Corporate Entrepreneurship and Innovation Performance: The Mediating Effect of Employee Engagement through Leader’s Supervision

The information in the abstract should be more precise to catch the attention of potential readers.

Done.  Page 1

Abstract: Purpose: -The purpose was to investigate the mediated moderating effect of employee engagement by leader's supervision in the effects of Corporate entrepreneurship on innovation performance. Design/methodology/approach- The study was cross-sectional and survey based in design. Tunisian Insurance and Reinsurance Company was the context for the study. Participants were 248(12 manager , and 236 employees). Findings –The relationship of CE and IP was mediated by EE. Additionally, leader's supervision moderated the relationship between CE and IP. Further, leader's supervision had a mediated moderation effect from CE to the IP , through the EE. Conclusion-The significance of this study lies in its contribution to CE ,IP , EE and leader's supervision literatures. It was revealed that CE behavior was found in the organizational learning processes that strengthen employees’ ability to analyze markets and formulate new products.  

The abbreviations EE, CE and IP must be explained in advance.

The purpose was to investigate the mediated moderating effect of employee engagement(EE) by leader's supervision in the effects of Corporate entrepreneurship(CE)on innovation performance(IP).

"248(12 manager" there are typos that need to be corrected, in this case the space before the parenthesis.

participants were 248 (12 manager , and 236 employees).

The methodology can be mentioned in this section. At least the analyses carried out to achieve the proposed objective.

The study was cross-sectional and survey based in design. Tunisian Insurance and Reinsurance Company was the context for the study.

The author(s) should indicate what unique knowledge they want to add to the existing literature.

Hence, it can be said that the empirical and theoretical understandings come together in order to bridge the gap by testing the mediated moderating effect of EE by leader's supervision in the effects of CE on IP, in Tunisia in particular. Examining the mediating role of EE by leader's supervision would be added to our understanding about the nature of relationship between CE and IP.

The state of the art should be articulated in a more in-depth approach. A general theoretical framework is suggested before starting with section 4.1 and beyond.

4. Theoretical background

Academics and practitioners have accepted CE as a legitimate route towards increased levels of organisational performance (Hornsby, Kuratko, Shepherd, & Bott, 2009).Corporate entrepreneurship is said to be a useful strategy that all organizations should be able to adopt if they wish to pursue innovation and expansion (Bani-Mustafa, Sam, Oualid, and Khalil, 2021). It also represents an employee’s willingness and engagement towards achieving their entrepreneurial vision (Do and Dung ,2020).

Hornsby, Kuratko& Zahra(2002)have outlined that positive perception about the internal factors of corporate entrepreneurship leads to numerous performance outcomes including innovation performance. Moreover, Nasution, Mavondo, Matanda& Ndubisi(2011)suggest that entrepreneurship and entrepreneurial climate within the organization is important in motivating employees to enhance productivity and bringing innovation to the business

On the other hand Lukeš,  and Stephan (2017)demonstrated the mediating role of perceived managerial support for supporting innovations in an organisation. In other words, even if the organisation supports innovation, this support does not function well when the support from middle managers is missing. Successful innovation requires that new ideas are put into practice and implemented , but there is a need for feedback from managers(Santos, Marques and Ferreira,2021).

Moreover, a lack of employee engagement has been evidenced to represent corporate-wide potential losses in creativity (Gilson & Shalley, 2004), productivity and corporate performance (Harter, Schmidt, & Hayes, 2002).

In point 4.2 on innovation, it is suggested to change the beginning of the sentence "Innovation is the "specific function of entrepreneurship [. . . .]" to another one as indicated by the authors X, Y, Z or innovation is a specific function of entrepreneurship (X, Y, Z)… You can use some of the references that I will suggest in this review.

Innovation is the specific function of entrepreneurship .It is the means by which the entrepreneur either creates new wealth-producing resources or endows existing resources with enhanced potential for creating wealth(Drucker ,2002; Medase,2020 ).

Discussion and recommendations

The discussion of the finding does not critically synthesize the findings.

Please this point needs to be further elaborated. It should include the key results provided by the analysis in relation to the three proposed hypotheses.

Results indicated that corporate entrepreneurship and innovation performance were positively correlated (r =.35, p < .01). Also there was a positive correlation between  leader's supervision and innovation performance (r = .43, p < .01). Moreover, employee engagement and leader's supervision were positively correlated (r = .49, p < .01). Also there was a positive correlation between employee engagement and innovation performance(r = .36, p < .01) .

when leader's supervision was higher than the average, when CE increased by 1, IP was increased by .57, which was statistically significant (B = .57, p < .01). Through the analysis results of the moderating effect, it was confirmed that leader's supervision was controlling the effect of CE on IP.

the interaction variables of corporate entrepreneurship and leader's supervision significantly predicted employee engagement (β = .49, p < .01), and employee engagement had a significant direct effect on innovation performance (β = .49, p < .01). = .53, p < .001)

Conclusion

This paper is short on conclusion. Require further development. What conclusions can be drawn as generalizable knowledge in the literature needs to be clarified.

