• Asia-Pacific Journal of Business Venturing and Entrepreneurship
• /
• v.15 no.3
• /
• pp.89-101
• /
• 2020

The purpose of this study is to examine how the variables of managerial competencies, namely transformational leadership, internal marketing, and structural influences, affect managerial performance through job satisfaction and customer orientation, by focusing on managers of clothing stores. Furthermore, the study aims to draw implications in connection with academic or practical start-ups that can improve management performance. Through examples of transformational leadership, internal marketing, and management performance of the previous study, the significance of the study is further stressed. Also, based on the previous study, this study empirically analyzes what results can be expected, focusing on managers of retail clothing stores, department stores, franchise stores, etc. In this study, we conduct an empirical analysis of 305 managers of retail clothing stores, department stores, franchise stores, etc. Because the results of the empirical analysis are from experiments at clothing stores first, it is found that managers' transformational leadership must go through a mediating effect process, which is job satisfaction for management performance. Second, it is found that transformational leadership must also go through a mediating effect process, which is customer orientation for management performance. Third, it is found that internal marketing must also go through a mediating effect process, which is job satisfaction for management performance. Therefore, as the researcher sought to verify, there is a complete mediating effect in retail clothing stores, department stores, franchise stores, etc., and it is confirmed that its role is significant. A study on whether or not entrepreneurship, as a control variable, affects business performance is conducted to find the statistical values that can be determine management performance when managers of retail clothing stores, department stores, and franchise stores answer entrepreneurial surveys with education- and knowledge-intensive backgrounds. As a result, with the statistical figures, it is confirmed that the managers are striving to improve their management performance based on their education- and knowledge-intensive backgrounds. Based on the research results, this study tried to test the parameters that can improve the management performance through empirical analysis centering on managers, Furthermore, the study attempted to draw implications for academic, practical, and start-ups that can improve management performance.

• Journal of Global Scholars of Marketing Science
• /
• v.19 no.3
• /
• pp.28-36
• /
• 2009

While existing literature has focused extensively on the strengths and weaknesses of the Chaebol and their ownership and governance, there have been few studies of Korean non-Chaebol firms. However, Lee, Lee and Pennings (2001) did not specifically investigate the competitive strategies that non-Chaebol firms use to survive against the Chaebol in the domestic Korean market. The motivation of this paper is to document, through four exploratory case studies, the successful competitive strategies of non-Chaebol Korean companies against the Chaebol and then offer some propositions that may be useful to other entrepreneurial firms as well as public policy makers. Competition and cooperation as conceptualized by product similarity and cooperative inter.firm relationship respectively, are major dimensions of firm.level marketing strategy. From these two dimensions, we develop the following $2{\times}2$ matrix, with 4 types of competitive strategies for non-Chaebol companies against the Chaebol (Fig. 1.). The non-Chaebol firm in Cell 1 has a "me-too" product for the low-end market while conceding the high-end market to a Chaebol. In Cell 2, the non-Chaebol firm partners with a Chaebol company, either as a supplier or complementor. In Cell 3, the non-Chaebol firm engages in direct competition with a Chaebol. In Cell 4, the non-Chaebol firm targets an unserved part of the market with an innovative product or service. The four selected cases such as E.Rae Electronics Industry Company (Co-exister), Intops (Supplier), Pantech (Competitor) and Humax (Niche Player) are analyzed to provide each strategy with richer insights. Following propositions are generated based upon our conceptual framework: Proposition 1: Non-Chaebol firms that have a cooperative relationship with a Chaebol will perform better than firms that do not. Proposition 1a; Co-existers will perform better than Competitors. Proposition 1b: Partners (suppliers or complementors) will perform better than Niche players. Proposition 2: Firms that have no product similarity with a Chaebol will perform better than firms that have product similarity. Proposition 2a: Partners (suppliers or complementors) will perform better than Co.existers. Proposition 2b: Niche players will perform better than Competitors. Proposition 3: Niche players should perform better than Co-existers. Proposition 4: Performance can be rank.ordered in descending order as Partners, Niche Players, Co.existers, Competitors. A team of experts was constituted to categorize each of these 216 non-Chaebol companies into one of the 4 cells in our typology. Simple Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) in SPSS statistical software was used to test our propositions. Overall findings are that it is better to have a cooperative relationship with a Chaebol and to offer products or services differentiated from a Chaebol. It is clear that the only profitable strategy, on average, to compete against the Chaebol is to be a partner (supplier or complementor). Competing head on with a Chaebol company is a costly strategy not likely to pay off for a non-Chaebol firm. Strategies to avoid head on competition with the Chaebol by serving niche markets with differentiated products or by serving the low-end of the market ignored by the Chaebol are better survival strategies. This paper illustrates that there are ways in which small and medium Korean non-Chaebol firms can thrive in a Chaebol environment, though not without risks. Using different combinations of competition and cooperation firms may choose particular positions along the product similarity and cooperative relationship dimensions to develop their competitive strategies-co-exister, competitor, partner, niche player. Based on our exploratory case-study analysis, partner seems to be the best strategy for non-Chaebol firms while competitor appears to be the most risky one. Niche players and co-existers have intermediate performance, though the former do better than the latter. It is often the case with managers of small and medium size companies that they tend to view market leaders, typically the Chaebol, with rather simplistic assumptions of either competition or collaboration. Consequently, many non-Chaebol firms turn out to be either passive collaborators or overwhelmed competitors of the Chaebol. In fact, competition and collaboration are not mutually exclusive, and can be pursued at the same time. As suggested in this paper, non-Chaebol firms can actively choose to compete and collaborate, depending on their environment, internal resources and capabilities.

