OR I G I N A L AR T I C L E Top management team attributes and corporate entrepreneurship: A meta-analysis Saadat Saeed1 | Mohammad Alasadi2 | Shumaila Y. Yousafzai3 | Shaker A. Zahra4 1Durham University Business School, Durham, UK 2College of Business Administration, Taibah University, Madinah, Saudi Arabia 3Graduate School of Business Nazarbayev University, Astana, Kazakhstan 4Strategic Management & Entrepreneurship Department, Carlson School of Management, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA Correspondence Saadat Saeed, Durham University Business School, Mill Hill Lane, Durham DH1 3LB, UK. Email: saadat.saeed@durham.ac.uk Funding information Collaborative Research Grant from Nazarbayev University, Grant/Award Number: 11022021CRP1510 Associate Editor: Gaia Rubera Abstract How do the attributes of a firm's top management team (TMT) influence cor- porate entrepreneurship across organizational and national contexts? Drawing on upper echelons theory and the managerial discretion perspective, this meta- analytic study examines the dynamic relationship between TMTs' attributes and corporate entrepreneurship, focusing on the moderating role of manage- rial discretion arising from organizational and national-level factors. To pro- vide insights into the micro-foundations of firm behavior, we explore how key TMT attributes—diversity, size, transformational leadership, tenure, general human capital, and entrepreneurial human capital—affect corporate entrepre- neurship. A comprehensive meta-analysis of 57 primary studies reveals that the effect of a TMT's attributes is context-dependent and is significantly influ- enced by the approach to managerial discretion taken by the country in which the firm operates. By showing that transformational leadership and the TMT's entrepreneurial human capital and size affect corporate entrepreneurship, while attributes like tenure, diversity, and general human capital have limited or no impact, our findings challenge the prevailing view that a standardized approach to the TMT's composition drives corporate entrepreneurship. The study also underscores the role of the national-level managerial discretion and finds that firms in institutional environments that feature low managerial dis- cretion must align their TMT strategies with local institutional contexts to maximize their corporate entrepreneurship. These findings advance upper ech- elons theory by demonstrating that managerial discretion acts as a boundary condition in shaping how the TMT's attributes influence corporate entrepre- neurship based on the national context. This research contributes to the fields of strategic and innovation management and offers practical insights for leaders who seek to harness the full potential of their TMTs. KEYWORD S corporate entrepreneurship, managerial discretion, meta-analysis, TMTs, upper echelons theory Received: 30 April 2022 Revised: 26 May 2024 Accepted: 3 September 2024 DOI: 10.1111/jpim.12762 This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. © 2024 The Author(s). Journal of Product Innovation Management published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Product Development & Management Association. J Prod Innov Manag. 2024;1–28. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/jpim 1 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6584-5923 mailto:saadat.saeed@durham.ac.uk http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ http://wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/jpim http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.1111%2Fjpim.12762&domain=pdf&date_stamp=2024-11-12 1 | INTRODUCTION Many business scholars agree that corporate entrepre- neurship enhances firms' vitality and competitiveness (Dess et al., 2003; Kuratko et al., 2015). As a multifaceted concept, corporate entrepreneurship encompasses a range of formal and informal activities at the firm level that target the discovery and exploitation of new opportu- nities. These activities, which include strategic renewal, innovation, and corporate venturing (Sharma & Chrisman, 1999), can improve the firm's competitiveness (Ireland et al., 2009; Phan et al., 2009), and performance (Bierwerth et al., 2015). Beyond its impact on individual firms, corporate entrepreneurship also contributes to broader economic development at the national level (Antoncic & Hisrich, 2003; Zahra et al., 1999), underscor- ing its role in fostering economic resilience and growth. The literature that draws on upper echelons theory (Finkelstein, 2009; Hambrick & Mason, 1984) suggests that responsibility for sensing and seizing opportunities for corporate entrepreneurship rests primarily with the firm's top management team (TMT) (Boone et al., 2019; Heavey & Simsek, 2013; Ling et al., 2008; Zahra et al., 2009). TMTs are at the apex of firms and have decision-making authority and accountability for resource allocation, strategy development, and overall firm performance (Quigley & Hambrick, 2015; Westphal & Zajac, 1995), so they affect firms' successes and failures, including their ability to drive corporate entrepreneurship initiatives (Corbett et al., 2013; Heavey & Simsek, 2013). The central tenet of upper eche- lons theory is that TMTs interpret and respond to their environments based on their members' backgrounds and personal attributes (Hambrick, 2007), so these attributes can determine whether a firm can drive corporate entre- preneurship by identifying business opportunities or mis- ses them entirely. Such lack of foresight has led to the decline and disappearance of many once-prominent cor- porations (Gupta et al., 2018). However, the literature on the relationship between TMTs and corporate entrepreneurship is not without lim- itations. Empirical results are mixed in terms of TMTs' attributes. For instance, the effect of a TMT's size on cor- porate entrepreneurship is reported as being positive (Chen et al., 2022), negative (Arzubiaga et al., 2018), and null (Chen & Nadkarni, 2017). Similarly, research gener- ally indicates a positive impact of a TMT's level of diver- sity on corporate entrepreneurship (Chen et al., 2022; Hayton, 2005), yet some studies report negative outcomes for dimensions like diversity in education, functional experience, and general experience (Ling et al., 2008; Srivastava & Lee, 2005). Whereas a TMT's size and diver- sity are considered to be at the heart of organizational governance, both of these attributes are also considered to be double-edged swords (Certo et al., 2006; Li & Jones, 2019). These inconsistencies pose challenges for large multinational companies and small- to medium-sized enterprises that seek to leverage corporate entrepreneurship to gain sustained competitive advan- tage, adaptability, and growth (Boone et al., 2019; Chin et al., 2021; Heavey & Simsek, 2013; Zahra, 1996a). In addition, research that focuses on the upper eche- lons theory demonstrates that the TMT's actions do not occur in isolation but are embedded in environments that are substantially shaped by the level of managerial discre- tion (Crossland & Hambrick, 2007, 2011). In the corpo- rate entrepreneurship domain, Heavey and Simsek (2013) suggest that a firm's pursuit of corporate entrepre- neurship is positively associated with the TMT's attri- butes and that these relationships vary according to the environmental context in which the firm operates. Build- ing on upper echelons theory to substantiate that Practitioner points • Firms should tailor their top management teams' (TMT) composition to fit their organiza- tions' national contexts. A standardized one- size-fits-all approach may not be effective in driving corporate entrepreneurship. • TMTs that have the right mix of attributes are more likely to drive corporate entrepreneur- ship. Appointing TMT members with strong entrepreneurial human capital and transforma- tional leadership skills is most likely to foster corporate entrepreneurship, as these attributes encourage innovation, strategic renewal, and corporate venturing. • Larger and more diverse TMTs can offer a broader range of perspectives, which helps firms identify and exploit new entrepreneurial opportunities. However, attributes like tenure and general human capital may have limited impacts on corporate entrepreneurship. • In international settings, firms should adapt their TMTs' composition to the level of mana- gerial discretion that is typical in each country to optimize corporate entrepreneurship. In institutional environments where the level of managerial discretion is low, as formal and informal institutional factors constrain decision-making, firms should design carefully their TMTs to ensure effective entrepreneurial outcomes. 2 JOURNAL OF PRODUCT INNOVATION MANAGEMENT 15405885, 0, D ow nloaded from https://onlinelibrary.w iley.com /doi/10.1111/jpim .12762 by D urham U niversity - U niversity, W iley O nline L ibrary on [13/11/2024]. See the T erm s and C onditions (https://onlinelibrary.w iley.com /term s-and-conditions) on W iley O nline L ibrary for rules of use; O A articles are governed by the applicable C reative C om m ons L icense relationship, we test the role of managerial discretion— that is, TMT members' latitude in taking action—as a boundary condition (Crossland & Hambrick, 2007). Some research suggests that TMTs' courses of action vary depending on the level of managerial discretion, which is influenced by organizational characteristics and national- level institutions that may constrain their decisions and actions (Burkhard et al., 2023; Kraft, 2022; Wang et al., 2023; Wangrow et al., 2015). In setting that feature high levels of managerial discretion settings, TMTs' oper- ations are relatively unconstrained, but in settings where managerial discretion is low, organizational and national conditions impose constraints that limit the TMT's strate- gic actions (Chatterjee & Hambrick, 2007; Simsek et al., 2010). We use a meta-analysis of 57 primary studies to explore whether the relationship between TMTs' attri- butes and corporate entrepreneurship is stronger when managerial discretion is high or when it is low. In response to the limitations in the literature, our meta-analysis examines differences in the strength of the relationship between the TMT's attributes and corporate entrepreneurship based on the level of managerial discre- tion that stems from organizational and national condi- tions. Our study offers three primary contributions to theory and research on TMTs and corporate entrepre- neurship and to the broader innovation management lit- erature. First, we contribute to upper echelons theory by providing a meta-analytic synthesis and generalization of research on TMTs' attributes as antecedents of corporate entrepreneurship. By leveraging meta-analytic tech- niques, this research offers a comprehensive empirical evaluation of the TMT attributes that are examined most often. This assessment addresses the mixed findings that previous qualitative reviews present regarding the rela- tionship between TMTs' attributes and corporate entre- preneurship (Corbett et al., 2013; Schindehutte et al., 2018; Urbano et al., 2022) and resolves some of these ambiguities by offering clearer insights into how TMTs' attributes systematically influence corporate entrepreneurship. Second, our study quantifies the relationships between TMTs' attributes and corporate entrepreneur- ship by producing estimates of effect size to clarify the extent to which TMTs' attributes relate to corporate entrepreneurship. It also enriches the micro-foundations perspective by examining the roles that TMTs play in shaping organizational outcomes (Felin et al., 2015). Third, we expand on upper echelons theory by embedding in the managerial discretion perspective an investigation of how the impact of TMTs' attributes on firms' entrepreneurial endeavors varies across contexts. This analysis emphasizes the context-dependent nature of corporate entrepreneurship and responds to calls for a more nuanced understanding of management in varied institutional frameworks (e.g., Dess et al., 2003; Guerrero et al., 2021; Schindehutte et al., 2018; Urbano et al., 2022). 