Drawing on resource dependency theory and the resource-absorbing perspective of risk-taking, this article examines how political connections provide firms with opportunities to gain government funding support to enhance financial slack, which can in turn benefit their entrepreneurial risk-taking. We employ both symmetrical (partial least squares structural equation modelling (PLS-SEM)) and configurational approaches (fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA)) using a sample of 202 small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in China. Our results from PLS-SEM suggest government financial funding support and financial slack play sequential mediating roles in the relationship between political connections and entrepreneurial risk-taking. The results of fsQCA further highlight the importance of political connections and financial slack as core conditions for entrepreneurial risk-taking and uncover the multiple pathways through which political connections influence entrepreneurial risk-taking. These findings advance our understanding of how entrepreneurial risk-taking in SMEs may require configurations of different resources.
ArzubiagaUKotlarJDe MassisA, et al. (2018) Entrepreneurial orientation and innovation in family SMEs: Unveiling the (actual) impact of the board of directors. Journal of Business Venturing33: 455–469.
2.
BoubakriNMansiSASaffarW (2013) Political institutions, connectedness, and corporate risk-taking. Journal of International Business Studies44: 195–215.
3.
BourgeoisLJ (1981) On the measurement of organizational slack. Academy of Management Review6: 29–39.
4.
BourgeoisLJSinghJV (1983) Organizational slack and political behavior among top management teams. Academy of Management Proceedings1: 43–47.
5.
BradleySWWiklundJShepherdDA (2011) Swinging a double-edged sword: The effect of slack on entrepreneurial management and growth. Journal of Business Venturing26: 537–554.
6.
BrislinRW (1980) Translation and content analysis of oral and written material. In: TriandisHCBerryJW (eds) Handbook of Cross-Cultural Psychology: Methodology. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, pp.389–444.
7.
BromileyP (1991) Testing a causal model of corporate risk taking and performance. Academy of Management Journal34: 37–59.
8.
BrustbauerJ (2016) Enterprise risk management in SMEs: Towards a structural model. International Small Business Journal31: 70–85.
9.
BurtROpperS (2020) Political connection and disconnection: Still a success factor for Chinese entrepreneurs. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice44: 1199–1228.
10.
CaoQSimsekZJansenJJP (2015) CEO social capital and entrepreneurial orientation of the firm: Bonding and bridging effects. Journal of Management41: 1957–1981.
11.
CarlsonJGuderganSPGelhardC, et al. (2019) Customer engagement with brands in social media platforms: Configurations, equifinality and sharing. European Journal of Marketing53: 1733–1758.
12.
CarnesCMXuKSirmonDG, et al. (2019) How competitive action mediates the resource slack-performance relationship: A meta-analytic approach. Journal of Management Studies56: 57–90.
13.
ChapmanGHewitt-DundasN (2018) The effect of public support on senior manager attitudes to innovation. Technovation69: 28–39.
14.
ChatterjeeSWernerfeltB (1991) The link between resources and type of diversification: Theory and evidence. Strategic Management Journal12: 33–48.
15.
CheXLiebenbergAP (2017) Effects of business diversification on asset risk-taking: Evidence from the U.S. property-liability insurance industry. Journal of Banking and Finance77: 122–136.
16.
ChenMLiuHWeiS, et al. (2018) Top managers’ managerial ties, supply chain integration, and firm performance in China: A social capital perspective. Industrial Marketing Management74: 205–214.
17.
ChenZSunYNewmanA, et al. (2011) Entrepreneurs, organizational members, political participation and preferential treatment: Evidence from China. International Small Business Journal30: 873–889.
18.
ChengLTWChanRYKLeungTY (2018) Impact of perk expenditure and marketing expenditures on corporate performance in China: The moderating role of political connections. Journal of Business Research86: 83–95.
19.
ChoIOrazemPF (2021) how endogenous risk preferences and sample selection affect analysis of firm survival. Small Business Economics56: 1309–1332.
