The influence of the industrial sector is a long-standing assumption in entrepreneurship studies, yet the mechanisms through which the industrial sector shapes entrepreneurial phenomena and the processes through which entrepreneurial actors interact with sectors to prospect, develop, and exploit entrepreneurial opportunities remain largely under-theorized and little understood. We critically reexamine the notion of “sector” in entrepreneurship research, advancing a more dynamic view of the industrial sectors captured by the concept of sector fluidity and identifying three approaches to move the sector more prominently onto the “front seat” of entrepreneurship theory and research. Defining sector-based entrepreneurial capabilities and examining their importance to advance current understanding of industry-specific determinants, processes, and outcomes of entrepreneurship, we set out an agenda for further research aimed at advancing sector studies in entrepreneurship.
AhsanM. (2017) The right people at the right time—The place does not matter. Academy of Management Review42(1): 145–148.
2.
AhujaG.Morris LampertC. (2001) Entrepreneurship in the large corporation: A longitudinal study of how established firms create breakthrough inventions. Strategic Management Journal22(6–7): 521–543.
3.
AlvarezS. A.BusenitzL. W. (2001) The entrepreneurship of resource-based theory. Journal of Management27(6): 755–775.
4.
AlvarezS. A.BarneyJ. B.AndersonP. (2013) Forming and exploiting opportunities: The implications of discovery and creation processes for entrepreneurial and organizational research. Organization Science24(1): 301–317.
5.
AlvarezS.BarneyJ.McBrideR.WuebkerR. (2017) On opportunities: Philosophical and empirical implications. Academy of Management Review39(2): 227–231.
6.
AutioE.KenneyM.MustarP.SiegelD.WrightM. (2014) Entrepreneurial innovation ecosystems and context. Research Policy43(7): 1097–1108.
7.
Autio, E., Nambisan, S., Thomas, L., & Wright, M. (in press). Digital affordances, spatial affordances, and the genesis of entrepreneurial ecosystems. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, forthcoming.
8.
BainJ. S. (1956) Barriers to new competition, their character and consequences in manufacturing industries, Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
9.
BakerT.GedajlovicE.LubatkinM. (2005) A framework for comparing entrepreneurship processes across nations. Journal of International Business Studies36(5): 492–504.
10.
BarneyJ. B. (1991) Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management17(1): 99–120.
11.
BelleflammeP.LambertT.SchwienbacherA. (2014) Crowdfunding: Tapping the right crowd. Journal of Business Venturing29: 585–609.
12.
BowmanC.AmbrosiniV. (2003) How the resource-based and the dynamic capability views of the firm inform corporate-level strategy. British Journal of Management14(4): 289–303.
13.
BoydB. K.DessG. G.RasheedA. M. (1993) Divergence between archival and perceptual measures of the environment: Causes and consequences. Academy of Management Review18(2): 204–226.
14.
BresmanH. (2013) Changing routines: A process model of vicarious group learning in pharmaceutical R&D. Academy of Management Journal56(1): 35–61.
15.
ButticèV.ColomboM. G.WrightM. (2017) Serial crowdfunding, social capital, and project success. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice41: 183–207.
16.
CarlandJ. W.HoyF.BoultonW. R.CarlandJ. A. C. (1984) Differentiating entrepreneurs from small business owners: A conceptualization. Academy of Management Review9(2): 354–359.
17.
CassonM. (1982) The entrepreneur: An economic theory, Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.
18.
CavesR. E.PorterM. E. (1977) From entry barriers to mobility barriers: Conjectural decisions and contrived deterrence to new competition. The Quarterly Journal of Economics91(2): 241–261.
19.
CovinJ. G.SlevinD. P. (1989) Strategic management of small firms in hostile and benign environments. Strategic Management Journal10(1): 75–87.
20.
CovinJ. G.SlevinD. P. (1990) New venture strategic posture, structure, and performance: An industry life cycle analysis. Journal of Business Venturing5(2): 123–135.
21.
CrookT. R.KetchenD. J.CombsJ. G.ToddS. Y. (2008) Strategic resources and performance: A meta-analysis. Strategic Management Journal29(11): 1141–1154.
22.
DavidssonP. (2005) The types and contextual fit of entrepreneurial processes. International Journal of Entrepreneurship Education2(4): 407–430.