2 | THEORETICAL BACKGROUND 2.1 | Defining corporate entrepreneurship Over the past three decades, corporate entrepreneurship has emerged as a multifaceted concept in the field of entrepreneurship and innovation research. Variously termed organizational entrepreneurship, intrapreneurship, corporate venturing, and strategic entrepreneurship (Schindehutte et al., 2018), corporate entrepreneurship focuses on entrepreneurial activities at the firm level (Jennings & Lumpkin, 1989; Kuratko et al., 1990). Arriving at a more nuanced understanding of management in var- ied institutional frameworks can assist explorations of firms' trajectories by differentiating between entrepreneur- ial activities and entrepreneurial behaviors. This study focuses on the latter because of its value in ensuring firms' sustainability and growth. Corporate entrepreneurship encompasses three core phenomena: innovation, corporate venturing, and strate- gic renewal (Heavey & Simsek, 2013; Kuratko, 2017; Zahra, 1993, 1996a). Innovation refers to a firm's ability to transform its organizational knowledge and resources creatively into new products, processes, and systems, thereby increasing its economic value (Ireland et al., 2009). Whether radical or incremental, innovation is central to firms' ability to increase their market success, growth, and competitiveness (Zahra, 1996a). Strategic renewal involves the reconfiguration of a firm's resources to revitalize its operations and build new wealth through changes in its business scope, competitive approach, and capabilities (Guth & Ginsberg, 1990; Zahra, 1996a, 1996b). Corporate venturing refers to pursuing entrepre- neurial endeavors in an existing organization, including expanding into new markets (Guth & Ginsberg, 1990). 2.2 | Theoretical framework Drawing on an array of integrative models, scholarship on corporate entrepreneurship focuses primarily on the TMT's strategic role in pursuing corporate entrepreneur- ship (Burgelman, 1983a; Guth & Ginsberg, 1990; Ireland et al., 2009; Kuratko, 2010; Zahra, 1993; Zahra et al., 2009). While scholars extensively research the attri- butes of TMTs that affect corporate entrepreneurship, SAEED ET AL. 3 15405885, 0, D ow nloaded from https://onlinelibrary.w iley.com /doi/10.1111/jpim .12762 by D urham U niversity - U niversity, W iley O nline L ibrary on [13/11/2024]. See the T erm s and C onditions (https://onlinelibrary.w iley.com /term s-and-conditions) on W iley O nline L ibrary for rules of use; O A articles are governed by the applicable C reative C om m ons L icense consensus on the overall impact of these attributes remains elusive. In addition, the consensus that corporate entrepreneurship is context-dependent necessitates a multi-level analytical approach to capture the nuances of the interplay between TMTs' attributes and corporate entrepreneurship fully (Dess et al., 2003; Ireland et al., 2007). Central to our research framework is the upper eche- lons theory, which posits that TMTs' attributes signifi- cantly influence their strategic decisions and organizational outcomes by shaping how they allocate resources and guide their firms' actions (Hambrick & Mason, 1984). Upper echelons theory underscores the critical role of the TMT's demographics, values, personal- ities, and experiences in shaping its members' percep- tions, priorities, and behaviors (Hambrick & Mason, 1984). Since obtaining data on TMT members' psychology would be prohibitively time-consuming and otherwise challenging, researchers use such observable attributes as human capital and diversity as proxies for managers' cognitive bases, values, and perceptions (Burkhard et al., 2023; Quigley & Hambrick, 2015). A large body of meta-analytical evidence demonstrates that such attributes as a TMT's diversity, size, type of leader- ship, tenure, and human capital (general and entrepre- neurial) influence organizational outcomes (Carpenter et al., 2004; Certo et al., 2006; Kirca et al., 2012; Wang et al., 2015, 2023). However, evidence for the influence of such attributes on corporate entrepreneurship remains unexplored, although it is needed to move the field for- ward (Corbett et al., 2013; Guerrero et al., 2021). Building on upper echelons theory, this study con- siders how managerial discretion context stemming from organizational and national context, serves as a boundary condition that influences the strategic choices TMTs make, thereby affecting the success of corporate entrepre- neurship (Hambrick & Finkelstein, 1987). Managerial discretion, which is the latitude TMT members have in influencing their firms' strategy and performance (Hambrick, 2007), is extensively documented in empirical studies (Wangrow et al., 2015) and meta-analytical evi- dence (Burkhard et al., 2023; Kraft, 2022; Wang et al., 2019, 2023; Zaandam et al., 2021). Managerial dis- cretion arises from two sources: organization- and national-level factors that dictate an organization's recep- tiveness to a variety of strategic actions, and institutional environmental factors that delineate the extent of strate- gic options that are available externally (Hambrick & Finkelstein, 1987). Organization-level context, such as firm size, determining the degree of freedom and auton- omy that TMTs enjoy within the organizational frame- work, influences the firm's direction and outcomes (Jeong & Harrison, 2017). National-level institutional environments may either constrain or enhance manage- rial discretion, thus affecting the strategic latitude that is available to TMTs (Crossland & Hambrick, 2007, 2011). Incorporating a managerial-discretion perspective, our research probes into how the organizational and national context of TMTs' managerial discretion serves as a boundary condition that influences the relationships between TMTs' attributes and corporate entrepreneurship. Our study combines upper echelons theory and insights on managerial discretion to determine whether the relationships between TMTs' attributes and corporate entrepreneurship are universally applicable or vary depending on the level of managerial discretion at the organizational and national levels. This approach seeks to bridge the gap in our understanding of how TMTs' attri- butes systematically influence corporate entrepreneurship based on the context, thus clarifying the variable impacts of TMT-driven strategies on corporate entrepreneurship. Figure 1 presents the theoretical framework. 2.3 | The TMT's attributes and corporate entrepreneurship The role of the TMT's attributes in fostering corporate entrepreneurship is multifaceted and well-supported by theories that emphasize strategic choice, particularly upper echelons theory (Hambrick & Mason, 1984). Upper echelons theory suggests that organizations reflect their TMTs' strategic choices and managerial philosophies, both of which are pivotal in cultivating a climate that is conducive to innovation (Green et al., 2008) and oversee- ing the mechanisms that are essential to corporate ven- turing, strategic renewal, and continual innovation (Chen & Nadkarni, 2017; Kuratko & Audretsch, 2013). TMTs also play a central role in providing a strategic direction (Benitez-Amado et al., 2010; Burgelman, 1983a) and translating organizational policy into actionable strategies, goals, and objectives (Heavey & Simsek, 2013). Extensive research highlights the importance of the TMT in initiating, promoting, and implementing entrepreneur- ial activities (Srivastava & Lee, 2005). Given the robust foundation provided by upper eche- lons theory and empirical evidence on the role of TMTs' attributes in fostering corporate entrepreneurship, test- able hypotheses can anchor our theoretical discussion in empirical inquiry and set the stage for a deep exploration of how the TMTs' attributes influence corporate entrepre- neurship. The six hypotheses we propose quantify the impact of each TMT attribute on corporate entrepreneur- ship, thus providing a framework for subsequent empiri- cal validation. 4 JOURNAL OF PRODUCT INNOVATION MANAGEMENT 15405885, 0, D ow nloaded from https://onlinelibrary.w iley.com /doi/10.1111/jpim .12762 by D urham U niversity - U niversity, W iley O nline L ibrary on [13/11/2024]. See the T erm s and C onditions (https://onlinelibrary.w iley.com /term s-and-conditions) on W iley O nline L ibrary for rules of use; O A articles are governed by the applicable C reative C om m ons L icense Diversity in a TMT, defined as the variety of personal attributes among team members, extends a TMT's access to external information networks (Díaz-Fern�andez et al., 2020) so it can connect with a broad range of stake- holders from which to gather unique insights (Heavey & Simsek, 2013; Li et al., 2021). Diversity also increases TMTs' ability to recognize a wide array of opportunities, a key advantage in dynamic markets where rapid identifi- cation of opportunities can mean securing a competitive edge (Hayton, 2005; Nuscheler et al., 2019). In addition, the varied perspectives that operate in a diverse TMT fos- ter rigorous decision-making during times of uncertainty or rapid technological change and enable firms to navi- gate complex challenges (Blanco-Oliver et al., 2018). The richness of perspectives brought about by diversity in the form of team members' nationalities in particular enhances TMTs' human and social capital and has a posi- tive influence on team dynamics and corporate entrepre- neurship (Boone et al., 2019). This form of diversity also fosters productive conflict, resulting in a variety of crea- tive solutions to complex problems (Olson et al., 2020; Talke et al., 2010). Therefore, the multifaceted influence of diversity on a TMT is integral to fostering a firm's entrepreneurial capabilities, suggesting that greater diver- sity in TMTs is associated with enhanced corporate entrepreneurship. Hypothesis 1. TMTs' diversity is positively associated with corporate entrepreneurship. The size of a TMT plays a role in its firm's corporate entrepreneurship through multiple facets of organiza- tional capability. Larger TMTs offer a richer variety of human capital than smaller TMTs can, as their large size broadens the team's scope and depth of expertise (Haleblian & Finikelstein, 1993; Yang & Wang, 2014). This diversity in skills and perspectives amplifies the team's ability to scan and evaluate the environment, thus increasing the volume and quality of information that can be used to extend corporate entrepreneurship (Bui et al., 2020; Jin et al., 2017; Li et al., 2021; Zahra et al., 2000) and navigate the complex challenges that are inherent in fostering an entrepreneurial spirit in estab- lished corporations (Heavey & Simsek, 2013). While size alone does not invariably correlate with capability (Díaz- Fern�andez et al., 2020), it signals a team's collective abil- ity to process complex information (Rovelli, 2020). More- over, a large TMT can facilitate environmental scanning, which increases the quality of information used in mak- ing the strategic decisions that drive corporate entrepre- neurship (Li et al., 2021; Tribbitt & Yang, 2017). Large TMTs also bring a wide array of both tangible and intan- gible assets—from financial resources to cognitive skills and network ties—that are less likely to be available in smaller TMTs (Jahanshahi et al., 2018). However, large TMTs also present challenges, such as when quick decision-making is required, as the size of the team can sometimes hinder the swift decision- making that is needed when the firm must act quickly to seize or execute an opportunity (Baron, 2006; Lehner & Kansikas, 2012; Urban & Wood, 2015). This challenge is often compounded by communication and integration issues in large teams (Amason et al., 2006; Haleblian & Finikelstein, 1993). In short, while larger teams can pro- vide the resources and capabilities that facilitate corpo- rate entrepreneurship, they must also manage the complexities that come with large groups to optimize their entrepreneurial outcomes. Given these dynamics, FIGURE 1 Research framework. SAEED ET AL. 5 15405885, 0, D ow nloaded from https://onlinelibrary.w iley.com /doi/10.1111/jpim .12762 by D urham U niversity - U niversity, W iley O nline L ibrary on [13/11/2024]. See the T erm s and C onditions (https://onlinelibrary.w iley.com /term s-and-conditions) on W iley O nline L ibrary for rules of use; O A articles are governed by the applicable C reative C om m ons L icense we posit that the size of the TMT is positively associated with corporate entrepreneurship. Hypothesis 2. The TMT's size is positively