic, and Statistical Considerations.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 51 (6): 1173–82, https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173.Search in Google Scholar

Bouncken, R. B., V. Fredrich, P. Ritala, and S. Kraus. 2020. “Value-Creation-Capture-Equilibrium in New Product Development Alliances: A Matter of Coopetition, Expert Power, and Alliance Importance.” Industrial Marketing Management 90: 648–62, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2020.03.019.Search in Google Scholar

Boxenbaum, E., and L. Rouleau. 2011. “New Knowledge Products as Bricolage: Metaphors and Scripts in Organizational Theory.” Academy of Management Review 36 (2): 272–96, https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2011.59330898.Search in Google Scholar

Brinckmann, J., J. Villanueva, D. Grichnik, and L. Singh. 2019. “Sources of Strategic Flexibility in New Ventures: An Analysis of the Role of Resource Leveraging Practices.” Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal 13 (2): 154–78, https://doi.org/10.1002/sej.1313.Search in Google Scholar

Brislin, R. 1980. “Translation and Content Analysis of Oral and Written Materials.” In Handbook of Cross-Cultural Psychology, edited by Triandis, H. C., and Berry, J. W., 389–444. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.Search in Google Scholar

Busch, C., and H. Barkema. 2021. “From Necessity to Opportunity: Scaling Bricolage across Resource-Constrained Environments.” Strategic Management Journal 42 (4): 741–73, https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.3237.Search in Google Scholar

Busenitz, L. W., J. O. Fiet, and D. D. Moesel. 2005. “Signaling in Venture Capitalist—New Venture Team Funding Decisions: Does it Indicate Long-Term Venture Outcomes?” Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice 29 (1): 1–12, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2005.00066.x.Search in Google Scholar

Campion, M. A., G. J. Medsker, and A. C. Higgs. 1993. “Relations Between Work Group Characteristics and Effectiveness: Implications for Designing Effective Work Groups.” Personnel Psychology 46 (4): 823–47, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1993.tb01571.x.Search in Google Scholar

Castrogiovanni, G. J. 1991. “Environmental Munificence: A Theoretical Assessment.” Academy of Management Review 16 (3): 542–65, https://doi.org/10.2307/258917.Search in Google Scholar

Chadwick, C., J. F. Super, and K. Kwon. 2015. “Resource Orchestration in Practice: CEO Emphasis on SHRM, Commitment‐based HR Systems, and Firm Performance.” Strategic Management Journal 36 (3): 360–76, https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2217.Search in Google Scholar

Chen, J. J., L. Xie, and S. Zhou. 2020. “Managerial Multi-Tasking, Team Diversity, and Mutual Fund Performance.” Journal of Corporate Finance 65: 101766, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcorpfin.2020.101766.Search in Google Scholar

Chen, J., F. Damanpour, and R. R. Reilly. 2010. “Understanding Antecedents of New Product Development Speed: A Meta-Analysis.” Journal of Operations Management 28 (1): 17–33, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2009.07.001.Search in Google Scholar

Cox, T. H., and S. Blake. 1991. “Managing Cultural Diversity: Implications for Organizational Competitiveness.” Academy of Management Perspectives 5 (3): 45–56, https://doi.org/10.5465/ame.1991.4274465.Search in Google Scholar

De Dreu, C. K., and M. A. West. 2001. “Minority Dissent and Team Innovation: The Importance of Participation in Decision Making.” Journal of Applied Psychology 86 (6): 1191–201, https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.86.6.1191.Search in Google Scholar

Delmar, F., and S. Shane. 2004. “Legitimating First: Organizing Activities and the Survival of New Ventures.” Journal of Business Venturing 19 (3): 385–410, https://doi.org/10.1016/s0883-9026(03)00037-5.Search in Google Scholar

Desa, G. 2012. “Resource Mobilization in International Social Entrepreneurship: Bricolage as a Mechanism of Institutional Transformation.” Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice 36 (4): 727–51, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2010.00430.x.Search in Google Scholar

Desa, G., and S. Basu. 2013. “Optimization or Bricolage? Overcoming Resource Constraints in Global Social Entrepreneurship.” Strategic Entrepreneurial Journal 7 (1): 26–49, https://doi.org/10.1002/sej.1150.Search in Google Scholar

Dess, G, G., and D. W. Beard. 1984. “Dimensions of Organizational Task Environments.” Administrative Science Quarterly 29 (1): 52–73, https://doi.org/10.2307/2393080.Search in Google Scholar

