Strategic entrepreneurship (SE) "involves simultaneous
opportunity-seeking and advantage-seeking behaviors and results in
superior firm performance" (Hitt et al., 2011, p. 963). This recent
definition highlights the origins of SE in both entrepreneurship and
strategic management: Rooted in Entrepreneurship, SE is concerned with
the discovery and creation of opportunities with the goal of creating
value (Hitt et al., 2011). Rooted in Strategic Management, SE is also
concerned with the creation of sustainable competitive advantages as
pathways towards opportunity exploitation. This broad area of
application has spawned great interest among the research community
(Harms et al., 2012).
At the same time however, the research field of SE can be
characterized as unstructured and fragmented. This may be due to its
rapid growth, but may also be an effect of the interface character of
this offshoot of the original disciplines of Strategic Management and
Entrepreneurship. Here, a large number of theoretical foundations and
conceptualizations can be found (Ireland et al., 2003; Hitt et al.,
2002). So it's not surprising that SE is heterogeneous in and of
itself, which makes it difficult to structure the research field and
identify its main discussion lines, which could be beneficial for the
perception of the development of SE as a discipline overall. At the end
of the 1980s, Low and MacMillan (1988) wrote with regard to
Entrepreneurship research: "As a body of literature develops, it is
useful to stop occasionally, take inventory [of] the work that has been
done, and identify new directions and challenges for the future"
(p. 139). Considering the rapid growth of SE research, this kind of
"inventory taking" may be relevant for SE research as well,
and is the basis for this article that seeks to graph the current state
of the art of SE research. Its foundation is a citation analysis of 143
key articles and 10,270 references. Descriptive facts and a network
graph reveal the intellectual structure of SE.
2. STRATEGIC ENTREPRENEURSHIP AT THE INTERFACE OF STRATEGIC
MANAGEMENT AND ENTREPRENEURSHIP RESEARCH
The origins of strategic management as an academic field can be
traced to the 1960s (Furrer et al., 2007). While Strategic Management
deals with the development of sustainable competitive advantages
resulting in the creation of value (Ramachandran et al., 2006), early
research almost solely investigated strategic issues in large,
established enterprises (Analoui and Karami, 2003). However, Strategic
Management research has moved beyond this context. For example, as early
as 1934, Schumpeter (1934) highlighted the temporary nature of
competitive advantages. This requires firms to continuously seek new
avenues towards competitive advantages, i.e. through entrepreneurial
behavior that leads to the exploration and creation of new opportunities
(Ireland et al., 2001).
The origins of entrepreneurship as an academic field can be traced
back to the 18th century, when Cantillon (1755) used this term to
differentiate self-employed entrepreneurs from employed workers, and in
the process linked entrepreneurship and risk-taking. Entrepreneurship
was emerging as an academic field of study when Karl Vesper founded an
interest group within the Academy of Management's (AoM) Business
Policy and Strategy Division in 1974. In 1987, entrepreneurship finally
became a separate division of the AoM (Meyer et al., 2002).
Entrepreneurship is now acknowledged as one of the major driving forces
of the economy in modern societies (Brock and Evans, 1989; Carree and
Thurik, 2000). It is also considered a key instrument for coping with
the new competitive landscape and its rapid rate of change (Hitt and
Reed, 2000). Entrepreneurial behavior can be found in various kinds of
enterprises, regardless of their size, age, or profit orientation (Kraus
et al., 2007). It describes the process of value creation through the
identification and exploitation of opportunities, e.g. through
developing new products, seeking new markets, or both (Lumpkin et al.,
1998; Shane and Venkataraman, 2000; McCline et al., 2000). It focuses on
innovation by identifying market opportunities and by building a unique
set of resources through which the opportunities can be exploited, and
is usually connected with growth (Ireland et al., 2001; Davidsson et
al., 2002). Entrepreneurial enterprises identify and exploit
opportunities that their competitors have not yet observed or have
underexploited (Hitt et al., 2002). An entrepreneurial enterprise's
resources are often intangible, and involve aspects such as unique
knowledge or proprietary technology.
A link between strategic management and entrepreneurship was
established as early as 1979, when Schendel and Hofer (1979) linked both
research fields by defining strategic management as "a process that
deals with the entrepreneurial work of the organization, with
organizational renewal and growth..." (p. 11), and furthermore
stated that "the entrepreneurial choice is at the heart of the
concept of strategy" (p. 6). Later, Stevenson and Jarillo (1990)
noted that there is a need to establish links between the fields of
entrepreneurship and strategic management. As Dess et al. (1999) put it,
"understanding entrepreneurial processes has been a central theme
in a good deal of both the entrepreneurship and strategic management
literatures" (p. 85). One of the most obvious linkages between
entrepreneurship and strategic management is in the topic of
opportunities. Opportunities are both at the very heart of
entrepreneurship and part of the SWOT analysis of strategic management.