associated with corporate entrepreneurship. Transformational leadership plays a pivotal role in fostering corporate entrepreneurship by inspiring an organization to pursue innovative and entrepreneurial endeavors and mobilizing them to that end. Leaders who exhibit transformational leadership are adept at crafting visionary scenarios that articulate a clear vision and rally support for discovering and capitalizing on new opportu- nities and markets (Gupta et al., 2004; Li et al., 2021). This ability to inspire and engage has significant value in settings that demand innovation and adaptability. More- over, a transformational leadership style significantly enhances employees' satisfaction, intellectual engage- ment, and creativity, all of which are components of a vibrant innovative culture (Pan et al., 2021; Shafique & Kalyar, 2018). By fostering an environment that encour- ages exploration and challenging the status quo, transfor- mational leaders enhance their firms' capacity for innovation, a key driver of corporate entrepreneurship. Transformational leadership is also instrumental in the effective execution of corporate entrepreneurship strate- gies. Leaders who engage their teams and communicate a compelling vision of the future facilitate the smooth implementation of innovative strategies that improve firm performance (Boukamcha, 2019; Ocak & Ozturk, 2018). The dynamic capabilities that are imbued in transformational leadership enable organizations to respond swiftly and effectively to emerging opportunities in the marketplace, thus sustaining competitive advan- tage and driving business growth. Given these benefits, we hypothesize that transformational leadership is posi- tively associated with corporate entrepreneurship. This relationship underscores the significance of the TMT's leadership style in guiding strategic direction and innova- tion and embedding a resilient entrepreneurial culture in the organization. Hypothesis 3. Transformational leadership on the TMT is positively associated with cor- porate entrepreneurship. The length of TMT members' tenure has a significant influence on corporate entrepreneurship by affecting firms' strategic orientation and innovative capabilities. Equipped with a wealth of historical knowledge and deep industry experience, long-tenured TMT members have honed the decision-making skills that are valuable in navigating complex business environments (Kraus et al., 2019; Sahaym et al., 2016). Their profound under- standing of their companies' historical context and indus- try dynamics enables them to identify opportunities and engage confidently in the risk-taking activities that are necessary for the successful pursuit of entrepreneurial initiatives (Hayton, 2005; Simsek, 2007). Moreover, the successful implementation of corporate entrepreneurship strategies often requires a high degree of interdependence in the organization. Long-tenured TMT members typically foster a strong sense of social cohesion in the TMT and have the shared cognitive frameworks that help to ensure that organizational resources and capabilities are aligned with the pursuit of innovative and entrepreneurial goals (Amason & Sapienza, 1997). Not to be outdone, short-tenured TMT members bring with them fresh perspectives and insights into emerging market trends and competitive landscapes, which can be equally beneficial for corporate entrepre- neurship (Floyd & Lane, 2000). Their willingness to chal- lenge the status quo and to introduce new ideas fosters an organizational culture that is receptive to innovation and change (Certo et al., 2006; Heavey & Simsek, 2013). When managed effectively, this dynamism can enhance their firms' entrepreneurial activities by encouraging agil- ity and adaptiveness (Heavey & Simsek, 2013). Given these dynamics, we hypothesize that TMT members' length of tenure is positively associated with corporate entrepreneurship. This hypothesis explores how the blend of stability provided by long-tenured members and the innovative push from newer members can together foster a conducive environment for corporate entrepre- neurship, enabling firms to leverage their cumulative experiences and fresh insights for sustained entrepre- neurial success. Hypothesis 4. The length of TMT members' tenure is positively associated with corporate entrepreneurship. The general human capital embodied in the TMT, as reflected in its members' educational background and experience, plays a valuable role in driving corporate entrepreneurship. TMT members' education level and fields of study have a significant influence on the quality of the TMTs' decisions related to corporate entrepreneur- ship. Academic backgrounds provide the cognitive tools that enhance team members' analytical capabilities and improve their decision-making processes in the complex entrepreneurial context (Jahanshahi et al., 2018; Nkongolo-Bakenda et al., 2010; Yuan et al., 2017). Simi- larly, TMTs' experience equips them with the practical skills necessary to identify and capitalize on opportuni- ties and to pursue a proactive approach to corporate 6 JOURNAL OF PRODUCT INNOVATION MANAGEMENT 15405885, 0, D ow nloaded from https://onlinelibrary.w iley.com /doi/10.1111/jpim .12762 by D urham U niversity - U niversity, W iley O nline L ibrary on [13/11/2024]. See the T erm s and C onditions (https://onlinelibrary.w iley.com /term s-and-conditions) on W iley O nline L ibrary for rules of use; O A articles are governed by the applicable C reative C om m ons L icense entrepreneurship (Nuscheler et al., 2019). Their experi- ence also broadens their internal and external networks, which can aid them in pursuing corporate entrepreneur- ship initiatives (Yuan et al., 2017). Effective networking enhances access to resources, including information and partnerships, which are instrumental in navigating the entrepreneurial landscape (Li et al., 2020). The depth of experience and knowledge in TMTs make them particularly alert to new opportunities for corporate entrepreneurship, often before they become apparent to the market at large (Tang et al., 2012; Tzabbar & Margolis, 2017). This alertness, combined with a propensity for proactiveness and risk-taking, enables these TMTs' firms to outmaneuver competitors and seize market opportunities (Heavey et al., 2009). Finally, the TMT's entrepreneurial human capital refers to the knowledge, skills, and connections that allow them to spot opportunities for new corporate entre- preneurship initiatives. Their connections in the organi- zation help them to build collaboration and assemble the resources needed for the successful execution of corpo- rate entrepreneurship activities. Therefore, we hypothesize that TMTs' general and entrepreneurial human capital are positively associated with corporate entrepreneurship such that the richer and more varied a TMT's general and entrepreneurial human capital, the more effectively the firm can engage in and sustain entrepreneurial activities by leveraging its leaders' strategic acumen and operational capabilities. Hypothesis 5. The amount of the TMT's general human capital is positively associated with corporate entrepreneurship. Hypothesis 6. The amount of the TMT's entrepreneurial human capital is positively associated with corporate entrepreneurship. 2.4 | The moderating effect of managerial discretion context This section considers the moderating impact of manage- rial discretion on the relationship between the TMT's attributes and corporate entrepreneurship. Beginning with Hambrick and Finkelstein's (1987) seminal work, which develops the concept of managerial discretion, scholars explore its applications in various contexts and at various levels, including the individual level (e.g., Wang et al., 2019), the organization level (e.- g., Burkhard et al., 2023), and the national level (e.g., Burkhard et al., 2023; Wang et al., 2023; Zaandam et al., 2021). Our study explores the dynamic interplay between the TMT's attributes and corporate entrepre- neurship, considering organization-level and national- level contexts as moderators. The concept of managerial discretion serves as a piv- otal mechanism through which the TMT exerts influence over corporate entrepreneurship initiatives (Hambrick, 2007; Wangrow et al., 2015). Managerial dis- cretion refers to TMTs' ability to act autonomously, bounded by the extent of stakeholder power and institu- tional constraints that may either facilitate or restrict their strategic choices. Therefore, the amount of manage- rial discretion available to TMTs can enhance or limit their impact on corporate entrepreneurship. We hypothe- size that the positive relationship between TMTs' attri- butes and corporate entrepreneurship is managerial discretion context-dependent arising from organization- level (e.g., organizational inertia) and national-level con- texts (e.g., the institutional environment). 2.4.1 | Organization-level managerial discretion There is evidence that organizational managerial discre- tion significantly influences the relationship between TMT attributes and firm-level outcomes (Burkhard et al., 2023; Jeong & Harrison, 2017) and we expect it will similarly affect the relationship between TMT attributes and corporate entrepreneurship. The latitude of manage- rial action varies with organizational size and affects how effectively TMTs can implement corporate entrepreneur- ship initiatives. Small firms' managerial discretion is typi- cally high because their routines are not entrenched and their organizational structures tend to be flexible. Com- pared to large firms, small firms often have flatter hierar- chies, fewer bureaucratic constraints, and closer interactions between TMT members and other organiza- tional members, which give their TMTs high levels of managerial discretion in adopting and implementing entrepreneurial strategies. For instance, top managers in smaller firms can compensate for limited resources with their personal capabilities and direct involvement in both strategic and operational roles (Alexiev et al., 2010; Lubatkin et al., 2006). Reduced board oversight and higher ownership concentration among executives also enhance TMTs' managerial discretion in decision-making about entrepreneurial activities (Robson & Bennett, 2000; Zahra et al., 2000). Conversely, large firms often exhibit low managerial discretion because of organizational inertia. Large firms are characterized by complex bureaucratic structures, established routines, and institutionalized processes that constrain strategic flexibility (Gilbert, 2001; Hannan & SAEED ET AL. 7 15405885, 0, D ow nloaded from https://onlinelibrary.w iley.com /doi/10.1111/jpim .12762 by D urham U niversity - U niversity, W iley O nline L ibrary on [13/11/2024]. See the T erm s and C onditions (https://onlinelibrary.w iley.com /term s-and-conditions) on W iley O nline L ibrary for rules of use; O A articles are governed by the applicable C reative C om m ons L icense Freeman, 1984). The presence of extensive hierarchical layers and rigorous oversight mechanisms limits their TMTs' ability to enact strategic changes and innovate swiftly. Consequently, the impact of their TMTs' attri- butes on corporate entrepreneurship is diminished in such environments, as the ability to pursue diverse strate- gic paths is restricted (Finkelstein & Hambrick, 1990; Lavie & Rosenkopf, 2006). The nuanced interplay between organizational con- text and TMTs' attributes suggests that, while large firms may have more resources to support entrepreneurial ini- tiatives, their bureaucratic nature can impede quick decision-making and strategic flexibility. In contrast, small firms' high levels of managerial discretion allow their TMTs to leverage their attributes to foster corporate entrepreneurship. Therefore, we hypothesize: Hypothesis 7. Organizational managerial discretion moderates the relationship between TMT attributes and corporate entrepreneur- ship such that the impact of the TMT's attri- butes on corporate entrepreneurship is more pronounced in smaller firms, which are typi- fied by high levels of managerial discretion, than it is in large firms, which are typified by low levels of managerial discretion. 