20.
CirilloAPennacchioLCarilloMR, et al. (2021) The antecedents of entrepreneurial risk-taking in private family firms: CEO seasons and contingency factors. Small Business Economics56: 1571–1590.
21.
CovinJGSlevinDP (1989) Strategic management of small firms in hostile and benign environments. Strategic Management Journal10: 75–87.
22.
CovinJGSlevinDP (1991) A conceptual model of entrepreneurship as firm behaviour. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice16: 7–25.
23.
DinhTQCalabròACampopianoG, et al. (2021) The impact of politically connected CEOs and boards of directors on firm performance: A study of Vietnamese family and nonfamily firms. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice. Epub ahead of print 7 January 2021. DOI: 10.1177/1042258720985477.
24.
DouglasEJShepherdDAPrenticeC (2020) Using fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis for a finer-grained understanding of entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing35: 105970. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusvent.2019.105970.
25.
DuJBaiTChenS (2019) Integrating corporate social and corporate political strategies: Performance implications and institutional contingencies in China. Journal of Business Research98: 299–316.
26.
DuttaSFoltaTBRodriguesJ (2020) Does Government fund the best entrepreneurial ventures: The case of the small business innovation research program. Academy of Management Discoveries8: 103–138. DOI: 10.5465/amd.2019.0078.
27.
EberhartRNEsleyCEEisenhardtKM (2017) Failure is an option: Institutional change, entrepreneurial risk, and new firm growth. Organization Science28: 93–112.
28.
Ferreras-MédezJLOlmos-PeñuelaJSalas-VallinaA, et al. (2021) Entrepreneurial orientation and new product development performance in SMEs: The mediating role of business model innovation. Technovation108: 102325. DOI: 10.1016/j.technovation.2021.102325.
29.
FissPC (2011) Building better casual theories: A fuzzy set approach to typologies in organization research. Academy of Management Journal54: 393–420.
30.
FornellCLarckerDF (1981) Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research18: 39–50.
31.
GaoSSSungMCZhangJ (2011) Risk management capability building in SMEs: A social capital perspective. International Small Business Journal31: 677–700.
32.
GeJCarneyMKellermannsF (2019) Who fills institutional voids? Entrepreneurs’ utilization of political and family ties in emerging markets. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice43: 1124–1147.
33.
GeJStanleyLJEddiestonK, et al. (2017) Institutional deterioration and entrepreneurial investment: The role of political connections. Journal of Business Venturing32: 405–419.
34.
GelhardCvon DelfSCuderganSP (2016) Heterogeneity in dynamic capability configurations: Equifinality and strategic performance. Journal of Business Research69: 5272–5279.
35.
GeorgeG (2005) Slack resources and the performance of privately held firms. Academy of Management Journal48: 661–676.
36.
GiraudoEGiudiciGGrilliL (2019) Entrepreneurship policy and the financing of young innovative companies: Evidence from the Italian startup act. Research Policy48: 103801. DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2019.05.010.
37.
GreckhamerTFurnariSFissPC, et al. (2018) Studying configurations with qualitative comparative analysis: Best practices in strategy and organization research. Strategic Organization16: 482–495.
38.
GuoDGuoYJiangK (2016) Government-subsidized R&D and firm innovation: Evidence from China. Research Policy45: 1129–1144.
39.
HairJFHowardMCNitzlC (2020) Assessing measurement model quality in PLS-SEM using confirmatory composite analysis. Journal of Business Research109: 101–110.
40.
HairJFRisherJJSarstedtM, et al. (2019) When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM. European Business Review31: 2–24.
41.
HairJFSarstedtMMatthewsLM, et al. (2016) Identifying and treating unobserved heterogeneity with FIMIX-PLS: Part I – Method. European Business Review28: 63–76.
42.
HiattSRSineWDTolbertPS (2009) From Pabst to Pepsi: The deinstitutionalization of social practices and the creation of entrepreneurial opportunities. Administrative Science Quarterly54: 635–667.