23.
DavidssonP. (2015) Entrepreneurial opportunities and the entrepreneurship nexus: A re-conceptualization. Journal of Business Venturing30(5): 674–695.
24.
De Massis, A., Audretsch, D., Uhlaner, L., & Kammerlander, N. (2017). Innovation with limited resources: Management lessons from the German Mittelstand. Journal of Product Innovation Management. doi:10.1111/jpim.12373.
25.
DeleryJ. E.DotyD. H. (1996) Modes of theorizing in strategic human resource management: Tests of universalistic, contingency, and configurational performance predictions. Academy of Management Journal39(4): 802–835.
26.
DessG. G.LumpkinG. T.CovinJ. G. (1997) Entrepreneurial strategy making and firm performance: Tests of contingency and configurational models. Strategic Management Journal18(9): 677–695.
27.
DessG. G.NewportS.RasheedA. M. (1993) Configuration research in strategic management: Key issues and suggestions. Journal of Management19(4): 775–795.
28.
DimovD. (2011) Grappling with the unbearable elusiveness of entrepreneurial opportunities. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice35(1): 57–81.
29.
DotyD. H.GlickW. H. (1994) Typologies as a unique form of theory building: Toward improved understanding and modeling. Academy of Management Review19(2): 230–251.
30.
EddlestonK.KellermannsF. W.SarathyR. (2008) Resource configuration in family firms: linking resources, strategic planning and technological opportunities to performance. Journal of Management Studies45(1): 26–50.
31.
EisenhardtK. M.MartinJ. A. (2000) Dynamic capabilities: what are they?Strategic Management Journal21(2000): 1105–1121.
32.
FeldmanM.FrancisJ.BercovitzJ. (2005) Creating a cluster while building a firm: Entrepreneurs and the formation of industrial clusters. Regional Studies39(1): 129–141.
33.
Fitz-KochS.NordqvistM.CarterS.HunterE. (2018) Entrepreneurship in the agricultural sector: A literature review and future research opportunities. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice42(1): 129–166.
34.
FlemingL. (2001) Recombinant uncertainty in technological search. Management Science47(1): 117–132.
35.
GalbraithJ. R. (1973) Designing complex organizations, Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
36.
GalunicD. C.RodanS. (1998) Resource recombinations in the firm: Knowledge structures and the potential for Schumpeterian innovation. Strategic Management Journal19(12): 1193–1201.
37.
GartnerW. B. (1985) A conceptual framework for describing the phenomenon of new venture creation. Academy of Management Review10(4): 696–706.
38.
GedajlovicE.HonigB.MooreC.PayneT.WrightM. (2013) Social capital and entrepreneurship: A schema and research agenda. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice37(3): 455–478.
39.
GeroskiP. A. (1990) Innovation, technological opportunity, and market structure. Oxford Economic Papers42(3): 586–602.
40.
GorgievskiM. J.StephanU. (2016) Advancing the psychology of entrepreneurship: A review of the psychological literature and an introduction. Applied Psychology65(3): 437–468.
41.
GraffinS. D.WardA. J. (2010) Certifications and reputation: Determining the standard of desirability amidst uncertainty. Organization Science21(2): 331–346.
42.
HansenM. T. (1999) The search-transfer problem: The role of weak ties in sharing knowledge across organization subunits. Administrative Science Quarterly44(1): 82–111.
43.
HargadonA.SuttonR. I. (1997) Technology brokering and innovation in a product development firm. Administrative Science Quarterly42: 716–749.
44.
HjorthD.JonesC.GartnerW. B. (2008) Recreating/recontextualising entrepreneurship. Scandinavian Journal of Management21: 81–84.
45.
HmieleskiK. M.EnsleyM. D. (2007) A contextual examination of new venture performance: entrepreneur leadership behavior, top management team heterogeneity, and environmental dynamism. Journal of Organizational Behavior28(7): 865–889.
46.
IlinitchA. Y.D'AveniR. A.LewinA. Y. (1996) New organizational forms and strategies for managing in hypercompetitive environments. Organization Science7(3): 211–220.
47.
JackS. L.AndersonA. R. (2002) The effects of embeddedness on the entrepreneurial process. Journal of Business Venturing17(5): 467–487.