2.4.2 | National-level managerial discretion National-level managerial discretion plays a central role in shaping the relationship between TMTs' attributes and corporate entrepreneurship. Grounded in institutional theory, national-level managerial discretion context is embedded in the formal and informal rules that govern appropriate and legitimate top managers' behaviors, including the freedom executives have to allocate firm resources (Crossland & Hambrick, 2011; North, 1990). Informal institutions establish unwritten social norms and cultural values, while formal institutions establish laws and regulations that serve as the legal framework for entrepreneurial endeavors (Vanacker et al., 2021). Together, both types of institutions define the operational environment or “rules of the game” that influence the constraints on TMTs' managerial actions (Burkhard et al., 2023; Wang et al., 2023). Managerial discretion varies significantly across coun- tries because of differing institutional frameworks. The institutional environment can either constrain or enable TMTs' managerial discretion, affecting their ability to drive firm performance in areas like corporate entrepre- neurship (Crossland & Hambrick, 2007, 2011). TMTs that operate in countries that feature weaker institutional constraints (formal and informal) have more managerial discretion to enact strategic changes and influence orga- nizational outcomes like corporate entrepreneurship than TMTs that operate in countries that have more con- straints do (Burkhard et al., 2023; Wang et al., 2019, 2023). In national cultures that tend to be open-minded and tolerant of uncertainty, TMTs can explore a wide range of strategic options without significant resistance. Cultures with high uncertainty tolerance are more receptive to innovative and unconventional actions, which provides TMTs latitude in undertaking actions that carry substan- tial risk and ambiguity (Crossland & Hambrick, 2007; Scott, 1995). In high power distance cultures, where authority is respected and rarely challenged, TMTs can make bold decisions with few obstacles (House, Hanges, Javidan, Dorfman, & Gupta, 2004; Zaandam et al., 2021). Individualistic cultures, which emphasize personal initia- tive and autonomy, also tend to support unilateral decision-making by TMTs (Aguinis & Henle, 2003; Crossland & Hambrick, 2007). In addition, loose cultures, where norms are weakly enforced, create an environment that allows for greater managerial latitude by TMTs, not strictly penalizing deviations from normative behaviors (Crossland & Hambrick, 2011; Gelfand et al., 2006). On the formal side, the dispersion of ownership, a country's legal origins, and the flexibility of employment laws affect TMTs' behaviors. For example, in cultures that feature dispersed ownership of firms, TMT members typically enjoy significant autonomy, so they can pursue innovative strategies and entrepreneurial activities with- out facing immediate pushback from shareholders (Crossland & Hambrick, 2011). Similarly, in common- law countries, where the emphasis is on protecting prop- erty rights and prioritizing shareholders' interests, TMTs may have more freedom to make risky investments or pursue the kinds of aggressive growth strategies that are characteristic of corporate entrepreneurship (La Porta et al., 2000). Finally, in countries where employers have high levels of flexibility and weak rules for employee pro- tection such that top managers can hire, reassign, or lay off employees freely, the positive impact of TMTs' attri- butes on corporate entrepreneurship is enhanced (Vanacker et al., 2021). Given this intricate interplay of formal and informal institutions, our hypothesis posits that national-level managerial discretion is a moderating factor in the rela- tionship between TMTs' attributes and corporate entre- preneurship. The weaker institutional constraints provide greater managerial discretion, allowing TMTs to more effectively translate their strategic visions into 8 JOURNAL OF PRODUCT INNOVATION MANAGEMENT 15405885, 0, D ow nloaded from https://onlinelibrary.w iley.com /doi/10.1111/jpim .12762 by D urham U niversity - U niversity, W iley O nline L ibrary on [13/11/2024]. See the T erm s and C onditions (https://onlinelibrary.w iley.com /term s-and-conditions) on W iley O nline L ibrary for rules of use; O A articles are governed by the applicable C reative C om m ons L icense entrepreneurial actions, thereby enhancing the firm's ability to pursue entrepreneurial endeavors. Hypothesis 8. National-level managerial dis- cretion moderates the relationships between TMT attributes and corporate entrepreneur- ship such that the hypothesized direct rela- tionships between TMTs' attributes and corporate entrepreneurship (H1 to H6) are more pronounced in countries where national-level managerial discretion is high than it is in countries where it is low. In contrast to previous perspectives that emphasize the benefits of high managerial discretion suggesting that greater freedom for TMTs fosters CE, an alternative hypothesis proposes that low managerial discretion can also significantly enhance corporate entrepreneurship. This perspective acknowledges the complex dynamics of corporate entrepreneurship, which often require a bal- ance between top-down strategic directives and bottom- up entrepreneurial initiatives (Phan et al., 2009). Burgelman (1983a, 1983b) introduced the concept of autonomous and induced strategic behaviors as the two primary forms of CE. Autonomous strategic behavior emphasizes the role of middle managers and even front- line employees as “product champions” who pursue new ideas and initiatives independently of top management's strategic frameworks (Kuratko, 2017). This bottom-up process is of significant value in organizations and culti- vates in national contexts with low managerial discretion and the ability to innovate and adapt is dispersed across organizational levels, rather than being confined to the executive suite. In the case of autonomous strategic behavior (Burgelman, 1983a, 1983b), lower managerial discretion could enhance corporate entrepreneurship by fostering more collaborative and inclusive environments. In envi- ronments that are characterized by low managerial dis- cretion, such as those that are typically found in collectivistic cultures or societies with strong normative pressure, the need for alignment and consensus could lead TMTs to promote a collaborative and inclusive approach (Triandis, 1995) to align the activities of middle managers and other employees to foster a distributed form of entrepreneurship. In such contexts, strategic ini- tiatives are not solely the prerogative of the TMT but are influenced by a broad range of internal stakeholders through consultative processes (Aguinis & Henle, 2003). In contrast to high power distance countries, in which high levels of managerial discretion facilitate rapid and efficient top-down implementation of novel ideas, low power distance countries exhibit low levels of managerial discretion that also tend to facilitate idea generation. This dynamic arises because individuals are willing to chal- lenge the status quo and pursue independent initiatives even in the face of supervisory resistance, unhindered by the constraints typically imposed by organizational hier- archy (Hofstede, 2001; House, Hanges, Javidan, Dorf- man, & Gupta, 2004; Shane et al., 1995). Integration and the collaborative mechanisms that operate in the context of low managerial discretion can help to align followers with leaders in their efforts to pursue corporate entrepreneurship. High uncertainty avoidance, which is also associated with low managerial discretion, plays a central role in facilitating corporate entrepreneurship by imposing a structured environment that promotes order, conformity, routine, and stability (Erez & Nouri, 2010). A structured approach is particularly beneficial for implementing cor- porate entrepreneurship initiatives, where clear, predict- able processes enhance the organization's ability to execute new ideas. A culture that is characterized by high uncertainty avoidance ensures the presence of established protocols and strong adherence to rules, which can streamline the process of bringing innovations to fruition by reducing ambiguity and aligning all organizational activities with common goals. Conversely, cultures that are characterized by low uncertainty avoidance (or high tolerance of uncertainty), which typically exhibit high managerial discretion, foster an environment that is con- ducive to deviating from rules, breaking routines, and tol- erating mistakes. While these attributes can enhance creativity and the generation of innovative ideas, they may impede the systematic implementation of those ideas into structured organizational processes (Sarooghi et al., 2015). The lack of strict guidelines and the permissive attitude toward errors, while beneficial for early stages of idea gen- eration and development, can create challenges when it comes to scaling innovations and integrating them into a firm's core operations (Bledow et al., 2011). As for the formal institutional environment, labor market regulations (stringent employee protection) often impose significant constraints on managerial actions, particularly in terms of hiring, firing, and adjusting work- force levels in response to strategic shifts. These regula- tions can introduce a degree of inflexibility in workforce management but can also mitigate the risks that are asso- ciated with poorly considered strategic changes that might be initiated when managerial discretion is high. Such stringent regulations may encourage firms to invest more in employee training and development (Bartelsman et al., 2016), which can enhance employees' skills and innovative ability, thus helping to foster an SAEED ET AL. 9 15405885, 0, D ow nloaded from https://onlinelibrary.w iley.com /doi/10.1111/jpim .12762 by D urham U niversity - U niversity, W iley O nline L ibrary on [13/11/2024]. See the T erm s and C onditions (https://onlinelibrary.w iley.com /term s-and-conditions) on W iley O nline L ibrary for rules of use; O A articles are governed by the applicable C reative C om m ons L icense entrepreneurial environment. In common law countries, the courts tend to protect the rights of inventors and crea- tors vigorously by ensuring that intellectual property rights are robustly enforced. In such countries, TMTs operate under legal frameworks that, while ensuring sta- bility and security for investors, could also impose rigid constraints that limit the agility required for corporate entrepreneurship. Kraft (2022) notes that TMTs that operate in contexts that feature high levels of managerial discretion have leeway to make idiosyncratic decisions like those that are typical in corporate entrepreneurship. Hypothesis 8. Alternative: National-level managerial discretion moderates the relation- ships between TMTs' attributes and corporate entrepreneurship such that the hypothesized direct relationships between TMTs' attributes and corporate entrepreneurship (H1 to H6) are more pronounced in countries where national-level managerial discretion is low than they are in countries where it is high. 3 | METHODOLOGY 3.1 | Literature search We followed a multi-step search process to compile the database for our meta-analysis. Our search covered arti- cles that were published up to June 2023 in databases that included ABI/INFORM, PsycINFO, EBSCO, Econ- Lit, ERIC (the expanded academic index), JSTOR, Sci- ence Direct, and Wilson Business Abstracts. We conducted the search using keywords like “executives,” “CEO,” “top management team,” “TMT,” “upper echelons,” “corporate entrepreneurship,” “firm-level entrepreneurship,” and “strategic entrepreneurship.” Subsequently, we performed a manual search in premier management and entrepreneurship journals, including Academy of Management Journal, Journal of Product Innovation Management, Journal of Management Studies, Journal of Management, Journal of World Business, Stra- tegic Management Journal, Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, Journal of Business Venturing, and Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal. To augment our database, we scrutinized the reference lists of published reviews of cor- porate entrepreneurship, such as those by Bierwerth et al. (2015), Dess et al. (2003), Kuratko (2017), and Urbano et al. (2022). We took several steps to minimize publication bias. First, we extended