Enterprises create value by identifying opportunities in their external
environment and by subsequently developing competitive advantages to
exploit them (Harms et al., 2012; Hitt et al., 2001; Ireland et al.,
2001). Finally, SE can be seen as a process in which opportunity
exploration and exploitation are balanced (Ireland et al. 2003). This
process perspective can be applied in efforts to understand building
blocks and the relation between these building blocks (van de Ven 2007)
within an SE process. In an integrative effort, Ireland et al. (2003)
developed an SE process model. SE begins with an entrepreneurial mind
set, an entrepreneurial culture, and entrepreneurial leadership (1). A
company in which these factors are well developed will manage resources
strategically, balancing exploration and exploitation (2). As a result,
a continuous stream of innovation (3) enables the firm to create wealth
[FIGURE 1 OMITTED]
A second link refers to the fact that both disciplines look at
similar research objects. For example, Cooper (1979) places start-ups,
the core research objects of entrepreneurship research, into the field
of strategic management by investigating the relationships between the
characteristics of entrepreneurs, venture strategies and performance. He
argues that strategic management researchers should study established
enterprises and growth-oriented start-ups, but not "mom and
pop" small businesses. This later led to the distinction between
"entrepreneurs" and "small business managers" by
Carland et al. (1984). From this point on, more and more scholars
studied the relationship between strategic management and business
performance in SMEs (Schwenk and Shrader, 1993; Kraus et al., 2006).
Finally, many key topics in entrepreneurship research such as new
venture creation, innovation, and opportunity-seeking have strong links
to strategic management research. First, new venture creation is in most
cases about the acquisition, mobilization and deployment of resources,
and the integration of these resources with opportunities, and can thus
be linked to Mintzberg's design school of strategic management
which addresses the matching of resources with opportunities (Sandberg,
1992). Second, innovation can be understood as creating new combinations
of production factors. This view builds on resources, which are the core
unit of analysis of the Resource-Based View of Strategic Management
(Wernerfelt, 1984; Barney, 1991). Third, innovation management can be
understood as a process. Here, both the cognitive school and the
entrepreneurial school of management by Mintzberg can be applied (for
example in exploring how innovations appear and in explaining the
strategic nature of innovations), along with the learning school, where
creation of innovations is seen as an organizational phenomenon (for
example by the way an innovation makes its way through the
organization). These overlapping topics illustrate the intersection of
the research fields.
We generate a literature overview to identify the key discussion
lines in SE research, conducting a citation analysis that is followed by
an analysis of the most cited references. We analyze the contents
explored within SE research. We then address the following research
question: What is the state of the art of research in SE? More
specifically, the following questions are answered: What are the most
influential publications, and what are the key topics found in these
publications? By answering these questions, we aim to illustrate the
intellectual foundations of SE research.
3. BIBLIOMETRIC ANALYSIS
Bibliometrics is the quantitative evaluation of researchers and
scientific institutions in terms of their publications (Diodato, 1994;
Havemann, 2009). The aim is to highlight the structures as well as the
development of scientific fields (Prevot et al. 2010). White and McCain
(1989) call bibliometrics "the quantitative study of literatures as
they are reflected in bibliographies" (p. 119). Bibliometrics has
established itself as a recognized method of analysis.Citation analysis
is a key method of bibliometrics (Moed, 2005). A citation analysis
examines citations in terms of the connection between who/what is being
cited and the publication/author referring to the citation. A scientific
paper is considered to be influential if other authors have cited it
frequently (Gundolf and Filser, forthcoming). The amount of citations is
seen as a qualitative value ("impact"). The assumption is that
an often-cited work conveys important scientific findings, and
constitutes a substantial basis for further elaborations, even though it
might even be cited for the purpose of criticism (Garfield, 1979). In
either case, a publication that is frequently cited is assumed to
represent a central contribution to the respective research discipline
(Klingemann, 1988; Yue and Wilson, 2004).
Our citation analysis of the Strategic Entrepreneurship literature
is based on articles that feature the terms "strategy" or
"strategic" and "entrepreneurship" in their titles.
The databases Emerald, EBSCO, ABI Inform/ProQuest, ScienceDirect and
Google Scholar were used to identify the articles for our citation
analysis. Furthermore, all articles that were published in the Strategic
Entrepreneurship Journal before 2012 were included. A total of 145
publications meeting these criteria were identified for the analysis.
The bibliometric analysis applied here to the field of Strategic
Entrepreneurship is based on the design proposed by Prevot et al. (2010)
and Gundolf and Filser (forthcoming). First, the references that are
used in each source were collected. After counting all references from
all sources, we counted the absolute frequency with which each reference
appears. In a final step, clusters were compiled on the basis of the
topical congruency of the most cited publications. To reduce the
complexity of the citation network's visual depiction, only the top
20 most- cited publications were taken (for comparable approaches see
e.g. Gundolf and Filser, forthcoming; Leonidou et al., 2010; Prevot et
al., 2010; Roth and Gmur, 2004; Schaffer et al., 2006; Voeth et al.,
4.1. Characteristics of the articles in the database
4.1.1. Number of publications published on SE
The number of publications on SE has increased over time (Figure
2). The noticeable jump in 2007 can be particularly attributed to the
release of the special edition on SE by Kuratko and Audretsch in
Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice. Similarly, the rising interest in
this field of research is also illustrated by the establishment of the
Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal (SEJ) that was created as a line
enhancement of the Strategic Management Journal (SMJ).
