Submitted Successfully!
To reward your contribution, here is a gift for you: A free trial for our video production service.
Thank you for your contribution! You can also upload a video entry or images related to this topic.
Version Summary Created by Modification Content Size Created at Operation
1
Quoc Hoang Thai
 -- 2652 2023-12-14 06:27:54 |
2 Reference format revised.
Lindsay Dong
-78 word(s) 2574 2023-12-19 03:23:41 |

Video Upload Options

Do you have a full video?
Send video materials Upload full video

Confirm

Are you sure to Delete?
Yes No
Cite
If you have any further questions, please contact Encyclopedia Editorial Office.
Thai, Q.H.; Mai, K.N. Entrepreneurial Financial Support and New Ventures’ Performance. Encyclopedia. Available online: https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/52722 (accessed on 02 July 2024).
Thai QH, Mai KN. Entrepreneurial Financial Support and New Ventures’ Performance. Encyclopedia. Available at: https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/52722. Accessed July 02, 2024.
Thai, Quoc Hoang, Khuong Ngoc Mai. "Entrepreneurial Financial Support and New Ventures’ Performance" Encyclopedia, https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/52722 (accessed July 02, 2024).
Thai, Q.H., & Mai, K.N. (2023, December 14). Entrepreneurial Financial Support and New Ventures’ Performance. In Encyclopedia. https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/52722
Thai, Quoc Hoang and Khuong Ngoc Mai. "Entrepreneurial Financial Support and New Ventures’ Performance." Encyclopedia. Web. 14 December, 2023.
Entrepreneurial Financial Support and New Ventures’ Performance
Edit
This entry is adapted from the peer-reviewed paper 10.3390/su152115519

Findings demonstrated that all financial and operational performances of new venture constructs in this research model were completely supported. Furthermore, entrepreneurial financial support had the strongest direct and indirect effects on firm innovation and competitive advantage, while firm innovation and competitive advantage fully mediated relationships between entrepreneurial financial support and firms’ financial and operational performance. In the post-COVID-19 pandemic era, the resource-based view (RBV) theory offers novel insight for governors and other stakeholders to build an efficient financial support system, while providing entrepreneurs with strategies to leverage said system to develop innovation for achieving better competitive advantage, leading to higher firm performance.

entrepreneurial financial support firm performance firm financial performance firm operational performance firm innovation

1. Resource-Based View Theory

Resource-based view (RBV) theory was developed as a crucial theoretical viewpoint applied to demonstrate tenaciousness in differences in performance across firms [1]. According to the RBV theory, the sustainable firm competitive advantage (FCA) and outcomes of an enterprise are the result of the possession of unique organizational resources that are valuable, rare, inimitable, and non-substitutable [2][3][4]. Regarding the external mechanism, the RBV theory reveals that enterprises can strengthen their resources through obtaining additional resources from an external system like FIN systems [5]. The RBV theory argues that externally available resources can affect new ventures’ firm performance [6][7]. Hence, superior firm performance is a result of external resources, which is demonstrated as financial support (FIN) [8][9]. Regarding the internal mechanism, capacity explains the formation and rearrangement of resources to foster productivity and accomplish strategic objectives [10]. Hence, Camisón and Villar-López [11] claimed that the establishment of INO in an enterprise can be characterized as an actual source of FCA [12], which causes an improvement in firm performance [13] because it generates new products or services, technologies, organizational design, and management methods. The RBV theory was also utilized in the work of Prange and Pinho [14] to view innovation (INO) as internal resources that express the consistent arrangement of organizational resources and capabilities to promote novel productions and markets [15], resulting in enterprises’ heterogeneity and exceptional performance [11][16].

2. Firm Performance

Firm performance refers to a firm’s ultimate result, comprising managerial effectiveness and elements beyond organizational management [17]. Furthermore, it is the overall level of satisfaction among all participants when they collect and transform inputs into outputs in an effective method [18]. It estimates what stimulates a firm to generate intended outcomes in terms of both means and ends [19]. Considering existing research on firm performance, various measurements have been applied. However, theresearch followed the framework of Venkatraman and Ramanujam [20] to clarify firm performance as a broad concept encompassing two smaller domains including FiPer and BOP. FiPer relates to the method that illustrates the overall performance of a firm, which is measured as the profitability (indicated by ratios such as return on assets, return on sale, and return on equity) [20][21]. BOP demonstrates long-term objectives and development capabilities, combining measures like new product establishment, product quality, manufacturing value-added, productivity, growth, satisfaction of stakeholders, and efficiency [20][22].