Conclusion

The significance of this study lies in its contribution to CE ,IP , EE and leader's supervision literatures. It was revealed that CE behavior was found in the organizational learning processes that strengthen employees’ ability to analyze markets and formulate new products. the interaction variables of corporate entrepreneurship and leader's supervision significantly predicted employee engagement, and employee engagement had a significant direct effect on innovation performance. the mediated moderating effect was significant at all levels of the moderating variable, and as the leader's supervision increased, the positive indirect effect increased. These results indicate that the indirect mediating effect of the corporate entrepreneurship on Innovation Performance through employee engagement is regulated by leader's supervision.

Research Limitations/implications

The limitations of the study are not described. Only one additional conclusion is provided. This section requires further development.

It is recommended to include theoretical and practical implications of the research in split section.

Research Implications

It is confirmed that individual employees can play various roles in the process of corporate entrepreneurship, but the most important role in the facilitation of CE is from a sponsor, i.e., a high-ranking manager who functions as the advocate of entrepreneurial activity. Leaders promote creativity and improve team members’ engagement in innovation activities to further progress CE phenomenon in firms.

 Reviewer comments

 My Response

The abstract needs to be rewritten and follow a logical order.

Done.  Page 1

Abstract: Purpose: -The purpose was to investigate the mediated moderating effect of employee engagement by leader's supervision in the effects of Corporate entrepreneurship on innovation performance. Design/methodology/approach- The study was cross-sectional and survey based in design. Tunisian Insurance and Reinsurance Company was the context for the study. Participants were 248(12 manager , and 236 employees). Findings –The relationship of CE and IP was mediated by EE. Additionally, leader's supervision moderated the relationship between CE and IP. Further, leader's supervision had a mediated moderation effect from CE to the IP , through the EE. Conclusion-The significance of this study lies in its contribution to CE ,IP , EE and leader's supervision literatures. It was revealed that CE behavior was found in the organizational learning processes that strengthen employees’ ability to analyze markets and formulate new products.  

The conclusion section needs to be expanded. the authors should explain what the implications of the study are.

Conclusion

The significance of this study lies in its contribution to CE ,IP , EE and leader's supervision literatures. It was revealed that CE behavior was found in the organizational learning processes that strengthen employees’ ability to analyze markets and formulate new products. the interaction variables of corporate entrepreneurship and leader's supervision significantly predicted employee engagement, and employee engagement had a significant direct effect on innovation performance. the mediated moderating effect was significant at all levels of the moderating variable, and as the leader's supervision increased, the positive indirect effect increased. These results indicate that the indirect mediating effect of the corporate entrepreneurship on Innovation Performance through employee engagement is regulated by leader's supervision.

In line 215 the authors state that "indicating that there was autocorrelation". How do they deal with this issue?

 Durbin-Waston coefficient values were calculated to examine the presence or absence of autocorrelation between residuals(occurs when the residuals are not independent of each other; That is, when the value of e[i+1] is not independent from e[i] . The value of the coefficient was.76, less than 1.0, indicating that there was autocorrelation(Chatterjee, Samprit; Simonoff, Jeffrey ,2013).

The interpretation of the correlation matrix values is unclear..

 As shown in Table 1, corporate entrepreneurship and innovation performance were positively correlated (r =.35, p < .01). Also there was a positive correlation between  leader's supervision and innovation performance (r = .43, p < .01). Moreover, employee engagement and leader's supervision were positively correlated (r = .49, p < .01). Also there was a positive correlation between employee engagement and innovation performance(r = .36, p < .01) .

In the literature review section, the authors just provide a very short list of papers analyzing the same topic. So, corollary to my previous point, what are the theoretical contribution of this study? There is no theory supporting the hypotheses. 

Theoretical background

Academics and practitioners have accepted CE as a legitimate route towards increased levels of organisational performance (Hornsby, Kuratko, Shepherd, & Bott, 2009).Corporate entrepreneurship is said to be a useful strategy that all organizations should be able to adopt if they wish to pursue innovation and expansion (Bani-Mustafa, Sam, Oualid, and Khalil, 2021). It also represents an employee’s willingness and engagement towards achieving their entrepreneurial vision (Do and Dung ,2020).