43.
HillmanAJ (2005) Politicians on the board of directors: Do connection affect the bottom line?Journal of Management3: 464–481.
44.
HillmanAJDalzielT (2003) Boards of directors and firm performance: Integrating agency and resource dependence perspectives. Academy of Management Review28: 383–396.
45.
HillmanAJWithersMCCollinsBJ (2009) Resource dependence theory: A review. Journal of Management35: 1404–1427.
46.
Hock-DoepgenMClaussTKrausS, et al. (2021) Knowledge management capabilities and organizational risk-taking for business model innovation in SMEs. Journal of Business Research130: 683–697.
47.
HoskissonREChiricoFZyungJ, et al. (2017) Managerial risk taking: A multitheoretical review and future research agenda. Journal of Management43: 137–169.
48.
HoskissonREHittMAHillCWL (1991) Managerial risk taking in diversified firms: An evolutionary perspective. Organization Science2: 296–314.
49.
JiJYiY (2022) Value variations of political ties in the acquisition of R&D capabilities: The roles of non-SOEs and dysfunctional competition. Industrial Marketing Management101: 1–11. DOI: 10.1016/j.indmarman.2021.11.012.
50.
JiangHJiaNBaiT, et al. (2021) Cleaning house before hosting new guests: A political path dependence model of political connection adaptation in the aftermath of anticorruption shocks. Strategic Management Journal42: 1793–1821.
51.
JiangXLiuHFeyC, et al. (2018) Entrepreneurial orientation, network resource acquisition, and firm performance: A network approach. Journal of Business Research87: 46–57.
52.
JonssonSLindberghJ (2013) The development of social capital and financing of entrepreneurial firms: From financial bootstrapping to bank funding. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice37: 661–686.
53.
JosephJKlingebielRWilsonAJ (2016) Organizational structure and performance feedback: Centralization, aspirations, and termination decisions. Organization Science27: 1065–1083.
54.
JourdanJKivlenieceI (2017) Too much of a good thing? The dual effect of public sponsorship on organizational performance. Academy of Management Journal60: 55–77.
55.
KimmittJMuñozPNewberyR (2020) Poverty and the varieties of entrepreneurship in the pursuit of prosperity. Journal of Business Venturing35: 105939. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusvent.2019.05.003.
56.
KissANFernhaberSMcDougall-CovinPP (2018) Slack, innovation, and export intensity: Implications for small and medium-sized enterprises. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice42: 671–697.
57.
KollmannTStöckmannC (2014) Filling the entrepreneurial orientation-performance gap: The mediating effects of exploratory and exploitative innovations. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice38: 1001–1026.
58.
KreiserPMMarinoLDDicksonP, et al. (2010) Cultural influences on entrepreneurial orientation: The impact of national culture on risk taking and proactiveness in SMEs. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice34: 959–983.
59.
KuuselaPKeilTMaulaM (2017) Driven by aspirations, but in what direction? Performance shortfalls, slack resources, and resource-consuming vs. resource-freeing organizational change. Strategic Management Journal38: 1101–1120.
60.
LiHZhangY (2007) The role of managers’ political networking and functional experience in new venture performance: Evidence from China’s transition economy. Strategic Management Journal28: 791–804.
61.
LiYAhlstromD (2020) Risk-taking in entrepreneurial decision-making: A dynamic model of venture decision. Asia Pacific Journal of Management37: 899–933.
62.
LiYLiPPWangHF, et al. (2017) How do resource structuring and strategic flexibility interact to shape radical innovation?Journal of Product Innovation Management34: 471–491.
63.
LiangHSarafNHuQ, et al. (2007) Assimilation of enterprise systems: The effect of institutional pressures and the mediating role of top management. MIS Quarterly31: 59–87.
64.
LinderCLechnerCPelzelF (2020) Many roads lead to Rome: How human, social, and financial capital are related to new venture survival. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice44: 909–932.
