Scientometric Analysis of Entrepreneurial Orientation: Research Mapping and Opportunity Areas

Abstract

This research presents a comprehensive scientometric analysis of Entrepreneurial Orientation (EO), a fundamental concept in strategic management and business performance. Through a bibliometric approach, 4314 articles indexed in the Web of Science from 1975 to 2024 were analyzed using advanced network analysis tools such as VOSviewer to examine the evolution of scientific production, citations, authors, journals, institutions, and the most influential countries in the field. The findings reveal an exponential growth in “EO” research over the past decades, with a high concentration of scientific output in the last eight years. The United States leads in publication volume and citations, followed by other countries with an increasing contribution. Co-authorship patterns and academic collaboration clusters have been identified, consolidating key research lines that link “EO” with innovation, market orientation, and business performance. This study provides a comprehensive perspective on the evolution of “EO” research, offering valuable insights for academics, policymakers, and professionals interested in new theoretical directions and practical applications that foster knowledge development and business competitiveness.

1. Introduction

Entrepreneurial Orientation (EO) is defined as the ability to identify, evaluate, and successfully exploit business opportunities in dynamic and competitive environments (Covin & Slevin, 1989; Lumpkin & Dess, 1996). Theoretically, it is understood as a set of behaviors and strategic processes that include innovation, proactiveness, and risk taking (Miller, 1983; Lumpkin & Dess, 2001). Abu-Rumman et al. (2021) define EO as processes that influence decision making and drive the introduction of new services, innovations, markets, and previously non-existent business models. EO enables an understanding of how business leaders adapt and differentiate themselves in environments where speed, flexibility, and adaptability are key factors for achieving sustainable success

One of the first researchers to theorize the concept of “EO” was Miller (1983), who examined its characteristics, highlighting innovation, proactiveness, and risk taking as key factors. Alongside him, Covin and Slevin (1989) are also considered pioneers in the theoretical development of the concept. They argue that EO, based on innovation, proactiveness, and risk taking, is essential in hostile environments, whereas in benign contexts, a more conservative orientation may be more effective. This study was among the first to address EO, highlighting its relevance and the need to adapt strategies to the environment. It shows that EO is key to adaptation and performance in challenging contexts.

The first recorded research in the Web of Science core collection to mention the concept of “EO” was the article by Ramachandran and Ramnarayan (1993), which explores how entrepreneurs with a pioneering and innovative orientation (PI) utilize networking to acquire critical resources and achieve business success. Along with this, in the article “Profiles of Managerial Activities in Small Firms”, Merz Russell and Sauber (1995) explore how “EO” is shaped by strategy, structure, and environment. Using a taxonomy developed from CEO data, the research identifies four distinct configurations. It highlights how “EO”, characterized by proactiveness and innovation, influences structural consistency and performance in specific contexts.

The research conducted by Lumpkin and Dess (1996) clarifies the “EO” construct and proposes a contingency framework to investigate its relationship with business performance. It explores and refines the dimensions of “EO”, suggesting models to test this relationship. The authors conclude that entrepreneurial activity drives business expansion, technological progress, and wealth creation, being essential for the high performance of enterprises in the United States.

According to the most recent evidence collected, the research conducted by Rauch et al. (2009) analyzes the relationship between “EO” and business performance through a meta-analysis of 53 studies. It finds a weak correlation with performance (r = 0.242) and a robust correlation across different operationalizations of key constructs and cultural contexts. The research concludes that EO can enhance business performance. Furthermore, Wiklund and Shepherd (2005) analyze how EO influences the performance of small businesses, based on a sample of 413 Swedish companies. Their findings indicate that a configurational approach combining EO, access to capital, and environmental dynamism explains performance more effectively than main effect or contingency models. They conclude that employees in high-EO firms can effectively overcome capital constraints and stable environments and that in dynamic contexts, access to capital improves performance through a more internal and efficient orientation. Likewise, Lumpkin and Dess (2001) investigate how proactiveness and competitive aggressiveness, two dimensions of “EO”, influence performance. Their findings highlight that these dimensions vary independently, and their impact on performance depends on the environment and the industry life cycle.

In Berrone et al. (2012), the research explores how EO in family firms may not be directly related to performance due to their mixed financial and non-financial objectives. Socioemotional wealth (SEW) may influence this relationship, affecting how these firms approach risk taking and Entrepreneurial Orientation. On the other hand, Wiklund and Shepherd (2003) investigate how knowledge-based resources and “EO” affect the performance of small and medium-sized enterprises. In Hult et al. (2004), the research examines innovation and performance impact, identifying that “EO”, along with market and learning orientation, are key factors that foster innovation. Furthermore, it analyzes how these factors and market turbulence influence the relationship between innovation and business performance.

