Determinants of university employee intrapreneurial behavior: The case of Latvian universities

Abstract

<jats:p> As the ongoing evolution in the higher education sector changes the roles of universities, entrepreneurial practices become more prominent in their agendas. The literature on academic entrepreneurship focuses predominantly on the commercialization of research and less on other intrapreneurial activities—namely those performed by non-academic employees. To fill this gap, this study aims to provide a comprehensive understanding of the factors that influence universities’ faculty members and non-academic staff to engage in intrapreneurial activities. The article analyzes Latvian university employees’ perceptions of 13 organizational, individual, and environmental factors and how they influence intrapreneurial behavior. Regarding the organizational factors, the results show that higher trust in managers, more available resources for innovative ideas, less formal rules and procedures, and greater freedom in decision-making can lead to higher levels of intrapreneurial behavior. With regard to individual factors, intrapreneurial behavior is associated with an employee’s initiative, but is not correlated with risk-taking and personal initiative. As to external factors, while environmental munificence is positively correlated with innovativeness, dynamism and unfavorable change influence employees’ engagement in intrapreneurial activities. </jats:p>

Determining employee satisfaction, intrapreneurship and firm growth among managers of Pakistan

“…However, in a low intrapreneurial climate, the firm's focus revolves around leadership style, systems culture and structure and its essential activities ( Rambakus et al., 2020 ). Similarly, Valka et al.’s (2020) findings show that greater trust in managers is responsible for them developing innovative thoughts to utilize the available resources. Besides, while intrapreneurial behaviour relates to an employee's creativity, it is unconnected to risk-taking and personal endeavours.…”

The bottleneck of intrapreneurship: are social positions and held expectations constraints in organizations’ entrepreneur process? A conceptual view

“…In other words, empirical research cannot know what a distinctive feature is unless intrapreneur characteristics have been observed within the environment involved and of the existents from which they are differentiated (Rand et al, 1990). Intrapreneurship is the sum of the individual knowledge, skills and abilities of the organizational human resources rather than idiosyncratic differences or similarities A conceptual view (Alpkan et al, 2010;Valka et al, 2020). Unfortunately, the qualities of an intrapreneur we mentioned are conducive to the success of an entrepreneurial initiative; for example, neither competitive nor motivated employees may not be entrepreneurial.…”

“…Role theory came forward as an influential aspect, which must be integrated into the concept of intrapreneurship because intrapreneurs develop via the social process and by interaction; the social process is made possible by communication (Stryker, 2006). Additionally, not all but some universally relevant and vital external factors do have an influence on intrapreneurship (Aparicio, 2017;Valka et al, 2020). However, it is not clear how intrapreneurs' vision is affected by these factors or which factors do they related.…”

Validation of the psychological safety, psychological empowerment, intrapreneurial behaviour and individual performance measurements

“…Intrapreneurship is the organizational entrepreneurship processes that spur innovative actions (Valka, Roseira, & Campos, 2020). The IB concept was formed from the entrepreneurship orientation (EO) concept, representing employees’ actions through risk-taking, innovativeness and proactive actions (Covin & Slevin, 1991; Antoncic & Hisrich, 2003; Mahmoud et al, 2017).…”