International Journal of Business

Management & Research (IJBMR)

ISSN(P): 2249-6920; ISSN(E): 2249-8036
Vol. 6, Issue 5, Oct 2016, 43-52
TJPRC Pvt. Ltd.

ENTREPRENEURSHIP CHALLENGES IN RE-FORMULATING FIRMS

CORPORATE STRATEGY: A FRAMEWORK FOR ANALYSIS
YEZDI H. GODIWALLA
Professor, Department of Management, College of Business and Economics,
University of Wisconsin-Whitewater, Whitewater, USA
ABSTRACT
Innovativeness and growth are wonderful words. Companies love them. Companies find pathways to them.
Their goals embrace them. Innovativeness and growth, once established as important goals, become integral parts of
corporate strategy. They inspire the manager, supervisors and other employees. Stockholders love them. Stakeholders like
them because their inducements would also grow. A-priori directional or strategic choices and decisions that a company
makes have a profound impact upon its fortunes and outcomes. Growth is among the challenges a small firm in an
entrepreneurial mode will face. Strategic choices are often not in the most concerns of the entrepreneur. Strategic
analysis and decision making are among the most important activities a company has to undertake in order to survive,
responsive to unpredictable future challenges. Entrepreneurial activity by nature involves risk taking and requires a
strong romance with an idea. Risk taking is a prerequisite for the entrepreneur to progress as he overcomes challenges
that defy a total, firm guaranteed confidence level in the choices he may make or the alternatives for which he opts.
This paper first presents a framework of analysis of the strategic situation facing the entrepreneurial firm. It then
suggests how the entrepreneur may improve the corporate strategy to meet with future challenges. The pursuit of
innovativeness and growth then must be tempered with a vigilance and preparedness to overcome challenges.

Original Article

grow, be continuous profitable, competitive, adaptable, self-correcting through organizational development, and thus be

The entrepreneurial firms innovation strategy is often considered to be its corporate strategy.
KEYWORDS: Entrepreneurs Innovation and Corporate Strategy; Entrepreneurial Strategic Analysis; Small Firms
Innovation Strategy Formulation

Received: Sep 02, 2016; Accepted: Sep 24, 2016; Published: Sep 28, 2016; Paper Id.: IJBMROCT20165

INTRODUCTION
Innovation and growth are among the more generic goals of an organization, along with establishment
and survival, competitiveness, organizational development, flexibility, and adjustability. After the establishment
stage, an entrepreneur dreams of sustained innovativeness and growth. He seeks newer ways to pursue them.
Innovativeness and growth are driving forces on which a firms leaders concentrate. Innovation and growth are
among the more important goals once an entrepreneurial company has sufficiently past the establishment stage and
the leaders are able to concentrate on the more strategic issues for the firms longer term performance.
The pursuit of innovativeness and growth is often rewarding but it is challenging. When re-formulating
its corporate strategy, an entrepreneurial firm should follow the processes indicated in this article. The process of
re-formulating of corporate strategy is not without difficulty. It is nebulous and uncertain as there appear to be no
finite set of procedures which would provide a consistent logical concatenation of cause and effect relationships of

www.tjprc.org

editor@tjprc.org

44

Yezdi H. Godiwalla

the firms activities. The process is fraught with hurdles and the company must learn to solve problems and overcome
difficulties.
The approach in this article provides an entrepreneurs feeling of confidence and that would, in turn, provide a
willingness to assuredly raise ones head to see over the immediacy and transcend beyond the extant anxious establishment
stage. The entrepreneur is now able to set his or her, (henceforth he expressly means either he or she) sights higher.
The willingness for the entrepreneur to suspend the anxiety of the earlier establishment stage and whole heartedly seek out
the future is an important personal choice. When an entrepreneurial firm re-formulates its corporate strategy, it views its
strategic situation (often called current analysis) and considers the strategic factors and formulates its corporate strategy.
Growth is an important consideration as it pursues its future corporate strategy. In this context, it is important for him to
willingly suspend the anxiety of the survival stage and focus his emotional and intellectual energies on the strategic issues
of sustained long term innovation, growth and progress.