3. Entrepreneurial Financial Support

FIN focuses principally on the capacity to obtain financial resources provided to entrepreneurs [23]. It identifies those financial organizations that handle tasks of entrepreneurs’ funding, encompassing “micro-loan, angel investors, zero-stage venture capital, venture capital funding, private equity, public capital markets, and debt” [24]. FIN is also regarded as sources of funding and finance including “friends and family, angel investors, private equity, venture capital, and access to debt” [25][26]. In addition, FIN refers to all components relevant to any forms of financing, encompassing “public subsidies or helps, informal investment, banks, credit, microcredits, venture capital, and others” [27].

4. Firm Innovation

INO is a novel concept, technique, or mechanism that can be obtained through offering a novel production, organizational design, management process, or modification in organizational culture [28]. INO is acknowledged as a combination of managerial activities, focusing on the renewal and development of organizational designs, operations, and methods with the aim to enhance organizational targets [29]. INO also illustrates the competencies to create and utilize novel concepts or attitudes. It is crucial for strengthening organizational outputs, resulting in high performance [30]. INO refers to a crucial approach through which organizations can aim to adapt novel equipment, methods, and administrative procedures associated with other innovative activities, enabling organizations to create an essential contribution to innovation procedures [31].

5. Firm Competitive Advantage

FCA is obtained in the circumstance that an organization’s strategy generates values that competitors cannot imitate or exploit. Organizations have to develop differentiation strategies to acquire FCA by having exclusive resources and abilities to focus on four major facets including value, rareness, imitability, and organization [2]. Peteraf and Barney [4] developed the following explicit definition of FCA: a firm possesses an FCA in the case that it has abilities to generate more economic value, which is the distinction between consumers’ perceived value from a good or service and its production cost, than marginal competitors within its product market. After that, Sigalas et al. [32] constructed the following two criteria to address a proper definition of FCA: (1) to integrate all latent characteristics of the notion and (2) not to encompass any assessment on its own values or organizational outcomes. They identified FCA as those organizational abilities producing more economic value than the least effective competitors and above the industry average in terms of manipulation of market opportunities, neutralization of competitive threats, and decline of cost. In addition to that, customer satisfaction and optimism, firm reputation, and employee commitment are also acknowledged as essential elements of FCA [21][33][34].

