RESEARCH PAPER

Mediating role of strategic orientations in the relationship

between entrepreneurial orientation and performance of
Saudi SMEs
Mohammed Abdulrab1 , Yaser Hasan S. Al-Mamary1 , Mohammed A. Alwaheeb1 ,
Naif Ghazi M. Alshammari1 , Hamad Balhareth1 , Serhan A. Al-Shammari1
1
University of Ha’il, Department of Management and Information Systems, College of Business Administration, Ha’il, Saudi
Arabia

How to cite: Abdulrab, M., Al-Mamary, Y.H.S., Alwaheeb, M.A. et al. (2021), “Mediating role of strategic
orientations in the relationship between entrepreneurial orientation and performance of Saudi SMEs”, Brazilian
Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 18, No. 04, e20211113.
https://doi.org/10.14488/BJOPM.2021.029

ABSTRACT

Goal: This study aims to examine the mediating role of strategic orientations in the relationship
between entrepreneurial orientation and performance of small and medium enterprises (SMEs) in
Saudi Arabia.
Design / Methodology / Approach: Quantitative analysis techniques is used in this study. Data from
206 KSA owners / managers of SMEs is obtained and analysed using Partial Least Squares Structural
Equation Modelling (PLS-SEM).
Results: Findings indicate that strategic orientations mediate the relationship between
entrepreneurial orientation and performance of SMEs in Saudi Arabia.
Limitations of the investigation: The proposed model may not be generalised and must be applied
in other contexts and cultures.
Practical implications: This study indicates that KSA managers should maintain emphasis on
entrepreneurship and establish unique strategic techniques to improve efficiency. Policymakers are
recommended to establish entrepreneurship initiatives for SMEs to form entrepreneurship.
Additional recommendations are also provided.
Originality / Value: This study adds to the current body of knowledge by addressing the mediating
role of market and technology orientation in the relationship between entrepreneurial orientation
and performance of Saudi SMEs.

Keywords: Entrepreneurial Orientation; Strategic Orientations; Performance; SMEs, KSA.

1. INTRODUCTION
According to the World Bank (2020), small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) are
mandated to be productive and to pursue creative and proactive techniques towards analytical
thought in the current complex market climate. SMEs account for approximately 90% of firms
worldwide and 99.41% of the Saudi Arabia private sector (Monshaat, 2020). Particularly in
advanced countries, SMEs are regarded as the key drivers of competition, fuelling jobs and
promoting financial growth (Ndubisi et al., 2020). SME strategies play a critical role in advancing
the corporate mission, maintaining vision and establishing the competitive advantages of a

Financial support: This research has been funded by Scientific Research Deanship at University of Ha’il- Saudi Arabia through
project number RG-191349.
Conflict of interest: The authors have no conflict of interest to declare.
Corresponding author: yaser_almamary@yahoo.com
Received: 23 November 2020
Accepted: 03 March 2021
Editor: Julio Vieira Neto.

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use,
distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Brazilian Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 18, No. 4, e20211113, 2021 | https://doi.org/10.14488/BJOPM.2021.029 1/15
Mediating role of strategic orientations in the relationship between entrepreneurial orientation and performance of Saudi SMEs

company (Jardioui et al., 2019). These businesses do not need to devote massive marketing
budgets or pursue large resources to gain competition. Even so, effective methods need to be
implemented to meet higher objectives for greater performance. SMEs must implement
innovative initiatives leading to potential advantages when existing strategies are obsolete
(Liñán et al., 2019). SMEs should be able to challenge conventional management styles in
developed countries and pursue efforts to convert these into constructive, highly successful and
value-added strategy. In the Saudi context, SMEs need to implement solutions that generate
value-added technologies for consumers and companies (Alrubaishi & Robson, 2019).
In this strategy, orientation is one of the most critical aspects. Previous research
demonstrated the value of entrepreneurial, market and technological orientations to boost
efficiency in SMEs (Alnawas & Farha, 2020). Corporations have to pursue a competitive
strategy that can anticipate and respond to external developments in their market climate. In
practice, strategic advice cause repercussions for SMEs by creating new and creative
perspectives into their sector (Rizan et al., 2019). At present, the crucial position that
entrepreneurial orientation plays in creativity, positive action and risk taking for SMEs is
recognised. Entrepreneurial orientation helps grow a given organisation’s competitive
advantage, increases innovation performance (Ferreira et al., 2020) and encourages
organisational reaction speed and corporate agility (Kohtamäki et al., 2020). In addition,
strategy plays a significant impact on economic development and in organisational growth
(Alhakimi & Mahmoud, 2020).
The influence of entrepreneurial, market and technology orientations on SME efficiency
in developing economies have been studied over the last two decades (Jogaratnam, 2017;
Martin & Javalgi, 2016, Abdulrab et al., 2020). Although this area has attracted extensive
research, few studies have investigated the mediating effect of entrepreneurial orientation
between strategic orientation and SMEs (Ali et al., 2020). Consequently, these gaps will be
resolved in addition to the absence of earlier research on the effects of entrepreneurial,
market and technology orientations on the performance of Saudi SMEs. The current research
attempts to investigate the mediating role of strategic orientations in the relationship between
entrepreneurial orientation and performance of Saudi SMEs.

2. LITERATURE REVIEW AND HYPOTHESES DEVELOPMENT

2.1. Entrepreneurial orientation (EO)

Entrepreneurial orientation is an attractive research issue, especially regarding the
business output (Covin & Wales, 2019, Al-Mamary et al., 2020a, Al-Mamary et al., 2020b).
Execution, procedures and decision-making exercises are described to provide a guide for new
and emerging enterprises (Rauch et al., 2009). Entrepreneurial orientation is a central factor
in improving an organisation’s strategic advantages (Covin & Miles, 1999) and can improve
efficiency in creativity (Zhai et al., 2018). Companies with a sound entrepreneurial orientation
are superior to companies who neglect such strategy (Bouncken et al., 2016).
Miller (1983) defined entrepreneurial orientation as a measure that businesses use to
introduce, take risks, predict and spotlight entrepreneurship. A growing number of scholars
have followed this view as a merging of creativity, proactivity and risk-taking, with possible
additions. Lumpkin and Dess (1996), for instance, interpreted entrepreneurial orientation
from another point of view and found this definition to be a mixture of five dimensions,
including those from Miller (1983) and Covin and Slevin (1989), competition and autonomy.
Innovativeness is an attempt to use imagination and to encourage innovative ideas, inventions
and creative moves, leading to new technologies, companies and high-tech procedures (Tidd
and Bessant, 2018).
Risk-taking refers to the propensity of SMEs to take striking moves, such as the expansion
of new unexplored markets or allocation of large organisational capital to tasks with dishonest
consequences or strong borrowing (Dess & Lumpkin, 2005). On the one hand, company
owners and managers must determine the considerable opportunities to take because the

Brazilian Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 18, No. 4, e20211113, 2021 2/15
Mediating role of strategic orientations in the relationship between entrepreneurial orientation and performance of Saudi SMEs

vast amount of risks can adversely affect overall organisational successes, entrepreneurial
advancement or creativity; on the other hand, low risk-taking willingness and low propensity
for complexity in cultures of high uncertainty-avoidance (Ozaralli & Rivenburgh, 2016). Pro-
activeness is also a significant contributor to the success of SMEs (Kreiser & Davis, 2010).