Digan, S. P., G. K. Sahi, S. Mantok, and P. C. Patel. 2019. “Women’s Perceived Empowerment in Entrepreneurial Efforts: The Role of Bricolage and Psychological Capital.” Journal of Small Business Management 57 (1): 206–29, https://doi.org/10.1111/jsbm.12402.Search in Google Scholar

Doty, D. H., and W. H. Glick. 1998. “Common Methods Bias: Does Common Methods Variance Really Bias Results?” Organizational Research Methods 1 (4): 374–406, https://doi.org/10.1177/109442819814002.Search in Google Scholar

Duymedjian, R., and C. C. Rüling. 2010. “Towards a Foundation of Bricolage in Organization and Management Theory.” Organization Studies 31 (2): 133–51, https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840609347051.Search in Google Scholar

Edmunds, A., and A. Morris. 2000. “The Problem of Information Overload in Business Organisations: A Review of the Literature.” International Journal of Information Management 20 (1): 17–28, https://doi.org/10.1016/s0268-4012(99)00051-1.Search in Google Scholar

Eesley, C. E., D. H. Hsu, and E. B. Roberts. 2014. “The Contingent Effects of Top Management Teams on Venture Performance: Aligning Founding Team Composition with Innovation Strategy and Commercialization Environment.” Strategic Management Journal 35 (12): 1798–817, https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2183.Search in Google Scholar

Eisenhardt, K. M., and C. B. Schoonhoven. 1990. “Organizational Growth: Linking Founding Team, Strategy, Environment, and Growth Among US Semiconductor Ventures, 1978-1988.” Administrative Science Quarterly 35 (3): 504–29, https://doi.org/10.2307/2393315.Search in Google Scholar

Ensley, M. D., A. Pearson, and C. L. Pearce. 2003. “Top Management Team Process, Shared Leadership, and New Venture Performance: A Theoretical Model and Research Agenda.” Human Resource Management Review 13 (2): 329–46, https://doi.org/10.1016/s1053-4822(03)00020-2.Search in Google Scholar

Ferneley, E., and F. Bell. 2006. “Using Bricolage to Integrate Business and Information Technology Innovation in SMEs.” Technovation 26 (2): 232–41, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2005.03.005.Search in Google Scholar

Ferreira, J. J., C. I. Fernandes, and S. Kraus. 2019. “Entrepreneurship Research: Mapping Intellectual Structures and Research Trends.” Review of Managerial Science 13 (1): 181–205, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11846-017-0242-3.Search in Google Scholar

Fisher, G. 2012. “Effectuation, Causation, and Bricolage: A Behavioral Comparison of Emerging Theories in Entrepreneurship Research.” Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice 36 (5): 1019–51, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2012.00537.x.Search in Google Scholar

Fornell, C., and D. F. Larcker. 1981. “Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error.” Journal of Marketing Research 18 (1): 39–50, https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378101800104.Search in Google Scholar

Frankenberger, K. and W. Stam. 2020. “Entrepreneurial Copycats: A Resource Orchestration Perspective on The Link Between Extra-Industry Business Model Imitation and New Venture Growth.” Long Range Planning 53 (4): 101872, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2019.02.005.Search in Google Scholar

García-Granero, A., Ó. Llopis, A. Fernández-Mesa, and J. Alegre. 2015. “Unraveling the Link Between Managerial Risk-Taking and Innovation: The Mediating Role of a Risk-Taking Climate.” Journal of Business Research 68 (5): 1094–104, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2014.10.012.Search in Google Scholar

Garud, R., and P. Karnøe. 2003. “Bricolage versus Breakthrough: Distributed and Embedded Agency in Technology Entrepreneurship.” Research Policy 32 (2): 277–300, https://doi.org/10.1016/s0048-7333(02)00100-2.Search in Google Scholar

Getnet, H., A. O’Cass, H. Ahmadi, and V. Siahtiri. 2019. “Supporting Product Innovativeness and Customer Value at the Bottom of the Pyramid through Context-Specific Capabilities and Social Ties.” Industrial Marketing Management 83: 70–80, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2018.11.002.Search in Google Scholar

