英语论文网

tors to the punch. Covin and Slevin (1989, p. 79) broadened the definition of proactively to represent an aggressive competitive orientation (Lumpkin and Dess 1997). These three dimensions have been used in a number of studies (Covin and Slevin 1989; Lumpkin and Dess 1996).

However, recent research indicates that the dimensions may vary independently. Lumpkin and Dess (1997) suggest that proactiveness and aggressive competitiveness are separate and distinct concepts. Proactiveness is defined as seeking new opportunities that may or may not be related to the present line of business (Venkataraman 1989, p. 949). Reasonable aggressiveness refers to the intensity of a firmaa‚¬a„￠s effort to outperform its rivals in the same industry (Lumpkin and Dess 1997, p. 3). Dimensions of an industrial orientation are propensity to undertake some risk, proactiveness, and competitive aggressiveness. However, more recent research on corporate private enterprise suggests that a fourth dimension should be included: the capacity for adaptation and renewal as opposed to the bureaucratic concern for stability (Hamel and Prahalad 1996; Stevenson and Jarillo 1990; Stopford and Baden-Fuller 1994). The Private enterprise and innovation literature also discusses the importance of both rewards and special organizational devices, for example, the presence of product champions (Kanter 1985; Shane 1994), to support innovation and industrial activity (Block and MacMillan 1993; Dougherty and Hardy 1996). Managerial support for corporate Private enterpriser is viewed as important for promoting an effective industrial environment (Kuratko, Montagno, and Hornsby 1990). In the case of franchising, support for industrial activity by franchisees may be built into the system through a champion at the franchisor firm or some formal program of recognition.

特许经营人的组织背景 Organizational Background of the Franchisor

Bird (1989) claims that the two inherent liabilities that are barriers to industrial firms are being new when others are older, and small size when others are large. The liability of age and size were identified by Stinchcombe (1965) and studied by a number of researchers (Venkataraman and Low 1994). Aldrich and Auster (1986) describe several ways that larger, established organizations use to cope with the liabilities of age and size. Franchising is included in their discussion as a strategy through which organizations maintain themselves by creating and drawing from smaller, newer organizations. Thus franchising also provides an example of smaller, newer organizations sustaining themselves with a strategy of establishing ties to older organizations and overcoming some of the liabilities of age and size.

A lot has been said about the effects of size on organizational dimensions and industrial activity (Scott 1992). The larger an organisation is the more it tends to be rigid in terms of creativity and modernization. (Block and Ornati 1987) A number of examples of the structural arrangements that large organizations make to override self-important procedures and promote innovation are found in the literature. These include certain reward systems and the skunk works described by Peters and Austin (1985). These examples illustrate the extent to which industrial activity has to be protected from the bureaucracy pr本论文由英语论文网提供整理，提供论文代写，英语论文代写，代写论文，代写英语论文，代写留学生论文，代写英文论文，留学生论文代写相关核心关键词搜索。