our database search to include institu- tional repositories like ProQuest Dissertations & Theses and academic platforms like arXiv and SSRN, targeting working papers, conference proceedings, and unpub- lished doctoral dissertations related to the antecedents of corporate entrepreneurship. We standardized the terms these manuscripts use to ensure consistency. Second, we reached out to subject-matter experts and academics in the field of corporate entrepreneurship, requesting any in-progress or unpublished works that may be relevant to our meta-analysis. Third, we reviewed the reference lists of the articles we had retrieved to uncover additional rel- evant studies. We applied the same inclusion and exclu- sion criteria that we used for the published works to any source identified through these steps to determine their suitability for the meta-analysis. Finally, to ensure we included nascent scholarship, we ran specialized search algorithms on Google Scholar using the “cited by” and “related articles” features, focusing on work that had not been published in peer-reviewed journals but were cited by articles in these journals. Our study employed the following key inclusion cri- teria. We focused on studies that use firm-level corporate entrepreneurship as their unit of analysis and excluded studies that focus on the individual/employee level (e.g., intrapreneurship). We also included only studies that report Pearson correlation coefficients between TMTs' attributes and corporate entrepreneurship or that provided sufficient statistical details to allow us to com- pute a correlation coefficient using the formulas Hunter and Schmidt (2011) provide. In addition, we selected studies that draw on the corporate entrepreneurship liter- ature and are set in a corporate context, so we excluded studies on academic entrepreneurship, social entrepre- neurship, and product innovation (when corporate entre- preneurship was not their main theoretical framework). Finally, although some scholars (e.g., Rensburg, 2015) consider entrepreneurial orientation a dimension of cor- porate entrepreneurship, we treated the two concepts separately, as entrepreneurial orientation encapsulates a firm's entrepreneurial inclination (Cruz & Nordqvist, 2012) and corporate entrepreneurship is con- cerned more with entrepreneurial activities themselves (Schindehutte et al., 2018; Thi & Trang, 2018). We adhered to several guidelines to maintain a reli- able level of independence among the correlations in our database (Aguinis et al., 2011). When a publication pre- sents results from multiple independent samples, we trea- ted each as a separate, independent sample (Geyskens et al., 2006). When multiple publications rely on identical or largely overlapping datasets, we treated them as a sin- gle study, entering the correlation between two identical variables into our database only once (Franke & Park, 2006; Geyskens et al., 2006). When a study provides multiple indicators of the same outcome variable (e.g., facets of TMTs' human capital like experience and 10 JOURNAL OF PRODUCT INNOVATION MANAGEMENT 15405885, 0, D ow nloaded from https://onlinelibrary.w iley.com /doi/10.1111/jpim .12762 by D urham U niversity - U niversity, W iley O nline L ibrary on [13/11/2024]. See the T erm s and C onditions (https://onlinelibrary.w iley.com /term s-and-conditions) on W iley O nline L ibrary for rules of use; O A articles are governed by the applicable C reative C om m ons L icense education), we averaged the effect sizes to account for statistical interdependence. When a study explores vari- ous outcome variables under corporate entrepreneurship (e.g., innovation, corporate venturing and/or strategic renewal), we entered the effect sizes separately into the database (Eisend, 2017). Our search process produced data on 128 effects from 57 independent samples, spanning the period from 1996 to 2023. A list of these studies and their characteristics is available in the Online Appendix. 3.2 | Variable classification and coding procedures To ensure accuracy and consistency in coding, we fol- lowed a manual coding process that outlines the informa- tion to be extracted from each study (Eisend, 2017; Lipsey & Wilson, 2001). The first two authors were responsible for the coding process, in which one author coded all the primary studies, while the other coded a randomly selected subset of effect sizes to ensure reliabil- ity (Borenstein et al., 2009). The intercoder reliability, measured through Cohen's kappa, was 0.96, indicating a high level of reliability (Valentine et al., 2010). We paid particular attention to the scales reported in primary studies to ensure that variables with conceptually similar constructs were not coded separately because of minor differences in labeling (Pigott, 2012). 3.3 | Dependent variable: Corporate entrepreneurship While the literature conceptualizes firm-level entrepre- neurial activities in various ways, we focus on corporate entrepreneurship because it captures a firm's actual entrepreneurial activities (Heavey et al., 2009). Following Zahra (1996a), who provides one of the measures of cor- porate entrepreneurship most frequently cited in our database, we assessed firms' corporate entrepreneurship based on three dimensions: innovation, corporate ventur- ing, and strategic renewal. This approach aligns with prior meta-analyses in the context of corporate entrepre- neurship, such as that by Bierwerth et al. (2015). We measured innovation using several scales, including the number of new products launched (Hayton, 2005), the number of patents (Rothaermel et al., 2006), and the amount of investment in cutting-edge research and devel- opment (R&D) (Yiu et al., 2007). We measured strategic renewal using scales like the percentage change in a firm's competitive strategies (Boeker, 1997), changes in structure and control systems (Gordon et al., 2000), and vertical integration patents (Rothaermel et al., 2006). We measured corporate venturing using scales that capture entrepreneurial ventures, such as when a firm enters a new industry (Hayton, 2005), enters an alliance with a new venture (Zahra, 2010), invests in a new venture (Zahra, 1995), or undertakes related and unrelated inter- national acquisitions (Zahra & Hayton, 2008). TABLE 1 Definition of TMT attributes and coding schemes. TMT attributes Definition Coding scheme examples TMT Diversity The distribution of personal attributes among interdependent members of a work unit (Jackson et al., 2003, p. 802) Diversity in education, tenure and functional background and experiences (Chen & Nadkarni, 2017; Hayton, 2005) TMT Size Number of members of the top management team members (Kirca et al., 2012) TMT size (Heavey & Simsek, 2013) Transformational Leadership The ability of the leader to motivate and inspire followers to move beyond their immediate self-interests through his charisma and being a role model (Bass, 1999) Transformational leadership (e.g., Chen et al., 2014) TMT Tenure Number of years within the firm/held a position as a member of TMT (Certo et al., 2006) Company tenure (Olson et al., 2020), top management team tenure (Pan et al., 2021) TMT General Human Capital Skills and knowledge that individuals acquire through investments in schooling, on-the-job training, and other types of experience (Unger et al. 2011) Education (Hayton 2005); Experience (Jahanshahi et al., 2018) TMT Entrepreneurial Human Capital Specific human capital related to entrepreneurship tasks (Unger et al. 2011) Scanning, evaluation (Lee et al., 2016; Nkongolo- Bakenda et al., 2010); entrepreneurship education (Nuscheler et al., 2019 Entrepreneurial alertness knowledge (Simsek et al., 2009) SAEED ET AL. 11 15405885, 0, D ow nloaded from https://onlinelibrary.w iley.com /doi/10.1111/jpim .12762 by D urham U niversity - U niversity, W iley O nline L ibrary on [13/11/2024]. See the T erm s and C onditions (https://onlinelibrary.w iley.com /term s-and-conditions) on W iley O nline L ibrary for rules of use; O A articles are governed by the applicable C reative C om m ons L icense 3.4 | TMTs' attributes Most research on TMTs centers on individual executives (e.g., chief executive offers) and broader groups of execu- tives with “overall responsibility for the organization” (Krause et al., 2022), such as TMTs. To align with this research landscape, we included both chief executive offi- cers' (CEOs') and TMTs' characteristics in our operationa- lization of TMTs' attributes whenever possible (Wang et al., 2023). We included TMTs' attributes only when multiple studies offer at least five correlations with corpo- rate entrepreneurship to ensure that our meta-analysis offers a meaningful investigation of their effects (Damanpour, 1991; Szymanski & Henard, 2001). Table 1 details the definitions, coding schemes, and examples of the key TMT attributes we included as antecedents to corporate entrepreneurship. 3.5 | Managerial discretion moderators 3.5.1 | Organization-level managerial discretion We operationalized organizational managerial discre- tion level through firm size by classifying firms into small and large firms (Wang et al., 2019), defining small firms as having 500 or fewer employees and/or annual sales revenues that do not exceed $20 million (e.g., Zahra et al., 2000), and large firms as having more than 500 employees and/or annual sales revenues that exceed $20 million. When data on the number of employees or sales revenues was not available, we inferred firm size from the nature of the databases from which the samples were drawn, such as the Fortune 500 list. We coded small firms as “1” and large firms as “0.” Following Jeong and Harrison (2017), we used the concept of organizational inertia as reflecting a firm's resistance to change, which can limit TMTs' influence on strategic decisions and overall organizational out- comes. Organizational inertia tends to be more pro- nounced in large firms than it is in small firms, as large firms tend to be entrenched in standardized routines and institutionalized mechanisms that impede adapt- ability and innovation (Finkelstein & Hambrick, 1990). A higher coding value in our model suggests that a firm exhibits less organizational inertia than one that has a low coding value and so has a high level of managerial discretion to implement strategic changes that foster entrepreneurial activities. 3.5.2 | National-level managerial discretion We measured national managerial discretion using Crossland and Hambrick's (2007, 2011) well-established methodologies, which have seen subsequent application in other studies (e.g., Burkhard et al., 2023; Kraft, 2022; Wang et al., 2023). This measure incorporates the four informal institutional variables of uncertainty tolerance, power distance, individualism, and cultural tightness and the three formal institutional variables of ownership dis- persion, legal origin, and employer flexibility. Informal Institutions are based on societal norms and cultural factors in the national context that influence the acceptance of and ability to execute TMTs' decisions. We combined Hofstede's (2001, 2022) and Gelfand et al.'s (2011) institutional dimensions to define informal institu- tions as consisting of uncertainty tolerance, power dis- tance, individualism, and cultural tightness. Cultures that score high in uncertainty tolerance tend to provide broad acceptance of unpredictable actions by TMTs, thereby offering TMTs significant managerial discretion. Cultures that score high in power distance demonstrate inherent respect and deference to authority, which can translate into less scrutiny of TMTs' decisions and enhanced managerial discretion. Cultures that emphasize individualism favor personal initiative and autonomy, which facilitates TMTs' unilateral decision-making. Finally, Gelfand et al.'s (2011) scores for cultural tightness (reversed) refer to the degree to which societal norms are enforced. “Loose” cultures, which are characterized by ambiguous and weakly enforced norms, offer TMTs more operational leeway than tight cultures do. Formal Institutions include legally codified rules and regulations that directly affect organizational governance and managerial actions. Ownership dispersion and legal origin are dichotomous variables, coded 1 for common law countries and dispersed firm structures and 0 for civil law countries and concentrated firm structures. This measure reflects the legal frameworks that govern corpo- rate behavior and managerial discretion (La Porta et al., 1999). The seventh institutional variable, employer flexibility, gauges the legal flexibility employers have in terms of labor relations and employment decisions (Botero et al., 2004). Finally, we created a composite score of managerial discretion for each country of interest using the mean of each country's standardized scores for the seven institu- tional variables. A higher value indicates that the coun- try's TMTs are less constrained by their environment, so they have higher managerial discretion. 