Although numerous studies on EO are linked to concepts such as market orientation, innovation, strategy, SMEs, entrepreneurship, performance, risk, and learning, no recent work has analyzed the dynamism of its scientific production. This creates a knowledge gap regarding the trends, authors, journals, universities, and countries with the highest volume of publications in this field.

The objective of this study is to conduct an analysis of the scientific production on “EO”, from its inception (considering the eight indexes that comprise the Web of Science’s main collection: SSCI, ESCI, SCI, BKCI-SSH, A&HCI, CPCI-SSH, BKCI-S, and CPCI-S). Trends in the number of publications, most cited authors, relevant scientific production groups, influential articles, journals, countries, and universities with the most publications will be identified.

The following are key research questions that will guide this study:

• What are the trends in scientific production and citation patterns related to EO?
• Which articles have had the greatest theoretical and methodological impacts on the development of EO research?
• Who are the most influential and productive authors in the EO field, and what networks or collaborations have shaped their contributions?
• From which countries and institutions do the leading researchers in the field of EO come from?
• Which scientific journals contribute most significantly to the consolidation and dissemination of EO knowledge?
• To what other concepts has EO been associated with in academic research?”

This approach is particularly relevant, as the scientometric analysis of EO, supported by solid empirical literature, enables an understanding of its potential and application across different domains. This type of analysis facilitates the identification of research patterns and contributes to advancing knowledge in key areas: in organizations, it fosters innovation and competitiveness; in academia, it promotes research and transforms theories into applications; in the public sector, it improves service efficiency and citizen responsiveness; and in the private sector, it supports sustainable growth and value creation. This study aims to serve as a key reference for researchers, as an updated scientometric and bibliometric analysis allows for tracking the evolution of the concept and identifying future research directions. These should be strategically planned and prioritized, exploring the connections between EO and other concepts, as well as their implications, with the goal of promoting the development of knowledge and innovation in this dynamic field.

2. Theoretical Framework and Conceptual Foundations of Entrepreneurial Orientation (EO)

Entrepreneurial Orientation (EO) is a fundamental concept in strategic management and entrepreneurship research, referring to a firm’s ability to adopt innovative, proactive, and risk-taking behaviors that drive business success (Miller, 1983; Covin & Slevin, 1989). Over the decades, EO has evolved into a key determinant of firm performance, market competitiveness, and long-term sustainability (Wiklund & Shepherd, 2011; Anderson et al., 2015). Furthermore, its impact varies across industries, firm sizes, and institutional environments, leading to multiple theoretical and methodological approaches for its analysis. Traditionally, EO has been understood as a multidimensional construct encompassing innovation, proactiveness, and risk taking (Miller, 2011). However, subsequent research expanded this view by incorporating autonomy and competitive aggressiveness (Lumpkin & Dess, 1996). These dimensions interact dynamically, influencing business growth, adaptability, and innovation capacity, thereby facilitating the exploration of new opportunities and the consolidation of sustainable competitive advantages (Short et al., 2010). EO has been widely applied in various business contexts, including internationalization, market orientation, knowledge-based entrepreneurship, and strategic management (Covin & Miller, 2014). Moreover, its study has gained relevance in emerging economies, where organizational flexibility and adaptability are essential for business survival.

2.1. Theoretical Perspectives on EO

Resource-Based View (RBV) and EO

The Resource-Based View (RBV) suggests that firms achieve competitive advantage by leveraging unique internal resources and capabilities, allowing them to differentiate themselves in dynamic markets (Barney, 1991). Within this framework, EO plays a key role by facilitating the identification, exploitation, and recombination of these resources to promote innovation, market expansion, and strategic positioning (Covin et al., 2006). Empirical studies confirm that EO enhances knowledge acquisition, absorptive capacity, and dynamic capabilities, enabling firms to reconfigure their resource base for sustained growth and greater resilience to changes in the competitive environment (Ferreira et al., 2020). Additionally, O’Shea et al. (2005) (12) demonstrate that EO not only improves the transfer and commercialization of technology but also facilitates the generation of disruptive innovation within knowledge-intensive firms, such as university spin-offs.

2.2. Dynamic Capabilities Theory and EO

The Dynamic Capabilities Theory (Teece et al., 1997) complements the Resource-Based View (RBV) by explaining how firms identify, exploit, and transform opportunities in changing environments, adapting to conditions of high volatility and competition. This theory plays a fundamental role in driving strategic agility, experimentation, and resource reconfiguration, enabling organizations to develop effective responses to crises and disruptive innovations (C. L. Wang, 2008). Recent research highlights that EO facilitates both exploratory and exploitative innovation, equipping firms with the tools to navigate technological disruptions and manage market uncertainty with greater flexibility and speed (Li et al., 2009). Additionally, EO enhances firms’ ability to integrate open innovation strategies, fostering knowledge exchange, organizational learning, and collaborative entrepreneurship. This dynamic interaction promotes the co-creation of value with key stakeholders in the business ecosystem, including suppliers, customers, and strategic partners (Cheng & Huizingh, 2014).