2.1.1. Entrepreneurial orientation and SMEs performance

Entrepreneurial orientation is a crucial factor in organisational success. Employing the
entrepreneurial orientation–quantification (Cho and Lee, 2018; Singh et al., 2019), Semrau et al.
(2016) used a sample of 1.248 SMEs from different countries. The results illustrated that
entrepreneurial orientation has a significant relation to the success of SMEs and is a common
principle of importance and legality in various businesses and settings. Covin and Wales (2019)
also examined the effect of entrepreneurial orientation on the different outcomes of SMEs,
proving the correctness and relevance of its definition and calculation. Other studies
demonstrated the impact on non-financial and financial affairs on the five axis of the
multidimensional entrepreneurial orientation system on SMEs (e.g. creativity, pro-activeness,
risk taking, autonomy and competitive aggression) (Hernández-Perlines et al., 2020).
As indicated by Centobelli et al. (2019), innovativeness is a key indicator for the financial
and non-financial success of SMEs. Further, risk-taking is important in improving the
organisational efficiency (Jung et al., 2020), as proven for SMEs (Astrini et al., 2020; Games,
2019). Pro-activeness improves financial efficiency (Hossain & Al Asheq, 2019) and has an
important influence on SMEs (Jalali et al., 2013). Proactive companies gain a strategic edge
through customer demands, innovative campaigns and higher charges (Anwar and Shah,
2020). Mahar and Ghumro (2019) indicated that competitive aggressiveness and autonomy
are important for the organisational successes of SMEs. Experiments have shown that
entrepreneurial orientation influences the performance of SMEs (Khanagha et al., 2017;
Lumpkin & Dess, 1996), and consequently, the following hypothesis is suggested:
H1. Entrepreneurial orientation has a significant positive effect on Saudi SMEs
performance.

2.2. Strategic orientation (SO)

Strategic orientation has been described as the execution of business operations
behaviour of enterprises. The following hypothesis is that strategic orientation is important in
assessing organisational success or failure. This principle has an effect on the management of
SMEs. As a controllable element, strategic orientation can also enhance the overall SME
efficiency. In addition, marketing analysis has shown that strategic orientation is a crucial
driver for outstanding achievement in the developed world (Jiang, Mavondo and Zhao, 2019).
Strategic orientation emphasises how corporations need to collaborate with external
influences such as rivals, consumers and technologies (Asghari and Amani, 2016). Strategic
orientation is connected with the competitive preferences, practices and actions of a business,
and with the achievement of a sustained advantage and overall performance enhancement
(Grinstein, 2008; Laukkanen et al., 2013).
Literature has studied and excessively discussed market and technology orientations as
important strategic recommendations (Ardito and Dangelico, 2018). Kohli and Jaworski (1990)
defined market orientation as the organisation’s business intelligence generation of existing
and upcoming needs, intelligence distribution across sections, and responsiveness. Three
dimensions of market orientation are proposed: market intelligence that refers to the data
obtained by an organisation about a particular sector or market; intelligence distribution that
is essential for business-oriented strategy preparation; and responsiveness that refers to the
capability that help businesses respond rapidly to growing market demands. In addition,
Narver and Slater (1990) described market orientation as ‘the productive and successful
organisational culture, which generates the requisite action to achieve a higher consumer
value and thus a continuous excellent market results.’ Market orientation is thus manifested
in three components: customer orientation, competitor orientation and inter-functional

Brazilian Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 18, No. 4, e20211113, 2021 3/15
Mediating role of strategic orientations in the relationship between entrepreneurial orientation and performance of Saudi SMEs

component. Businesses can reach full market orientation potential if they are guided by
entrepreneurial orientation (Slater and Narver, 1995). Matsuno et al. (2002) found that
entrepreneurial orientation drives business orientation; the higher the degree of
entrepreneurial orientation, the higher the level of market orientation. This can be
demonstrated by the fact that entrepreneurial orientation encourages the potential and
desire of the company to understand the need to minimise ambiguity, contribute to business
learning practices and to take more measured risks.
Technology orientation is a primary source for corporate growth and market
advancement in various business forms (Masa’deh et al., 2018). Gatignon and Xuereb (1997)
have described technology orientation as being able and committed to obtaining and using
considerable technical experience in innovative technologies. Lei et al. (2019) also described
technology orientation as the company ability to suggest or incorporate new technology,
products or inventions. This description implies that the importance of consumers and long-
term enterprise performance rely on the introduction of innovative technical solutions, goods,
facilities or procedures (Kumar et al., 2018). A technology-based business strives to create new
goods or services by acquiring the newest innovations. Technology orientation thereby
contributes to financial and non-financial performance (Masa’deh et al., 2018).
The use of the most current technologies decide the technological strategy of an
organisation, particularly as its technical resources and skills are gathered and dispersed.
Furthermore, the growth, development and implementation of technologies are essential to
the advancement of SMEs. Technology in low-tech businesses is mainly based on the
implementation and advancement of technical innovation, but is a significant determinant for
potential success in high-tech companies (Enjolras et al., 2019). Efficiency levels of SMEs using
the same technology may also differ according to the implementation techniques applied
given its initial introduction (Ruiz-Jiménez and del Mar Fuentes-Fuentes, 2016). A favourable
association suggests that entrepreneurial orientation has a clear positive effect (Hakala, 2011)
and a significant correlation with technology orientation. Moreover, Baker and Sinkula (2009)
states a close connection between entrepreneurial and market orientations, and a correlation
between entrepreneurial orientation and SMEs performance. Therefore, Matsuno et al. (2002)
concluded that the market orientation exists particularly at the level of corporate culture. As
such, the impact of entrepreneurial orientation on marketing and technology orientations may
also be illustrated by the improved results of SMEs.
Based on the above discussion, the following hypotheses are proposed:
H2: Entrepreneurial orientation has a significant positive effect on market orientation.
H3: Entrepreneurial orientation has a significant positive effect on technology orientation.