65.
LiuBWangJChanKC, et al. (2021) The impact of entrepreneurs’ financial literacy on innovation within small and medium-sized enterprises. International Small Business Journal39: 228–246.
66.
LuFZhuZZhuL, et al. (2022) Political tie hot potato: The contingent effect of China’s anti-corruption policy on cash and innovation. Research Policy51: 104476. DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2022.104476.
67.
LubatkinMHSimsekZLingY, et al. (2006) Ambidexterity and performance in small-to medium-sized firms: The pivotal role of top management team behavioral integration. Journal of Management32: 646–672.
68.
LungeanuPSternIZajacEJ (2015) When do firms change technology-sourcing vehicles? The role of poor innovative performance and financial slack. Strategic Management Journal37: 855–869.
69.
LuoXRYangLHeX (2020) Can one stone kill two birds? Political relationship building and partner acquisition in new ventures. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice44: 817–841.
70.
MarinoLDLohrkeFTHillJS, et al. (2008) Environmental shocks and SME alliance formation intentions in an emerging economy: Evidence from the Asian financial crisis in Indonesia. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice38: 157–183.
71.
MatthewsLMSarstedtMHairJF, et al. (2016) Identifying and treating unobserved heterogeneity with FIMIX-PLS: Part I – Method. European Business Review28: 63–76.
72.
MiklianJHoelscherK (2022) SMEs and exogenous shocks: A conceptual literature review and forward research agenda. International Small Business Journal40: 178–204.
73.
MisangyiVFGreckhamerTFurnariS, et al. (2017) Embracing causal complexity: The emergence of a neo-configurational perspective. Journal of Management43: 255–282.
74.
MorganTAnokhinSOfsteinL (2020) SME response to major exogenous shocks: The bright and dark sides of business model pivoting. International Small Business Journal38: 369–379.
75.
MountMPBaerM (2021) CEOs’ regulatory focus and risk-taking when firms perform below and above the bar. Journal of Management. Epub ahead of print 25 May 2021. DOI: 10.1177/01492063211016029.
76.
NohriaNGulatiR (1996) Is slack good or bad for innovation?Academy of Management Journal39: 1245–1264.
77.
NunnallyJCBernsteinIH (1994) Psychometric Theory. McGraw-Hill Series in Psychology, vol. 3. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
78.
OECD (2022) Financing SMEs and Entrepreneurs 2022: An OECD Scoreboard. Paris: OECD Publishing. DOI: 10.1787/e9073a0f-en.
79.
OtchereISenbetLWZhuP (2020) Does political connection distort competition and encourage corporate risk taking? International evidence. Journal of Empirical Finance55: 21–42.
80.
PaelemanIVanackerT (2015) Less is more, or not? On the interplay between bundles of slack resources, firm performance and firm survival. Journal of Management Studies52: 819–848.
81.
PalichLEBagbyDR (1995) Using cognitive theory to explain entrepreneurial risk-taking: Challenging conventional wisdom. Journal of Business Venturing10: 425–438.
82.
PappasIOWoodsideAG (2021) Fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA): Guidelines for research practice in Information Systems and marketing. International Journal of Information Management58: 102310. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2021.102310.
83.
PatelPCTsionasM (2021) Macroeconomic uncertainty and risk: Collective optimism of small-business owners. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice. Epub ahead of print 31 January 2021. DOI: 10.1177/1042258720985475.
84.
PfefferJSalancikGR (1978) The External Control of Organizations: A Resource Dependence Perspective. New York, NY: Harper & Row.
85.
PfefferJSalancikGR (2003) The External Control of Organizations: A Resource Dependence Perspective (rev. ed.). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
86.
PodsakoffPMMacKenzieSBLeeJY, et al. (2003) Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology88: 879–903.
87.
PodsakoffPMMacKenzieSBPodsakoffNP (2012) Sources of method bias in social science research and recommendations on how to control it. Annual Review of Psychology63: 539–569.