2.3. Institutional and Cultural Influences on EO

The effectiveness of Entrepreneurial Orientation (EO) varies across institutional and cultural contexts, as regulatory environments, national culture, and economic conditions shape entrepreneurial behavior and firms’ willingness to take risks and innovate in specific markets (Kreiser et al., 2010). In this sense, EO is not only an organizational strategy but also a structural adaptation to the dominant societal values. S. M. Lee and Peterson (2000) argue that EO is deeply embedded in social norms and cultural orientations, influencing risk taking, proactiveness, and responsiveness to emerging opportunities. Moreover, EO functions as a strategic response to both institutional constraints and opportunities, playing a key role in environments with restrictive or uncertain regulatory frameworks. Anderson et al. (2015) reconceptualize EO by analyzing how firms balance regulatory pressures with entrepreneurial initiatives, suggesting that institutional factors can either facilitate or hinder EO adoption.

2.4. EO and Business Performance

EO as a Driver of Business Growth

Entrepreneurial Orientation (EO) is a critical determinant of business growth and competitive advantage, as it enhances firms’ ability to identify opportunities, innovate business models, and adapt to dynamic environments. Moreno and Casillas (2008) propose a causal model in which EO, mediated by organizational capabilities, directly impacts business expansion by facilitating efficient resource allocation and the implementation of innovative strategies. Anderson and Eshima (2013) further validate this relationship by demonstrating that EO enhances SME growth, particularly when firms effectively manage intangible assets and organizational knowledge. Moreover, they argue that firms with a well-defined entrepreneurial culture achieve greater resilience in the face of market changes and economic cycles. Similarly, Rosenbusch et al. (2013) conducted a meta-analysis highlighting that EO significantly improves firm profitability, although its impact varies depending on environmental and industry conditions. Factors such as competitive intensity and environmental stability influence the extent of the benefits derived from high EO. This aligns with Stam and Elfring (2008), who emphasize the role of business networks in maximizing EO effectiveness, as they facilitate access to strategic resources, financing, and specialized knowledge.

2.5. EO, Innovation, and Market Orientation

EO is closely linked to market orientation and innovation strategies, as it enhances firms’ ability to anticipate trends, respond to demand changes, and develop differentiated products or services (Slater & Narver, 2000). Baker and Sinkula (2009) argue that EO complements market orientation by fostering customer-driven innovation, which enhances firms’ ability to identify and exploit new business opportunities, thereby optimizing their strategic positioning and competitive advantage. A study by Avlonitis and Salavou (2007) concludes that EO stimulates innovation and product differentiation, enabling firms to better adapt to highly dynamic environments and increase their competitiveness in saturated markets. Furthermore, firms with high EO tend to invest more in research and development (R&D), which accelerates the commercialization process of innovations and reduces the risk of technological obsolescence. Additionally, Cheng and Huizingh (2014) demonstrate that EO strengthens firms’ open innovation capabilities, facilitating the integration of external knowledge sources, such as strategic alliances, business networks, and collaboration with academic institutions.

2.6. EO and Strategic Networks

The impact of Entrepreneurial Orientation (EO) is amplified through networks and strategic alliances, as these enable firms to access key resources, share knowledge, and strengthen their competitive positioning in dynamic markets (Walter et al., 2006). Firms with high EO effectively leverage social capital to obtain critical market information, identify new opportunities, and access funding sources that facilitate their expansion and long-term sustainability (Stam & Elfring, 2008). For instance, Keh et al. (2007) found that EO enhances firms’ ability to acquire and utilize marketing information, leading to better decision making and stronger business performance. Similarly, Knight (2000) suggests that EO enables firms to expand internationally, leveraging their entrepreneurial mindset to overcome entry barriers in global markets.

2.7. Variations of EO in Different Business Contexts

EO in SMEs and Born-Global Firms

Entrepreneurial Orientation (EO) plays a crucial role in SMEs and newly internationalized firms, as it enhances their adaptability and growth potential in highly dynamic markets. Kuivalainen et al. (2007) demonstrate that a high level of EO accelerates the internationalization of born-global firms, enabling them to achieve early market entry and competitive positioning, even against well-established industry players. Similarly, Wiklund and Shepherd (2011) conceptualize EO as a learning mechanism that allows firms to experiment with new business models and refine their strategies based on market feedback. This process of continuous experimentation and adjustment is particularly valuable in highly uncertain environments, where rapid responsiveness and constant innovation are critical determinants of success.