12 JOURNAL OF PRODUCT INNOVATION MANAGEMENT 15405885, 0, D ow nloaded from https://onlinelibrary.w iley.com /doi/10.1111/jpim .12762 by D urham U niversity - U niversity, W iley O nline L ibrary on [13/11/2024]. See the T erm s and C onditions (https://onlinelibrary.w iley.com /term s-and-conditions) on W iley O nline L ibrary for rules of use; O A articles are governed by the applicable C reative C om m ons L icense 3.6 | Control variables Our methodological controls include the type of corpo- rate entrepreneurship the study addresses, the study's publication year, and the journal's quality. Methodologi- cal moderators include the year of publication (dichoto- mized as pre-2010, which takes a value of 1, and 0 otherwise) and the journal's quality, which we rated based on the ranking system of the Association of Busi- ness Schools (Storey et al., 2016). 3.7 | Meta-analytic technique The random-effects meta-analysis method was adopted for synthesizing effect size estimates from primary studies (Hunter & Schmidt, 2011; Schmidt et al., 2009). This approach is consistent with recent meta-analyses, where the random-effects model is preferred (Franke & Park, 2006; Rodriguez Cano et al., 2004; Storey et al., 2016). The random-effects model operates on the premise that observed variability arises from both between-study variance and within-study variance (also known as sampling error variance). Compared to the fixed-effects model, which attributes variability solely to sampling error, the random-effects model offers a more comprehensive view and is less susceptible to Type I errors (Hunter & Schmidt, 2011). Using reliability coefficients from the original study, we corrected each effect size (correlation) for measure- ment errors in both variables. We used the mean reliabil- ities from other relevant studies for studies that lack reliability coefficients (Cooper, 2017; Eisend, 2017) and obtained the true score correlation (ρ) by computing the weighted average of the reliability-corrected correlations. We calculated the 95% confidence interval and tested the homogeneity of the population correlations using the Q- statistic, where a significant Q-value indicates that vari- ances in the studies' effect sizes studies might be explained through moderators (Hunter & Schmidt, 2011). We employed Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software, which incorporates Hunter and Schmidt's (2011) artifact- distribution formulas for artifact control (Borenstein et al., 2009). The I2 statistic estimates the proportion of variance that is due to heterogeneity while avoiding the sample size sensitivity that can bias the Q-statistic (Borenstein et al., 2009). The I2 ranges from 0% to 100%, with higher values indicating true score variance in effect sizes rela- tive to sampling error variance; if I2 is low, then the sam- ple shows no heterogeneity, and nothing is worth exploring in the subgroup or moderator analysis. Tau is the measure of the dispersion of true effect sizes between studies in terms of the scale of the effect size. We con- ducted file-drawer analyses to assess the susceptibility of the findings to availability bias—that is, the tendency of published studies to report greater effect sizes than unpublished ones do—which may lead to inflated meta- analytic estimates (Koricheva et al., 2013). Therefore, we calculated the fail-safe number to determine the number of unpublished studies that would be required to change the effect size (Rosenthal, 1979). To complement the findings from the bivariate analy- sis and substantiate the relationships we identified, we used meta-analytical structural equation modeling and meta-analytical regression, which allowed for a more robust examination of the intricate TMT attributes and corporate entrepreneurship relationships (e.g., Chliova et al., 2015; Kirca et al., 2005; Unger et al., 2011). 3.8 | Meta-analytic structural equation modeling We supplemented the bivariate meta-analysis with meta- analytic structural equation modeling, one of the advan- tages of which is its comprehensive framework, which allows for a nuanced and in-depth examination of all var- iables in a single model (Kirca et al., 2012). Unlike the bivariate approach, which focuses on determining the strength of relationships, meta-analytic structural equation modeling considers a wide spectrum of poten- tial antecedents and control variables, as controls like the firm's size and age might affect the strength of the rela- tionships. Through this exhaustive approach, meta- analytic structural equation modeling paves the way to discerning the singular impact of a particular relation- ship, such as that between TMTs' entrepreneurial human capital and corporate entrepreneurship, after accounting for other key influences. In essence, it provides a pano- ramic view, thus ensuring that the effect size derived reflects the net influence, adjusted for other potential antecedents of corporate entrepreneurship. We conducted the meta-analytic structural equation modeling in two stages (Cheung & Chan, 2005). In the first stage, we used meta-analytic techniques to create a pooled correlation matrix, which serves as the input for the second stage, where the pooled correlation matrix is analyzed using path analysis (e.g., Viswesvaran & Ones, 1995). In the second stage, we tested the direct effects of TMTs' attributes (H1 to H6) on corporate entre- preneurship, which involved creating a pooled correla- tion matrix that included the pairwise relationships among the variables under study. We conducted meta- analytic structural equation modeling on this pooled cor- relation matrix using AMOS software (Arbuckle & SAEED ET AL. 13 15405885, 0, D ow nloaded from https://onlinelibrary.w iley.com /doi/10.1111/jpim .12762 by D urham U niversity - U niversity, W iley O nline L ibrary on [13/11/2024]. See the T erm s and C onditions (https://onlinelibrary.w iley.com /term s-and-conditions) on W iley O nline L ibrary for rules of use; O A articles are governed by the applicable C reative C om m ons L icense Wothke, 1999), which allowed us to test the direct rela- tionships between TMT attributes and corporate entre- preneurship across multiple studies. 3.9 | Meta-analytical regression analysis To test the moderating hypotheses (H7 and H8), we employed meta-analytical regression analysis, that uses weighted least squares to model the previously unex- plained variance in effect sizes (Lipsey & Wilson, 2001). In addition to our key organization-level and national- level explanatory variables that capture the strength of managerial discretion, we included four control variables in our meta-regressions to account for the primary stud- ies' characteristics: a dummy variable denoting the publi- cation period (pre-2010 or not), each publication's ranking provided by the Association of Business Schools to account for differences in journal quality (Storey et al., 2016), a dummy variable indicating whether a study used panel data (reference group) or cross-sectional data (Burkhard et al., 2023), and a categorical variable (strategic renewal, innovation, venturing, and overall cor- porate entrepreneurship) that controlled for differences in the studies' operationalizations of corporate entrepre- neurship. We employed a random-effects model, through Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software (Borenstein et al., 2009). To clarify the moderating role of contextual factors hypothesized in H7 and H8, we complemented the main regression with another set of meta-regressions for each relationship between TMT attributes and corpo- rate entrepreneurship. Following Hedges and Olkin's (2014) recommendation, we conducted meta-regression analyses only when there were at least 10 effect sizes. 4 | RESULTS 4.1 | Summary of bivariate analysis results Table 2 displays the main effects results for TMTs' attri- butes and corporate entrepreneurship. To interpret the magnitude of the effect sizes, we followed Cohen's (1988) guidelines, which categorize correlations as weak (around 0.10), moderate (around 0.30), and strong (approaching 0.50). Weak correlations, despite being sta- tistically significant, are considered to have only a modest impact on corporate entrepreneurship, moderate correla- tions suggest a tangible but not overwhelming influence, and strong correlations indicate key drivers with substan- tial direct impact on corporate entrepreneurship. In terms of publication bias, large fail-safe k values indicate that the meta-analytic effect sizes are robust in showing resistance to potential biases introduced by unpublished null results. Our findings provide a nuanced explanation of the complex relationship between TMTs' attributes and TABLE 2 Bivariate analysis of TMT attributes and corporate entrepreneurship relationships. Construct k N Min Max r ρ SE 95% CI I2 z TU2 Q fk TMT attributes TMT Diversity 25 4162 �0.14 0.38 0.06 0.08** 0.03 0.01 to 0.14 77.81 2.28 0.02 109.63*** 152 TMT Size 23 24,371 �0.19 0.46 0.14 0.18*** 0.02 0.12 to 0.24 92.36 6.16 0.01 56.44*** 5876 Transformational Leadership 13 3282 �0.03 0.67 0.33 0.44*** 0.06 0.30 to 0.56 95.25 5.74 0.08 253.13*** 3114 TMT Tenure 18 4,546,866 �0.23 0.18 0.01 0.01 0.00 �0.05 to 0.03 68.70 0.35 0.01 54.32*** 1486 TMT Human Capital (Overall) 49 19,374 �0.15 0.72 0.18 0.29*** 0.01 0.14 to 0.38 96.67 6.10 0.11 363.40*** 6224 General Human Capital 29 15,497 �0.15 0.30 0.04 0.05** 0.01 0.03 to 0.09 80.75 3.80 0.01 84.14** 134 Entrepreneurial Human Capital 20 3877 �0.15 0.72 0.38 0.53*** 0.06 0.28 to 0.64 95.67 7.09 0.13 438.86*** 6090 Firm's Characteristics Firm Size 44 26,592 �0.56 0.35 0.15 0.19*** 0.02 0.10 to 0.19 90.95 8.12 0.01 485.92*** 4517 Firm Age 35 25,563 �0.20 0.59 0.02 0.03 0.01 �0.01 to 0.08 93.64 0.37 0.02 264.52*** 3057 Abbreviations: r, sample weighted average correlation; ρ, estimated population correlation corrected for unreliability; CI, 95% confidence interval; fk, fail-safe- k; I2, I squared; k, number of correlations analyzed; N, combined sample size; Q, heterogeneity; SE, standard error; TU2, Tau squared; Z, Z-test for significance of effect size. **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001. 14 JOURNAL OF PRODUCT INNOVATION MANAGEMENT 15405885, 0, D ow nloaded from https://onlinelibrary.w iley.com /doi/10.1111/jpim .12762 by D urham U niversity - U niversity, W iley O nline L ibrary on [13/11/2024]. See the T erm s and C onditions (https://onlinelibrary.w iley.com /term s-and-conditions) on W iley O nline L ibrary for rules of use; O A articles are governed by the applicable C reative C om m ons L icense corporate entrepreneurship. Two TMT attributes stand out as major influencers: entrepreneurial human capi- tal and transformational leadership. Entrepreneurial human capital shows a strong and statistically signifi- cant correlation with corporate entrepreneurship (ρ= 0.53, p< 0.001), which suggests that the TMT's skills and experiences related to entrepreneurship play a pivotal role in shaping corporate entrepreneurship activities. Transformational leadership is another key driver, with a significant and robust relationship to corporate entrepreneurship (ρ= 0.44, p<0.001) which indicates that the leadership style the TMT adopts can substantially influence the firm's entrepreneurial endeavors. By contrast, the TMT's diversity (ρ= 0.08, p<0.01) and size (ρ= 0.18, p<0.001) have weaker influ- ences. Firms' characteristics like firm size (ρ= 0.19, p<0.001), while relevant, have a more subdued impact on corporate entrepreneurship than firm age (ρ= 0.03, n. s.). Finally, TMT tenure did not show statistically signifi- cant correlations with corporate entrepreneurship (ρ= 0.01, n.s.). 