Hornsby, Kuratko& Zahra(2002)have outlined that positive perception about the internal factors of corporate entrepreneurship leads to numerous performance outcomes including innovation performance. Moreover, Nasution, Mavondo, Matanda& Ndubisi(2011)suggest that entrepreneurship and entrepreneurial climate within the organization is important in motivating employees to enhance productivity and bringing innovation to the business

On the other hand Lukeš,  and Stephan (2017)demonstrated the mediating role of perceived managerial support for supporting innovations in an organisation. In other words, even if the organisation supports innovation, this support does not function well when the support from middle managers is missing. Successful innovation requires that new ideas are put into practice and implemented , but there is a need for feedback from managers(Santos, Marques and Ferreira,2021).

Moreover, a lack of employee engagement has been evidenced to represent corporate-wide potential losses in creativity (Gilson & Shalley, 2004), productivity and corporate performance (Harter, Schmidt, & Hayes, 2002).

the paper requires extensive editing of English language and style (the use of the past tense, etc.)

Done , edited and revised  

The contribution of the paper is not clear. The authors do not explain why it is important to study the paper topic in the Tunisian context and the company chosen to undertake the survey. Besides, after carefully reading the paper development, I cannot find relevant differences with the paper by Abu Shams et al. (2017).

This study contributes to CE, IP , EE and LS literatures. To the best of our knowledge, the model developed for this research is a new model, tested only in this research, especially in Tunisian society. The model developed for this research includes the mediating effect of employee engagement through leader's supervision. It is worth investigating the mediated moderating effect of employee engagement by leader's supervision in the effects of Corporate Entrepreneurship on Innovation Performance in the Tunisian context.

information in the abstract should be more precise to catch the attention of potential readers.

Done. Page 1

Abstract: Purpose: -The purpose was to investigate the mediated moderating effect of employee engagement by leader's supervision in the effects of Corporate entrepreneurship on innovation performance. Design/methodology/approach- The study was cross-sectional and survey based in design. Tunisian Insurance and Reinsurance Company was the context for the study. Participants were 248(12 manager , and 236 employees). Findings –The relationship of CE and IP was mediated by EE. Additionally, leader's supervision moderated the relationship between CE and IP. Further, leader's supervision had a mediated moderation effect from CE to the IP , through the EE. Conclusion-The significance of this study lies in its contribution to CE ,IP , EE and leader's supervision literatures. It was revealed that CE behavior was found in the organizational learning processes that strengthen employees’ ability to analyze markets and formulate new products.

The abbreviations EE, CE and IP must be explained in advance.

The purpose was to investigate the mediated moderating effect of employee engagement(EE) by leader's supervision in the effects of Corporate entrepreneurship(CE)on innovation performance(IP).

"248(12 manager" there are typos that need to be corrected, in this case the space before the parenthesis.

participants were 248 (12 manager , and 236 employees).

The methodology can be mentioned in this section. At least the analyses carried out to achieve the proposed objective.

The study was cross-sectional and survey based in design. Tunisian Insurance and Reinsurance Company was the context for the study.

The author(s) should indicate what unique knowledge they want to add to the existing literature.

Hence, it can be said that the empirical and theoretical understandings come together in order to bridge the gap by testing the mediated moderating effect of EE by leader's supervision in the effects of CE on IP, in Tunisia in particular. Examining the mediating role of EE by leader's supervision would be added to our understanding about the nature of relationship between CE and IP.

The state of the art should be articulated in a more in-depth approach. A general theoretical framework is suggested before starting with section 4.1 and beyond.

4. Theoretical background

Academics and practitioners have accepted CE as a legitimate route towards increased levels of organisational performance (Hornsby, Kuratko, Shepherd, & Bott, 2009).Corporate entrepreneurship is said to be a useful strategy that all organizations should be able to adopt if they wish to pursue innovation and expansion (Bani-Mustafa, Sam, Oualid, and Khalil, 2021). It also represents an employee’s willingness and engagement towards achieving their entrepreneurial vision (Do and Dung ,2020).

Hornsby, Kuratko& Zahra(2002)have outlined that positive perception about the internal factors of corporate entrepreneurship leads to numerous performance outcomes including innovation performance. Moreover, Nasution, Mavondo, Matanda& Ndubisi(2011)suggest that entrepreneurship and entrepreneurial climate within the organization is important in motivating employees to enhance productivity and bringing innovation to the business

On the other hand Lukeš, and Stephan (2017)demonstrated the mediating role of perceived managerial support for supporting innovations in an organisation. In other words, even if the organisation supports innovation, this support does not function well when the support from middle managers is missing. Successful innovation requires that new ideas are put into practice and implemented , but there is a need for feedback from managers(Santos, Marques and Ferreira,2021).

Moreover, a lack of employee engagement has been evidenced to represent corporate-wide potential losses in creativity (Gilson & Shalley, 2004), productivity and corporate performance (Harter, Schmidt, & Hayes, 2002).