Gundry, L. K., J. R. Kickul, M. D. Griffiths, and S. C. Bacq. 2011. “Creating Social Change Out of Nothing: The Role of Entrepreneurial Bricolage in Social Entrepreneurs’ Catalytic Innovations.” In Advances in Entrepreneurship, Firm Emergence and Growth, edited by Lumpkin, G. T. and Katz, J. A., 1–24. Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.10.1108/S1074-7540(2011)0000013005Search in Google Scholar

Guo, H., Z. Su, and D. Ahlstrom. 2016. “Business Model Innovation: The Effects of Exploratory Orientation, Opportunity Recognition, and Entrepreneurial Bricolage in an Emerging Economy.” Asia Pacific Journal of Management 33 (2): 533–49, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10490-015-9428-x.Search in Google Scholar

Guo, Z., J. Zhang, and L. Gao. 2018. “It is Not a Panacea! The Conditional Effect of Bricolage in SME Opportunity Exploitation.” R&D Management 48 (5): 603–14, https://doi.org/10.1111/radm.12325.Search in Google Scholar

Haeussler, C., M. Hennicke, and E. Mueller. 2019. “Founder-Inventors and Their Investors: Spurring Firm Survival and Growth.” Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal 13 (3): 288–325, https://doi.org/10.1002/sej.1326.Search in Google Scholar

Hair, J. F., W. C. Black, B. J. Babin, and R. E. Anderson. 2010. Multivariate Data Analysis: A Global Perspective. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.Search in Google Scholar

Hambrick, D. C., T. S. Cho, and M. J. Chen. 1996. “The Influence of Top Management Team Heterogeneity on Firms’ Competitive Moves.” Administrative Science Quarterly 41 (4): 659–84, https://doi.org/10.2307/2393871.Search in Google Scholar

Helfat, C. E., S. Finkelstein, W. Mitchell, M. Peteraf, H. Singh, D. Teece, and S. G. Winter. 2007. Dynamic Capabilities: Understanding Strategic Change in Organizations. Malden, MA: Blackwell.Search in Google Scholar

Hendry, C., and P. Harborne. 2011. “Changing the View of Wind Power Development: More Than ‘Bricolage’.” Research Policy 40 (5): 778–89, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2011.03.001.Search in Google Scholar

Heyden, M. L., S. Van Doorn, M. Reimer, F. A. Van Den Bosch, and H. W. Volberda. 2013. “Perceived Environmental Dynamism, Relative Competitive Performance, and Top Management Team Heterogeneity: Examining Correlates of Upper Echelons’ Advice-Seeking.” Organization Studies 34 (9): 1327–56, https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840612470229.Search in Google Scholar

Horwitz, S. K. 2005. “The Compositional Impact of Team Diversity on Performance: Theoretical Considerations.” Human Resource Development Review 4 (2): 219–45, https://doi.org/10.1177/1534484305275847.Search in Google Scholar

Horwitz, S. K., and I. B. Horwitz. 2007. “The Effects of Team Diversity on Team Outcomes: A Meta-Analytic Review of Team Demography.” Journal of Management 33 (6): 987–1015, https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206307308587.Search in Google Scholar

Hwang, M. I., and J. W. Lin. 1999. “Information Dimension, Information Overload and Decision Quality.” Journal of Information Science 25 (3): 213–8, https://doi.org/10.1177/016555159902500305.Search in Google Scholar

Jin, L., K. Madison, N. D. Kraiczy, F. W. Kellermanns, T. R. Crook, and J. Xi. 2017. “Entrepreneurial Team Composition Characteristics and New Venture Performance: A Meta-Analysis.” Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice 41 (5): 743–71, https://doi.org/10.1111/etap.12232.Search in Google Scholar

Kleinschmidt, E. J., U. De Brentani, and S. Salomo. 2007. “Performance of Global New Product Development Programs: A Resource‐Based View.” Journal of Product Innovation Management 24 (5): 419–41, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5885.2007.00261.x.Search in Google Scholar

Klotz, A. C., K. M. Hmieleski, B. H. Bradley, and L. W. Busenitz. 2014. “New Venture Teams: A Review of the Literature and Roadmap for Future Research.” Journal of Management 40 (1): 226–55, https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206313493325.Search in Google Scholar

Kor, Y. Y., J. T. Mahoney, and S. C. Michael. 2007. “Resources, Capabilities and Entrepreneurial Perceptions.” Journal of Management Studies 44 (7): 1187–212, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2007.00727.x.Search in Google Scholar