2.2.1. Strategic orientation and SMEs performance

Management strategy conceptualisation is commonly connected to achievement
performance (Morgan and Strong, 2003). The positive linkage between strategic orientation
and SMEs performance is well established in literature (Alani et al., 2019; Boohene, 2018;
Espino-Rodríguez and Ramírez-Fierro, 2018; Lin et al., 2019; Obeidat, 2016; Omar et al., 2019).
A market-oriented approach facilitates and strengthens strong efficiency, provided that
consumer expectations and loyalty are prioritised (Reijonen et al., 2012). Market orientation
enhances the performance of manufacturing corporations (Alhakimi and Mahmoud, 2020;
Ali et al., 2020; Narver and Slater, 1990). SME managers are thus inspired to use market
orientation to satisfy evolving consumer expectations and concurrently accomplish market
objectives (Masa’deh et al., 2018; Tidd and Bessant, 2018). Current research also shows the
relation between market orientation and SMEs (Ali et al., 2020; Amin et al., 2016; Isichei et al.,
2020), but requires further analysis for its exploration. The correlation between technology
orientation and the performance of SMEs was also examined (Adegbuyi et al., 2018; Hsu et al.,
2014; Rajala and Westerlund, 2012).
Therefore, the following hypotheses are proposed:
H4: Market orientation has a significant positive effect on SMEs performance.

Brazilian Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 18, No. 4, e20211113, 2021 4/15
Mediating role of strategic orientations in the relationship between entrepreneurial orientation and performance of Saudi SMEs

H5: Technology orientation has a significant positive effect on SMEs performance.

H6: Market orientation has a mediation effect in the relationship between
entrepreneurial orientation and SMEs performance.
H7: Technology orientation has a mediation effect in the relationship between
entrepreneurial orientation and SMEs performance.
Figure 1 shows the following research model based on the above rationale.

Figure 1: The research framework

3. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Quantitative approach is used to gather information on the mediating role of
strategic orientation in the relationship between entrepreneurial orientation and
performance of SMEs. This study uses a survey questionnaire, which was less boring and
available regardless of location. Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modelling
(PLS-SEM) using Smart PLS software is applied to examine the research hypotheses
(Ramayah et al., 2018). Likert-style scales are used to measure all indicators.
Entrepreneurial orientation is measured using a 9-item scale, which includes three
dimensions adopted from Covin and Slevin (1989). Market orientation is measured using
a 15-item scale that comprises three dimensions adopted from Narver and Slater (1990).
A sample item is ‘Our competitive advantage is based on understanding customers’
needs.’ Furthermore, technology orientation is measured using a 12-item scale adopted
from Gatignon and Xuereb (1997). Moreover, the performance of SMEs is measured
using 10 items adopted from Anwar and Shah (2020) and Danso et al. (2016). The
efficiency of SMEs is measured relative to their main competitors or industry over the
last three years (1 = ‘extremely declining’; 5 = ‘extremely improved’). An online survey is
shared through social networks including email groups, Twitter and WhatsApp to owners
and managers of Saudi SMEs. Google Forms are used to gather details, and the Arabic
questionnaire is requested to be completed by the respondents. Data collection took
approximately two months in 2020. The online survey yields a total of 230 participants,
and after deletion of incomplete answers, the final dataset contained 206 participants.

4. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS AND RESULTS

4.1 Measurement model assessment

As recommended by Ringle et al. (2020), this study considered measurement model
reliability and validity and used composite reliability and Cronbach’s alpha to evaluate internal
consistency of a measurement item. According to Hair Junior et al. (2017), the value of
Cronbach’s alpha should be 0.7 or higher. Similarly, the appropriate composite reliability value

Brazilian Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 18, No. 4, e20211113, 2021 5/15
Mediating role of strategic orientations in the relationship between entrepreneurial orientation and performance of Saudi SMEs

for the construct should be 0.7 or above. Table 1 reveals that all constructs in this study
attained a minimum value of 0.7 for composite reliability and Cronbach’s alpha, suggesting
adequate internal reliability.

Table 1. Loading, Cronbach’s alpha, Composite Reliability and AVE.

Average
Cronbach’s Composite
Constructs Indicators Loading Variance
alpha Reliability
Extracted
Inn1 0.846 0.806 0.885 0.720
Inn2 0.851
Inn3 0.849
Pro1 0.880 0.837 0.902 0.755
Entrepreneurial
Pro2 0.888
Orientation
Pro3 0.837
Rit1 0.910 0.844 0.906 0.764
Rit2 0.902
Rit3 0.805
Cuo1 0.868 0.937 0.950 0.761
Cuo2 0.853
Cuo3 0.911
Cuo4 0.882
Cuo5 0.894
Cuo6 0.826
Com1 0.913 0.932 0.952 0.831
Market Orientation Com2 0.932
Com3 0.954
Com4 0.844
Inc1 0.785 0.827 0.878 0.591
Inc2 0.762
Inc3 0.780
Inc4 0.715
Inc5 0.799
TO1 0.790
TO2 0.882
TO3 0.782
TO4 0.852
TO5 0.880
Technology TO6 0.798
0.960 0.965 0.697
Orientation TO7 0.774
TO8 0.819
TO9 0.850
TO10 0.915
TO11 0.901
TO12 0.761
Perf1 0.814
Perf2 0.725
Perf3 0.751
Perf4 0.823
Perf5 0.910
Performance 0.949 0.956 0.687
Perf 6 0.898
Perf7 0.854
Perf8 0.759
Perf9 0.882
Perf10 0.851

Brazilian Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 18, No. 4, e20211113, 2021 6/15
Mediating role of strategic orientations in the relationship between entrepreneurial orientation and performance of Saudi SMEs

Hair Junior et al. (2017) also suggested the investigation of discriminant and convergent
validity. Convergent validity could be evaluated using other indicators, including the load factor
and average variance extracted (AVE). All indicators attained values of loading above 0.7, which
is appropriate in multivariate analysis (Hair Junior et al., 2014). AVE values ranged 0.591–0.831
and were greater than 0.5 nominal value (Fornell & Larcker, 1981). Two tests for discriminant
validity were administered, namely, the heterotrait–monotrait test (HTMT), to assess the
discriminant value of constructs (Henseler et al., 2015). The values of the HTMT relation should
be less than 0.85 to show discriminant validity. The results showed that all values were below
the 0.85 criterion, indicating proper discriminatory validity (Henseler et al., 2015). On the basis
of such analyses, PLS-SEM predictions were considered verified by the dataset.