[FIGURE 2 OMITTED]
4.1.2. Key authors in SE research
Table 1 shows the affiliations of the top nine most productive
scholars in the area of SE. Other authors that have published less than
four articles are not listed. The geographical distribution of the most
productive SE researchers shows a dominance of Anglo-American countries.
In addition, only a few of the teams of authors come from one single
institution. The most active authors, i.e. those with the highest amount
of publications in this field, have co-authors affiliated with other
institutions. It's also noticeable that no single institution can
be considered as the leader in the SE field.
4.2. Characteristics of the references
A total of 10,507 references were cited in the analyzed articles.
The high number of cited references indicates to some extent the
unexplored character and newness of SE compared to other related areas
such as International Entrepreneurship or Entrepreneurial Marketing
(e.g. Eggers et al., 2009; Kraus, 2011). The newness and unexplored
character of SE might accentuate the necessity to include publications
that have their origin in disciplines such as management, strategy,
entrepreneurship, etc. to explore the interfaces as well as more
specific issues within SE. The fields of management and entrepreneurship
strongly influence SE. In the references within our database, the
influence of management is clearly greater than that of
entrepreneurship. The majority of journals are attributed to the field
of management, while only a small percentage are entrepreneurship
journals (Figure 3). The strong influence of management literature seems
to indicate that SE is regarded as a subcategory of strategic
management, which might simply be due to the greater amount of
management publications compared to entrepreneurship research.
[FIGURE 3 OMITTED]
Table 2 lists the 20 most influential publications on SE that were
published between 1934 and 2007. This compilation can be regarded as the
core of SE research. Most of the publications are from the years
2000-2007 (7), before the 1990s (7), and during the 1990s (6). 14 of the
20 most influential publications are articles, while six are monographs.
With the scientific journal publications that were among the most cited
references, 12 out of 14 articles were published in journals that fall
into the realm of management, while only two articles come from
entrepreneurship. Hence, scientific journal publications provide an
essential basis for elaborations. Of note is that among the most
influential publications, the Academy of Management Review and the
Strategic Management Journal are the most frequently used publication
channels. So the fundamental basis for previous findings is noticeably
provided by high-class journals. Moreover, it is surprising that one of
the most cited references in our analysis was published in 2007.
Bibliometrics has the limitation that a reference requires a
certain period to unfold its potential (Garfield, 1979) and to be
recognized as an important source for progression. This analysis shows
that the timeframe to be rewarded is just 4 years. However, this might
be due to the fact that this article was published in the first issue of
the Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal (SEJ). However, as the database
contains all of the articles published in the SEJ, this article might
build the basis and justification for further elaborations of other
authors that aim to publish in the same journal (Monastersky, 2005).
4.3. Citation network and topic cluster
The citation analysis produced a network of the top 20 publications
that have the greatest influence on the SE field (see Figure 4).
The publications outside the clusters are the source articles for
this analysis. The outgoing arrows mark citations, and those
publications within a cluster illustrate the references that have been
cited. The size of the circle each cited reference is enclosed within
represents the number of citations received. The top 20 shows all
references that have been cited at least 17 times. We identify the
following four cluster topics on the basis of the top 20 most-cited
--Cluster 1: Entrepreneurship Research (Kirzner, 1973; Knight,
1921; March, 1991; Nelson and Winter, 1982; Penrose, 1959; Schumpeter,
--Cluster 2: Strategic Management (Barney, 1991; Cohen and
Levintal, 1990; Teece, 1986; Teece et al., 1997; Wernerfelt, 1984)
--Cluster 3: (Corporate) Entrepreneurship (Busenitz and Barney,
1997; Lumpkin and Dess, 1996; Sarasvathy, 2001; Shane, 2000; Shane,
2003; Shane and Venkataraman, 2000)
--Cluster 4: Strategic Entrepreneurship (Alvarez and Barney, 2007;
Hitt et al., 2001; Ireland et al., 2003)
[FIGURE 4 OMITTED]
4.3.1. Cluster 1: Entrepreneurship Research
The papers that are referenced in Cluster 1 are core theoretical
contributions to entrepreneurship research that provide a foundation for
business and entrepreneurship issues. Knight (1921), Schumpeter (1934)
and Kirzner (1973) are core authors of entrepreneurship research. While
Knight refers to risk-taking as a major characteristic for
entrepreneurs, Schumpeter regards the realization of innovative ideas as
entrepreneurial behavior. Penrose (1959) and Nelson and Winter (1982)
advanced this research with further and more detailed aspects and
perspectives that deal with the causes of firm growth (Penrose, 1959)
and a reflection on the evolution of economic change (Nelson and Winter,
1982). Finally, March (1991) advanced entrepreneurship theory by
investigating the antecedents and consequences of organizational
These core authors can be regarded as fundamental to
entrepreneurship research. Hence, it is not surprising that other
bibliographic analyses, for example on family firms (Kraus et al.,
2011b), or entrepreneurial marketing (Eggers et al., 2009; Kraus et al.,
2011a), also refer to this core body of literature, which deeply roots
SE research in the entrepreneurship literature.