88.
PodsakoffPMOrganDW (1986) Self-reports in organizational research: Problems and prospects. Journal of Management12: 531–533.
89.
PutninšTJSaukaA (2020) Why does entrepreneurial orientation affect company performance?Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal14: 711–735.
90.
RaginCC (2000) Fuzzy Set Social Science. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
91.
RaginCC (2008) Measurement versus Calibration: A set-theoretic approach. In: Box-SteffensmeeierJMBradyHECollierD (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Political Methodology. DOI: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199286546.001.0001.
92.
RaginCCFissPC (2008) Net effects analysis versus configurational analysis: An empirical demonstration. In: RaginCC (ed.) Redesigning Social Inquiry: Fuzzy Sets and Beyond. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, pp.190–212.
93.
RankONStrengeM (2018) Entrepreneurial orientation as a driver of brokerage in external networks: Exploring the effects of risk taking, proactivity, and innovativeness. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal12: 482–503.
94.
RauchAWiklundJLumpkinGT, et al. (2009) Entrepreneurial orientation and business performance: An assessment of past research and suggestions for the future. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice33: 761–787.
95.
RenkoMYli-RenkoHDenooL (2020) Sold, not bought: Market orientation and technology as drivers of acquisitions of private biotechnology ventures. Journal of Business Venturing37:106022. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusvent.2020.106022.
96.
RidgeJWIngramAHillAD (2017) Beyond lobbying expenditures: How lobbying breadth and political connectedness affect firm outcomes. Academy of Management Journal60: 1138–1163.
97.
RingleCMSarstedtMMitchellR, et al. (2020) Partial least squares structural equation modeling in HRM research. International Journal of Human Resource Management31: 1617–1642.
98.
SarstedtMRingleCMHairJF (2017) Partial least squares structural equation modeling. In: HomburgCKlarmannMVombergA (eds) Handbook of Market Research. Cham: Springer, pp.587–632.
99.
SharfmanMPWolfGChaseRB, et al. (1988) Antecedents of organizational slack. Academy of Management Review13: 601–614.
100.
ShengSZhouKZLiJJ (2011) The effects of business and political ties on firm performance: Evidence from China. Journal of Marketing75: 1–15.
101.
ShiWMarkóczyLStanCV (2014) The continuing importance of political ties in China. The Academy of Management Perspectives28: 57–75.
102.
ShmueliGSarstedtMHairJF, et al. (2019) Predictive model assessment in PLS-SEM: Guidelines for using PLSpredict. European Journal of Marketing53: 2322–2347.
103.
SunPHuWHHillmanAJ (2016) The dark side of board political capital: Enabling blockholder rent appropriation. Academy of Management Journal59: 1801–1822.
104.
SunPMellahiKWrightM (2012) The contingent value of corporate political ties. Academy of Management Perspectives26: 68–82.
105.
SunPMellahiKWrightM, et al. (2015) Political tie heterogeneity and the impact of adverse shocks on firm value. Journal of Management Studies52: 1036–1063.
106.
TangJTangZCowdenBJ (2018) Exploring the relationship between entrepreneurial orientation, CEO dual values, and SME performance in state-owned vs. nonstate-owned enterprises in China. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice41: 883–908.
107.
TeeceDPeterafMLeihS (2016) Dynamic capabilities and organizational agility: Risk, uncertainty and strategy in the innovation economy. California Management Review58: 13–35.
108.
TihanyiLAguileraRVHeugensP, et al. (2019) State ownership and political connections. Journal of Management45: 2293–2321.
109.
TitusVJrO’BrienJPDixitJ (2022) Does performance breed slack? Ownership as a contingency to the performance feedback and slack relationship. Journal of Management48: 1270–1298.
110.
ToCKilduffGJOrdoñezL, et al. (2018) Going for it on fourth down: Rivalry increases risk-taking, physiological arousal, and promotion focus. Academy of Management Journal61: 1281–1306.
