Synergistic Impacts of Entrepreneurial and Learning Orientations on Performance: A Meta-Analysis
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Entrepreneurial orientation (EO) and learning orientation (LO) are two key strategic orientations that are thought to individually influence firm performance. However, there is little understanding regarding their mutual relationship – similarities and complementarities – and their combinative effect on performance. To address this, we meta-analyzed 60 samples from 59 studies based on 16762 firms using a random effects model, to find the relationships between EO, LO, and firm performance. We find that the correlation between EO and LO is fairly large (r = 0.44) and is moderated by the country’s entrepreneurship profile, represented by entrepreneurial intention and fear of failure. While EO and LO operate through similar processes, they have independent, additive and synergistic effects on performance. EO and LO explain 17% and 13% of performance respectively while synergistically explaining 21% when combined. Furthermore, the EO-LO intercorrelation moderates the EO-performance and LO-performance relationships, so under conditions of high association, their combined effect can reach 38% of the performance variance.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it