4.3.2. Cluster 2: Strategic Management
This cluster has a strong link to the Resource-Based View of the
firm. According to Wernerfelt (1984) the development of competitive
advantages results from the resources a firm possesses. Barney (1991)
discusses four characteristics of resources that lead to sustained
competitive advantages: value, rareness, imitability, and
sustainability. The RBV states that sustainable competitive advantages
cannot be purchased on the market, but need to be developed from within
the firm. Here, Teece et al. (1997) state that dynamic capabilities, in
other words a "firm's ability to integrate, build, and
reconfigure internal and external competences" (p. 516) are
essential for meeting future challenges and adapting to rapidly changing
environments. To achieve this, learning capabilities need to be
developed that enable employees to build strategic assets, integrate new
strategic assets within the firm, and continuously redesign the existing
ones. As to what can be regarded as a specific type of resource, Cohen
and Levintal (1990) introduce the concept of absorptive capacity. They
argue that a firm's ability to recognize possibilities, the access
to external information, and assimilation and realization are critical
factors for innovativeness. As the environment impacts learning ability,
absorptive capacity leads to an effective allocation of resources.
The ideas of value generation and value capture (as exemplified by
Teece (1986) who investigates the question of who profits from
innovation) can be identified as general themes of this cluster. Core
authors of the Strategic Management literature are referenced, deeply
touting SE research in Strategic Management research. Of note is that
the RBV receives extensive attention, while the Market Based View
appears to be neglected.
4.3.3. Cluster 3: (Corporate) Entrepreneurship
While the papers in Cluster 1 refer to the theoretical basis of
entrepreneurship research, the papers in Cluster 3 tend to deal with
entrepreneurship in the corporate context. Many SE papers refer to the
concept of entrepreneurial orientation (in the version of Lumpkin and
Dess 1996), stating that entrepreneurial firms are innovative,
proactive, risk-taking, aggressive, and striving for autonomy. Lumpkin
and Dess (1996) suggest exploring the consequences of EO via mediation
and moderation models.
The basis of entrepreneurial firm behavior is the entrepreneurial
behavior of key individuals. The SE literature refers to Busenitz and
Barney (1997) who investigate the differences in the decision-making
process between entrepreneurs and managers. While the decision making of
entrepreneurs relies somewhat on biases and heuristics (such as
overconfidence and representativeness), managers tend to apply a more
rational and structured decision making style. The reliance of the SE
literature on the literature on (corporate) decision making is further
illustrated by the prominent role that Shane (2000) plays in the SE
literature. Shane and Venkataraman (2000) define entrepreneurship as
"[...] the study of sources of opportunities; the processes of
discovery, evaluation, and exploitation of opportunities; and the set of
individuals who discover, evaluate, and exploit them" (Shane and
Venkataraman, 2000, p. 218). Shane (2000) argues that entrepreneurs who
have access to and are familiar with certain information such as certain
technologies will be more likely to identify opportunities than
entrepreneurs new to an industry or field. This so-called
individual-opportunity nexus is elaborated further and serves as a key
foundation for SE research (Shane, 2003).
A final core paper of this cluster is by Sarasvathy (2001) who
introduces the concepts of "effectuation" and
"causation" as two distinct, yet interrelated decision-making
styles of entrepreneurs. The literature on causation and effectuation
picks up on decision making between novices and experts, or
entrepreneurs and managers; this is a theme also seen in the paper by
Busesitz and Barney (1997). An even stronger link to the SE literature
lies in the fact that effectuation seems to fly in the face of
established strategic management theory that emphasizes strategic
planning, while effectuation highlights incremental approaches to
4.3.4. Cluster 4: Strategic Entrepreneurship
In this cluster, the SE literature refers not to other research
streams, but begins to refer to itself. This self-referencing can be
regarded as a first step in the direction of a separate research field
with its own theories and actors. For example, Hitt et al. (2001)
introduce SE by drawing an overview of the issues and topics addressed
in the context of a special on SE in the Strategic Management Journal.
They stress that "new ventures and established firms need to be
simultaneously entrepreneurial and strategic" (Hitt et al., 2001,
p. 448). Ireland et al. (2003) develop a model aiming to explain the
dimensions of SE, positing that entrepreneurial ventures have a
deficiency regarding the development of competitive advantages, while
large, established firms have a deficiency regarding the identification
of opportunities. Firms that employ SE can create wealth by addressing
mutual deficiencies. Similarly, Ireland et al. (2003) summarize that SE
contains an opportunity- and advantage- seeking dimension that can be
used for wealth creation. This view is expanded on by Ireland et al.