ENTREPRENEURIAL DECISION MAKING, ACTIVITIES AND GROWTH

In his study, Forbes (2005) argues that those entrepreneurs who display higher entrepreneurial self-efficacy
(ESE), i.e. those individuals who believe that they can capably manage and perform all the relevant tasks of
entrepreneurship, were more successful in their new ventures. Further, Forbes (2005) found that such entrepreneurs
themselves had not only felt and showed a higher level ESE and self-confidence, but they had also greatly involved their
employees. In addition, they showed that they had a firm grasp of the current facts and had felt that they could manage the
current situation. In this study, building on this construct of entrepreneurial self-efficacy (ESE), the author found that the
results indicated that entrepreneurs exhibit a stronger belief in their own abilities when their ventures make decisions in
ways that involve other employees, that are more comprehensive, and that incorporate more current information.
Exploratory analyses also provide preliminary evidence that ESE enhances firm performance (Forbes, 2005).
Fernandez-Perez, Garcia-Morales and Pulles (2016) studied the effectiveness of cognition process and
identification of strategic entrepreneurial opportunities, or as they call it, strategic opportunity recognition (SOR).
They found that the influence of strategic schemas on SOR is quite high. The issue of the inter-relatedness between the
external social networks and entrepreneurial strategic flexibility through the CEOs cognition process is an important one.
They concluded that regarding the model of entrepreneurial strategic decision-making, the external social networks do in
fact make a positive impact on strategic flexibility and performance, depending on their composition and CEO-specific
social and cognitive factors (Fernandez-Perez et al, 2016). Their evidence also led them to conclude that the combined
approached (of social and cognitive factors together), as related to nature of decision-making modes, resulted in a greater
ability for the entrepreneur to respond flexibly to their evolving environments (Fernandez-Perez et al, 2016).
Lyon, Lumpkin, Dess (2000) studied the research issue of how an entrepreneurial firm can perform well when in
an entrepreneurial stage of the firm. Involved in the study was the issue of the three approaches to measurement:
managerial perceptions, firm behaviors, and resource allocations (Lyon, Lumpkin, Dess 2000). Their study concluded that
all three together are simultaneously important to the greater effectiveness of a sound assessment of the entrepreneurial
situation.
Entrepreneurial activity does inherently involve the entrepreneur to pursue risk taking and have a strong romance
and obsession with an idea (Adomako, Narteh, Danquah, Analoui, 2016). Entrepreneurs bring a new idea or a new
Impact Factor (JCC): 5.4362