4.2. Structural model assessment

The bootstrap method is used to evaluate the structural model (Chin, 2010). Following
the determination of the measurement model, the assessment was carried out to confirm the
hypotheses. Path coefficients and R2 values for accessing a structural model are used in PLS-
SEM. Figure 2 and Table 2 indicate the verification of the five direct hypotheses.
Entrepreneurial orientation shows significant impact on performance of SMEs (β = 0.370,
t = 2.600, p < 0.05), Thus, H1 is accepted. Likewise, entrepreneurial orientation shows a
significant effect on market orientation (β = 0.856, t = 27.789, p < 0.05) and technology
orientation (β = 0.544, t = 9.510, p < 0.05). Thus, H2 and H3 are accepted. Furthermore, market
orientation shows a significant influence on performance of SMEs (β = 0.308, t = 2.042,
p < 0.05). Thus, H4 is accepted. Technology orientation also shows a significant effect on the
performance of SMEs (β = 0.211, t = 3.009, p < 0.05). Thus, H5 is accepted. Moreover, the
bootstrapping method is used to validate the mediating effect investigated in the present
study. This method has been used and suggested for research that evaluates these indirect
effects (Hayes, 2009). Based on the results in Table 3, entrepreneurial orientation has
significant indirect effect on the performance of SMEs through market orientation (β = 0.264,
t = 2.055, p < 0.05). Similarly, technology orientation has a significant role in mediating the
relationship between entrepreneurial orientation and SMEs performance (β = 0.115, t = 2.772,
p < 0.05). Acceptable R2 standards vary; nevertheless, the R2 value proposed by Chin (1998) is
0.60 and higher as substantial, (0.33–0.59) as moderate and (0.19–0.32) as weak. Figure 2
indicates that all independent variables clarify 64.9% of the performance variance.

Table 2. Structural model: direct effect

Hypothesis Relationship Std. Beta t-value p-value Decision

H1 EO -> Perf 0.370 2.600 0.010 Supported
H2 EO -> MO 0.856 27.789 0.000 Supported
H3 EO -> TO 0.544 9.510 0.000 Supported
H4 MO -> Perf 0.308 2.042 0.042 Supported
H5 TO -> Perf 0.211 3.009 0.003 Supported

Table 3. Structural model: mediation analysis

Hypothesis Relationship Std. Beta t-value p-value Decision

H1 EO -> MO -> Perf 0.264 2.055 0.040 Supported

H2 EO -> TO -> Perf 0.115 2.772 0.006 Supported

Brazilian Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 18, No. 4, e20211113, 2021 7/15
Mediating role of strategic orientations in the relationship between entrepreneurial orientation and performance of Saudi SMEs

Figure 2: Path coefficient results

5. DISCUSSIONS AND CONCLUSION

This research investigates the mediating role of strategic orientation in the relationship
between entrepreneurial orientation and performance of Saudi SMEs. Entrepreneurial
orientation is hypothesised to have a positive impact on the performance of SMEs, which the
results reveal to be significant (β = 0.370, t = 2.600, p < 0.05). This result is consistent with
previous research, which found that performance is significantly affected by entrepreneurial
orientation (e.g., Jalali et al., 2013; Ali et al., 2020). Previous studies claimed that
entrepreneurial orientation represents the degree to which an organisation can adjust risk-
taking and proactive tactics to creativity (Covin and Slevin, 1989). Thus, organisations with high
entrepreneurial orientation tend to be able to perform better than those with limited
concerns. The implementation of entrepreneurial orientation strategy in SMEs contributes to
the innovation and the creation of innovative goods, services and technical processes in a
more competitive environment (Ramezan et al., 2013).
Similarly, entrepreneurial orientation exhibits a significant effect on market orientation
(β = 0.856, t = 27.789, p < 0.05) and technology orientation (β = 0.544, t = 9.510, p < 0.05). This
finding broadly supports previous studies that showed entrepreneurial orientation has a
significant influence on market orientation (Matsuno et al., 2002; Slater and Narver, 1995) and
positive effect on or significant correlation with technology orientation (Hakala, 2011; Wiklund
and Shepherd, 2005).
The impact of market orientation on SME efficiency is also discussed. Market orientation
significantly affects SME performance (β = 0.308, t = 2.042, p < 0.05), verifying the results of
several studies (e.g., Al-Henzab et al., 2018; Lekmat et al., 2018; and Alhakimi and Mahmoud,
2020). As a component of strategic orientations, market orientation may affect the
performance of Saudi SMEs. Market orientation may also include guidelines for actions related
to the creation of and responsiveness to business knowledge (Amin et al., 2016). By cultivating
interest in the knowledge of consumers and rivals, market-based companies can effectively

Brazilian Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 18, No. 4, e20211113, 2021 8/15
Mediating role of strategic orientations in the relationship between entrepreneurial orientation and performance of Saudi SMEs

adapt and respond to evolving consumer demands by providing new goods and services
(Ali et al., 2020). Technology orientation also exhibits a significant effect on the performance
of SMEs (β = 0.211, t = 3.009, p < 0.05), supporting the results of Hsu et al. (2014) and Lei et al.
(2019). Therefore, technology orientation may encourage risk-taking, create innovative ideas
that shape consumer behaviour and contribute to the growth of developing markets (Ali et al.,
2020). The present findings are consistent with earlier literature (Adegbuyi et al., 2018;
Ali et al., 2016) that indicates technology orientation has a significant effect on the
performance of SMEs. Technology orientation has often been viewed as optimistic, with its
capacity to strengthen the use of digital technologies in the mixed marketing elements (e.g.
commodity, price, delivery and promotions) (Adams et al., 2019).
Furthermore, the results reveal that market orientation mediates the relationships
between entrepreneurial orientation and the performance of Saudi SMEs (β = 0.264, t = 2.055,
p < 0.05). This research illustrates the indirect effect of entrepreneurial orientation on the
performance of SMEs as mediated by market orientation, and highlights the role of
entrepreneurial orientation in the performance of SMEs. The results are consistent with
previous papers (Baker and Sinkula, 2009; Kohli and Jaworski, 1990; Slater and Narver, 1995)
and clarified that in the relationship between entrepreneurial orientation and SME efficiency,
market orientation plays a mediating role. For example, Matsuno et al. (2002) demonstrated
that market orientation fully mediates the relationship between entrepreneurial orientation
and company efficiency, and that companies that already have a high entrepreneurial
orientation should similarly cultivate market orientation. As a result, the characteristics of
market orientation require the inter-functional orientation in the organisation to satisfy
market demands, and the ability to consider the view of rivals in an environment of economic
competition, which is vital for SMEs to increase their performance. Likewise, the results
revealed that technology orientation mediates the relationships between entrepreneurial
orientation and performance of Saudi SMEs (β = 0.115, t = 2.772, p < 0.05). This finding is
consistent with the results of Hakala and Kohtamäki (2010). However, this finding contradicts
a related study by Shim and Seo (2019), who found that technology orientation did not
significantly mediate the relationship between entrepreneurial orientation and the
performance of Saudi SMEs.
In brief, this analysis reveals a significant relationship between entrepreneurial orientation
and the performance of SMEs. In addition, market and technology orientations mediate the
relationships between entrepreneurial orientation and the performance of Saudi SMEs. While this
study focuses on current literature, previous findings have been discussed in various
environments and contexts. Therefore, this study helps to recognise the value of introducing
various strategic directions, which can increase the efficiency of Saudi SMEs.

6. IMPLICATIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH

This study investigates the mediating role of strategic orientations in the relationship
between entrepreneurial orientation and the performance of Saudi SMEs. This study adds to
the current body of knowledge by addressing the mediating role of market and technology
orientations in the relationship between entrepreneurial orientation and the performance of
Saudi SMEs. The results can be used as a guide for management to measure the performance
and use of different strategic orientations that can maximise the efficiency of SMEs. In
addition, to enhance their efficiency, Saudi SMEs need to concentrate on several strategic
orientations. The methods in which these strategic orientations lead to the success of SMEs
must also be considered by owners and managers. Their success must be assessed in terms
of performance metrics and then how these factors apply to each other must be considered.
Evaluating various facets of the performance of SMEs can assist management in evaluating
successes and developing strategies. This study shows that the integration of several
orientations is an ideal approach for improving the performance of SMEs. These findings
reflect the findings of Masa’deh et al. (2018), who also found that relying on only one strategic
orientation can lead to poor performance of SMEs. In view of the lack of resources relevant to

Brazilian Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 18, No. 4, e20211113, 2021 9/15
Mediating role of strategic orientations in the relationship between entrepreneurial orientation and performance of Saudi SMEs

the budget, SMEs face difficulties in aligning time and expertise with various strategic
orientations. Managers must then first evaluate their current position to explain future
directions and then establish suitable procedures. Generally, these results reinforce
guidelines for introducing technology orientation with visionary qualities and market-oriented
practices that can enhance the efficiency of SMEs.
While the goals of this study are well accomplished, certain limitations remain to be
discussed. Numerous recommendations for future studies also require mention. First, this
study analyses only the combined impact of entrepreneurial, market and technology
orientations on the performance of SMEs in Saudi Arabia. Future studies must also explore
other variables that can affect the performance of SMEs, and the mediating role of other
factors. Moreover, this study only uses the expectations of SME owners and managers to
assess their performance, which may have had an effect on the metrics. Future studies are
also urged to concentrate on measures of objective performance. Consequently, this study
uses a cross-sectional design in which the data are obtained at one point in time. Future
studies should also conduct a longitudinal study to explore the impact of entrepreneurial
orientation on performance of Saudi SMEs, and the mediating role of strategic orientations in
such relationship.

REFERENCES
Abdulrab, M., Alwaheeb, M.A., Al‐Mamary, Y.H. et al. (2020), “Effect of entrepreneurial orientation and
strategic orientations on financial and nonfinancial performance of small and medium enterprises in
Saudi Arabia”, Journal of Public Affairs, Vol. •••, pp. 2305.
Adams, P., Freitas, I.M.B. and Fontana, R. (2019), “Strategic orientation, innovation performance and the
moderating influence of marketing management”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 97, pp. 129-40.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.12.071.
Adegbuyi, A.A., Oladele, O.P., Iyiola, O.O. et al. (2018). An empirical review of technology orientation and
small and medium enterprises (SMEs) performance. in Proceedings of the 32nd International Business
Information Management Association Conference, IBIMA 2018 - Vision 2020: Sustainable Economic
Development and Application of Innovation Management from Regional expansion to Global Growth.
Al-Henzab, J., Tarhini, A. and Obeidat, B.Y. (2018), “The associations among market orientation, technology
orientation, entrepreneurial orientation and organizational performance”, Benchmarking, Vol. 25, pp.
3117-3142.
Alani, E., Kamarudin, S., Alrubaiee, L. et al. (2019), “A model of the relationship between strategic
orientation and product innovation under the mediating effect of customer knowledge
management”, Journal of International Studies, Vol. 12, No. 3, pp. 232-42.
http://dx.doi.org/10.14254/2071-8330.2019/12-3/19.
Alhakimi, W. and Mahmoud, M. (2020), “The impact of market orientation on innovativeness: evidence
from Yemeni SMEs”, Asia Pacific Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, Vol. 14, No. 1, pp. 47-59.
Ali, D., Leifu, G. and Rehman, R.-u. (2016), “The impact of technology orientation and Customer orientation
on firm Performance: evidence form chinese firms”, International Journal of Management and
Marketing Research, Vol. 9, No. 1, pp. 1-11.
Ali, G.A., Hilman, H. and Gorondutse, A.H. (2020), “Effect of entrepreneurial orientation, market
orientation and total quality management on performance Evidence from Saudi SMEs”,
Benchmarking, Vol. 27, No. 4, pp. 1503-31. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/BIJ-08-2019-0391.
Al-Mamary, Y.H.S., Abdulrab, M., Alwaheeb, M.A. et al. (2020a), “Factors impacting entrepreneurial
intentions among university students in Saudi Arabia: testing an integrated model of TPB and EO”,
Education + Training, Vol. 62, No. 7/8, pp. 779-803. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/ET-04-2020-0096.
Al-Mamary, Y.H., Alwaheeb, M.A., Alshammari, N.G.M. et al. (2020b), “The effect of entrepreneurial
orientation on financial and non-financial performance in Saudi SMES: a review”, Journal of Critical
Reviews, Vol. 7, No. 14, pp. 270-8.
Alnawas, I. and Farha, A.A. (2020), “Strategic orientations and capabilities’ effect on SMEs’ performance”,
Marketing Intelligence & Planning, Vol. 38, No. 7, pp. 829-45. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/MIP-11-2019-
0548.