2.8. EO in Family Businesses

The influence of Entrepreneurial Orientation (EO) in family businesses is complex and varies depending on generational leadership, risk tolerance, and inherited organizational values (Lumpkin et al., 2010). Cruz and Nordqvist (2012) examine how family businesses integrate EO across generations and find that younger leaders are more likely to adopt aggressive entrepreneurial strategies compared to previous generations. Additionally, Zellweger et al. (2012) introduce the concept of Family Entrepreneurial Orientation (FEO), emphasizing how transgenerational entrepreneurship fosters long-term sustainability and innovation.

2.9. EO in Social and Sustainable Entrepreneurship

EO extends beyond traditional for-profit businesses and encompasses social entrepreneurship and sustainability initiatives, playing a key role in creating value at the community and environmental levels. Lumpkin et al. (2013) analyze the role of EO in social enterprises, highlighting that entrepreneurial efforts in social contexts prioritize sustainability, community impact, and ethical business practices. In this context, EO drives the development of innovative business models that combine economic objectives with the resolution of social and environmental challenges.

2.10. Future Directions in EO Research

Despite extensive research, significant gaps remain in the EO literature, particularly concerning its applicability across different economic and organizational environments. Wales et al. (2013) call for more context-specific studies that examine the interaction of EO with regulatory frameworks, digital transformation, and emerging markets, as these variables can significantly influence the effectiveness of entrepreneurial strategies. Additionally, Short et al. (2010) advocate for improving EO measurement methodologies (Covin & Miller, 2014), leveraging computational text analysis and machine learning to enhance empirical research. These tools can provide a more precise assessment of EO, allowing for a better understanding of its complexity and evolution across different industries. Similarly, Covin et al. (2006) and Dess and Lumpkin (2005) suggest that future studies should refine EO’s conceptual boundaries, particularly in globalized business environments, where traditional models may require adaptation. In this sense, exploring how EO interacts with new forms of entrepreneurship is essential.

3. Materials and Methods

The methodology used is a bibliometric analysis, which is an area of scientific research that has developed rapidly and has been applied to many research fields, as it is an effective way to evaluate the merits of a certain thematic area or a certain journal (Shang et al., 2015; X. Wang et al., 2020).

The above is combined with a scientometric analysis, defined by Nalimov and Mulcjenko (1971) as the development of quantitative approaches to study the progress of science as an informational process. Some of the main topics considered by scientometrics are the ways of measuring the quality and impact of research, understanding citation processes, mapping scientific fields, and the use of indicators in research policy and management (Mingers & Leydesdorff, 2015).

The present study focuses its search on an online database, the Web of Science (WoS), which houses scientific articles from all disciplines. The search was conducted from the earliest records maintained by the database, corresponding to the year 1975, up to the end of 2024, at which point the database was considered closed for the purposes of this research. For a greater scope, we have considered the eight indexes that make up the main collection of the Web of Science (SSCI, ESCI, SCI, BKCI-SSH, A&HCI, CPCI-SSH, BKCI-S, and CPCI-S).

In this research, the most relevant indicators related to “EO” (“Entrepreneurial Orientation”) concepts will be analyzed, in all languages. The search yielded 4.752 findings, for which it was narrowed only to articles, leaving out other resources such as book chapters and editorial material, among others. This resulted in 4.314 documents that have been cited 158.131 times. To characterize the sample, in the period between 2017 and 2024, a total of 3.480 publications were identified, representing 80.66% of all existing articles in this area of study. In addition, the impact of these articles is notable in terms of citations: between the same years, 134.914 accumulated citations were registered, which constitutes 85.31% of the total citations in the database related to “EO”. This recent selection of articles and citations allows for an updated analysis of scientific production, showing both the intensity of research in the field and its influence on the academic literature. Unlike previous studies that have applied bibliometric and scientometric approaches, this research stands out for its use of a more updated time frame, the application of stricter inclusion criteria, and the implementation of precise analytical techniques based on quantifiable indicators. These elements strengthen its methodological robustness and allow for a clearer, more current, and structured understanding of the evolution and consolidation of knowledge related to Entrepreneurial Orientation (EO). To analyze the temporal evolution of scientific production on EO, exponential trend models were used, as they are suitable for representing accelerated growth patterns. Only models with an R² > 0.9 were considered, indicating a strong fit between the data and the curve. This criterion ensures that the trends reflect consistent behavior rather than random fluctuations, allowing for a more accurate interpretation of the field’s dynamism.