48.
JinL.MadisonK.KraiczyN. D.KellermannsF. W.CrookT. R.XiJ. (2017) Entrepreneurial team composition characteristics and new venture performance: A meta-analysis. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice41(5): 743–771.
49.
JungH. J.LeeJ. (2015) The quest for originality: A new typology of knowledge search and breakthrough inventions. Academy of Management Journal59(5): 1725–1753.
50.
KellermannsF. W.WalterJ.CrookR.KemmererB.NarayananV. K. (2016)) Resource-based theory in entrepreneurship: A content-analytical comparison of researchers’ and entrepreneurs’ views. Journal of Small Business Management54(1): 26–48.
51.
Khandwalla, P. N. (1977). The design of organizations (Vol. 260). New York, NY: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich New York.
52.
KingA. A.TucciC. L. (2002) Incumbent entry into new market niches: The role of experience and managerial choice in the creation of dynamic capabilities. Management Science48(2): 171–186.
53.
KirznerI. M. (1979) Perception, opportunity, and profit, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
54.
Kotlar, J., De Massis, A., Wright, M., & Frattini, F. (2018). Organizational goals: Antecedents, formation processes, and implications for firm behavior and performance. International Journal of Management Reviews, forthcoming. DOI: 10.1111/ijmr.12170.
55.
KleinP. G. (2008) Opportunity discovery, entrepreneurial action, and economic organization. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal2(3): 175–190.
56.
LevinthalD.MarchJ. G. (1981) A model of adaptive organizational search. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization2(4): 307–333.
57.
LockettA.MurrayG.WrightM. (2002) Do UK venture capital firms still have a bias against high tech investments?Research Policy31: 1009–1030.
58.
LumpkinG. T.DessG. G. (2001) Linking two dimensions of entrepreneurial orientation to firm performance: The moderating role of environment and industry life cycle. Journal of Business Venturing16(5): 429–451.
59.
MarchJ. G. (1991) Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization Science2(1): 71–87.
60.
MarchJ. G.SimonH. A. (1958) Organizations, New York: John Wiley.
61.
MarshS. J.StockG. N. (2003) Building dynamic capabilities in new product development through intertemporal integration. Journal of Product Innovation Management20(2): 136–148.
62.
MawdsleyJ. K.SomayaD. (2016) Employee mobility and organizational outcomes: An integrative conceptual framework and research agenda. Journal of Management42(1): 85–113.
63.
McDougallP. P. (1989) International versus domestic entrepreneurship: new venture strategic behavior and industry structure. Journal of Business Venturing4(6): 387–400.
64.
McKelvieA.HaynieJ. M.GustavssonV. (2011) Unpacking the uncertainty construct: Implications for entrepreneurial action. Journal of Business Venturing26(3): 273–292.
65.
McKelvie, A., Wiklund, J. & Brattström, A. (2018). Externally acquired or internally generated? Knowledge development and perceived environmental dynamism in new venture innovation. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 42(1), 24–46.
66.
Micelotta, E., Washington, M. & Docekalova, I. (2018). Industry gender imprinting and new venture creation: The liabilities of women’s leagues in the sports industry. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 42(1), 94–128.
67.
MillerD. (1987) The genesis of configuration. Academy of Management Review12(4): 686–701.
68.
NavisC.OzbekO. V. (2016) The right people in the wrong places: The paradox of entrepreneurial entry and successful opportunity realization. Academy of Management Review41(1): 109–129.
69.
NavisC.OzbekO. V. (2017) Why context matters: Overconfidence, narcissism, and the role of objective uncertainty in entrepreneurship. Academy of Management Review42(1): 148–153.
70.
NelsonR. R. (1982) An evolutionary theory of economic change, Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
71.
NewbertS. L. (2007) Empirical research on the resource-based view of the firm: An assessment and suggestions for future research. Strategic Management Journal28: 121–146.
72.
PauwelsC.ClarysseB.WrightM.Van HoveJ. (2016) Understanding a new generation incubation model: The accelerator. Technovation50–51: 13–24.
73.
PisanoG. P. (2017) Toward a prescriptive theory of dynamic capabilities: connecting strategic choice, learning, and competition. Industrial and Corporate Change26(5): 747–762.