(2011) who explain that it is not only monetary wealth that can be
sought as an outcome of SE, but societal, organizational and individual
benefits as well.
Alvarez and Barney (2007) investigate the question whether
entrepreneurial opportunities exist ex ante (and can be discovered) or
do not exist ex ante (and can be created). The authors stress that
"the actions that entrepreneurs actually take can be thought of as
a manifestation of the assumptions they make about the nature of the
context within which they are operating--is it a discovery context or a
creation context" (Alvarez and Barney, 2007, p. 17).
5. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
All in all, the foundations of SE research are general management
research, strategy research in particular from the 1990s (chiefly based
upon the resource-based view), as well as the newer entrepreneurship
research. Noticeable is how the still relatively new field of SE
research frequently cites itself (Cluster 4), which indicates a strong
cooperation and scholarly exchange within this community. Regarding the
number and influence of their publications, Barney and Shane are
considered to be the current leaders in the SE research field, with each
having three indicatory publications.
The integration of entrepreneurial (opportunity-seeking) and
strategic (advantage-seeking) perspectives appears to be a promising
approach for management of present business operations. Both
perspectives are essential for the continuous generation of value
(McGrath and MacMillan, 2000; Ireland et al., 2001). There is no doubt
that strategic management has to become more entrepreneurial. Therefore
it appears necessary for it to move away from its traditionally
administrative approach to a viewpoint that is more strategically
entrepreneurial. This would foster a new conception of management built
upon strategic agility, flexibility, creativity, and continual
innovation. Furthermore, such a conception and/or mode of behavior and
way of thinking support the transformation of administration-oriented
employees into intrapreneurs (Kraus, 2009).
SE research is in an evolving stage. Progress is seen in the
references to specific SE publications (Cluster 4). However, the nature
and facets of SE are still somewhat under- defined, as evidenced by the
ongoing discussion in the literature about the definition of SE.
Schindehutte and Morris (2009) explicitly raise the question of the
"nature" of SE. Here, Kraus and Kauranen (2009) suggest
applying a configuration approach (e.g. Mugler, 2004; Wiklund and
Shepheard, 2005; Harms et al., 2009) to SE theory, which highlights the
reciprocal interplay of the levels of entrepreneur, strategy,
structure/resources, and environment in the establishment of SE
processes. Hitt et al. (2011) took the first step towards advancing the
understanding of SE by developing an input- process-output model.
The bibliometric analysis showed that there are still only a few
researchers/research groups who are thoroughly dedicated to this topic.
Therefore, the research field of SE offers ample space for researchers,
particularly those who are interested in immersing themselves in this
topic, while promising many theoretical challenges and practical
applications. The authors hope that the structured overview of the most
influential publications and their thematic clustering presented in this
paper will support the development of further research within the
Alvarez, S.A. and Barney, J. B. (2007): "Discovery and
creation: alternative theories of entrepreneurial action",
Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 1 (1-2), 11-26.
Analoui, F. and Karami, A. (2003): Strategic management in small
and medium enterprises, Thomson, London.
Barney, J.B. (1991): "Firm resources and sustained competitive
advantage", Journal of Management, 17 (1), 99-120.
Brock, W.A. and Evans, D.S. (1989): "Small business
economics", Small Business Economics, 1 (1), 7-20.
Busenitz, L.W. and Barney, J.B. (1997): "Differences between
entrepreneurs and managers in large organizations: Biases and heuristics
in strategic decision-making", Journal of Business Venturing, 12
Cantillon, R. (1755): Essai Sur la Nature du Commerce en General,
Frank Cass and Company Ltd, London.
Carland, J.W., Hoy, F., Boulton, W.R. and Carland, J.A. (1984):
"Differentiating entrepreneurs from small business owners: A
conceptualization", Academy of Management Review, 9 (2), 354-359.
Carree, M.A. and Thurik, A.R. (2000): The impact of
entrepreneurship on economic growth. In: D.B. Audretsch and Z.J. Acs
(eds.), Handbook of Entrepreneurship, Kluwer Academic Publishers,
Cohen, W. and Levinthal, D. (1990): "Absorptive capacity: a
new perspective on learning and innovation", Administrative Science
Quarterly, 35 (2), 128-152.
Cooper, A.C. (1979): Strategic management: New ventures and small
business. In: D.E. Schendel and C. Hofer (eds.), Strategic management,
Little, Brown & Co., Boston, 316-327.
Davidsson, P., Delmar, F. and Wiklund, J. (2002): Entrepreneurship
as Growth: Growth as Entrepreneurship. In: M.A. Hitt, R.D. Ireland, S.M.