The choice of Entrepreneurial Orientation (EO) as the subject of study is based on its central role as a driver of organizational transformation in contexts marked by uncertainty, global competition, and technological acceleration. EO has not only gained increasing attention in the academic literature but has also become an analytical reference for understanding how organizations develop strategic capabilities oriented toward change, innovation, and sustainable value creation. From an integrative perspective, this study approaches EO as a dynamic phenomenon that links key entrepreneurial behaviors—innovation, proactiveness, and risk taking—with the institutional, technological, and cultural conditions that shape its evolution. This approach enables an examination of the field’s structure, the most influential contributors to its development, and the emerging lines of research that guide its theoretical consolidation.

The bibliometric indicators used for the analysis are articles, citations, journals, institutions, authors, and countries. In addition, scientometric analyses were carried out for the review of co-authorships between authors, institutions, countries, and the co-occurrence of keywords related to the concepts of “EO”; in this way, it is possible to design a detailed map with key concepts based on frequency data and their respective clusters. The results are studied through social network analysis based on graph theory using VOSviewer software version 1.6.20. The search carried out in the WoS database, updated as of 5 May 2025, is as follows: TS = (“Entrepreneurial Orientation”) AND DOCUMENT TYPES: (Article) Indexes = SSCI, ESCI, SCI-EXPANDED, BKCI-SSH, A&HCI, CPCI-SSH, BKCI-S, CPCI-S Timespan = 1975–2024. The TS concept refers to the search for the concept in the title, abstract, and keywords of the author, of each article or book included in the database. To ensure the quality and consistency of the data obtained, a data-cleaning process was carried out that included manual verification of duplicates, the normalization of author and institution names, and the unification of keywords with different orthographic or grammatical variants. This procedure was complemented by automated tools integrated into VOSviewer software, which enabled the detection of inconsistencies and the grouping of equivalent terms using lexical matching and frequency-based techniques.

4. Results

4.1. Articles and Citations in the Study Area

After searching for articles related to the concept of “EO” between 1975 and 2024, a total of 4.314 articles were identified, spanning the period from 1993 to 2024. Regarding the search concepts, only two articles were published in 1993, indicating that all articles related to these concepts written before this date were not published in WoS-indexed journals.

The published articles have collectively received 158.131 citations, following an exponential growth trend modeled by y = 8 × 10⁻¹⁹⁸e^0.2276x, with an R² of 97.7%. This demonstrates a consistent exponential growth, highlighting the increasing critical mass in this field of study (see Figure 1).

Figure 1 shows no production until 1993, at which point a slight increase begins, continuing until 2007, when growth accelerates until 2024, reaching its peak production with 700 articles. Notably, the last eight years account for a total of 3.480 publications, representing 80.66% of all existing articles, bringing the total to 4.314. Considering the number of articles published in 2017 (163), 2018 (188), 2019 (264), 2020 (461), 2021 (471), 2022 (571), 2023 (662), and 2024 (700), the growing interest in the search concept in recent years is evident.

In Figure 2, it can be observed that the number of citations per year for the concept of “EO” remains at its lowest levels until 1996, when a slight increase begins, continuing until 2008, at which point sustained and exponential growth begins, reaching its highest number of citations in 2024 (a total of 33.126). Considering the number of citations in 2017 (5.819), 2018 (7.440), 2019 (10.542), 2020 (14.851), 2021 (17.853), 2022 (21.209), 2023 (24.074), and 2024 (33.126), these years account for a total of 134.914 citations, representing 85.31% of all existing citations, which amount to 158.131.

Table 1. General structure and distribution of citations in scientific articles on Entrepreneurial Orientation (EO).

Number of Citations	Number of Articles	% of Articles
More than 1.000	10	0.23%
More than 500, less than 1.000	14	0.32%
More than 250, less than 500	60	1.39%
More than 100, less than 250	244	5.66%
More than 50, less than 100	448	10.39%
Less than 50	3087	71.56%
0 citations	451	10.45%
Total	4314	100.00%

Source: Own data based on the Web of Science (2025).

presents the citation rate of the articles. According to the count, a total of 158,131 citations have been made on this topic. The analysis reveals that 451 articles have not been cited, 3087 articles have between 1 and 50 citations, 448 articles have more than 50 but fewer than 100 citations, 244 articles have 100 or more but fewer than 250 citations, 60 articles have between 250 and 500 citations, and 14 articles have more than 500 but fewer than 1000 citations. Finally, 10 articles have received more than 1000 citations.

Table 2. Articles with the highest citation count in the scientific literature on Entrepreneurial Orientation (EO).