111.
TylerBBCanerT (2016) New product introductions below aspirations, slack and R&D alliances: A behavioral perspective. Strategic Management Journal37: 896–910.
112.
VanackerTCollewaertVPaelemanI (2013) The relationship between slack resources and the performance of entrepreneurial firms: The role of venture capital and angel investors. Journal of Management Studies50: 1070–1096.
113.
VanackerTCollewaertVZahraSA (2017) Slack resources, firm performance, and the institutional context: Evidence from privately held European firms. Strategic Management Journal38: 1305–1326.
114.
VossGBSirdeshmukhDVossZG (2008) The effects of slack resources and environmental threat on product exploration and exploitation. Academy of Management Journal51: 147–164.
115.
WalesWJPatelPCLumpkinGT (2013) In pursuit of greatness: CEO narcissism, entrepreneurial orientation, and firm performance variance. Journal of Management Studies50: 1041–1069.
116.
WangCLChungHFL (2013) The moderating role of managerial ties in market orientation and innovation: An Asian perspective. Journal of Business Research66: 2431–2437.
117.
WangDSutherlandDNingL, et al. (2018) Exploring the influence of political connections and managerial overconfidence on R&D intensity in China’s large-scale private sector firms. Technovation69: 40–53.
118.
WangHChoiJWanG, et al. (2016) Slack resources and the rent-generating potential of firm-specific knowledge. Journal of Management42: 500–523.
119.
WangHQianC (2011) Corporate philanthropy and corporate financial performance: The roles of stakeholder response and political access. Academy of Management Journal54: 1159–1181.
120.
WangYLiJFurmanJL (2017) Firm performance and state innovation funding: Evidence from China’s Innofund program. Research Policy46: 1142–1161.
121.
WhiteLLockettACurrieG, et al. (2021) Hybrid context, management practices and organizational performance: A configurational approach. Journal of Management Studies58: 718–748.
122.
WiklundJShepherdD (2003) Knowledge-based resources, entrepreneurial orientation, and the performance of small and medium-sized businesses. Strategic Management Journal24: 1307–1314.
123.
WoodsideAG (2016) The good practices manifesto: Overcoming bad practices pervasive in current research in business. Journal of Business Research69: 365–381.
124.
XuDZhouKZDuF (2019) Deviant versus aspirational risk taking: The effects of performance feedback on bribery expenditure and R&D intensity. Academy of Management Journal62: 1226–1251.
125.
ZhangJGuanJ (2018) The time-varying impacts of government incentives on innovation. Technological Forecasting and Social Change135: 132–144.
126.
ZhangJAO’KaneCChenG (2020) Business ties, political ties, and innovation performance in Chinese industrial firms: The role of entrepreneurial orientation and environmental dynamism. Journal of Business Research121: 254–267.
127.
ZhaoBZiedonisR (2020) State governments as financiers of technology startups: Evidence from Michigan’s R&D loan program. Research Policy49: 103926. DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2020.103926.
128.
ZhaoHLuJ (2016) Contingent value of political capital in bank loan acquisition: Evidence from founder-controlled private enterprises in China. Journal of Business Venturing31: 153–174.
129.
ZhengWNiNCrillyD (2019) Non-profit organizations as a nexus between government and business: Evidence from Chinese charities. Strategic Management Journal40: 658–684.
130.
ZhengWSinghKChungC-N (2017) Ties to unbind: Political ties and firm sell-offs during institutional transition. Journal of Management43: 2005–2036.
131.
ZhouJLiJJiaoH, et al. (2020) The more funding the better? The moderating role of knowledge stock on the effects of different government-funded research projects on firm innovation in Chinese cultural and creative industries. Technovation92–93: 102059. DOI: 10.1016/j.technovation.2018.11.002.
132.
ZhouW (2013) Political connections and entrepreneurial investment: Evidence from China’s transition economy. Journal of Business Venturing28: 299–315.