Lee, X., N. Xie, and L. Pang. 2008. “Empirical Analysis of R&D Capability in China’s Automotive Firms.” In PICMET’08-2008 Portland International Conference on Management of Engineering & Technology, 294–303.Search in Google Scholar

Leenders, M. A., and B. Wierenga. 2008. “The Effect of the Marketing-R&D Interface on New Product Performance: The Critical Role of Resources and Scope.” International Journal of Research in Marketing 25 (1): 56–68, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijresmar.2007.09.006.Search in Google Scholar

Li, H., and K. Atuahene-Gima. 2001. “Product Innovation Strategy and Performance of New Technology Ventures in China.” Academy of Management Journal 44 (6): 1123–34, https://doi.org/10.2307/3069392.Search in Google Scholar

Liang, Q., G. Luo, and S. Xie. 2013. “A Review of Classical Models of Entrepreneurial Opportunity Research from a Constructivist Perspective.” Foreign Economics & Management 35 (5): 14–22, https://doi.org/10.3724/sp.j.1218.2013.00500.Search in Google Scholar

Liu, J., J. Chen, and Y. Tao. 2015. “Innovation Performance in New Product Development Teams in China’s Technology Ventures: The Role of Behavioral Integration Dimensions and Collective Efficacy.” Journal of Product Innovation Management 32 (1): 29–44, https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12177.Search in Google Scholar

Mishra, C. S., and R. K. Zachary. 2015. “The Theory of Entrepreneurship.” Entrepreneurship Research Journal 5 (4): 251–68, https://doi.org/10.1515/erj-2015-0042.Search in Google Scholar

Moorman, C., and A. S. Miner. 1998. “The Convergence of Planning and Execution: Improvisation in New Product Development.” Journal of Marketing 62 (3): 1–20, https://doi.org/10.1177/002224299806200301.Search in Google Scholar

O’Reilly, C. A.III 1980. “Individuals and Information Overload in Organizations: Is More Necessarily Better?” Academy of Management Journal 23 (4): 684–96, https://doi.org/10.5465/255556.Search in Google Scholar

Opper, S., V. Nee, and H. J. Holm. 2017. “Risk Aversion and Guanxi Activities: A Behavioral Analysis of CEOs in China.” Academy of Management Journal 60 (4): 1504–30, https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2015.0355.Search in Google Scholar

Oviatt, B. M., and P. P. McDougall. 1994. “Toward a Theory of International New Ventures.” Journal of International Business Studies 25 (1): 45–64, https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490193.Search in Google Scholar

Podsakoff, P. M., and D. W. Organ. 1986. “Self-reports in Organizational Research: Problems and Prospects.” Journal of Management 12 (4): 531–44, https://doi.org/10.1177/014920638601200408.Search in Google Scholar

Podsakoff, P. M., S. B. MacKenzie, J. Y. Lee, and N. P. Podsakoff. 2003. “Common Method Biases in Behavioral Research: A Critical Review of the Literature and Recommended Remedies.” Journal of Applied Psychology 88 (5): 879–903, https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879.Search in Google Scholar

Priem, R. L., and J. E. Butler. 2001. “Is the Resource-Based “View” a Useful Perspective for Strategic Management Research?” Academy of Management Review 26 (1): 22–40, https://doi.org/10.2307/259392.Search in Google Scholar

Qian, C., Q. Cao, and R. Takeuchi. 2013. “Top Management Team Functional Diversity and Organizational Innovation in China: The Moderating Effects of Environment.” Strategic Management Journal 34 (1): 110–20, https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.1993.Search in Google Scholar

Ravishankar, M. N., and A. Gurca. 2015. “A Bricolage Perspective on Technological Innovation in Emerging Markets.” IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 63 (1): 53–66, https://doi.org/10.1109/tsp.2015.2405503.Search in Google Scholar

Scazziota, V. V., T. Andreassi, F. A. R. Serra, and L. Guerrazzi. 2020. “Expanding Knowledge Frontiers in Entrepreneurship: Examining Bricolage and Effectuation.” International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research 26 (5): 1355–2554, https://doi.org/10.1108/ijebr-11-2019-0638.Search in Google Scholar

Senyard, J. 2014. “Entrepreneurial Bricolage and Young Firm Performance: The Moderating Effect of Team Composition.” In Australian Centre for Entrepreneurship Research Exchange Conference 2014 Proceedings, Queensland University of Technology, Australia, edited by P. Davidsson, 1024–39.Search in Google Scholar