Brazilian Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 18, No. 4, e20211113, 2021 10/15
Mediating role of strategic orientations in the relationship between entrepreneurial orientation and performance of Saudi SMEs

Alrubaishi, D. and Robson, P. (2019), “Innovation in Saudi Family SMEs: The role of social capital and family
involvement”, International Review of Entrepreneurship, Vol. 17, No. 1
Amin, M., Thurasamy, R., Aldakhil, A.M. et al. (2016), “The effect of market orientation as a mediating
variable in the relationship between entrepreneurial orientation and SMEs performance”, Nankai
Business Review International, Vol. 7, No. 1, pp. 39-59. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/NBRI-08-2015-0019.
Anwar, M. and Shah, S.Z.A. (2020), “Entrepreneurial orientation and generic competitive strategies for
emerging SMEs: Financial and nonfinancial performance perspective”, Journal of Public Affairs.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pa.2125.
Ardito, L. and Dangelico, R.M. (2018), “Firm environmental performance under scrutiny: The role of
strategic and organizational orientations”, Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental
Management, Vol. 25, No. 4, pp. 426-40. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/csr.1470.
Asghari, A.F. and Amani, R. (2016), “Surveying the Influence of Market and Innovation Orientation on E-
Loyalty (Case Study: an Iranian Company). Journal of Administrative Management”, Education + Training,
Vol. 12, No. 4, pp. 43-50.
Astrini, N., Rakhmawati, T., Sumaedi, S. et al. (2020). “Innovativeness, Proactiveness, and Risk-taking:
Corporate Entrepreneurship of Indonesian SMEs’ In IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and
Engineering. http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/722/1/012037.
Baker, W.E. and Sinkula, J.M. (2009), “The complementary effects of market orientation and
entrepreneurial orientation on profitability in small businesses”, Journal of Small Business
Management, Vol. 47, No. 4, pp. 443-64. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-627X.2009.00278.x.
Boohene, R. (2018). Entrepreneurial orientation, strategic orientation and performance of small family
firms in the Kumasi Metropolis. Academy of Entrepreneurship Journal.
Bouncken, R.B., Plüschke, B.D., Pesch, R. et al. (2016), “Entrepreneurial orientation in vertical alliances:
joint product innovation and learning from allies”, Review of Managerial Science, Vol. 10, No. 2, pp. 381-
409. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11846-014-0150-8.
Centobelli, P., Cerchione, R. and Singh, R. (2019), “The impact of leanness and innovativeness on
environmental and financial performance: Insights from Indian SMEs”, International Journal of
Production Economics, Vol. 212, pp. 111-24. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2019.02.011.
Chin, W. W. (1998), “Commentary: Issues and opinion on structural equation modeling” MIS Quarterly, Vol.
22, No. 1, pp. 7-16.
Chin, W.W. (2010), How to write up and report PLS analyses Handbook of partial least squares. Springer,
Berlin, Heidelberg, pp. 655-690. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-32827-8_29.
Cho, Y.H. and Lee, J.-H. (2018). Entrepreneurial orientation, entrepreneurial education and performance.
Asia Pacific Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, Vol. 12, No. 2, pp. 124-34.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/APJIE-05-2018-0028.
Covin, J.G. and Miles, M.P. (1999), “Corporate entrepreneurship and the pursuit of competitive
advantage”, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Vol. 23, No. 3, pp. 47-63.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/104225879902300304.
Covin, J.G. and Slevin, D.P. (1989), “Strategic management of small firms in hostile and benign
environments”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 10, No. 1, pp. 75-87.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250100107.
Covin, J.G. and Wales, W.J. (2019). Crafting high-impact entrepreneurial orientation research: Some suggested
guidelines. Los Angeles, CA, SAGE Publications Sage.
Danso, A., Adomako, S., Damoah, J.O. et al. (2016), “Risk-taking propensity, managerial network ties and
firm performance in an emerging economy”, The Journal of Entrepreneurship, Vol. 25, No. 2, pp. 155-
83. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0971355716650367.
Dess, G.G. and Lumpkin, G.T. (2005), “The role of entrepreneurial orientation in stimulating effective
corporate entrepreneurship”, The Academy of Management Perspectives, Vol. 19, No. 1, pp. 147-56.
http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/ame.2005.15841975.
Enjolras, M., Camargo, M., & Schmitt, C. (2019), “Are High-Tech Companies More Competitive Than
Others? An Empirical Study of Innovative and Exporting French SMEs”, Technology Innovation
Management Review, Vol. 9, No 1.

Brazilian Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 18, No. 4, e20211113, 2021 11/15
Mediating role of strategic orientations in the relationship between entrepreneurial orientation and performance of Saudi SMEs