6. Entrepreneurial Financial Support, Firm Performance, Firm Innovation, and Firm Competitive Advantage

Access to finance through various programs (e.g., formal finance accessed from financial institutions and banks or informal finance accessed from friends, family, and money lenders) has been determined as a positive antecedent of the FiPer of a firm, which is indicated by number of sales [35], higher financial progress, and profitability [36]. FIN provided by the government positively affects stable new ventures’ firm performance because enterprises that receive government financial assistance increase their probability of enhanced income, cash flow, and profitability [37][38][39][40][41]. Peter et al. [42] approved this conclusion by demonstrating that FIN has a significant and positive impact on the FiPer of SMEs by easing financial constraints, reducing risks, and generating economic conditions that promote innovation, entrepreneurial activities, and high profit.
Moreover, firms’ access to finance significantly stimulates various facets of BOP including overall growth [43][44], accomplishment of growth and investment opportunities [45], long-term survival of SMEs [46], and the acknowledgement of sustainability challenges [47]. Access to external finance positively influences the BOP, represented by the productivity of labor and organization, of SMEs in both developing and developed nations because financial constraints hinder productivity and represent vital obstacles to efficient entrepreneurial activities [48][49][50]. FIN from governments stimulates organizations by improving their BOP and enlarging their business to achieve higher return on equity, return on assets, and market growth [40]. Kijkasiwat et al. [51] indicated that FIN positively improves BOP, leading to enhanced products and services, production procedures, logistics and delivery, maintenance structure, and organization and administration.
FIN from financial institutions, banks, and other sources positively improves investment in products and processes, leading to the strengthened INO of SMEs in Nigeria [52]. Moreover, FIN through trade credit, asset finance, and overdraft positively improves the INO of new ventures in various nations [53]. The availability of FIN stimulates the INO of MSMEs in India by enabling them to participate actively in innovative activities in which they enforce novel or essential products or processes, novel marketing strategies, or novel organizational techniques in organizational operations, workplace management, and external relationships [54]. FIN demonstrated through the development of financial institutions positively contributes to the INO of enterprises in the EU through mobilizing finance to facilitate firms’ patenting activity [55].
FIN positively influences FCA of new ventures since it reconstructs internal procedures and shapes capabilities of new ventures to access resources crucial for developing capabilities, providing FCA [56][57][58]. FIN facilitates FCA because it enables organizations to create returns from distinctions in the valuation employed to a firm between acquisition and divestment and independent of shifts in fundamental outcomes [59][60][61]. Thus, FIN from the government positively stimulates FCA because it helps organizations in reducing numerous costs and assists them in creating particular products and services [38]. Lafuente et al. [62] demonstrated a positive impact of FIN entrenched in an entrepreneurial ecosystem on FCA through the exploitation of resources and competencies, which are adjusted regarding the circumstances of the institutional establishment in which enterprises are operating.
According to the RBV theory, FCA is acknowledged as the closest driver to performance [2]. FCA allows an enterprise to increase its firm performance compared with its rivals [63][64]. Various scholars have confirmed a significant relationship between FCA and firm performance [40][65][66]. An organization can utilize its FCA to exploit its strengths to assure efficient performance and generate values necessary for sustainable participation in the market, maximizing FiPer and sustaining a high degree of BOP [67][68][69]. Marolt et al. [70] concluded that an SME possessing strong FCA can provide exceptional value to its customers and, thus, it can enhance its sales volume, market share, customer satisfaction, and loyalty. Because an essential objective of firms is to acquire a higher degree of financial outcomes, the obtainment of a continuous FCA is an important factor in achieving this fundamental purpose [71]. Thus, Saeidi et al. [21] proved a positive effect of FCA on the FiPer of manufacturing and consumer product firms in Iran. a positive effect was also confirmed in the context of SMEs functioning as family businesses in Turkey [72]. Jeong and Chung [73] demonstrated that manufacturing SMEs can leverage their FCA to obtain a positive FiPer in the consumer goods sector in Korea. Ofori and Appiah-Nimo [74] suggested that FCA is an essential element of the survival of firms in the hospitality context because of its positive impact on the BOP of hotels in Ghana. Supporting this view, Suandi et al. [75] proposed that organizations with higher levels of FCA can manipulate business opportunities and neutralize competitor threats, improving the BOP of banks in Indonesia.
The RBV theory also suggests that firms can challenge their opponents through generating and improving INO, resulting in FCA and higher levels of firm performance [76]. Despite previous studies concluding mixed results regarding the associations between INO and firm performance [77][78], numerous scholars have explained that INO is a crucial factor benefiting improvements in firm performance. García-Morales et al. [79] and Rita et al. [80] approved the positive impacts of INO on the firm performance of Spanish organizations by stating that an organization adopts an innovative viewpoint to create essential production and technology skills, securing sources for enhanced firm performance. Alipour et al. [81] emphasized that the existence of innovative, skillful, highly qualified, and suitable staff and a particular structure for strategic planning—helping organizations to create efficient approaches and procedures in order to offer novel products and services for their consumers—positively stimulated both the FiPer and BOP of 102 service sector firms in Iran. Moreover, Mai et al. [82] verified the positive influences of INO on the firm performance of tourism and hospitality enterprises in Vietnam. INO—which offers renewal in firms and adaptability in conducting business and enhancing working relationships—enhances the firm performance of companies in Saudi Arabia, promoting their growth and competitiveness in the market [83]. Tripathi and Kalia [84] demonstrated that informational technology enterprises in India can challenge their opponents by enforcing an innovative strategy, i.e., INO, to facilitate FCA and superior firm performance.
INO refers to the development of products, processes, and technologies which help new ventures to enforce novel and effective marketing methods to obtain FCA and, thus, only innovative firms achieve superior firm performance and sustainability in the market in response to business fluctuations [85][86][87]. Hence, Sulistyo and Ayuni [88] suggested that SMEs, which are constantly seeking innovative approaches to improve their designs and values, are the first to become beneficiaries and, thus, INO stimulates new ventures’ sustainable FCA. Azeem et al. [89] demonstrated a positive effect of INO on the FCA of enterprises operating in the textile industry of Pakistan. The improvement and adaptation of novel concepts, behaviors, or procedures in organizational administration strengthens the associations between a firm and its extraneous elements, enabling the firm to enhance its essential capital and generate value for the firm, resulting in FCA [90]. Furthermore, INO is very valuable for developing firms in achieving a sustainable FCA because it encourages the utilization of novel ideas and innovation to create organizational superiority [69][91].