Senyard, J., P. Davidsson, and P. R. Steffens. 2015. “Environmental Dynamism as a Moderator of the Relationship Between Bricolage and Firm Performance.” In Academy of Management Annual Meeting Proceedings, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, 14893–933.10.5465/ambpp.2015.14893abstractSearch in Google Scholar

Senyard, J., T. Baker, and P. Davidsson. 2009. “Entrepreneurial Bricolage: Towards Systematic Empirical Testing.” Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research 29 (5): 5–19.Search in Google Scholar

Senyard, J., T. Baker, P. Steffens, and P. Davidsson. 2014. “Bricolage as a Path to Innovativeness for Resource‐Constrained New Firms.” Journal of Product Innovation Management 3 (2): 211–30, https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12091.Search in Google Scholar

Shan, P., M. Song, and X. Ju. 2016. “Entrepreneurial Orientation and Performance: Is Innovation Speed a Missing Link?” Journal of Business Research 69 (2): 683–90, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.08.032.Search in Google Scholar

Shane, S., and D. Cable. 2002. “Network Ties, Reputation, and the Financing of New Ventures.” Management Science 48 (3): 364–81, https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.48.3.364.7731.Search in Google Scholar

Sharfman, M, P., and J. W. Dean. 1991. “Conceptualizing and Measuring the Organizational Environment: A Multidimensional Approach.” Journal of Management 17 (4): 681–700, https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639101700403.Search in Google Scholar

Shepherd, D. A. 1999. “Venture Capitalists’ Assessment of New Venture Survival.” Management Science 45 (5): 621–32, https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.45.5.621.Search in Google Scholar

Shepherd, D. A., and A. Zacharakis. 2003. “A New Venture’s Cognitive Legitimacy: An Assessment by Customers.” Journal of Small Business Management 41 (2): 148–67, https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-627x.00073.Search in Google Scholar

Sirmon, D. G., and M. A. Hitt. 2003. “Managing Resources: Linking Unique Resources, Management, and Wealth Creation in Family Firms.” Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice 27 (4): 339–58, https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-8520.t01-1-00013.Search in Google Scholar

Sirmon, D. G., M. A. Hitt, and R. D. Ireland. 2007. “Managing Firm Resources in Dynamic Environments to Create Value: Looking Inside the Black Box.” Academy of Management Review 32 (1): 273–92, https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2007.23466005.Search in Google Scholar

Sirmon, D. G., M. A. Hitt, R. D. Ireland, and B. A. Gilbert. 2011. “Resource Orchestration to Create Competitive Advantage: Breadth, Depth, and Life Cycle Effects.” Journal of Management 37 (5): 1390–412, https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206310385695.Search in Google Scholar

Sitkin, S, B., and L. R. Weingart. 1995. “Determinants of Risky Decision-Making Behavior: A Test of the Mediating Role of Risk Perceptions and Propensity.” Academy of Management Journal 38 (6): 1573–92, https://doi.org/10.5465/256844.Search in Google Scholar

Sivasubramaniam, N., S. J. Liebowitz, and C. L. Lackman. 2012. “Determinants of New Product Development Team Performance: A Meta‐Analytic Review.” Journal of Product Innovation Management 29 (5): 803–20, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5885.2012.00940.x.Search in Google Scholar

Smith, K. G., C. J. Collins, and K. D. Clark. 2005. “Existing Knowledge, Knowledge Creation Capability, and the Rate of New Product Introduction in High-Technology Firms.” Academy of Management Journal 48 (2): 346–57, https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2005.16928421.Search in Google Scholar

Song, L, Z., M. Song, and M. E. Parry. 2010. “Perspective: Economic Conditions, Entrepreneurship, First-Product Development, and New Venture Success.” Journal of Product Innovation Management 27 (1): 130–5, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5885.2009.00704.x.Search in Google Scholar

Song, M., K. Podoynitsyna, H. Van Der Bij, and J. I. Halman. 2008. “Success Factors in New Ventures: A Meta-Analysis.” Journal of Product Innovation Management 25 (1): 7–27.10.1111/j.1540-5885.2007.00280.xSearch in Google Scholar

Su, Z., J. Yang, and Q. Wang. 2020. “The Effects of Top Management Team Heterogeneity and Shared Vision on Entrepreneurial Bricolage in New Ventures: An Attention-Based View.” IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, https://doi.org/10.1109/TEM.2020.2984628.Search in Google Scholar