R	Authors	Year	Title	Journal	TC
1	Lumpkin, GT; Dess, GG (Lumpkin & Dess, 1996)	1996	Clarifying the entrepreneurial orientation construct and linking it to performance	Academy of Management Review	4.941
2	Rauch, Andreas; Wiklund, Johan; Lumpkin, G. T.; Frese, Michael (Lumpkin et al., 2009)	2009	Entrepreneurial Orientation and Business Performance: An Assessment of Past Research and Suggestions for the Future	Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice	1.831
3	Wiklund, J; Shepherd, D (Wiklund & Shepherd, 2005)	2005	Entrepreneurial orientation and small business performance: a configurational approach	Journal of Business Venturing	1.692
4	Berrone, Pascual; Cruz, Cristina; Gomez-Mejia, Luis R. (Berrone et al., 2012)	2012	Socioemotional Wealth in Family Firms: Theoretical Dimensions, Assessment Approaches, and Agenda for Future Research	Family Business Review	1.684
5	Lumpkin, GT; Dess, GG (Lumpkin & Dess, 2001)	2001	Linking two dimensions of entrepreneurial orientation to firm performance: The moderating role of environment and industry life cycle	Journal of Business Venturing	1.637
6	Wiklund, J; Shepherd, D (Wiklund & Shepherd, 2003)	2003	Knowledge-based resources, entrepreneurial orientation, and the performance of small- and medium-sized businesses	Strategic Management Journal	1.468
7	Hult, GTM; Hurley, RF; Knight, GA (Hult et al., 2004)	2004	Innovativeness: Its antecedents and impact on business performance	Industrial Marketing Management	1.257
8	Zhou, KZ; Yim, CK; Tse, DK (Zhou et al., 2005)	2005	The effects of strategic orientations on technology- and market-based breakthrough innovations	Journal of Marketing	1.149
9	Lee, C; Lee, K; Pennings, JM (C. Lee et al., 2001)	2001	Internal capabilities, external networks, and performance: A study on technology-based ventures	Strategic Management Journal	1.142
10	Rosenbusch, Nina; Brinckmann, Jan; Bausch, Andreas (Rosenbusch et al., 2011)	2011	Is innovation always beneficial? A meta-analysis of the relationship between innovation and performance in SMEs	Journal of Business Venturing	1.091

Abbreviations: R: ranking; TC: total citations. Source: Own elaboration based on Web of Science data (2025).

details the 10 articles considered the most influential based on the total number of citations per article. Together, these articles account for 11.3% of the total citations, demonstrating a high concentration of references relative to the total number of articles related to “EO.”

4.2. Leading Authors

Within the set of 4.314 articles published in the Web of Science (WoS) database (2025) on the concept of “EO,” a total of 9.202 authors have contributed, either as sole authors or in co-authorship. A high concentration of influence is evident, as reflected in the percentage of citations held by the 10 most influential authors, which account for 24.81% of the total citations.

According to the data presented in

Table 3. Most influential authors in the field of Entrepreneurial Orientation (EO).

R	Author’s Name	Institution	TP-EO	TC-EO	%	HA	TP-A	TC-A	T164
1	Lumpkin, G. Tom	University of Tennessee Knoxville	20	10.205	6.45%	35	55	14.186	12
2	Wiklund, Johan	Syracuse University	16	7.001	4.43%	53	115	15.809	9
3	Covin, Jeffrey G.	University of Wyoming	22	4.082	2.58%	51	71	15.333	7
4	Kraus, Sascha	Free University of Bozen-Bolzano	52	3.761	2.38%	77	356	21.806	4
6	Wales, William	State University of New York at Albany	23	2.791	1.76%	22	46	3.903	8
5	Frese, Michael	Asia School of Business	7	2.729	1.73%	68	197	21.744	3
7	Hughes, Mathew	University of Leicester	31	2.649	1.68%	35	73	4.372	4
8	Rauch, Andreas	Johannes Kepler University Linz	5	2.339	1.48%	26	43	6.527	2
9	Gomez-mejias, luis	Arizona State University	4	1.863	1.17%	63	138	22.790	1
10	Chirico, Francesco	Jonkoping University	22	1.815	1.14%	33	67	3.948	3

Abbreviations: R, author ranking; TP-EO, total articles of the author in the search vectors; TC-EO, total citations of the author’s articles in the search vectors; HA, author’s h-index; TP-A, total articles of the author; TC-A, total citations per author; T164, total articles of the author that are among the 164 most influential articles published of all time. Source: Own elaboration based on Web of Science data (2025).

