The mediating role of entrepreneurial orientation in the market orientation-performance relationship Tsering, Chemi ProQuest document link ABSTRACT The purpose of this study is to investigate how market orientation (MO), family involvement and entrepreneurial behaviors are related and affect business performance in developing economy setting. The proposed conceptualized model argues that knowledge and information acquired through marketing are generally important for the entrepreneurial process and affect entrepreneurial behavior. As such MO maximizes the probability that a firm acquires useful knowledge for developing innovation. Secondly, when a family firm decides to engage in innovative behavior, the family may need to extend greater assistance and cooperation in order to reap the benefits of the venture. By nature, the resources and capabilities needed to support this task cannot be perfectly predicted, and thus a family that is able to coordinate responsibilities and support one another's efforts should be in a beneficial position. As such, entrepreneurship is greatly leverage by family to have a positive performance impact. FULL TEXT INTRODUCTION Strategic orientation is not entirely a large firm concern although it is equally important for small firms. It can be viewed as a culture that influences success(Baker and Sinkula, 2009). Two such firm capabilities entrepreneurial orientation (EO) and market orientation (MO) have received significant research attention in recent decades (Gonza 'lez-Benito et al.,2007), that it is argued can boost firm success in challenging environments (Lee et al., 2001; Webb et al., 2011; Boso., et al 2013). MO is firm's culture that guides the allocation of resources and the formulation of strategies for an organization which is based on customer needs and wants (Kholi and Jaworski 1990). EO is posited to reflect the extent to which firms establish the identification and exploitation of untapped opportunities as an organizing principle of the firm (Lumpkin and Dess 1996). However, the relationships among these cultural orientations and their complementarities, inseparability and joint effects on performance have not been clearly explained. Research efforts mostly are based on different theoretical frameworks (mediation: Matsuno et al., 2002; Blesa and Ripolles, 2003; Baker and Sinkula 2009; Felgueira et al 2013; Gonza 'lez-Benito et al., 2007;Noble et al 2002; Aljanabi and Noor, 2015) and (moderation: Atuahene-Gima and Ko 2001; Baker and Sinkula 2009; Bhuian et al, 2005; Boso et al., 2012; 2013; Gonza 'lez-Benito et al., 2007; Li and Liu, 2008; Morgan et al., 2014;), provide different empirical results and, in short, cause confusion. Accordingly, scholars have suggested that there is a pressing need to more clearly outline the boundary conditions of these orientations (Boso et al., 2013); how relevant are they to the bottom line (Baker and Sinkula, 2009; Morgan et al., 2009; Stam and Elfring, 2008)? Does high market orientation require high entrepreneurship, or does high entrepreneurship require high market orientation (Gonza 'lez-Benito et al., 2007)? How does MO and other strategic orientations work in different conditions (Grinstein, 2008)? On the contrary, Boso et al. (2013) argue that investing in EO and MO is appropriate for all businesses all of the time. Most importantly the benefits or costs of investing in these firm strategic orientations in less developed societies are unknown especially to the micro firms (Boso et al., 2013). In micro firms, family is a reliable resource for business success. Therefore, family involvement (FINVOL) may provide additional insights into the role of EO and firm success meaning that FINVOL reinforces the importance of EO in the success of the firm. PDF GENERATED BY PROQUEST.COM Page 1 of 12