The Effect of Entrepreneur's Fear of Failure on firm's Entrepreneurial Orientation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study focuses on the fear of failure (FF) in entrepreneurship and its effect on the entrepreneurial orientation (EO) as a strategic orientation in firms. There has been much research on EO as a predictor of organizations’ performance since it is considered a manifestation of the entrepreneurial direction inside the organization. Yet, the research on the relationships between individual-level variables and EO itself still has room for contribution, especially the internal aspects related to the entrepreneur or the manager. Therefore, this research aims to explore FF in entrepreneurship and its inhibiting and motivating roles. In addition, given that the firm is the unit of analysis in this study, this research explained how an entrepreneur’s FF affects the EO of the firm amidst the COVID-19 outbreak. The study administered a quantitative research design using a structured questionnaire. The results showed a positive influence of the entrepreneur’s fear of failure on the firm’s entrepreneurial orientation manifested in the firm’s innovativeness dimension. However, the other two dimensions that contribute to the firm’s EO representation (proactiveness & risk-taking) showed insignificant relationships with the entrepreneur’s FF.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".