Swar, B., T. Hameed, and I. Reychav. 2017. “Information Overload, Psychological Ill-Being, and Behavioral Intention to Continue Online Healthcare Information Search.” Computers in Human Behavior 70: 416–25, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.12.068.Search in Google Scholar

Symeonidou, N., and N. Nicolaou. 2018. “Resource Orchestration in Start-Ups: Synchronizing Human Capital Investment, Leveraging Strategy, and Founder Start-Up Experience.” Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal 12 (2): 194–218, https://doi.org/10.1002/sej.1269.Search in Google Scholar

Tang, Z., and S. Rothenberg. 2009. “Does Perceptual Acuity Matter? – An Investigation of Entrepreneurial Orientation, Perceptual Acuity, and Firm Performance.” Journal of Enterprising Culture 17 (1): 79–102, https://doi.org/10.1142/s0218495809000278.Search in Google Scholar

Tekleab, A. G., A. Karaca, N. R. Quigley, and E. W. Tsang. 2016. “Re-examining the Functional Diversity-Performance Relationship: The Roles of Behavioral Integration, Team Cohesion, and Team Learning.” Journal of Business Research 69 (9): 3500–7, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.01.036.Search in Google Scholar

Ucbasaran, D., A. Lockett, M. Wright, and P. Westhead. 2003. “Entrepreneurial Founder Teams: Factors Associated with Member Entry and Exit.” Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice 28 (2): 107–28, https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1540-6520.2003.00034.x.Search in Google Scholar

Van Oorschot, K., K. Eling, and F. Langerak. 2018. “Measuring the Knowns to Manage the Unknown: How to Choose the Gate Timing Strategy in NPD Projects.” Journal of Product Innovation Management 35 (2): 164–83, https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12383.Search in Google Scholar

Walheiser, D., C. Schwens, and A. Engelen. 2019. “Strategic Planning and Firm Performance in SMEs: The Moderating Effects of Bricolage and Structure.” In Academy of Management Annual Meeting Proceedings, Briarcliff Manor, NY, 14783.10.5465/AMBPP.2019.14783abstractSearch in Google Scholar

Wang, Y. 2016. “Bringing the Stages Back in: Social Network Ties and Start‐up Firms’ Access to Venture Capital in China.” Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal 10 (3): 300–17, https://doi.org/10.1002/sej.1229.Search in Google Scholar

Wang, B., Y. Liu, J. Qian, and S. K. Parker. 2021. “Achieving Effective Remote Working During the COVID‐19 Pandemic: A Work Design Perspective.” Applied Psychology: An International Review 70 (1): 16–59, https://doi.org/10.1111/apps.12290.Search in Google Scholar

Weiss, M., J. Backmann, S. Razinskas, and M. Hoegl. 2018. “Team Diversity in Innovation-Salient Research in the Journal of Product Innovation Management.” Journal of Product Innovation Management 35 (5): 839–50, https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12465.Search in Google Scholar

Wernerfelt, B. 1984. “A Resource-Based View of the Firm.” Strategic Management Journal 5 (2): 171–80, https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250050207.Search in Google Scholar

Wu, L., H. Liu, and J. Zhang. 2017. “Bricolage Effects on New-Product Development Speed and Creativity: The Moderating Role of Technological Turbulence.” Journal of Business Research 70: 127–35, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.08.027.Search in Google Scholar

Xiang, Q., J. Zhang, and H. Liu. 2020. “Organisational Improvisation as a Path to New Opportunity Identification for Incumbent Firms: An Organisational Learning View.” Innovation 22 (4): 422–46, https://doi.org/10.1080/14479338.2020.1713001.Search in Google Scholar

Xie, X. Y., W. Feng, and Q. Hu. 2020. “Does New Venture Team Power Hierarchy Enhance or Impair New Venture Performance? A Contingency Perspective.” Journal of Business Venturing 35 (6): 106059, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2020.106059.Search in Google Scholar

Yu, X., Y. Li, D. Chen, X. Meng, and X. Tao. 2019. “Entrepreneurial Bricolage and Online Store Performance in Emerging Economies.” Electronic Markets 29 (2): 167–85, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12525-018-0302-9.Search in Google Scholar