7. Mediating Roles of Firm Competitive Advantage and Firm Innovation

FCA gained from INO positively affects new ventures’ firm performance [67][68][70]. INO allows new ventures to offer more value to customers and maintain their competitive advantage, resulting in better firm performance and profitability [92]. It improves new ventures’ firm performance by clarifying and enforcing differentiation and cost leadership strategies [93]. New ventures encounter tough competition when operating in a turbulent market and, thus, they need to develop and enforce innovations that promote their competitiveness in the market, leading to exceptional firm performance [94]. Moreover, the leverage of INO shapes strategic activities necessary for achieving FCA, increasing new ventures’ firm performance [95]. Pergelova and Angulo-Ruiz [56] demonstrated that new ventures in the US possessing an innovation-based FCA have higher values of FiPer. Anwar [85] verified a mediating function of FCA in the positive association between INO and the FiPer of SMEs operating in the emerging market of Pakistan because INO helps firms to obtain a continuous FCA by offering various new methods and generating better profitability and success.
In both developed and developing nations, FIN has no direct impact on firm performance; instead, internal elements mediate the associations between them [56][96]. Due to the constantly shifting economy and business environment, entrepreneurs and their new ventures have to become innovative to obtain a sustainable FCA [97]. New ventures also exploit the benefits of FIN from the government to embrace new equipment and recruit high-quality staff. It stimulates them to enforce improved INO, ultimately increasing firm performance because of the effectiveness of production and delivery procedures [98][99]. Furthermore, FIN stimulates enterprises in generating and developing unique products and services to achieve their FCA [38]. Moreover, the mediating role of FCA has been broadly researched [38][40][56]. Pergelova and Angulo-Ruiz [56] and Jayeola et al. [96] found that FIN provided by the government does not unveil a direct statistically significant impact on new ventures’ firm performance. Nevertheless, FIN demonstrates an indirect impact on firm performance via a mediating contribution of FCA, especially innovation-oriented formation, because FIN enhances original “hard” resources for new ventures, offers them authority among partners, and supports them with a resource “slack” which can be utilized for asset improvement, novel project implement, better market position, and superior firm performance. Songling et al. [40] confirmed that FCA plays a mediating function in the positive associations between FIN and firm performance in an emerging market of Pakistan. Furthermore, Anwar and Li [38] found that FIN enables organizations to reduce numerous costs and create particular products and services, resulting in FCA. These advantages increase profitability and improve the firm performance of SMEs in Pakistan. On the other hand, various articles have emphasized that FIN can be utilized to acquire other internal resources and mechanisms for enterprises including INO [52][53][54][55]. If an external mechanism (FIN) is accumulated via an internal mechanism (INO), organizations are offered FCA [2], which in turn positively influences firm performance [56][67][68][70]. Therefore, the RBV theory emphasizes that the abilities of an organization to transform available resources into capabilities and resources that are valuable, rare, inimitable, and non-substitutable becomes especially crucial in procedures of gathering and reconfiguring said resources to exploit business opportunities, leading to FCA and superior firm performance [100]. In this circumstance, FIN provides original resource inputs, and then entrepreneurs must develop innovative strategies and procedures that connect to FCA which ultimately mediates the relationships between FIN and new ventures’ firm performance. 