NAAS Rating: 3.07

Entrepreneurship Challenges in Re-Formulating Firms

Corporate Strategy: A Framework for Analysis

45

application to an existing idea in a way that which would be marketable and therefore benefit mankind. Focus on the
marketable aspects of the idea is an important one.
When one considers the rationales of entrepreneurial decision making it is interesting to review the neuroscience
issues. Studies have shown the inconsistencies in strategic decision making and how that can affect the course of the firms
performance (Mitchell, Shepherd, Sharfman, 2011). They studied hostility and dynamism as how these two factors affect
an erratic strategic decision-making outcome. Unexpectedly, they found that, in dynamic environments managers make
less erratic strategic decisions. Similarly, hostility and dynamism interact in their effect on erratic strategic decisions in that
the positive relationship between environmental hostility and erratic strategic decisions will be less positive for managers
experiencing high environmental dynamism than those experiencing low environmental dynamism (Mitchell, Shepard,
Sharfman, 2011). Thus, hostility in the environment can cause more erratic strategic decision-making than dynamism in the
environment. Similar findings reveal the need for a more focused approach, seasoned with greater practice in strategic
decision-making under heavier environmental conditions (Mehrabi, Kolabi, 2012).
In their study, Jumpponen and Pihkala (2008) found that in the case of the managers of small businesses in postUSSR Russia were able to manage the change with lessening of external control in their businesses and yet within reason
perform well in the relevant business environment. They analyzed to see if the companies which still operated in hostile
environment had aimed at firm survival or did they actively scanned the environment for attractive growth opportunities.
Their findings indicated that, although the business environment was often projected to the outside world to be better
developed since the departure of the former USSR in 1991, however, in many respects, indicated that the business
environment was not conducive to rapid startups or entrepreneurial activity. Hostile environments affected the rate of
establishment and start up because the entrepreneur was bogged down with obstacles and the less than satisfactory
development of the infrastructure and government climate for new businesses (Jumpponen, Pihkala, 2008).
Individual human decision making and activities are sometimes based on other factors as well. Lee and Hyojung
(2016) studied the issues of the neural science of strategic decision making. They found that the temporal parietal junction
(TPJ) and medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC) are specifically involved in accurately predicting the behaviors of others during
social interactions. (Further,) mPFC has an important role in the arbitration between multiple strategies and learning
algorithms during individual and social decision making. (Lee and Hyojung, 2016). Thus, the complex human mind runs
through many algorithms before arriving at the preferred choice, often less than fully logical. They posit the argument that
the process is dynamic and depend on other or outside factors, like social interactions. In this context they state, during
iterative social interactions, choices might change dynamically as knowledge about the intentions of others and estimates
for choice outcomes are incrementally updated via reinforcement learning (2016). Thus, the entrepreneurial strategic
decision making process is neither purely rational nor consistent.
The entrepreneur usually is the technical developer. He more so focuses on the evolving content of the product or
service (Svoboda, 20016). He is less likely to know the management details. He often does not have enough capital to
launch the project off the ground. He also lacks the marketing and promotional know how. He needs help in these areas of
management, finance, and marketing until he learns them or he has people who will capably direct them. For him,
entrepreneurial decision-making is neither a science nor an art. He pays little attention to the decision-making process in
order to become better at it through practice. He just does what comes to him (Ucbasaran, 2008).

www.tjprc.org

editor@tjprc.org

46

Yezdi H. Godiwalla

Growth and entrepreneurial activity are closely inter-twined. All entrepreneurs usually place growth as a most
important goal. Growth in itself is very appealing and most people associated with the new venture associate with a strong
expectation of growth. Stockholders love it. Stakeholders like it because their inducements would also grow. They focus on
growth of the future as they make current investments and re-investments in the entrepreneurial ventures.
The pursuit of growth is rewarding but challenging. It is not without difficulty. It is fraught with hurdles and the
company must learn to obviate and overcome them. A-priori directional or strategic choices and decisions that a company
makes have a profound impact upon its fortunes and outcomes. Risk-taking behavior and, in particular, gambling
propensities in decision-making circumstances of uncertainty, are relevant here as we study entrepreneurs risk-taking
behavior in the pursuit of an identified opportunity (Forbes, 2005; Lorains, Dowling, Enticott, Bradshaw, Trueblood, Stout,
2014; Venkatraman, Huettel, 2012). Growth and entrepreneurial activity are viewed synonymously in risk-taking and the
pursuit of an opportunity because they are very closely inter-related. All entrepreneurs crave for their entrepreneurial
project to get off the ground and rise. In doing so, they may sometimes take undue risks or a hurried and incomplete
analysis and decision-making process (Ucbasaran, 2008).
In his study, Vermeulen (2006) felt that there should be more research on strategic decision making for smaller
and entrepreneurial firms, commenting that there is a greater body of research performed on larger organization.
He developed a typology of entrepreneurial decision makers. He concluded from his empirical study of 646 entrepreneurs
that there were five distinct types of decision makers: Dare Devils, Lone Rangers, Doubtful Minds, Informers? Friends
and Busy Bees (Vermeulen, 2006).
The study of entrepreneurs thinking and decision making has been a point of interest to many. This includes the
study of entrepreneurs decision making in extreme circumstances of high uncertainty, time pressure, emotionally charged,
and other consequential extremes. In their study, Shepherd, Williams, Patzelt (2015), they reduced the initial number of
research from 602 wider scope articles to a shaper focused scope of 156 articles. Their findings indicate that the
entrepreneurs primary activities are: opportunity assessment decisions, entrepreneurial entry decisions, decisions about
exploiting opportunities, entrepreneurial exit decisions, heuristics and biases in the decision-making context, characteristics
of the entrepreneurial decision maker, and environment as decision context (Shepard, Williams, Patzelt, 2015).
In this context, it may be observed that strategic management, which would include strategic data gathering,
analysis and decision making, is a vitally important activity that a company must perform for future viability and
continuous competitiveness and growth. It has to steadily and sustainably grow. Ideally, growth patterns should be
consistent.
A companys growth ideally should be such that the company is continuously showing steady profits. It should
strive to be increasingly competitive and it should improve its adaptability. An entrepreneurial company, usually a small
firm with fewer employees than needed to perform a proper data gathering and data categorizing and strategic analysis and
decision making, is not appropriately suited for pursuing an effective, mature and professional formal strategic
management process.
An entrepreneurial firm should pursue organizational development activities so as to identify and solve its own
problems and address its issues. In essence, it should become self reliant and self-sufficient in so far as being able to
correct itself if it goes on an undesirable direction. Ideally, it should do these self-correcting activities through sustained