Espino-Rodríguez, T.F. and Ramírez-Fierro, J.C. (2018), “The relationship between strategic orientation
dimensions and hotel outsourcing and its impact on organizational performance. An application in a
tourism destination”, Sustainability (Switzerland), Vol. 10, No. 6, pp. 1769.
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su10061769.
Ferreira, J., Coelho, A. and Moutinho, L. (2020), “Dynamic capabilities, creativity and innovation capability
and their impact on competitive advantage and firm performance: The moderating role of
entrepreneurial orientation”, Technovation, Vol. 92, pp. 102061.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2018.11.004.
Fornell, C. and Larcker, D.F. (1981), “Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables
and measurement error”, JMR, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 18, No. 1, pp. 39-50.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/002224378101800104.
Games, D. (2019), “Can SME benefit from innovation in an emerging market economy”, Academy of
Entrepreneurship Journal, Vol. 25, No. 1, pp. 1-10.
Gatignon, H. and Xuereb, J.-M. (1997), “Strategic orientation of the firm and new product performance”,
JMR, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 34, No. 1, pp. 77-90.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/002224379703400107.
Grinstein, A. (2008), “The relationships between market orientation and alternative strategic orientations”,
European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 42, No. ½, pp. 115-34.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/03090560810840934.
Hair Junior, J.F., Sarstedt, M., Hopkins, L. et al. (2014), “Partial least squares structural equation modeling
(PLS-SEM)”, European Business Review
Hair Junior, J. F., Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M., & Gudergan, S. P. (2017). Advanced issues in partial least squares
structural equation modeling. SAGE publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Hakala, H. (2011), “Strategic orientations in management literature: Three approaches to understanding
the interaction between market, technology, entrepreneurial and learning orientations”, International
Journal of Management Reviews, Vol. 13, No. 2, pp. 199-217. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-
2370.2010.00292.x.
Hakala, H. and Kohtamäki, M. (2010), “The interplay between orientations: Entrepreneurial, technology
and customer orientations in software companies”, Journal of Enterprising Culture, Vol. 18, No. 03, pp.
265-90. http://dx.doi.org/10.1142/S0218495810000598.
Hayes, A.F. (2009), “Beyond Baron and Kenny: Statistical mediation analysis in the new millennium”,
Communication Monographs, Vol. 76, No. 4, pp. 408-20.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03637750903310360.
Henseler, J., Ringle, C.M. and Sarstedt, M. (2015), “A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in
variance-based structural equation modeling”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 43,
No. 1, pp. 115-35. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8.
Hernández-Perlines, F., Ariza-Montes, A. and Araya-Castillo, L. (2020), “Socioemotional wealth,
entrepreneurial orientation and international performance of family firms”, Economic Research-
Ekonomska Istraživanja, Vol. 33, No. 1, pp. 3125-45.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1331677X.2019.1685398.
Hossain, M.U. and Al Asheq, A. (2019), “The Role of Entrepreneurial Orientation to SME Performance in
Bangladesh”, International Journal of Entrepreneurship, Vol. 23, No. 1, pp. 1-6.
Hsu, T.T., Tsai, K.H., Hsieh, M.H., & Wang, W. Y. (2014), “Strategic orientation and new product
performance: the roles of technological capability”, Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, Vol.
31, No. 1, pp. 44-58.
Isichei, E.E., Agbaeze, K.E. and Odiba, M.O. (2020), “Entrepreneurial orientation and performance in SMEs
The mediating role of structural infrastructure capability”, International Journal of Emerging Markets,
Vol. 15, No. 6, pp. 1219-41. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IJOEM-08-2019-0671.
Jalali, A., Jaafar, M. and Thurasamy, R. (2013), “Influence of entrepreneurial orientation on the financial
performance: evidence from SMEs in Iran”, Middle East Journal of Management, Vol. 1, No. 2, pp. 168-
85. http://dx.doi.org/10.1504/MEJM.2013.057263.
Jardioui, M., Garengo, P. and El Alami, S. (2019), “How organizational culture influences performance
measurement systems in SMEs”, International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management,
Vol. 69, No. 2, pp. 217-35. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IJPPM-10-2018-0363.

Brazilian Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 18, No. 4, e20211113, 2021 12/15
Mediating role of strategic orientations in the relationship between entrepreneurial orientation and performance of Saudi SMEs

Jiang, W., Mavondo, F. and Zhao, W. (2019), “The impact of business networks on dynamic capabilities and
product innovation: The moderating role of strategic orientation”, Asia Pacific Journal of Management,
Vol. •••, pp. 1-28. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10490-018-9628-2.
Jogaratnam, G. (2017), “The effect of market orientation, entrepreneurial orientation and human capital
on positional advantage: Evidence from the restaurant industry”, International Journal of Hospitality
Management, Vol. 60, No. 1, pp. 104-13. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2016.10.002.
Jung, K.B., Kang, S.-W. and Choi, S.B. (2020), “Empowering Leadership, Risk-Taking Behavior, and
Employees’ Commitment to Organizational Change: The Mediated Moderating Role of Task
Complexity”, Sustainability, Vol. 12, No. 6, pp. 2340. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su12062340.
Khanagha, A., Dehkordi, A.M., Zali, M.R. et al. (2017), “Performance implications of entrepreneurial
orientation at public research and technology institutions”, Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues,
Vol. 4, No. 4, pp. 601-10. http://dx.doi.org/10.9770/jesi.2017.4.4(15).
Kohli, A.K. and Jaworski, B.J. (1990), “Market orientation: the construct, research propositions, and
managerial implications”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 54, No. 2, pp. 1-18.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/002224299005400201.
Kohtamäki, M., Heimonen, J., Sjödin, D. et al. (2020), “Strategic agility in innovation: Unpacking the
interaction between entrepreneurial orientation and absorptive capacity by using practice theory”,
Journal of Business Research, Vol. 118, pp. 12-25. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.06.029.
Kreiser, P.M. and Davis, J. (2010), “Entrepreneurial orientation and firm performance: The unique impact
of innovativeness, proactiveness, and risk-taking”, Journal of Small Business and Entrepreneurship, Vol.
23, No. 1, pp. 39-51. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08276331.2010.10593472.
Kumar, U., Butt, I. and Kumar, V. (2018), “The impact of strategic orientations on development of
manufacturing strategy and firm’s performance”, International Journal of Technology Management, Vol.
77, No. 4, pp. 187-209. http://dx.doi.org/10.1504/IJTM.2018.092954.
Laukkanen, T., Nagy, G., Hirvonen, S. et al. (2013), “The effect of strategic orientations on business
performance in SMEs”, International Marketing Review, Vol. 30, No. 6, pp. 510-35.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IMR-09-2011-0230.
Lei, L., Wu, X. and Fu, Y. (2019), “Effects of Sustainability and Technology Orientations on Firm Growth:
Evidence from Chinese Manufacturing”, Sustainability, Vol. 11, No. 16, pp. 4406.
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su11164406.
Lekmat, L., Selvarajah, C. and Hewege, C. (2018), “Relationship between Market Orientation,
Entrepreneurial Orientation, and Firm Performance in Thai SMEs: The Mediating Role of Marketing
Capabilities”, International Journal of Business & Economics, Vol. 17, No. 3
Lin, Y., Luo, J., Ieromonachou, P. et al. (2019), “Strategic orientation of servitization in manufacturing firms
and its impacts on firm performance”, Industrial Management & Data Systems, Vol. 119, No. 2, pp. 292-
316. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IMDS-10-2017-0485.
Liñán, F., Paul, J. and Fayolle, A. (2019), “SMEs and entrepreneurship in the era of globalization: advances
and theoretical approaches”, Small Business Economics, Vol. 55, pp. 1-9.
Lumpkin, G.T. and Dess, G.G. (1996), “Clarifying the entrepreneurial orientation construct and linking it to
performance”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 21, No. 1, pp. 135-72.
http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/amr.1996.9602161568.
Mahar, S., and Ghumro, I. A. (2019). Entrepreneurial orientation its impact on business performance of
small and medium enterprises of Sindh. SSRN Electronic Journal. Vol. V, No. I, pp. 458-68.
Martin, S.L. and Javalgi, R.R.G. (2016), “Entrepreneurial orientation, marketing capabilities and
performance: the moderating role of competitive intensity on Latin American International new
ventures”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 69, No. 6, pp. 2040-51.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.10.149.
Masa’deh, R., Al-Henzab, J., Tarhini, A. et al. (2018), “The associations among market orientation,
technology orientation, entrepreneurial orientation and organizational performance”, Benchmarking,
Vol. 25, No. 8, pp. 3117-42. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/BIJ-02-2017-0024.
Matsuno, K., Mentzer, J.T. and Özsomer, A. (2002), “The effects of entrepreneurial proclivity and market
orientation on business performance”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 66, No. 3, pp. 18-32.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.66.3.18.18507.