References

  1. Barney, J.B.; Griffin, R.W. The Management of Organizations: Strategy, Structure, Behavior; Houghton Mifflin Company: Boston, MA, USA, 1992.
  2. Barney, J. Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. J. Manag. 1991, 17, 99–120.
  3. Galbreath, J. Which resources matter the most to firm success? An exploratory study of resource-based theory. Technovation 2005, 25, 979–987.
  4. Peteraf, M.A.; Barney, J.B. Unraveling the resource-based tangle. Manag. Decis. Econ. 2003, 24, 309–323.
  5. Peng, M.W.; Sun, S.L.; Pinkham, B.; Chen, H. The institution-based view as a third leg for a strategy tripod. Acad. Manag. Perspect. 2009, 23, 63–81.
  6. Morgan, N.A.; Zou, S.; Vorhies, D.W.; Katsikeas, C.S. Experiential and informational knowledge, architectural marketing capabilities, and the adaptive performance of export ventures: A cross-national study. Decis. Sci. 2003, 34, 287–321.
  7. Morgan, N.A.; Kaleka, A.; Katsikeas, C.S. Antecedents of export venture performance: A theoretical model and empirical assessment. J. Mark. 2004, 68, 90–108.
  8. Hayter, C.S.; Nelson, A.J.; Zayed, S.; O’Connor, A.C. Conceptualizing academic entrepreneurship ecosystems: A review, analysis and extension of the literature. J. Technol. Transf. 2018, 43, 1039–1082.
  9. Seguí-Mas, E.; Jiménez-Arribas, I.; Tormo-Carbó, G. Does the environment matter? Mapping academic knowledge on entrepreneurial ecosystems in GEM. Entrep. Res. J. 2018, 9, 20170170.
  10. Makadok, R. Toward a synthesis of the resource-based and dynamic-capability views of rent creation. Strateg. Manag. J. 2001, 22, 387–401.
  11. Camisón, C.; Villar-López, A. Innovación organizacional como habilitador de capacidades de innovación tecnológica y desempeño empresarial. J. Bus. Res. 2014, 67, 2891–2902.
  12. Goldman, S.L.; Nagel, R.N.; Preiss, K. Agile Competitors and Virtual Organizations: Strategies for Enriching the Customer; Van Nostrand Reinhold: New York, NY, USA, 1995.
  13. OECD. Oslo Manual: Guidelines for Collecting and Interpreting Innovation Data, 3rd ed.; OECD: Paris, France, 2005.
  14. Prange, C.; Pinho, J.C. How personal and organizational drivers impact on SME international performance: The mediating role of organizational innovation. Int. Bus. Rev. 2017, 26, 1114–1123.
  15. Wang, C.L.; Ahmed, P.K. The development and validation of the organisational innovativeness construct using confirmatory factor analysis. Eur. J. Innov. Manag. 2004, 7, 303–313.
  16. Boso, N.; Story, V.M.; Cadogan, J.W. Entrepreneurial orientation, market orientation, network ties, and performance: Study of entrepreneurial firms in a developing economy. J. Bus. Ventur. 2013, 28, 708–727.
  17. Kirchhoff, B.A. Organization effectiveness measurement and policy research. Acad. Manag. Rev. 1977, 2, 347–355.
  18. Roy, M.H.; Dugal, S.S. Using employee gainsharing plans to improve organizational effectiveness. Benchmarking Int. J. 2005, 12, 250–259.
  19. Holbeche, L.S. Organisational effectiveness and agility. J. Organ. Eff. People Perform. 2018, 5, 302–313.
  20. Venkatraman, N.; Ramanujam, V. Measurement of business performance in strategy research: A comparison of approaches. Acad. Manag. Rev. 1986, 11, 801–814.
  21. Saeidi, S.P.; Sofian, S.; Saeidi, P.; Saeidi, S.P.; Saaeidi, S.A. How does corporate social responsibility contribute to firm financial performance? The mediating role of competitive advantage, reputation, and customer satisfaction. J. Bus. Res. 2015, 68, 341–350.
  22. Arsezen-Otamis, P.; Arikan-Saltik, I.; Babacan, S. The relationship between paternalistic leadership and business performance in small tourism businesses: The moderating role of affective organizational commitment. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 2015, 207, 90–97.
  23. Liguori, E.; Bendickson, J.; Solomon, S.; McDowell, W.C. Development of a multi-dimensional measure for assessing entrepreneurial ecosystems. Entrep. Reg. Dev. 2019, 31, 7–21.
  24. Isenberg, D. The entrepreneurship ecosystem strategy as a new paradigm for economic policy: Principles for cultivating entrepreneurship. Present. Inst. Int. Eur. Aff. 2011, 1, 13.
  25. Stam, E. Entrepreneurial ecosystems and regional policy: A sympathetic critique. Eur. Plan. Stud. 2015, 23, 1759–1769.
  26. World Economic Forum (WEF). The World Economic Forum. Available online: https://www.weforum.org/ (accessed on 15 July 2023).
  27. Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM). The World Foremost Study of Entrepreneurship Since 1999. 2021. Available online: https://www.gemconsortium.org/ (accessed on 15 July 2023).
  28. Kwon, K.; Cho, D. How transactive memory systems relate to organizational innovation: The mediating role of developmental leadership. J. Knowl. Manag. 2016, 20, 1025–1044.