Impact Factor (JCC): 5.4362

NAAS Rating: 3.07

Entrepreneurship Challenges in Re-Formulating Firms

Corporate Strategy: A Framework for Analysis

47

organizational development activities. In this way, it has a better chance to pro-actively manage its future challenges and
difficulties, whether they are anticipated or unanticipated.
Entrepreneurial Strategic Analyses for Re-Formulating Corporate Strategy
The articles major thrust is to present in a table a two page framework for analysis. The table, which is at the end,
provides: (a) the present situation and the circumstances that led to the present situation (the first page of the table), and,
(b) the future strategy (the tables second page).
The first page should be completed before going on to the second page. That is to say, the entrepreneur needs to
analyze the circumstances that led to the present set of organizational situations. He then needs to analyze the overall set of
circumstances. After assessing the reality he can focus on formulating future strategy.
The entrepreneur is usually most concerned about the product and technology, and, how he plans to promote it to
the market. His concern of technological details of the product and the operational details of the service aspects keep him
preoccupied. Such preoccupation keeps him focusing on the strategic issues. These strategic issues are important and they
are raised in this paper. He must be aware of his strategic intent if he is to be effective in his formulation for future strategy
(Hamel and Prahalad, 1989).
The Two Page Table: Analysis of the Past Three Years with Emphasis on the Last One Year
The two page table is a comprehensive, at-one-overall, complete glance of all the factors which could be relevant
to the entrepreneur firms strategic analysis and decision making. The entrepreneur needs to develop a clear understanding
of his evolving current situation, and what circumstances brought his firm to the current situation. Thus, he needs to review
the past few years of information, but give greater weightage to the last one year. His method for a comprehensive analysis
should be to have at one, complete glance, all of the picture so that he can assess the current situation. In this way, he can
integrate and inter-relate all the more important issues and factors which are or could be pertinent to a particular decision
making situation. Page 1 of the table provides him with a perspective when it is completed. His firms organizational
environments, both internal and external, would give him a full grasp of the quality organizations performance. He needs
to know his companys competitors and what his strategys major components are (Porter, 1996; Porter, 1998).
Once he is aware of the firms strategy, he can focus on the external analyses of major opportunities and the
accompanying threats and risks. These are critical to an entrepreneurial firm, particularly in its early stages, so that the firm
can focus upon exploiting its opportunities effectively. Because scarcity of resources can be an important problem in a
competitive situation, he must also check for efficient use of resources (Brown and Eisenhardt, 1998).
As it is delineated in page 2 of the table, the entrepreneur must analyze all aspects of his likely or projected future
strategy (in a broad form), particularly on such issues as the new products-services and the new markets that he is trying to
create (Kim and Mauborgne, 1999). His major task is to first conceive the new products, services and markets, and then
promote the new products and services to the new markets. In doing so, he must he must skillfully combine his strengths
needed to exploit the market opportunities, contain its vulnerable weaknesses, deflect its threats, solve problems.
These issues and approaches may well become the cornerstone of the future strategy. Indeed, they may even become the
strategic intent for the future strategy. He needs to manage his firm in an uncertainty even after he scans the external
environments for critical information (Elenkov, 2000). Such an approach would enable him to assess his own propensity to
deal with uncertainty and manage in difficult circumstances.
www.tjprc.org