Brazilian Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 18, No. 4, e20211113, 2021 13/15
Mediating role of strategic orientations in the relationship between entrepreneurial orientation and performance of Saudi SMEs

Miller, D. (1983), “The correlates of entrepreneurship in three types of firms”, Management Science, Vol.
29, No. 7, pp. 770-91. http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.29.7.770.
Monshaat. (2020). The Impact of COVID-19 on SME in Saudi Arabia: A Large-Scale Survey. Riyadh, Saudi
Arabia: Prince Sultan University, Saudi Economic Association.
Morgan, R.E. and Strong, C.A. (2003), “Business performance and dimensions of strategic orientation”,
Journal of Business Research, Vol. 56, No. 3, pp. 163-76. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0148-
2963(01)00218-1.
Narver, J.C. and Slater, S.F. (1990), “The effect of a market orientation on business profitability”, Journal of
Marketing, Vol. 54, No. 4, pp. 20-35. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/002224299005400403.
Ndubisi, N.O., Zhai, X.A. and Lai, K. (2020), “Small and medium manufacturing enterprises and Asia’s
sustainable economic development”, International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 233, pp.
107971. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2020.107971.
Obeidat, B.Y. (2016), “The effect of strategic orientation on organizational performance: The mediating
role of innovation. International Journal of Communications”, Network and System Sciences, Vol. 9, No.
11, pp. 478-505. http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/ijcns.2016.911039.
Omar, A.R.C., Hussin, M.Y.M. and Muhammad, F. (2019), “Assessing strategic orientation and mosques
performance”, Review of World Economics, Vol. 10, No. 5, pp. 30-5.
http://dx.doi.org/10.5430/rwe.v10n5p30.
Ozaralli, N. and Rivenburgh, N.K. (2016), “Entrepreneurial intention: antecedents to entrepreneurial
behavior in the USA and Turkey”, Journal of Global Entrepreneurship Research, Vol. 6, No. 1, pp. 3.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40497-016-0047-x.
Rajala, R. and Westerlund, M. (2012). The effects of service orientation, technology orientation and open
innovation on the performance of software-intensive service businesses. In 45th Hawaii International
Conference on System Sciences. IEEE, Maui, HI. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/HICSS.2012.563.
Ramayah, T., Cheah, J., Chuah, F. et al. (2018). Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM)
using smartPLS 3.0 An Updated Guide and Practical Guide to Statistical Analysis. Pearson, Kuala Lumpur,
Malaysia.
Ramezan, M., Sanjaghi, M.E. and Baly, H.R.K. (2013), “Organizational change capacity and organizational
performance: An empirical analysis on an innovative industry”, Journal of Knowledge-based Innovation
in China, Vol. 5, No. 3, pp. 188-212. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JKIC-07-2013-0012.
Rauch, A., Wiklund, J., Lumpkin, G.T. et al. (2009), “Entrepreneurial orientation and business performance:
An assessment of past research and suggestions for the future”, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice,
Vol. 33, No. 3, pp. 761-87. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2009.00308.x.
Reijonen, H., Laukkanen, T., Komppula, R. et al. (2012), “Are growing SMEs more market‐oriented and
brand‐oriented”, Journal of Small Business Management, Vol. 50, No. 4, pp. 699-716.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-627X.2012.00372.x.
Ringle, C.M., Sarstedt, M., Mitchell, R. et al. (2020), “Partial least squares structural equation modeling in
HRM research”, International Journal of Human Resource Management, Vol. 31, No. 12, pp. 1617-43.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2017.1416655.
Rizan, M., Balfas, F. and Purwohedi, U. (2019), “The influence of strategic orientation, organizational
innovation capabilities and strategic planning on the performance of technology-based firms”,
Academy of Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 18, No. 3, pp. 1-11.
Ruiz-Jiménez, J.M. and del Mar Fuentes-Fuentes, M. (2016), “Management capabilities, innovation, and
gender diversity in the top management team: An empirical analysis in technology-based SMEs”, BRQ
Business Research Quarterly, Vol. 19, No. 2, pp. 107-21. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.brq.2015.08.003.
Semrau, T., Ambos, T. and Kraus, S. (2016), “Entrepreneurial orientation and SME performance across
societal cultures: An international study”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 69, No. 5, pp. 1928-32.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.10.082.
Shim, Y. and Seo, J. (2019), “A Study on Entrepreneurial Orientation and Startup Performance: Mediating
Effect of Strategic Orientation”, International Journal of Emerging Multidisciplinary Research, Vol. 3, No.
4, pp. 32-40.
Singh, S.H., Bhowmick, B., Eesley, D. et al. (2019), “Grassroots innovation and entrepreneurial success: Is
entrepreneurial orientation a missing link”, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Vol. 164, pp.
119582. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2019.02.002.

Brazilian Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 18, No. 4, e20211113, 2021 14/15
Mediating role of strategic orientations in the relationship between entrepreneurial orientation and performance of Saudi SMEs

Slater, S.F. and Narver, J.C. (1995), “Market orientation and the learning organization”, Journal of Marketing,
Vol. 59, No. 3, pp. 63-74. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/002224299505900306.
Tidd, J. and Bessant, J.R. (2018). Managing innovation: integrating technological, market and organizational
change. John Wiley & Sons.
Wiklund, J. and Shepherd, D. (2005), “Entrepreneurial orientation and small business performance: a
configurational approach”, Journal of Business Venturing, Vol. 20, No. 1, pp. 71-91.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2004.01.001.
World Bank (2020), “Small and Medium Enterprises (SMES) Finance”, available at:
https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/smefinance.
Zhai, Y.-M., Sun, W.-Q., Tsai, S.-B. et al. (2018), “An empirical study on entrepreneurial orientation,
absorptive capacity, and SMEs’ innovation performance: A sustainable perspective”, Sustainability,
Vol. 10, No. 2, pp. 314. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su10020314.

Author contributions: All authors contributed equally to this paper.

Brazilian Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 18, No. 4, e20211113, 2021 15/15