  29. Prasad, B.; Junni, P. CEO transformational and transactional leadership and organizational innovation: The moderating role of environmental dynamism. Manag. Decis. 2016, 54, 1542–1568.
  30. Jia, X.; Chen, J.; Mei, L.; Wu, Q. How leadership matters in organizational innovation: A perspective of openness. Manag. Decis. 2018, 56, 6–25.
  31. Chen, Q.; Wang, C.H.; Huang, S.Z. Effects of organizational innovation and technological innovation capabilities on firm performance: Evidence from firms in China’s Pearl River Delta. Asia Pac. Bus. Rev. 2020, 26, 72–96.
  32. Sigalas, C.; Economou, V.P.; Georgopoulos, N.B. Developing a measure of competitive advantage. J. Strategy Manag. 2013, 6, 320–342.
  33. Shore, L.M.; Barksdale, K.; Shore, T.H. Managerial perceptions of employee commitment to the organization. Acad. Manag. J. 1995, 38, 1593–1615.
  34. El-Garaihy, W.H.; Mobarak, A.K.M.; Albahussain, S.A. Measuring the impact of corporate social responsibility practices on competitive advantage: A mediation role of reputation and customer satisfaction. Int. J. Bus. Manag. 2014, 9, 109.
  35. Morris, M.; Stevens, P. Evaluation of a New Zealand business support programme using firm performance micro-data. Small Enterp. Res. 2010, 17, 30–42.
  36. Harelimana, J.B. Effect of debt financing on business performance: A comparative study between I&M Bank and Bank of Kigali, Rwanda. Glob. J. Manag. Bus. Res. 2017, 17, 37–45.
  37. Kurniawan; Maulana, A.; Iskandar, Y. The Effect of Technology Adaptation and Government Financial Support on Sustainable Performance of MSMEs during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Cogent Bus. Manag. 2023, 10, 2177400.
  38. Anwar, M.; Li, S. Spurring competitiveness, financial and environmental performance of SMEs through government financial and non-financial support. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2021, 23, 7860–7882.
  39. Ntiamoah, E.B.; Li, D.; Kwamega, M. Impact of government and other institutions’ support on performance of small and medium enterprises in the agribusiness sector in Ghana. Am. J. Ind. Bus. Manag. 2016, 6, 558.
  40. Songling, Y.; Ishtiaq, M.; Anwar, M.; Ahmed, H. The role of government support in sustainable competitive position and firm performance. Sustainability 2018, 10, 3495.
  41. Xiang, D.; Worthington, C.A. The Impact of Government Financial Assistance on the performance and financing of Australian SMEs. Account. Res. J. 2017, 30, 447–464.
  42. Peter, F.; Adegbuyi, O.; Olokundun, M.; Peter, A.O.; Amaihian, A.B.; Ibidunni, A.S. Government financial support and financial performance of SMEs. Acad. Strateg. Manag. J. 2018, 17, 1–10.
  43. Fowowe, B. Access to finance and firm performance: Evidence from African countries. Rev. Dev. Financ. 2017, 7, 6–17.
  44. Okello Candiya Bongomin, G.; Mpeera Ntayi, J.; Munene, J.C.; Akol Malinga, C. The relationship between access to finance and growth of SMEs in developing economies: Financial literacy as a moderator. Rev. Int. Bus. Strategy 2017, 27, 520–538.
  45. Beck, T.; Demirgüç-Kunt, A.; Maksimovic, V. Bank competition and access to finance: International evidence. J. Money Credit Bank. 2004, 36, 627–648.
  46. Braun, M.; Briones, I.; Islas, G. Interlocking directorates, access to credit, and business performance in Chile during early industrialization. J. Bus. Res. 2019, 105, 381–388.
  47. Sanchez-Famoso, V.; Mejia-Morelos, J.H.; Cisneros, L. New insights into non-listed family SMEs in Spain: Board social capital, board effectiveness, and sustainable performance. Sustainability 2020, 12, 814.
  48. Chowdhury, M.A.S.; Chuanmin, S.; Sokolová, M.; Akbar, A.; Ali, Z.; Ali, H.; Alam, M.Z. Assessing the Empirical Linkage among Access to Finance, Firm Quality, and Firm Performance: New Insight from Bangladeshi SMEs’. Front. Psychol. 2022, 13, 865733.
  49. Boermans, M.A.; Willebrands, D. Financial constraints matter: Empirical evidence on borrowing behavior, microfinance and firm productivity. J. Dev. Entrep. 2018, 23, 1850008.
  50. Ferrando, A.; Ruggieri, A. Financial constraints and productivity: Evidence from euro area companies. Int. J. Financ. Econ. 2018, 23, 257–282.
  51. Kijkasiwat, P.; Shahid, A.U.; Hassan, M.K.; Hunjra, A.I. Access to finance, social capital and the improvement of corporate performance: Evidence from Southeast Asia. Manag. Financ. 2022, 48, 1047–1068.
  52. Adegboye, A.C.; Iweriebor, S. Does Access to Finance Enhance SME Innovation and Productivity in Nigeria? Evidence from the World Bank Enterprise Survey. Afr. Dev. Rev. 2018, 30, 449–461.
  53. Fombang, M.S.; Adjasi, C.K. Access to finance and firm innovation. J. Financ. Econ. Policy 2018, 10, 73–94.