74.
PorterM. E. (1980) Competitive strategy, New York: Free Press.
75.
Radaelli, G., Dell'Era, C., Frattini, F., & Messeni Petruzzelli, A. (2018). Entrepreneurship and human capital in professional sport: A longitudinal analysis of the Italian soccer league. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 42(1), 70–93.
76.
RosenkopfL.NerkarA. (2001) Beyond local search: boundary-spanning, exploration, and impact in the optical disk industry. Strategic Management Journal22(4): 287–306.
77.
RuvioA.RosenblattZ.Hertz-LazarowitzR. (2010) Entrepreneurial leadership vision in nonprofit vs. for-profit organizations. The Leadership Quarterly21(1): 144–158.
78.
SchreyöggG.SydowJ. (2010) Organizing for fluidity? Dilemmas of new organizational forms. Organization Science21(6): 1251–1262.
79.
Schumpeter, J. A. (1939). Business cycles (Vol. 1): Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
80.
ShaneS. (2012) Reflections on the 2010 AMR decade award: Delivering on the promise of entrepreneurship as a field of research. Academy of Management Review37(1): 10–20.
81.
ShaneS.VenkataramanS. (2000) The promise of entrepreneurship as a field of research. Academy of Management Review25(1): 217–226.
82.
SimonH. (1996) Hidden Champions. Lessons from 500 of the world's best unknown companies, Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
83.
SørensenJ. B.SharkeyA. J. (2014) Entrepreneurship as a mobility process. American Sociological Review79(2): 328–349.
84.
StewartG. L. (2006) A meta-analytic review of relationships between team design features and team performance. Journal of Management32(1): 29–55.
85.
StuartT. E.PodolnyJ. M. (1996) Local search and the evolution of technological capabilities. Strategic Management Journal17(S1): 21–38.
86.
SzulanskiG. (1996) Exploring internal stickiness: Impediments to the transfer of best practice within the firm. Strategic Management Journal17(S2): 27–43.
87.
TeeceD. J. (2007) Explicating dynamic capabilities: the nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic Management Journal28(13): 1319–1350.
UzziB. (1996) The sources and consequences of embeddedness for the economic performance of organizations: The network effect. American Sociological Review61(4): 674–698.
90.
VenkataramanS. (1997) The distinctive domain of entrepreneurship research. Advances in entrepreneurship, firm emergence and growth3(1): 119–138.
91.
VenkatramanN.PrescottJ. E. (1990) Environment-strategy coalignment: an empirical test of its performance implications. Strategic Management Journal11(1): 1–23.
92.
von BrielF.DavidssonP.ReckerJ. C. (2018) Digital technologies as external enablers of new venture creation in the IT hardware sector. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice42(1): 47–69.
93.
WelterF. (2011) Contextualizing entrepreneurship—conceptual challenges and ways forward. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice35(1): 165–184.
94.
WigginsR. R.RuefliT. W. (2005) Schumpeter's ghost: Is hypercompetition making the best of times shorter?Strategic Management Journal26(10): 887–911.
95.
Wright, M. & Drori, I. (eds.) (2018). Accelerators: Successful Venture Creation and Growth. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
96.
Wright, M., Tartari, J., Huang, K., DiLorenzo, F. and Bercovitz, J. (2018). Knowledge worker mobility in context: Pushing the boundaries of theory and methods, Journal of Management Studies, forthcoming.
97.
WrightM.ZahraS. (2011) The other side of paradise: Examining the dark side of entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship Research Journal1(3): 1–5.
98.
ZahraS. A. (1996) Governance, ownership, and corporate entrepreneurship: The moderating impact of industry technological opportunities. Academy of Management Journal39(6): 1713–1735.
99.
ZahraS. A.CovinJ. G. (1995) Contextual influences on the corporate entrepreneurship-performance relationship: A longitudinal analysis. Journal of Business Venturing10(1): 43–58.
100.
ZahraS. A.WrightM. (2011) Entrepreneurship's next act. The Academy of Management Perspectives25(4): 67–83.
101.
ZahraS. A.SapienzaH. J.DavidssonP. (2006) Entrepreneurship and dynamic capabilities: a review, model and research agenda. Journal of Management Studies43(4): 917–955.
