This paper presents the findings of a study of the association between corporate governance and entrepreneurial innovation in a major Asian metropolitan city. We identified three primary attributes of entrepreneurial innovation: preference for risk–taking, acceptance of changes, and development of new initiatives. While we intended to establish the relationship between corporate governance and entrepreneurial innovation, our research yielded mixed results. CEO/Chairman duality was found to be positively related to preference for risk–taking and development of new initiatives of firms, but not to the acceptance of changes in firms. Results also showed that whether directors were executive or non–executive had no significant impact on the level of entrepreneurial innovation of their firms. However, share–ownership of directors was found to be related to risk–taking preference, but not to acceptance of changes and development of new initiatives of firms.
Amabile, T. , Contri, R. , Coon, H. , Lazenby, J. , & Herron, M. (1996). Assessing the work environment for creativity . Academy of Management Journal, 39: 1154–84 .
2.
Backman, J. (1983). Entrepreneurship and the Outlook for America. New York: Free Press .
3.
Baysinger, B.D. , Kosnik, R.D. , & Turk, T.A. (1991). Effects of board and ownership structure on corporate R&D strategy . Academy of Management Journal, 34: 205–14 .
4.
Birley, S. (1986). The role of networks in the entrepreneurial process . Journal of Business Venturing, 1: 107–17 .
5.
Brazeal, D.V. & Herbert, T.T. (1999). The genesis of entrepreneurship . Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 23: 29–45 .
6.
Burgelman, R.A. (1983). Corporate entrepreneurship and strategic management: Insights form a process study . Management Science, 29: 1349–63 .
7.
Bygrave, W.D. & Hofer, C.W. (1991). Theorizing about entrepreneurship . Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 16: 13–22 .
8.
Cadbury, A. (1993). The Cadbury Report: The UK Perspective, Keynote address to the First Asian–Pacific Corporate Governance Conference, May 1993, Sydney.
9.
Chandler, A. (1991). The functions of the HQ unit in the multi–business firm . Strategic Management Journal, 12: 31–50 .
10.
Chandler, G. , Keller, C. , & Lyon, D. (2000). Unraveling the determinants and consequences of an innovation–supportive organizational culture . Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 25: 59–76 .
11.
Cochran, P.L. & Wartick, S.L. (1988). Corporate Governance—A Review of the Literature, Morristown. NJ: Financial Executives Research Foundation .
12.
Daily, C.M. & Dalton, D.R. (1994). Bankruptcy and corporate governance: The impact of board composition and structure . Academy of Management Journal, 37: 1603–17 .
13.
Damanpour, F. (1991). Organizational innovation: A meta–analysis of effects of determinants and moderators . Academy of Management Journal, 34: 555–90 .
14.
Demb, A. , & Neubauer, F. (1992). The corporate board: Confronting the paradoxes . Long Range Planning, 25: 9–20 .
15.
Donaldson, G. & March, J.G. (1983). Decision–making at the top. New York: Basic Books .
16.
Drucker, P. (1985). Innovation and Entrepreneurship, Practice and Principles. New York: Harper Row .
17.
Fama, E. (1980). Agency problems and the theory of the firm . Journal of Political Economics, 88: 288–307 .
18.
Fama, E. & Jensen, M. (1983). Separation of ownership and control . Journal of Law and Economics, 26: 301–25 .
19.
Herche, J. (2000). Innovations in procurement management . Academy of Marketing Science Journal, 28: 450–55 .
20.
Hornaday, R.W. (1992). Thinking about entrepreneurship: A fuzzy set approach . Journal of Small Business Management, 30: 12–23 .
21.
Hung, H. (1998). A typology of the theories of the roles of governing boards . Corporate Governance: An International Review, 6: 101–11 .
22.
Jensen, M. , & Meckling, W. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behaviors, agency costs, and ownership structure . Journal of Financial Economics, 3: 5–50 .
23.
Jessop, R. & Sum, N.L. (2000). An entrepreneurial city in action: Hong Kong's emerging strategies in and for (inter)urban competition . Urban Studies, 37: 2287–313 .
24.
Lorsch, J.W. and MacIver, E.A. (1989). Pawns or Potentates: The Reality of America's Corporate Boards, Boston: Harvard School Press .
25.
Mace, M.L. (1971). Directors: Myth and Reality. Boston: Harvard University Press .
26.
Mallette, P. & Fowler, K.L. (1992). Effects of board composition and stock ownership on the adoption of poison pills . Academy of Management Journal, 35: 1010–35 .
27.
March, J.G. , & Simon, H.A. (1958). Organizations. New York: John Wiley .
28.
Palmer, R.E. (1977). Audit committees: Are they effective? An auditor's view . Journal of Accountancy, 144: 76–79 .
29.
Pinchot, G. (1985). Intrapreneuring: Why you don't have to leave the corporation to become an entrepreneur. New York: Harper & Row .
30.
Rogers, E.W. (2001). Building the innovative organization: Management systems that encourage innovation . Industrial & Labor Relations Review, 54: 897–99 .
31.
Scott, S.G. & Bruce, R.A. (1994). Determinants of innovative behavior: A path model of individual innovation in the workplace . Academy of Management Journal, 37: 580–618 .
32.
Shane, S. (1995). Is the independent entrepreneurial firm a valuable organizational form. Academy of Management Journal, Best Paper Proceedings, 110–21.
33.
Sit, V.F.S. (1998). Entrepreneurship and economic development in Hong Kong . The China Quarterly, 155: 685–86 .