  54. Kaur, P.; Kaur, N.; Kanojia, P. Firm innovation and access to finance: Firm-level evidence from India. J. Financ. Econ. Policy 2022, 14, 93–112.
  55. Clò, S.; Frigerio, M.; Vandone, D. Financial support to innovation: The role of European development financial institutions. Res. Policy 2022, 51, 104566.
  56. Pergelova, A.; Angulo-Ruiz, F. The impact of government financial support on the performance of new firms: The role of competitive advantage as an intermediate outcome. Entrep. Reg. Dev. 2014, 26, 663–705.
  57. Doh, S.; Kim, B. Government support for SME innovations in the regional industries: The case of government financial support program in South Korea. Res. Policy 2014, 43, 1557–1569.
  58. Hansen, H.; Rand, J.; Tarp, F. Enterprise growth and survival in Vietnam: Does government support matter? J. Dev. Stud. 2009, 45, 1048–1069.
  59. Sidek, S.; Mohamad, M.R.; Wan, W.M.N. Entrepreneurial orientation and SME performance: The serial mediating effects of access to finance and competitive advantage. Int. J. Acad. Res. Bus. Soc. Sci. 2019, 9, 81–100.
  60. Castellaneta, F. Building firm capability: Managerial incentives for top performance. J. Bus. Strategy 2016, 37, 41–46.
  61. Henard, D.H.; McFadyen, M.A. Resource dedication and new product performance: A resource-based view. J. Prod. Innov. Manag. 2012, 29, 193–204.
  62. Lafuente, E.; Alonso-Ubieta, S.; Leiva, J.C.; Mora-Esquivel, R. Strategic priorities and competitiveness of businesses operating in different entrepreneurial ecosystems: A benefit of the doubt (BOD) analysis. Int. J. Entrep. Behav. Res. 2021, 27, 1351–1377.
  63. Eyasu, A.M.; Arefayne, D. The effect of corporate social responsibility on banks’ competitive advantage: Evidence from Ethiopian lion international bank SC. Cogent Bus. Manag. 2020, 7, 1830473.
  64. Guimarães, J.C.F.D.; Severo, E.A.; Vasconcelos, C.R.M.D. Sustainable competitive advantage: A survey of companies in Southern Brazil. Braz. Bus. Rev. 2017, 14, 352–367.
  65. Do, B.; Nguyen, N. The links between proactive environmental strategy, competitive advantages and firm performance: An empirical study in Vietnam. Sustainability 2020, 12, 4962.
  66. Ramírez, Y.; Dieguez-Soto, J.; Manzaneque, M. How does intellectual capital efficiency affect firm performance? The moderating role of family management. Int. J. Product. Perform. Manag. 2021, 70, 297–324.
  67. Mukhsin, M.; Suryanto, T. The effect of sustainable supply chain management on company performance mediated by competitive advantage. Sustainability 2022, 14, 818.
  68. Astuti, P.D.; Datrini, L.K.; Chariri, A. Understanding the antecedents and consequences of sustainable competitive advantage: Testing intellectual capital and organizational performance. Economies 2023, 11, 120.
  69. Yaskun, M.; Sudarmiatin, S.; Hermawan, A.; Rahayu, W.P. The Effect of Market Orientation, Entrepreneurial Orientation, Innovation and Competitive Advantage on Business Performance of Indonesian MSMEs. Int. J. Prof. Bus. Rev. 2023, 8, 39.
  70. Marolt, M.; Zimmermann, H.D.; Pucihar, A. Social Media Use and Business Performance in SMEs: The Mediating Roles of Relational Social Commerce Capability and Competitive Advantage. Sustainability 2022, 14, 15029.
  71. Majeed, S. The impact of competitive advantage on organizational performance. Eur. J. Bus. Manag. 2011, 3, 191–196.
  72. Tufan, C.; Mert, I.S. The sequential effect of absorptive capacity, strategic agility, and sustainable competitive advantage on sustainable business performance of SMEs. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2023, 30, 55958–55973.
  73. Jeong, S.W.; Chung, J.E. Enhancing competitive advantage and financial performance of consumer-goods SMEs in export markets: How do social capital and marketing innovation matter? Asia Pac. J. Mark. Logist. 2023, 35, 74–89.
  74. Ofori, D.; Appiah-Nimo, C. Relationship management, competitive advantage and performance of hotels: A resource-based view. J. Afr. Bus. 2022, 23, 712–730.
  75. Suandi, E.; Herri; Yulihasri; Syafrizal. Evaluating the relationship between entrepreneurial marketing, competitive advantage, and Islamic banks performance. J. Financ. Serv. Mark. 2023, 28, 599–614.
  76. Bommer, M.; Jalajas, D.S. Innovation sources of large and small technology-based firms. IEEE Trans. Eng. Manag. 2004, 51, 13–18.
  77. Rosenbusch, N.; Brinckmann, J.; Bausch, A. Is innovation always beneficial? A meta-analysis of the relationship between innovation and performance in SMEs. J. Bus. Ventur. 2011, 26, 441–457.
  78. Li, H.; Atuahene-Gima, K. Product innovation strategy and the performance of new technology ventures in China. Acad. Manag. J. 2001, 44, 1123–1134.