editor@tjprc.org

48

Yezdi H. Godiwalla

In analyzing the organizational strengths-weakness profile he should make a judgment about the extent to which
the organization is capable of meeting its current and near future challenges with a favorable cost/benefit analysis
(Gadiesh and Gilbert, 1998). The thrust of his analyses should be: how can he make his organization more effective so that
his firms strengths may yield better performance (Stalk, Evens and Shulman, 1992; Watson, 1993).
The frameworks, contained in the table, are a working document to help analytical thinking and to raise and
pursue discussions and to make intelligent and informed decisions. This decision making may be difficult and is achieved
through a review of multiple issues and review many facets and weigh in diverse arguments and judge pros and cons of
arguments in order to finally decide on a course of action. Page 1 of the table provides a complete overview of the
organizations internal strengths-weakness profile and the past performance (through its opportunity pursuit endeavors) in
the context of the past corporate strategy. Page 2 provides a set of likely, projected scenarios from which the entrepreneur
may make informed choices, directions and strategy for the future.
The two pages of the table provide a comprehensive framework for analysis. They also afford him the way for
effective reflection in order to correctly consider all the relevant facts and information at a glance. The table is perspicuous
and his overall comprehensive grasp in a single-sitting, a one-glance, an integrated review. It is not as if he has different
straws of stray thoughts flying around him, without a meaningful coherence and without his own consolidated
comprehension.
Assessment of Recent Trends and Activities
The table provides an assessment of the current situation, and, a projection of various scenarios for the future.
This approach of an assessment of recent trends focuses on the important external environments, and the proposed changes
in the firm. Gathering important information and categorizing it and then analyzing it would lead to some trends and
generate important inferences as to what may be the effective course of actions. The pursuit of analysis and review of
trends requires a review of newer events that raise the level of uncertainty in an increasingly unpredictable and uncertain
world. Subsequently, the firm may develop the next cycles corporate strategy.
The internal analysis focuses on products as expected by the market, particularly as supplied by the competitors.
Strengths and weakness analysis brings to the fore a realistic situation and generate an audit of capabilities and potentials
of the firm. This creates a spectrum of what the firm can and cannot do in the short and long run.
Benchmarking and improving are closely related and they must be closely integrated. These are important issues
and they must be brought together. Benchmarking involves of comparisons of various kinds: (a) It could be comparisons
with the other firms in the relevant reference groups in the same industry and other industries which bear some vital
similarities; (b) or, it could be comparisons with the same firm past performances in similar circumstances or similar
period; (c) or it could be comparisons with other non-similar firms in the different businesses and technologies but having
similar stages of entrepreneurial growth, comparisons with other firms, irrespective of industry, but whose entrepreneurs
are of similar mind set and personalities and possess similar entrepreneurial drive and characteristics.
The markets service needs escalate as the market grows and becomes more sophisticated. This leads to greater
awareness and selectiveness on the part of the customers. It is particularly more manifested when the markets players
(customers, channel distribution members, independent service suppliers) are more fully informed, and where the different
market players bear an equalized or a balanced information loading.
Impact Factor (JCC): 5.4362

NAAS Rating: 3.07

Entrepreneurship Challenges in Re-Formulating Firms

Corporate Strategy: A Framework for Analysis

49

When all the needed information is fully available and product and service details are transmitted to all market
players in real time, on can expect that the market will make better decisions about the trends affecting the industry.
The entrepreneurial firm should focus on generating a greater resource base in order to derive the information and process
it correctly and in a timely manner and make effective decisions and execute them to the benefit of the entrepreneurial
firm. Thus, the entrepreneur needs to be more focused and improve his products and services.
The firm may also need to evaluate its business lines and specific strategies as it improves its technological
capabilities and peoples technical, managerial and marketing skills and resources. These are needed in coping with the
challenges of growth.
The final part of page 2 of the table is to formulate the corporate strategy of the next cycle. Resources and
strategic intent are important aspects of this activity.
The current review often provides with a solid ground feeling because it is based on events that have actually
taken place. The future scenarios are usually more influenced by and dependent on external environments. Thus, external
and future orientations are the very basis of a strategic approach. The entrepreneur must be more future and external
environment.
The analyses of the two pages must be combined as on comprehensive and integrated framework for decision
making for future actions and future scenarios because the focus is on the continuous long term from the here and now.
The approach of an integrated review engenders the grasp of the connectedness between the present and the future.
This aspect of connectedness is an important for a higher confidence level of the entrepreneur. Where he first was delving
in the nebulous, the unknown and the uncertain, he now has some better grasp of the connectedness of the present with the
future, a sense of continuity that deflates the feeling of helplessness and lack of control over the events. The growth of the
firms performance along the chartered course makes him more confident of the entrepreneurial firms leaders.