Camp and D.L. Sexton (eds.), Strategic entrepreneurship: Creating a new
mindset, Blackwell, Oxford, 328-340.
Dess, G.G., Lumpkin, G.T. and McGee, J.E. (1999): "Linking
corporate entrepreneurship to strategy, structure, and process:
suggested research directions", Entrepreneurship: Theory &
Practice, 23 (3), 85-103.
Diodato, V. (1994): Dictionary of Bibliometrics, Haworth, New York.
Eggers, F., Kraus, S. and Filser, M. (2009): "Entrepreneurial
Marketing - Zum Bedarf eines modifizierten Marketingansatzes fur junge
wachstumsorientierte Unternehmen", Zeitschrift fur KMU &
Entrepreneurship, 57 (3/4), 187-218.
Furrer, O., Thomas, H. and Goussevskaia, A. (2007): "The
structure and evolution of the strategic management field: A content
analysis of 26 years of strategic management research",
International Journal of Management Reviews, 10 (1), 1-23.
Garfield, E. (1979): "Is Citation Analysis a Legitimte
Evalutaion Tool?", Scientomtrics, 1 (4), 359-375.
Gundolf, K. and Filser, M. (forthcoming): "Management Research
and Religion: A Citation Analysis", Journal of Business Ethics.
Harms, R., Schulz, A., Kraus, S. and Fink, M. (2009): "The
Conceptualization of 'Opportunity' in Strategic Management
Research", International Journal of Entrepreneurial Venturing, 1
Harms, R., Walsh, T. and Groen, A. (2012): "The Strategic
Entrepreneurship process--new avenues for research", International
Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior and Research, 13 (2).
Havemann, F. (2009): Einfuhrung in die Biliometrie, Gesellschaft
fur Wissenschaftsforschung, Berlin.
Hitt, M.A., Ireland, D., Sirmon, D.G. and Trahms, C.A. (2011):
"Strategic Entrepreneurship: Creating Value for Individuals,
Organizations, and Society", Academy of Management Perspectives, 25
Hitt, M.A., Ireland, R.D., Camp, S.M. and Sexton, D.L. (2001):
"Strategic Entrepreneurship: Entrepreneurial Strategies for Wealth
Creation", Strategic Management Journal, 22 (6/7), 479-491.
Hitt, M.A., Ireland, R.D., Camp, S.M. and Sexton, D.L. (2002):
Strategic entrepreneurship: Integrating entrepreneurial and strategic
management perspectives. In: M. Hitt, R. Ireland, M. Camp and D. Sexton
(eds.), Strategic Entrepreneurship: Creating a new mindset, Blackwell,
Hitt, M.A. and Reed, T.S. (2000): Entrepreneurship in the new
competitive landscape. In: G.D. Meyer and K.A. Heppard (eds.),
Entrepreneurship as Strategy, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, 23-48.
Ireland, R.D., Hitt, M.A., Camp, S.M. and Sexton, D.L. (2001):
"Integrating entrepreneurship and strategic management actions to
create enterprise wealth", Academy of Management Executive, 15 (1),
Ireland, R.D., Hitt, M.A. and Simon, D.G. (2003): "A model of
strategic entrepreneurship: The construct and its dimensions",
Journal of Management, 29 (6), 963-989.
Kirzner, I. (1973): Competition and entrepreneurship, University of
Chicago Press, Chicago.
Klingemann, H.D. (1988): Zitierhaufigkeit als Qualitatsindikator.
In: H.D. Daniel and R. Fisch (eds.), Evaluation von Forschung,
Universitatsverlag Konstanz, Konstanz, 201-214.
Knight, F.H. (1921): Risk, uncertainty and profit, University of
Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.
Kraus, S. (2009): Strategic Corporate Entrepreneurship--A Case
Study on the Basis of the Configuration Approach, USE, Utrecht.
Kraus, S. (2011): "International Entrepreneurship:
State-of-the-art of Current Research--A Citation Analysis", African
Journal of Business Management, 5 (3), 1020-1038.
Kraus, S., Eggers, F., Harms, R., Hills, G.E. and Hultman, C.M.
(2011a): "Diskussionslinien der Entrepreneurial
Marketing-Forschung: Ergebnisse einer Zitationsanalyse",
Zeitschrift fur Betriebswirtschaft, 81 (Special Issue 06/11), 27-58.
Kraus, S., Filser, M., Gotzen, T. and Harms, R. (2011b):
"Familienunternehmen - Zum State-of-the-Art der
betriebswirtschaftlichen Forschung", Betriebswirtschaftliche
Forschung und Praxis, (6), 587-605.
Kraus, S., Fink, M., RoRl, D. and Jensen, S.H. (2007):
"Marketing in Small And Medium Sized Enterprises", Review of
Business Research, 7 (3), 1-11.
Kraus, S., Harms, R. and Schwarz, E.J. (2006): "Strategic
planning in smaller enterprises--New empirical findings",
Management Research News, 29 (6), 334-344.
