Understanding and Measuring Autonomy: An Entrepreneurial Orientation Perspective

Abstract

Autonomy is an important component of an entrepreneurial orientation (EO), but most studies that assess the EO construct do not include autonomy measures. This article first addresses the theoretical relevance of autonomy as an element of firm-level entrepreneurial behavior. After a review of existing autonomy measures, it then proposes scale items to test the autonomy dimension of EO. Finally, it reports the results of two studies of the proposed autonomy scale and addresses implications for future EO-related autonomy research.

Tweaking the entrepreneurial orientation–performance relationship in family firms: the effect of control mechanisms and family-related goals

“…Similar to the findings for Innovativeness and Proactiveness, literature largely agrees on the direct positive performance effect of having a propensity to act autonomously (Lumpkin and Dess 2001;Lumpkin et al 2009). The dimension Autonomy refers to acting independently and making key decisions without external influence.…”

“…The scales to evaluate the EO dimensions (see Table 2) were measured on a sevenpoint semantic differential of two opposed statements, which are based on prior literature (Covin and Slevin 1989;Lumpkin and Dess 2001;Lumpkin et al 2009; Kallmuenzer and Peters 2017), which aimed at capturing ''aspects of the subconstructs that were not included in the previously used scales'' (Lumpkin and Dess 2001, p. 439). This additional item measures the attitude of family firms in competition and addresses previous discussions on the less aggressive competitive behavior of family firms (Deephouse and Jaskiewicz 2013;Gómez-Mejía et al 2007).…”

“…Attempts to transmit the EO-performance relationship to family firms have been pursued, predominantly by analyzing the effect of particular EO dimensions from the multidimensional construct on financial performance (e.g. Lumpkin et al 2009;De Massis et al 2014;Naldi et al 2007;Bouncken et al 2016), by focusing on growth as the performance measure , by investigating effects of management composition (Sciascia et al 2013), or by investigating the moderating effect of Socio-Emotional Wealth (SEW) on the unidimensional EOperformance relationship (Schepers et al 2014). Despite the importance to understand how entrepreneurial attitudes take effect in family firms, there is not yet a concordant opinion on the transmission of the multidimensional EO construct on family firm performance (Zellweger and Sieger 2012;Kallmuenzer 2015).…”

Microfranchise emergence and its impact on entrepreneurship

“…As key non-monetary motivators for engaging in the entrepreneurial process (Rindova, Barry and Ketchen 2009;Zhu, Chen and Li 2011), these concepts continue to be studied, particularly among nascent entrepreneurs. Autonomy is defined as "the ability to work independently, make decisions, and take actions aimed at bringing forth a business concept or vision and carrying it through to completion" (Lumpkin andDess 1996 in Lumpkin, Cogliser andSchneider 2009 pp 62-63) with independent thinking and action part and parcel of autonomy. For many prospective entrepreneurs, autonomy means having control over one's own destiny by being one's own boss (independence).…”

“…But how would this be different in the social entrepreneurship domain where the primary motivation for launching an enterprise is at the 'societal' rather than 'individual' level? While autonomy is important to entrepreneurship, few studies have looked at how it contributes to the entrepreneurial value creation process (Lumpkin et al 2009). We aim to gain insight into this issue in an emerging market context.…”