• Asia-Pacific Journal of Business Venturing and Entrepreneurship
• /
• v.6 no.1
• /
• pp.109-132
• /
• 2011

While the resource-based view suggests that a firm's competitive advantage rests on a set of valuable, rare and inimitable resources more generally (Barney, 1991), research in new firms has more specially indicated a link between initial resources and early performance and survival (Bruderl and Schussler, 1990; Fichman and Levinthal, 1991; Carroll et al., 1996). The RBV primarily focuses on the particular resources, and their characteristics, that provide the potential for advantage (Conner, 1991). Yet in order to realize this advantage, organizations must not only develop their resources, but also effectively deploy them (Admit and Shoemaker, 1993). This suggests that advantage from resources may reside in both the input (resource development) side and the output (resource deployment) side. This research looks at venture survival as a function of both the resources a firm owns, and the resources it can access from others. We focus more specifically on technology resources, which are among a technology-based firm's most critical resources (Itami, 1987). In addition, technological knowledge can contribute a large portion of the value of a firm's products (Goodman and Lawless, 1994). We look at both the input and output side: the pool of technology resources that serve as an input to a firm's activities, and the market that values and purchases the output of this activity. We take an international perspective, examining whether resources explain internationalization on the input and output side, and in turn, whether this internationalization can explain survival. We explore three sets of questions. First, can survival in entrepreneurial firms be explained as a function of the resources a firm owns, and beyond that, to those the firm can access, and still further, to those the firm can access internationally? Second, do resources explain internationalization on both the input and output side? And finally, does internationalization explain survival? Implications for theory include extending the RBV to not only include a firm's resources, but its access to the resources of other entities. In addition, examining internationalization on both the input and output side enables us to understand not just the potential advantage of resources, but the manner in which they are deployed as a source of advantage. This research also contributes to the literature on international entrepreneurship by examining whether internationalization can explain survival for early stage firms. For practitioners, this research will provide insights on the importance of building alliances and, in so doing, broadening an organization's perspective about the technology resources available to the firm on the input side. The study will also inform practitioners about the value of maximizing the market for a firm's valuable resources. In addition, this research provides an extraordinary opportunity to access a large, comprehensive, and longitudinal dataset on technology-based ventures in Korea.

• Asia-Pacific Journal of Business Venturing and Entrepreneurship
• /
• v.18 no.5
• /
• pp.185-196
• /
• 2023

This paper investigates the effects of entrepreneurs' cognitive biases on business opportunity evaluation, given their strong entrepreneurial spirit, which is characterized by innovation, proactivity, and risk-taking. When making decisions related to business activities, entrepreneurs typically make rational judgments based on their knowledge, experience, and the advice of external experts. However, in situations of extreme stress or when quick decisions are required, they often rely on heuristics based on their cognitive biases. In particular, we often see cases where entrepreneurs fail because they make decisions based on heuristics in the process of evaluating and selecting new business opportunities that are planned to guarantee the growth and sustainability of their companies. This study was conducted in response to the need for research to clarify the effects of entrepreneurs' cognitive biases on new business opportunity evaluation, given that the cognitive biases of entrepreneurs, which are formed by repeated successful experiences, can sometimes lead to business failure. Although there have been many studies on the effects of cognitive biases on entrepreneurship and opportunity evaluation among university students and general people who aspire to start a business, there have been few studies that have clarified the relationship between cognitive biases and social networks among entrepreneurs. In contrast to previous studies, this study conducted empirical surveys of entrepreneurs only, and also conducted research on the relationship with social networks. For the study, a survey was conducted using a parallel survey method using online mobile surveys and self-report questionnaires from 150 entrepreneurs of small and medium-sized enterprises. The results of the study showed that 'overconfidence' and 'illusion of control', among the independent variables of entrepreneurs' cognitive biases, had a statistically significant positive(+) effect on business opportunity evaluation. In addition, it was confirmed that the moderating variable, social network, moderates the effect of overconfidence on business opportunity evaluation. This study showed that entrepreneurs' cognitive biases play a role in the process of evaluating and selecting new business opportunities, and that social networks play a role in moderating the structural relationship between entrepreneurs' cognitive biases and business opportunity evaluation. This study is expected to be of great help not only to entrepreneurs, but also to entrepreneur education and policy making, by showing how entrepreneurs can use cognitive biases in a positive way and the influence of social networks.