, it is definitively established that the most influential author is Professor Tom Lumpkin, Ph.D., from the University of Tennessee Knoxville. He has published 20 articles related to “EO,” accumulating 10.205 citations, which represents 6.45% of the total citations. Moreover, 12 of his articles rank among the 164 most influential publications, based on the h-index of the search vectors. The second most influential author is researcher Johan Wiklund, from Syracuse University, who, with 16 articles, has garnered a total of 7.001 citations, with 4 of them ranking among the most influential. The details of the other most influential authors of all time in the field of “EO” are provided in Table 3.

On the other hand, the number of articles developed and published serves as another metric to assess the contribution of different authors to the generation of knowledge related to the search vector. These authors are not always recognized as the most influential, but they are significant in terms of their contribution to the development of the topic across different contexts and approaches. For this reason,

Table 4. Most productive authors in Entrepreneurial Orientation (EO) research.

R	Author’s Name	University	TP-EO	TC-EO	PC-EO	% Tt	H-A	TP-A	TC-A
1	Kraus, Sascha	Free University of Bozen-Bolzano	52	3.761	72.33	1.21%	77	356	21.806
2	Adomako, Samuel	Lebanese American University	36	1.354	37.61	0.83%	34	126	3.189
3	Hughes, Mathew	University of Leicester	31	2.649	85.45	0.72%	35	73	4.372
4	Wales, William	State University of New York at Albany	23	2.791	121.35	0.53%	22	46	3.903
5	Chirico, Francesco (Chirico et al., 2011)	Jonkoping University	22	1.815	82.50	0.51%	33	67	3.948
6	Covin, Jeffrey G.	University of Wyoming	22	4.082	185.55	0.51%	51	71	15.333
7	Hernández-perlines Felipe	Universidad de Castilla-La Mancha	20	624	31.20	0.46%	23	64	1.396
8	Lumpkin, G. Tom	University of Tennessee Knoxville	20	10.205	510.25	0.46%	35	55	14.186
9	Tang, Jintong	Saint Louis University	20	1.167	58.35	0.46%	27	72	3.384
10	Ruiz-ortega MJ	Universidad de Castilla-La Mancha	19	631	33.21	0.44%	43	43	961
		Total set	240	25.459	106.8	5.56%	75

Abbreviations: R, author ranking; TP-EO, total articles of the author considering the search vectors; TC-EO, total citations of the author’s articles in the search vectors; PC-EO, citations per article in the search vectors; % Tt, percentage over the total articles on the search vectors; H-A, author’s h-index; TP-A, total articles of the author; TC-A, total citations of the author. Source: Own elaboration based on Web of Science data (2025).

has been compiled, detailing the authors who have published at least 19 articles related to “EO”. Additionally, the table provides information on the number of articles published on the topic, the total number of citations received, the average number of citations per article, the percentage of total published articles, the author’s h-index, the total number of publications by the author, and the total citations recorded in the WoS platform as of April 2025.

From Table 4, it can be observed that 10 authors have published at least 19 articles related to “EO”. Notably, six of the most productive authors also rank among the most influential in terms of the number of citations: Kraus et al. (2012). The latter stands out as the tenth most productive author while ranking first among the most influential. Regarding the previous paragraphs, Figure 3 presents a graph illustrating the co-authorship analysis among the most significant authors in the “EO” research field. The articles were processed using VOSviewer software, which identified seven major clusters that are interconnected. These clusters are detailed in

Table 5. Co-authorship clusters for the scientific production on Entrepreneurial Orientation (EO).

Cluster 1 (6)—red	Cluster 2 (5)—green	Cluster 3 (4)—blue	Cluster 4 (4)—yellow
arzubiaga, unai	hernandez-linares, reme	calabro, andrea	ferreira, joao j.
chirico, francesco	kellermanns, franz w.	eggers, fabian	ferreira, joao j. m.
de massis, alfredo	morgan, todd	kraus, sascha	hughes, mathew
iturralde, tromin	patel, pankaj c.	niemand, thomas	rodrigues, ricardo gouve
maseda, amaia	wincent, joakim
sanchez-famoso, valeria
Cluster 5 (4)—lilac	Cluster 6 (3)—sky blue	Cluster 7 (3)—orange
lumpkin, g. t.	bouncken, ricarda b.	gupta, vishal k.
payne, g. tyge	covin, jeffrey g.	shirokova, galina
short, jeremy c.	hernandez-perlines, felip	wales, william j.
wiklund, johan

Source: Own data created with VOSviewer software (2025).

.