CONCLUSIONS
The challenge of an at-a-glance review and analyses would help an entrepreneur to: (a) assess the reality and
analyze it (page 1 of the table); and, (b) make intelligent and educated projections for the future and re-formulate the firms
corporate strategy (page 2 of the table). This paper addresses that challenge and helps the entrepreneur in being more
detailed yet more overall in his complete grasp of the organizational situation so that he can formulate future strategies.
The benefits of innovation, risk-taking entrepreneurial activity, and growth are important aspects for an
entrepreneurial firm as its leaders eschew the temptations of excessive or unreasonable or irrational risk-taking that is
likely to result in less than desirable results. The focus of the review and analysis of the table is on important issues of the
current analysis of the known entities and events (analysis as it is derived from page 1 of the table), and, also the probable
future events if the firm were to follow a particular course of events (analysis as it is derived from page 2 of the table), such
that the two combined would generate a higher level of confidence of the future courses of actions that the entrepreneurial
firms leaders are contemplating.
The continuity of the present into the long term future is important for the entrepreneur because of the desire to
keep his both feet on the ground and hold the reigns of the future as he chariots his firm over the horizon into the future. By
his very innate romance and obsession with his entrepreneurial idea, his venture, his products, his services, his customers
and his markets, all of which he want to enacts and increasingly enact, his sacrifices, and, in fact, his whole life, he is
www.tjprc.org

editor@tjprc.org

50

Yezdi H. Godiwalla

willing to see more the optimistic, rather than the realistic, side of the review and assessment of his firms current, future,
and internal and external environments. He is only convinced of what is possible, even if only remotely possible.
His desire to share the benefits to the mankind of his unique idea, as the inspiration soon dawns on him, is that
which his burgeoning enterprise will over-ride any and all anxiety of uncertainty and any fear of the future. He is wholly
optimistic and he has not a shred of reservation. It is from the extant and the existing, from the present and even the
portentous, from here and now, to the future and beyond that he is fully focused. This total immersion in his infant venture
brings his enthusiasm and drive to forge through the future as uncertain as it may be.
Innovation and growth, twin born with his risk-taking, romance and progress, propel him to seek newer and
riskier approaches when older methods do not yield the desired results, often apparently if not for anything but to be
different and for the sheer excitement. Innovation applies not only to creatively improve its research and development of
the product design and of its technologies, but also to the innovation of the business model through critical review and
creative re-thinking of the way a firm does its business and performs its internal operations and the ways by which it relates
to its stakeholders.
Growth will be his obsession once he establishes his entrepreneurial firm. This is because, with increasing sales
and enlarging markets, there can be no higher complement to him than an increasing acknowledgement and acceptance of
his products and services. His desire to grow and have his infant venture, acknowledged as a meaningful, relevant and
worthwhile enterprise, would drive him to prove others wrong and himself right, no matter the high personal cost and the
grave business danger.
In his desire to further his earlier success, he seeks the pursuit of expanding his marketable opportunity, often
without much regard to the extant attending risks, threats, challenges and costs. The line dividing good sense, good
judgment, on the one hand, and, non-sense, on the other, does not exist for him. He is the pioneer for whom no sensible
analysis, no reasonable, cautious decision making exist. As the steward of his future project, he and he alone is the bright
star, the great defender, the sole proponent. Only he can bring his great idea to a glorious fruition. He strongly feels that he
has to spearhead his project as if he is the standard bearer and all his energies will conquer all obstacles, threats and
challenges, known and unknown.
REFERENCES
1.