Kraus, S. and Kauranen, I. (2009): "Strategic Management and
Entrepreneurship: Friends or Foes?", International Journal of
Business Science and Applied Management, 4 (1), 37-50.
Leonidou, L.C., Katsikeas, C.S. and Coudounaris, D.N. (2010):
"Five decades of business research into exporting: A bibliographic
analysis", Journal of International Management, 16 (1), 78-91.
Low, M.B. and MacMillan, I.C. (1988): "Entrepreneurship: Past
research and future challenges", Journal of Management, 14 (2),
Lumpkin, G.T. and Dess, G.G. (1996): "Clarifying the
entrepreneurial orientation construct and linking it to
performance", Academy of Management Review, 21 (1), 135-172.
Lumpkin, G.T., Shrader, R.C. and Hills, G.E. (1998): "Does
formal business planning enhance the performance of new ventures?",
Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research, 180-199.
March, J.G. (1991): "Exploration and exploitation in
organizational learning", Organization Science, 2 71-87.
McCline, R.L., Bhat, S. and Baj, P. (2000): "Opportunity
recognition: An exploratory investigation of a component of the
entrepreneurial process in the context of the health care
industry", Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 25 (2), 81-94.
McGrath, R.G. and MacMillan, I. (2000): The entrepreneurial
mindset, Harvard Business School Press, Boston.
Meyer, G.D., Neck, H.M. and Meeks, M.D. (2002): The
Entrepreneurship-Strategic Management Interface. In: M.A. Hitt, R.D.
Ireland, S.M. Camp and D.L. Sexton (eds.), Strategic entrepreneurship:
Creating a new mindset, Blackwell, Oxford, 19-44.
Moed, H.F. (2005): Citation Analysis in Research Evaluation,
Monastersky, R. (2005): "The number that's devouring
science", The Chronicle of Higher Education.
Mugler, J. (Ed.), (2004). The Configuration Approach to the
Strategic Management of Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises. Budapest
Tech International Jubilee Conference, Budapest.
Nelson, R.R. and Winter, S.G. (1982): An evolutionary theory of
economic change, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
Penrose, E.T. (1959): The theory of the growth of the firm, John
Wiley, New York.
Prevot, F., Branchet, B., Boissin, J.-P., Castagnos, J.-C. and
Guieu, G. (2010): The intellectual structure of the competence-based
management: a bibliometrc analysis. In: R. Sanchez, A. Heene and T.E.
Zimmermann (eds.), Research in Competence-Based Management--A Focused
Issue on Identifying, Building, and Linking Competences, Emerald Group
Publishing Limited, Bingley, United Kingdom, 231-258.
Ramachandran, J., Mukherji, S. and Sud, M. (2006): "Strategic
Entrepreneurship in a Globalising Economy: Evidence from Emerging
Economies", IIMB Management Review, 28 (3), 291- 302.
Roth, S. and Gmur, M. (2004): "Strukturen und
Entwicklungslinien der Marketingforschung. Ergebnisse einer Zitations-
und Kozitationsanalyse nordamerikanischer Marketing- Journals
1987-2001", Marketing ZFP, 26 (2), 141-158.
Sandberg, W.R. (1992): "Strategic management's potential
contributions to a theory of entrepreneurship", Entrepreneurship:
Theory & Practice, 16 (3), 73-90.
Sarasvathy, S. D. (2001): "Causation and effectuation: Toward
a theoretical shift from economic inevitability to entrepreneurial
contingency", Academy of Management Review, 26 (2), 243-263.
Schaffer, Utz, Binder, Christoph and Gmur, Markus (2006):
"Struktur und Entwicklung der Controllingforschung - Eine
Zitations- und Kozitationsanalyse von Controllingbeitragen in
deutschsprachigen wissenschaftlichen Zeitschriften von 1970 bis
2003", Zeitschrift fur Betriebswirtschaft, 76 (4), 395-440.
Schendel, D.E. and Hofer, C.W. (1979): Strategic management,
Little, Brown & Co., Boston.
Schindehutte, M. and Morris, M.H. (2009): "Advancing Strategic
Entrepreneurship Research: The Role of Complexity Science in Shifting
the Paradigm", Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 33 (1),
Schumpeter, J.A. (1934): The theory of economic development,
Harvard University Press, Cambridge.
Schwenk, C.R. and Shrader, C.B. (1993): "Effects of formal
strategic planning on financial performance in small firms: a
meta-analysis", Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 17 (3),
Shane, S. (2000): "Prior knowledge and the discovery of
entrepreneurial opportunities", Organization Science, 11 (4),
Shane, S. (2003): A General Theory of Entrepreneurship. The
Individual- Opportunity Nexus, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham.
Shane, S. and Venkataraman, S. (2000): "The promise of
entrepreneurship as a field of research", Academy of Management
Review, 25 (1), 217-226.
Stevenson, H.H. and Jarillo, J.C. (1990): "A paradigm of
entrepreneurship: entrepreneurial management", Strategic Management
Journal, 11 (4), 17-27.