In point 4.2 on innovation, it is suggested to change the beginning of the sentence "Innovation is the "specific function of entrepreneurship [. . . .]" to another one as indicated by the authors X, Y, Z or innovation is a specific function of entrepreneurship (X, Y, Z)… You can use some of the references that I will suggest in this review.

Innovation is the specific function of entrepreneurship .It is the means by which the entrepreneur either creates new wealth-producing resources or endows existing resources with enhanced potential for creating wealth(Drucker ,2002; Medase,2020 ).

Discussion and recommendations

The discussion of the finding does not critically synthesize the findings.

Please this point needs to be further elaborated. It should include the key results provided by the analysis in relation to the three proposed hypotheses.

Results indicated that corporate entrepreneurship and innovation performance were positively correlated (r =.35, p < .01). Also there was a positive correlation between leader's supervision and innovation performance (r = .43, p < .01). Moreover, employee engagement and leader's supervision were positively correlated (r = .49, p < .01). Also there was a positive correlation between employee engagement and innovation performance(r = .36, p < .01) .

when leader's supervision was higher than the average, when CE increased by 1, IP was increased by .57, which was statistically significant (B = .57, p < .01). Through the analysis results of the moderating effect, it was confirmed that leader's supervision was controlling the effect of CE on IP.

the interaction variables of corporate entrepreneurship and leader's supervision significantly predicted employee engagement (β = .49, p < .01), and employee engagement had a significant direct effect on innovation performance (β = .49, p < .01). = .53, p < .001)

Conclusion

This paper is short on conclusion. Require further development. What conclusions can be drawn as generalizable knowledge in the literature needs to be clarified.

Conclusion

The significance of this study lies in its contribution to CE ,IP , EE and leader's supervision literatures. It was revealed that CE behavior was found in the organizational learning processes that strengthen employees’ ability to analyze markets and formulate new products. the interaction variables of corporate entrepreneurship and leader's supervision significantly predicted employee engagement, and employee engagement had a significant direct effect on innovation performance. the mediated moderating effect was significant at all levels of the moderating variable, and as the leader's supervision increased, the positive indirect effect increased. These results indicate that the indirect mediating effect of the corporate entrepreneurship on Innovation Performance through employee engagement is regulated by leader's supervision.

Research Limitations/implications

The limitations of the study are not described. Only one additional conclusion is provided. This section requires further development.

It is recommended to include theoretical and practical implications of the research in split section.

Research Implications

It is confirmed that individual employees can play various roles in the process of corporate entrepreneurship, but the most important role in the facilitation of CE is from a sponsor, i.e., a high-ranking manager who functions as the advocate of entrepreneurial activity. Leaders promote creativity and improve team members’ engagement in innovation activities to further progress CE phenomenon in firms.

References suggested

Bani-Mustafa, Ahmed, Sam Toglaw, Oualid Abidi, and Khalil Nimer. 2021. Do Individual Factors Affect the Relationship between Faculty Intrapreneurship and the Entrepreneurial Orientation of Their Organizations? Economies 9: 199. https://doi.org/10.3390/economies 9040199

Chaithanapat, Pornthip, Prattana Punnakitikashem, Nay Chi Khin Khin Oo, and Sirisuhk Rakthin (2022), “Relationships among Knowledge-Oriented Leadership, Customer Knowledge Management, Innovation Quality and Firm Performance in SMEs,” Journal of Innovation and Knowledge, 7 (1). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jik.2022.100162

González-Tejero, C. B., & Molina, C. M. (2022). Training, corporate culture and organizational work models for the development of corporate entrepreneurship in SMEs. Journal of Enterprising Communities: People and Places in the Global Economy. https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/JEC-12-2021-0178/full/html

Naveed, R. T., Alhaidan, H., Al Halbusi, H., & Al-Swidi, A. K. (2022). Do organizations really evolve? The critical link between organizational culture and organizational innovation toward organizational effectiveness: Pivotal role of organizational resistance. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, Journal of Innovation & Knowledge  (IF9.269), DOI: 10.1016/j.jik.2022.100178

Kassa, A.G. and Tsigu, G.T. (2020).Corporate entrepreneurship, employee engagement and innovation: a resource-basedview and a social exchangetheory perspective, International Journal of Organizational Analysis, Journal of Entrepreneurship in Emerging Economies 7(2):148-167

Adair, J. (2010)Leadership for Innovation: How to Organize Team Creativity and Harvest Ideas", Human Resource Management International Digest, Vol. 18 No. 6. https://doi.org/10.1108/hrmid.2010.04418fae.003.

Heavey, C., & Simsek, Z. (2013). Top Management Compositional Effects on Corporate Entrepreneurship: The Moderating Role of Perceived Technological Uncertainty. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 46(8): 1289–1314. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12033