Adomako, S., Narteh, B., Danquah, J., K., Analoui, F. 2016. Entrepreneurial orientation in dynamic environments.
International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research, 22(5), 616-642.

2.

Elenkov, D. S. 2000. Strategic uncertainty and environmental scanning: The case of institutional influences on scanning
behavior. Strategic Management Journal, 18, 287-302.

3.

Fernndez-Prez, V., Garca-Morales, V. J., Pulls, Dainelis, C. 2016. Entrepreneurial decision-making, external social
networks and strategic flexibility: The role of CEOs' cognition. European Management Journal, June 2016, 34(3), 296-309.

4.

Forbes, Daniel P.2005. The effects of strategic decision making on entrepreneurial self-efficacy. Entrepreneurship Theory and
Practice, 29(5), 599-626.

5.

Gadiesh, O., Gilbert, J. L. 1989. Profit pools: A fresh look at strategy. Harvard Business Review, 76(3), May-June, 139-147.

6.

Hamel, G., Prahalad, C. K. 1989. Strategic intent. Harvard Business Review, 67(3), May-June, 63-76.

Impact Factor (JCC): 5.4362

NAAS Rating: 3.07

Entrepreneurship Challenges in Re-Formulating Firms

Corporate Strategy: A Framework for Analysis
7.

51

Jumpponen, J., Pihkala, T. 2008. Entrepreneurial decision making in Russia- Strategic management in hostile business
environment? International Council for Small Business, World Conference Proceedings, 1-19.

8.

Lee, D., Hyojung, Seo. 2016. Neural basis of strategic decision making. Trends in Neurosciences, January, 39(1), pp.40-48.

9.

Lorains, F. K., Dowling, N. A., Enticott, P. G., Bradshaw, J. L., Trueblood, J. S., Stout, J. C. 2014. Strategic and non-strategic
problem gamblers differ on decision-making under risk and ambiguity. Addiction, 109(7), 1128-1137.

10. Lyon, Douglas W., Lumpkin, G. T., Dess, Gregory G. 2000. Enhancing entrepreneurial orientation research: Operationalizing
and measuring a key strategic decision making process. Journal of Management, 26(5), pp.1055-1085.
11. Mitchell, J. Shepherd, D., Sharfman, M. 2011. Erratic strategic decisions: when and why managers are inconsistent in
strategic decision making. Strategic Management Journal, 32(7), 683-693.
12. Mehrabi, R., Kolabi, A. 2012. Investigating effect of entrepreneur's personal attributes and cognitive heuristics on the quality
of entrepreneurial strategic decision making. Global Business and Management Research, 4(2), 178-192.
13. Porter, M. 1998. Clusters and the new economics of competition. Harvard Business Review, 76(6), November-December, 7790.
14. Porter, M. 1996. What is strategy? Harvard Business Review, 74(6), November-December, 65-67.
15. Shepherd, D. A., Williams, T. A., Patzelt, H. 2015. Thinking about entrepreneurial decision making. Journal of Management,
41(1), pp.11-46.
16. Stalk, G., P. Evans, Shulman, L. E. 1992. Competing on capabilities: The new rules of corporate strategy. Harvard Business
Review, 70(2), March-April, 57-69.
17. Svoboda, E. 2006. Methods of strategic decision making in the management of entrepreneurial subjects. Journal of Central
European Agriculture, 6(4), pp.597-602.
18. Ucbasaran, D. 2008. The fine science of entrepreneurial decision-making. Journal of Management Studies, 45(1), 221-237.
19. Venkatraman, V., Huettel, S. A. 2012. Strategic control in decision-making under uncertainty. European Journal of
Neuroscience, 35(7), 1075-1082.
20. Vermeulen, P. 2006. Strategic decision-making in small firms: Towards a taxonomy of entrepreneurial decision-makers. EIM
Business and Policy Research 2006.
21. Watson, G. H. 1993. Strategic benchmarking: How to rate your companys performance against the worlds best. New York:
John Wiley and Sons.

www.tjprc.org

editor@tjprc.org

52

Yezdi H. Godiwalla

APPENDICES
Table 1

Table 2

Impact Factor (JCC): 5.4362

NAAS Rating: 3.07