  79. García-Morales, V.J.; Jiménez-Barrionuevo, M.M.; Gutiérrez-Gutiérrez, L. Transformational leadership influence on organizational performance through organizational learning and innovation. J. Bus. Res. 2012, 65, 1040–1050.
  80. Rita, M.R.; Widi, N.Y.; Budi, K.A. Peer-to-Peer lending, financial bootstrapping and government support: The role of innovation mediation on MSME performance. Ekon. Horizonti 2021, 23, 247–261.
  81. Alipour, N.; Nazari-Shirkouhi, S.; Sangari, M.S.; Vandchali, H.R. Lean, agile, resilient, and green human resource management: The impact on organizational innovation and organizational performance. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2022, 29, 82812–82826.
  82. Mai, N.K.; Do, T.T.; Ho Nguyen, D.T. The impact of leadership competences, organizational learning and organizational innovation on business performance. Bus. Process Manag. J. 2022, 28, 1391–1411.
  83. Defalla, B.M.A.; Choong, Y.V. Impact of Transformational Leadership Style, Organizational Innovation on Company Performance in Saudi Arabia. Webology 2022, 19, 5329–5337.
  84. Tripathi, A.; Kalia, P. Examining the effects of supportive work environment and organisational learning culture on organisational performance in information technology companies: The mediating role of learning agility and organisational innovation. Innovation 2022, 1–21.
  85. Anwar, M. Business model innovation and SMEs performance—Does competitive advantage mediate? Int. J. Innov. Manag. 2018, 22, 1850057.
  86. Chatzoglou, P.; Chatzoudes, D. The role of innovation in building competitive advantages: An empirical investigation. Eur. J. Innov. Manag. 2017, 21, 44–69.
  87. Lloréns Montes, F.J.; Ruiz Moreno, A.; Miguel Molina Fernández, L. Assessing the organizational climate and contractual relationship for perceptions of support for innovation. Int. J. Manpow. 2004, 25, 167–180.
  88. Sulistyo, H.; Ayuni, S. Competitive advantages of SMEs: The roles of innovation capability, entrepreneurial orientation, and social capital. Contaduría Y Adm. 2020, 65, 1–18.
  89. Azeem, M.; Ahmed, M.; Haider, S.; Sajjad, M. Expanding competitive advantage through organizational culture, knowledge sharing and organizational innovation. Technol. Soc. 2021, 66, 101635.
  90. Alfawaire, F.; Atan, T. The effect of strategic human resource and knowledge management on sustainable competitive advantages at Jordanian universities: The mediating role of organizational innovation. Sustainability 2021, 13, 8445.
  91. Banmairuroy, W.; Kritjaroen, T.; Homsombat, W. The effect of knowledge-oriented leadership and human resource development on sustainable competitive advantage through organizational innovation’s component factors: Evidence from Thailand’s new S-curve industries. Asia Pac. Manag. Rev. 2022, 27, 200–209.
  92. Teece, D.J. Business models, business strategy and innovation. Long Range Plan. 2010, 43, 172–194.
  93. Haggège, M.; Gauthier, C.; Rüling, C.C. Business model performance: Five key drivers. J. Bus. Strategy 2017, 38, 6–15.
  94. Pellikka, J.T.; Malinen, P. Business models in the commercialization processes of innovation among small high-technology firms. Int. J. Innov. Technol. Manag. 2014, 11, 1450007.
  95. Purkayastha, A.; Sharma, S. Gaining competitive advantage through the right business model: Analysis based on case studies. J. Strategy Manag. 2016, 9, 138–155.
  96. Jayeola, O.; Sidek, S.; Sanyal, S.; Hasan, S.I.; An, N.B.; Ajibade, S.S.M.; Phan, T.T.H. Government financial support and financial performance of SMEs: A dual sequential mediator approach. Heliyon 2022, 8, e11351.
  97. Scuotto, V.; Del Giudice, M.; Bresciani, S.; Meissner, D. Knowledge-driven preferences in informal inbound open innovation modes. An explorative view on small to medium enterprises. J. Knowl. Manag. 2017, 21, 640–655.
  98. Qian, C.; Cao, Q.; Takeuchi, R. Top management team functional diversity and organizational innovation in China: The moderating effects of environment. Strateg. Manag. J. 2013, 34, 110–120.
  99. Shu, C.; Wang, Q.; Gao, S.; Liu, C. Firm patenting, innovations, and government institutional support as a double-edged sword. J. Prod. Innov. Manag. 2015, 32, 290–305.
  100. Amit, R.; Schoemaker, P.J. Strategic assets and organizational rent. Strateg. Manag. J. 1993, 14, 33–46.
More
© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy.
Upload a video for this entry
Information
Subjects: Business
Contributors MDPI registered users' name will be linked to their SciProfiles pages. To register with us, please refer to https://encyclopedia.pub/register :
Quoc Hoang Thai
,
Khuong Ngoc Mai
View Times: 283
Revisions: 2 times (View History)
Update Date: 19 Dec 2023
Table of Contents
    1000/1000
    Hot Most Recent
    Video Production Service
    Feedback