4.2 | Summary of the main effects of TMTs' attributes on corporate entrepreneurship with meta-analytic structural equation modeling Our study leveraged meta-analytic structural equation modeling in an effort to delineate the influence of TMTs' attributes on corporate entrepreneurship and assess the direct effects posited in hypotheses H1–H6. Using a meta-analytic correlation matrix (provided in the Online Appendix), we constructed a structural equation model with a harmonic mean sample size of 1170 to investigate these effects. The path coefficients reported in Table 3 reveal significant and robust relationships between sev- eral TMT attributes and corporate entrepreneurship. Our model's fit indices indicate an adequate fit, supporting the structural validity of our analysis (χ2(1) = 3.14, p = 0.09; RMSEA = 0.10; AGFI = 0.95; NFI = 0.97; RMSR = 0.02). Our results, which align closely with our earlier bivar- iate analysis, show that the TMT's entrepreneurial human capital (β = 0.337, p < 0.001) and transforma- tional leadership (β = 0.257, p < 0.001) in particular have strong, positive relationships with corporate entrepre- neurship. This finding aligns with the upper echelons theory's suggestion that TMTs' entrepreneurial capabili- ties and leadership styles are drivers of corporate entre- preneurial activities. The analysis also revealed that TMTs' diversity (β = 0.058, p < 0.05) and size (β = 0.145, p < 0.001) relate, albeit more modestly, to corporate entrepreneur- ship. Other TMT attributes, such as tenure and general human capital, had no significant impact on corporate entrepreneurship when all variables were considered concurrently, even after controlling for firm size and firm age. In addition, our findings indicate that larger firms are more likely to engage in corporate entrepreneurship activities (β = 0.063, p < 0.05) than smaller firms are. However, firm age, which was not significant in the bivariate analysis, is not significantly related to corporate entrepreneurship. The insights gleaned from the meta-analytic structural equation modeling augment the foundational understanding provided by the bivariate analyses by offering a more nuanced and robust perspec- tive on the complex interplay of the TMTs' attributes that influence corporate entrepreneurship. 4.3 | The moderating role of organization- and national-level managerial discretion The meta-analytic regression results presented in Table 4 examine the moderating effects of organization- and national-level managerial discretion on the relationship between TMTs' attributes and corporate entrepreneur- ship. The model, which includes key managerial discre- tion contextual variables along with control variables, achieves a satisfactory fit, with an R2 of 0.32, indicating that 32% of the variance in the relationship is explained by our model. Our analysis tested Hypothesis 7, which proposed that organization-level managerial discretion moderates the relationship between TMTs' attributes and corporate entrepreneurship, with a more pronounced impact in TABLE 3 Path model results from meta-analytic structural equation modeling. Variable Model 1 TMT Diversity 0.058 (0.03)* TMT Size 0.145 (0.03)*** Transformational Leadership 0.257 (0.03)*** TMT Tenure �0.017 (0.03) TMT General Human Capital 0.051 (0.03) TMT Entrepreneurial Human Capital 0.337 (0.03)*** Firm Size 0.063 (0.03)* Firm Age �0.002 (0.03) Note: Standardized path coefficients are presented with standard errors in parentheses. *p < 0.05; ***p < 0.001. SAEED ET AL. 15 15405885, 0, D ow nloaded from https://onlinelibrary.w iley.com /doi/10.1111/jpim .12762 by D urham U niversity - U niversity, W iley O nline L ibrary on [13/11/2024]. See the T erm s and C onditions (https://onlinelibrary.w iley.com /term s-and-conditions) on W iley O nline L ibrary for rules of use; O A articles are governed by the applicable C reative C om m ons L icense smaller firms, which tend to have high levels of manage- rial discretion. However, the results did not support this hypothesis. Contrary to our expectations, the data indi- cated that organization-level managerial discretion had no significant moderating effect on the relationship between TMT attributes and corporate entrepreneurship (β = 0.051, n.s.). However, the results of testing Hypothesis 8 revealed a significant and negative moderating effect of national- level managerial discretion on the relationship between TMTs' attributes and corporate entrepreneurship (β = �0.067, p < 0.05). Thus, these results support alter- native Hypothesis 8 and but do not support Hypothe- ses 7 or 8. To delve into these relationships, we conducted addi- tional meta-regression analyses that focused on a single TMT attribute, with results summarized in Table 5. These analyses consistently supported the findings from Table 4, showing no support for Hypothesis 7 across all of the TMT attributes, we examined and no moderating effect of organization-level managerial discretion (firm size) on the relationship between TMTs' attributes and corporate entrepreneurship. For TMT general human capital, there was evidence supporting Hypothesis 7, indi- cating a moderating effect of organization-level manage- rial discretion on the relationship between TMT attributes and corporate entrepreneurship. For Hypothesis 8, further analyses confirmed that national-level managerial discretion negatively moder- ates the positive relationships between four TMT attri- butes and corporate entrepreneurship: TMT size (β = �0.042, p < 0.05), TMT tenure (β = �0.087, p < 0.05), and both general human capital (β = �0.041, p < 0.05), and entrepreneurial human capital (β = �0.210, p < 0.1). Finally, in analyzing the results presented in Table 4, we find interesting results for the variables. First, the dummy variable that represents the studies in our sample that were published before 2010 showed significant results (β = 0.142, p < 0.05), suggesting that the temporal context played a role in shaping the research outcomes, reflecting shifts in the corporate entrepreneurship research over time. Second, journal quality exhibited a negative correlation with corporate entrepreneurship out- comes (β = �0.091, p < 0.05), which highlights the influ- ence of the editorial standards and research methodologies that vary across publication outlets. This finding also suggests that studies that are published in non-leading journals report higher effect sizes for corpo- rate entrepreneurship, possibly indicating a publication bias or differences in these outlets' methodological rigor. The finding underscores the importance of considering the source of research data when interpreting results, particularly in meta-analyses, where data synthesis spans a broad range of journals. Third, the analysis revealed that the relationship between TMTs' attributes and corpo- rate entrepreneurship is weaker in panel studies than it is in studies that use other research designs (β = �0.156, p < 0.01), perhaps because of the longitudinal nature of panel studies, which may capture nuanced temporal dynamics that cross-sectional designs overlook. How corporate entrepreneurship was operationalized was not a significant factor in our model (β = 0.051, n.s.), so how the studies in our sample measure corporate entrepreneurship does not have a significant impact on the relationship between TMTs' attributes and corporate TABLE 4 Meta-analytic regression of contextual moderators on the overall relationship between TMT attributes and CE. Variable/Model Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Year (Before 2010 = 1) 0.038 (0.06) 0.142 (0.06)* 0.142 (0.06)* Journal Quality (Leading = 1) �0.089 (0.05)† �0.088 (0.05)* �0.091 (0.04)* CE types �0.012 (0.02) �0.015 (0.02) �0.015 (0.02) Data type (Panel = 1) �0.177 (0.05)*** �0.156 (0.05)** �0.156 (0.05)** Organization-level managerial discretion 0.051 (0.04) 0.051 (0.04) National-level managerial discretion �0.067 (0.03)* K 118 118 118 Q (model) 20.23*** 19.61*** 39.61*** R2 0.13 0.20 0.32 Tau2 0.06 0.05 0.04 Note: Standardized regression coefficients are presented with standard errors in parentheses. Abbreviations: K, the number of studies; Q, the homogeneity statistic; R2, the proportion of between-study variance explained by moderator(s); Tau2, random- effects between study variance component. †p < 0.10; *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001. 16 JOURNAL OF PRODUCT INNOVATION MANAGEMENT 15405885, 0, D ow nloaded from https://onlinelibrary.w iley.com /doi/10.1111/jpim .12762 by D urham U niversity - U niversity, W iley O nline L ibrary on [13/11/2024]. See the T erm s and C onditions (https://onlinelibrary.w iley.com /term s-and-conditions) on W iley O nline L ibrary for rules of use; O A articles are governed by the applicable C reative C om m ons L icense entrepreneurship. The uniformity in effect across the operational definitions of corporate entrepreneurship underscores the robustness of TMT attributes' influence on corporate entrepreneurship, irrespective of how it is measured. 5 | DISCUSSION In contributing to the ongoing debate on the impact of TMTs' attributes on corporate entrepreneurship (e.g., Schindehutte et al., 2018; Urbano et al., 2022), our meta-analysis has useful implications for TMT research. While the TMT's role in driving corporate entrepreneur- ship is a focal point in academia, a comprehensive under- standing of how TMTs' attributes affect corporate entrepreneurship remains elusive. Our study helps to fill this gap by exploring the influence of TMTs' diversity, size, use of transformational leadership, tenure, general human capital, and entrepreneurial human capital on corporate entrepreneurship. In doing so, our study enriches the dialogue initiated by Lieberson and O'Con- nor (1972) concerning the TMT's influence on organiza- tional outcomes, especially under varying levels of managerial discretion (Hambrick & Mason, 1984). Our results challenge the prevailing wisdom by sug- gesting that a one-size-fits-all approach to assembling TMTs may not be as effective as once thought. In doing so, we respond to calls to reintroduce context into TMT research (Hambrick, 2007; Yamak et al., 2014). We found that the effects of TMTs' attributes depend on context, particularly the organization- and national-level context, and its effect on managerial discretion. Our find- ings also suggest that firms cannot blindly replicate the composition of successful TMTs that operate in other national contexts and expect the same outcomes, as the contextual effect could be attributed to variations in the informal and formal institutional environments that sub- stantially shape countries' views of an acceptable level of managerial discretion. 