Yu, X., Y. Li, Z. Su, Y. Tao, B. Nguyen, and F. Xia. 2020. “Entrepreneurial Bricolage and Its Effects on New Venture Growth and Adaptiveness in an Emerging Economy.” Asia Pacific Journal of Management 37 (4): 1141–63, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10490-019-09657-1.Search in Google Scholar

Zhou, W., and E. Rosini. 2015. “Entrepreneurial Team Diversity and Performance: Toward an Integrated Model.” Entrepreneurship Research Journal 5 (1): 31–60, https://doi.org/10.1515/erj-2014-0005.Search in Google Scholar

Zouaghi, F., T. Garcia-Marco, and M. G. Martinez. 2020. “The Link Between R&D Team Diversity and Innovative Performance: A Mediated Moderation Model.” Technological Forecasting and Social Change 161: 120325, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2020.120325.Search in Google Scholar
Received: 2020-10-20
Accepted: 2021-05-29
Published Online: 2021-06-28

© 2021 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Articles in the same Issue

  1. Frontmatter
  2. Competitive Research Articles
  3. Entrepreneurial Bricolage and New Product Development Performance in New Ventures: The Contingent Effects of Founding Team Involvement
  4. Performance Impacts of Innovation Outcomes in Entrepreneurial New Ventures
  5. In and Out of Self-Employment, Are You Really an Entrepreneur: The Rise of a New Division?
  6. Innovation Strategy Development and Facilitation of an Integrative Process with an MCDM Framework
  7. Entrepreneurial Orientation and Start-Up Performance: A Configurational Approach
  8. Entrepreneurship and Firm Strategy: Integrating Resources, Capabilities, and Judgment through an Austrian Framework
  9. The Role of Entrepreneurial Performance in Supporting Economic Development of Countries: An Empirical Approach
  10. I Regret as My Family Fallows My Entrepreneurial Self-Efficacy! Evidence from the Male Sample of an Emerging Economy (Pakistan)
  11. From Dream to Reality: The Ambivalent Role of Nascent Entrepreneurs’ Motivation in the Intention-Action Gap
  12. The Role of Entrepreneurs’ Empathy in New Venture Performance: The Mediating Effects of Entrepreneurial Orientation
  13. Exploring the Effects of Innovation Ecosystem Models on Innovative Performances of Start-Ups: The Contingent Role of Open Innovation
  14. Broaden the Pathway to Inclusive Entrepreneurship: A Transaction Cost Proposition
https://doi.org/10.1515/erj-2020-0485
Keywords for this article
entrepreneurial bricolage; new product development; new venture success; new venture founding team

Articles in the same Issue

  1. Frontmatter
  2. Competitive Research Articles
  3. Entrepreneurial Bricolage and New Product Development Performance in New Ventures: The Contingent Effects of Founding Team Involvement
  4. Performance Impacts of Innovation Outcomes in Entrepreneurial New Ventures
  5. In and Out of Self-Employment, Are You Really an Entrepreneur: The Rise of a New Division?
  6. Innovation Strategy Development and Facilitation of an Integrative Process with an MCDM Framework
  7. Entrepreneurial Orientation and Start-Up Performance: A Configurational Approach
  8. Entrepreneurship and Firm Strategy: Integrating Resources, Capabilities, and Judgment through an Austrian Framework
  9. The Role of Entrepreneurial Performance in Supporting Economic Development of Countries: An Empirical Approach
  10. I Regret as My Family Fallows My Entrepreneurial Self-Efficacy! Evidence from the Male Sample of an Emerging Economy (Pakistan)
  11. From Dream to Reality: The Ambivalent Role of Nascent Entrepreneurs’ Motivation in the Intention-Action Gap
  12. The Role of Entrepreneurs’ Empathy in New Venture Performance: The Mediating Effects of Entrepreneurial Orientation
  13. Exploring the Effects of Innovation Ecosystem Models on Innovative Performances of Start-Ups: The Contingent Role of Open Innovation
  14. Broaden the Pathway to Inclusive Entrepreneurship: A Transaction Cost Proposition
Sign up now to receive a 20% welcome discount
Institutional Access
How does access work?
Have an idea on how to improve our website?
Please write us.
© 2025 De Gruyter Brill
Downloaded on 26.10.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/erj-2020-0485/html?srsltid=AfmBOorhqx6unGTdiEFtMR6nz5gXxnO4yUnZWRrfQR4BiWXylOfIZrQk
Scroll to top button