Teece, D.J. (1986): "Profiting from technological innovation:
Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public
policy", Research Policy, 15 (6), 285-305.
Teece, D.J., Pisano, G. and Shuen, A. (1997): "Dynamic
capabilities and strategic management", Strategic Management
Journal, 18 (7), 509-533.
Voeth, M., Gawantka, A. and Chatzopoulou, G. (2006): "Impact
auf die deutschsprachige Marketingforschung - Ergebnisse einer
Zitationsanalyse der deutschsprachigen Marketing ZFP-Jahrgange 1979 bis
2004", Marketing - Zeitschrift fur Forschung und Praxis, 28 (1),
Wernerfelt, B. (1984): "A resource-based view of the
firm", Strategic Management Journal, 5 (2), 171-180.
White, H.D. and McCain, K.W. (1989): "Bibliometrics",
Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 24 119-186.
Wiklund, Johan and Shepherd, Dean (2005): "Entrepreneurial
Orientation and Small Business Performance: A Configuration
Approach", Journal of Business Venturing, 20 (1), 71-91.
Yue, W. and Wilson, C.S. (2004): "Measuring the citation
impact of research journals in clinical neurology: A structural equation
modelling analysis.", Scientometrics, 90 (3), 317-332.
Dr. Sascha Kraus is Asc. Professor for Entrepreneurship at the
University of Liechtenstein and Extraordinary Professor for
Entrepreneurship at Utrecht University, The Netherlands. Before his
current positions, Prof. Kraus was Evald and Hilda Nissi Foundation
International Fellow at the University of Vaasa, Finland and Substitute
Professor at the Salzburg University of Applied Sciences, Austria.
Professor Rainer Harms is Asst. Professor at the Institute for
Governance Studies, NIKOS, University Twente, The Netherlands. He has
also served as a visiting Professor at UAB Barcelona, Spain, and WU
Vienna, Austria. He works on the topic of Entrepreneurship and
Dr. Matthias Filser is Research Assistant and Lecturer at the
Groupe Sup de Co Montpellier Business School, France and Ph.D. student
at Utrecht University, Netherlands.
Sascha Kraus, University of Liechtenstein, Liechtenstein
Rainer Harms, University of Twente, The Netherlands
Matthias Filser, Montpellier Business School, France
Table 1: The most-published authors in the field of strategic
Author Institution Country
Ireland, R.D. Texas A&M University, Robins School USA
of Business, University of Richmond
Baron, R.A. Oklahoma State University, Lally USA
School of Management
Hitt, M.A. Mays School of Business, Texas A&M USA
Wright, M. Ghent University, Nottingham UK
Hmieleski, K.M. Texas Christian University, M.J. USA
Neeley School of Business
Ketchen, D.J. Texas A&M University, Auburn USA
Shepherd, D.A. Indiana University USA
Alvarez, S.A. Ohio State University USA
Audretsch, D.B. Indiana University, Max Planck USA/
Institute of Economics Germany
Author Number of
Ireland, R.D. 9
Baron, R.A. 5
Hitt, M.A. 5
Wright, M. 5
Hmieleski, K.M. 4
Ketchen, D.J. 4
Shepherd, D.A. 4
Alvarez, S.A. 4
Audretsch, D.B. 4
Table 2: Top 20 most influential publications on the field of strategic
Author Year Title Citations
Ireland, Hitt, 2003 A model of strategic 36
Sirmon entrepreneurship: The
construct and its dimensions
Shane, 2000 The promise of entrepreneurship 36
Venkataraman as a field of research
Barney 1991 Firm resources and sustained 35
Schumpeter 1934 The theory of economic 32
Alvarez, Barney 2007 Discovery and creation: 31
Alternative theories of
March 1991 Exploration and exploitation 26
in organizational learning
Hitt, Ireland, 2001 Strategic entrepreneurship: 26
Camp, Sexton Entrepreneurial strategies for
Cohen, Levintal 1990 Absorptive capacity: A new 25
perspective on learning and
Knight 1921 Risk, uncertainty, and profit 24
Nelson, Winter 1982 An evolutionary theory of 22
Penrose 1959 The theory of the growth of 21
Kirzner 1973 Competition and 20
Lumpkin, Dess 1996 Clarifying the entrepreneurial 20
orientation construct and
linking it to performance
Shane 2000 Prior knowledge and the 19
discovery of entrepreneurial
Busenitz, 1997 Differences between 18
Barney entrepreneurs and managers in
large organizations: Biases
and heuristics in strategic
Teece 1986 Profiting from technological 18
innovation: Implications for
licensing and public policy
Wernerfelt 1984 A resource-based view of the 18
Teece, Pisano, 1997 Dynamic capabilities and 17
Shuen strategic management
Sarasvathy 2001 Causation and effectuation: 17
Toward a theoretical shift from
economic inevitability to
Shane 2003 A general theory of 17