5.1 | Theoretical implications for upper echelons theory The findings from this study contribute to upper echelons theory research, which suggests that organizational out- comes are largely reflective of TMTs' attributes. Our research extends upper echelons theory by providing a nuanced empirical examination of how certain of TMTs' attributes influence corporate entrepreneurship, an area that is not otherwise comprehensively explored. Our find- ings contribute to the literature in four primary ways. First, our study enriches the strategic management and innovation management literatures' discussions that are based on meta-analytical evidence regarding the impacts of TMTs' attributes on a variety of organizational outcomes, such as financial performance (Burkhard et al., 2023; Certo et al., 2006; Wang et al., 2016; Zaandam et al., 2021), corporate social responsibility (Wang et al., 2023), innovation (Kraft, 2022), and multinational- ity (Kirca et al., 2012). Building on this established stream of meta-analytical evidence that underlies upper echelons theory, our study contributes by demonstrating TABLE 5 Meta-analytic regression of contextual moderators on TMT attributes and corporate entrepreneurship relationships. Moderator TMT diversity— CE TMT size— CE Transformational leadership—CE TMT tenure— CE Human capital (overall)—CE TMT general human capital TMT entrepreneurial human capital—CE Organizational- level managerial discretion �0.025 (0.06) �0.046 (0.06) �0.145 (0.21) 0.063 (0.05) �0.025 (0.07) �0.08 (0.02)** �0.106 (0.11) National-level managerial discretion �0.040 (0.09) �0.042 (0.02)* 0.050 (0.06) �0.087 (0.04)* �0.130 (0.07)* �0.041 (0.02)** �0.210 (0.11)† k 21 23 13 18 42 26 20 Q model 0.28 6.82* 0.65 2.89† 5.55* 15.35*** 2.79 R2 0.00 0.08 0.03 0.02 0.33 0.90 0.01 Tau2 0.012 0.007 0.03 0.00 0.06 0.003 0.05 Note: Standardized regression coefficients are presented with standard errors in parentheses. Abbreviations: K, the number of studies; Q, the homogeneity statistic; R2, the proportion of between-study variance explained by moderator(s); Tau2, random- effects between study variance component. †p < 0.1; *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001. SAEED ET AL. 17 15405885, 0, D ow nloaded from https://onlinelibrary.w iley.com /doi/10.1111/jpim .12762 by D urham U niversity - U niversity, W iley O nline L ibrary on [13/11/2024]. See the T erm s and C onditions (https://onlinelibrary.w iley.com /term s-and-conditions) on W iley O nline L ibrary for rules of use; O A articles are governed by the applicable C reative C om m ons L icense empirically how TMTs' attributes can foster corporate entrepreneurship, an underexplored area in this broad field of innovation management and strategic manage- ment. By highlighting the pivotal role of TMTs' attributes in corporate entrepreneurship, our study fills a significant gap in strategic leadership research and helps to explain how leadership dynamics influence not just typical firm performance metrics but also corporate entrepreneurship (Busenbark et al., 2016; Neely et al., 2020). Second, our study offers the first meta-analysis that investigates the attributes of TMTs that drive corporate entrepreneurship empirically. Our research extends the corporate entrepreneurship literature's attempts to con- solidate TMTs' attributes through qualitative reviews (e.g., Corbett et al., 2013; Phan et al., 2009; Sakhdari, 2016; Schindehutte et al., 2018; Urbano et al., 2022) by reconciling the mixed findings that have characterized previous research and offering a more refined and precise description of how TMTs' attributes influence corporate entrepreneurship. Conducting this meta-analysis enabled us to determine the true magnitude and direction of rela- tionships between key TMT attributes and corporate entrepreneurship. This research helps to resolve ambigui- ties and provides a clearer direction for both future aca- demic research and practice by defining the strength and significance of TMTs' attributes in enhancing corporate entrepreneurship. In adopting Aguinis et al.'s (2011) recommendation to juxtapose meta-analytic findings with previously pub- lished meta-analyses, we contextualize the relative strength and implications of our findings. This approach illuminates our findings on the impact of TMTs' attri- butes on corporate entrepreneurship compared to their impact on other organizational outcomes, such as finan- cial performance and non-financial performance (e.g., corporate social responsibility). We discuss where we found some differences and similarities with other meta-analytical evidence on TMTs' attributes. Third, our study reveals TMT attributes that predict corporate entrepreneurship that differ from those that other meta-analyses link to organizational outcomes (e.g., financial outcomes, corporate social responsibility outcomes, multi-nationality outcomes). These differences illustrate the contextual specificity of TMTs' attributes in the realm of corporate entrepreneurship. Our study found that TMT members' tenure does not significantly influence corporate entrepreneurship, whereas other meta-analytical studies show that it negatively correlates with corporate social responsibility (Wang et al., 2023), positively with financial performance (Wang et al., 2016), and not at all with multi-nationality (Kirca et al., 2012). This difference could suggest that the proactivity and risk-taking that is required for corporate entrepreneurship may not align with the stability and consistency that is often associated with longer tenures, which may both benefit financial performance and have adverse effects on corporate social responsibility but not necessarily corporate entrepreneurship. Our results indicate that TMTs' general human capi- tal does not have a significant impact on corporate entre- preneurship (when analyzed alongside TMTs' entrepreneurial human capital using meta-analytic struc- tural equation modeling). This finding diverges from Wang et al. (2016), who find that general education has a positive influence on firms' strategic actions (e.g., strategic scope, risk, and change). This difference suggests that certain entrepreneurial competencies are more useful in fostering corporate entrepreneurship than the TMT's general educational background and under- scores the need for a more nuanced approach to selecting TMT members when a firm seeks entrepreneurial out- comes. Contrary to Certo et al. (2006), whose findings indicate a negative relationship between the TMT's size and the firm's financial performance, and Kirca et al. (2012), who conclude no relationship between the TMT's size and multi-nationality, our analysis reveals that the TMT's size has a positive impact on corporate entrepre- neurship. This result could suggest that large TMTs, which may offer a broader range of skills and more com- prehensive managerial capacities than small firms do, are better equipped to drive corporate entrepreneurship. Overall, these differences highlight the need for a more nuanced understanding of how TMTs' attributes that are grounded in upper echelons theory influence various dimensions of organizational outcomes. Fourth, our study reveals relationships between TMTs' attributes and corporate entrepreneurship that resemble those that other meta-analyses find, thereby substantiating and expanding upper echelons theory's scope in the strategic management and innovation man- agement literature. For instance, among the most influ- ential antecedents of corporate entrepreneurship is TMT members' entrepreneurial human capital. This finding highlights that experiences in entrepreneurial ventures, a willingness to take risks, and an aptitude for innovative thinking are not just beneficial but could be critical for established firms that seek to be more entrepreneurial. While Unger et al. (2011) find a modest effect of task- related human capital on entrepreneurship (effect size = 0.11), our study reveals an effect size that is almost five times larger (effect size = 0.53). Moreover, Wang et al. (2016) meta-analysis shows that TMT members' task-related experience is positively related to their firms' strategic actions (e.g., strategic scope, risk, and change) but that TMT members' general experience is only mod- erately to negatively related to these actions. This finding 18 JOURNAL OF PRODUCT INNOVATION MANAGEMENT 15405885, 0, D ow nloaded from https://onlinelibrary.w iley.com /doi/10.1111/jpim .12762 by D urham U niversity - U niversity, W iley O nline L ibrary on [13/11/2024]. See the T erm s and C onditions (https://onlinelibrary.w iley.com /term s-and-conditions) on W iley O nline L ibrary for rules of use; O A articles are governed by the applicable C reative C om m ons L icense shows that TMTs' entrepreneurial (or task-related) human capital is far more valuable to established firms than it is to individual entrepreneurs. Our results are consistent with other meta-analyses in the strategic leadership field that find that TMTs' trans- formational leadership significantly contributes to their firms' innovativeness (Lee et al., 2020; Watts et al., 2020). Transformational leaders, known for their ability to inspire and intellectually stimulate employees and to fos- ter an inclusive culture, are pivotal in driving corporate entrepreneurship. This leadership style catalyzes innova- tion by empowering employees, encouraging risk-taking, and nurturing a forward-thinking organizational ethos. Our results resonate with the broader literature that con- nects transformational leadership with increasing firms' entrepreneurial output, reinforcing the value of such leadership qualities in achieving strategic entrepreneurial outcomes. The positive associations of TMT size and diversity with corporate entrepreneurship that our study finds echo the findings from other meta-analyses (Certo et al., 2006; Hosseini, 2019) that report that larger and more diverse TMTs are likely to bring a wide range of the perspectives, skills, and experiences that can be useful in identifying and exploiting new opportunities and driving corporate entrepreneurship. 5.2 | Implications for the managerial discretion perspective Our study's findings have significant implications for the discourse surrounding TMTs' power (Ozgen et al., 2024; Wangrow et al., 2015) in the organization- and national- level contexts. Among these implications is that our results complement research that focuses on national- level and organization-level sources of managerial discre- tion (Crossland & Hambrick, 2011) while exploring the TMT's influence on a variety of organizational outcomes. Another implication for the managerial discretion perspective is related to our finding that the effects of the organization-level managerial discretion moderator are weak and nonsignificant. Building on Jeong and Harri- son (2017) and Burkhard et al. (2023), we designed this measure to explain the amount of TMTs' discretion that stems from firm size, with high levels of managerial dis- cretion expected in small firms and low levels in large firms. However, the weak effects our analysis revealed suggest that TMTs' attributes have a similar impact on corporate entrepreneurship regardless of firm size (as the source of managerial discretion). This finding indicates that the influence of TMTs' attributes on corporate entre- preneurship may be robust across organizational contexts, challenging the view that firm size alters TMTs' strategic influence. In line with Crossland and Hambrick (2011), who argue that the degree of national managerial discretion afforded to TMTs can vary based on institutional settings, our results also confirm that a low level of national man- agerial discretion is an important contextual variable in considering corporate entrepreneurship. This finding emphasizes that managerial discretion significantly influ- ences the relationship between TMTs' attributes and cor- porate entrepreneurship. However, national managerial discretion is unlikely to be the only contextual factor, so future research could explore additional institutional var- iables that may affect this relationship. The literature's mixed findings regarding the role of national-level managerial discretion as a moderator between TMTs' attributes and organizational outcomes underscore the complexity of this relationship. Studies like Burkhard et al. (2023), Kraft (2022), and Wang et al. (2023) provide insights into these mixed findings by con- sidering the impacts of national managerial discretion and the importance of certain of TMTs' attributes and behaviors. For instance, Burkhard et al. (2023) observe that high levels of managerial discretion positively mod- erate the relationship between overconfident TMT mem- bers and strategic risk-taking. This observation suggests that, in environments that feature large amounts of man- agerial freedom, bold decisions that are driven by over- confidence can lead to the aggressive risk-taking that can translate into strategic gains, although it depends on the context. In contrast, Kraft (2022) finds that narcissistic CEOs have a negative effect on firm performance when the level of managerial discretion is high. This finding points to the risks associated with high levels of manage- rial discretion, where the self-serving and potentially harmful behaviors that are typical of narcissistic leaders can undermine organizational objectives and perfor- mance. Wang et al. (2023) report that national-level man- agerial discretion does not significantly moderate the relationship between TMT members' attributes and cor- porate social responsibility. This finding could indicate that the factors that influence corporate social responsi- bility are less sensitive to variations in managerial discre- tion or that other contextual or organizational factors play a more decisive role in shaping the outcomes of cor- porate social responsibility. These mixed results call for a more nuanced and attribute-specific approach to studying managerial discre- tion. The literature indica