In this way, each cluster represents a group of influential authors who have collaborated in the production of certain scientific publications. These seven clusters are identified in the graph shown in Figure 3, each highlighted in a specific color. Cluster 1 is marked in red, where the circle corresponding to author Alfredo De Massis appears as the largest, indicating that he has the highest level of co-authorship within this cluster, with a total of seven co-authored works. Cluster 2 is represented in green, where the most prolific co-author is Pankaj Patel, with four co-authored publications. Cluster 3, composed of four authors, is shown in blue, with Sascha Kraus standing out as the author with the most co-authorships, totaling nine. Cluster 4, displayed in yellow and also composed of four authors, highlights Mathew Hughes as the leading co-author, with six collaborations. In Cluster 5, colored lilac and consisting of four authors, G. Lumpkin holds the highest number of co-authorships, also with six. Cluster 6, in light blue and comprising three authors, features Jeffrey Covin as the most prolific co-author, with seven collaborations. Finally, Cluster 7, represented in orange and formed by three authors, shows William Wales as the author with the greatest number of co-authorships in that group, with six. In summary, the graph demonstrates a high level of collaboration, with each cluster composed of a significant number of authors.

4.3. Principal Journals

Regarding the main sources of publication, the analysis shows that the 4.314 studied articles have been published in 891 journals indexed in the WoS, with a high degree of concentration, as 10 journals account for 944 articles, representing 21.88% of the total publications on the subject. The dataset presents an average of 51.42 citations per article, with a total of 48.545 citations and an h-index of 108. The details of the 10 journals that have published at least 50 articles related to the concept of “EO” are presented in

Table 6. Web of Science journals contributing to scientific production on Entrepreneurial Orientation (EO).

R	Sources (Journals)	N	% of Tt	TC-EO	PC-EO	H-EO	FI 5Y	Q
1	Journal of Business Research	184	4.27%	10.475	56.93	59	11.5	Q1
2	Sustainability	168	3.89%	2.968	17.67	30	4.0	Q2
3	Journal of Small Business Management	109	2.53%	5.523	50.67	43	6.8	Q2
4	International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal	82	1.90%	2.805	34.21	30	6.1	Q2
5	International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior Research	82	1.90%	1.817	22.16	24	6.4	Q2
6	Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice	79	1.83%	12.634	159.92	50	14.4	Q1
7	Industrial Marketing Management	72	1.67%	5.540	76.94	38	10.2	Q1
8	Management Decision	60	1.39%	1.731	28.85	23	5.9	Q3
9	International Small Business Journal Researching Entrepreneurship	58	1.34%	4.194	72.31	34	7.6	Q2
10	Journal of Business Industrial Marketing	50	1.16%	858	17.16	19	3.8	Q3
	Total set	944	21.88%	48.545	51.42	108

Abbreviations: R, ranking; N, total articles considering only the search vector in the journal; % of Tt, percentage of articles over the total articles considering the search vectors; PC-EO, average citations per article in the search vectors; H-EO, h-index considering only the search vectors; TC-EO, total citations considering only the search vectors; FI Y5, journal’s impact factor in the last 5 years; Q, quartile in the category. Source: Own data based on the Web of Science (2025).

, where the ranking is based on the number of published articles, followed by the total number of citations as the second ordering criterion.

Analyzing Table 6, the most productive journal is the Journal of Business Research, published by Elsevier Science Inc. (Amsterdam, the Netherlands), with 184 articles related to the search concepts. Additionally, this journal holds the highest h-index among the listed sources. However, the journal with the highest number of citations, making it the most influential, is Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, with 12.634 citations. This journal also has the highest average number of citations per article and the highest impact factor over the past five years.

4.4. Institutions

Regarding the main affiliation organizations of the authors, based on the 4.314 articles analyzed, researchers have produced this knowledge with a slight institutional concentration, as they are affiliated with 3.260 organizations. Among these, 10 institutions contributed at least 45 articles related to the analyzed topic. The details of these institutions are presented in

Table 7. Institutions associated with scientific production on Entrepreneurial Orientation (EO), based on author affiliation.

R	Organizations	Country	NP	% Tt	TC-EO	PC-EO	h-EO
1	Xi an Jiaotong University	People’s Republic of China	66	1.53%	2.931	44.4	28
2	Universidad de Castilla la Mancha	Spain	59	1.37%	1.689	28.6	24
3	University System of Ohio	United States	56	1.30%	3.864	69.0	32
4	Universidade da Beira Interior	Portugal	55	1.27%	996	18.1	20
5	Loughborough University	England	53	1.23%	2.754	52.0	31
6	State University System of Florida	United States	52	1.21%	4.184	80.5	24
7	Jonkoping University	Sweden	48	1.11%	9.246	192.6	26
8	University of Valencia	Spain	48	1.11%	1.674	34.9	20
9	Indiana University System	United States	45	1.04%	6.050	134.4	31
10	Lappeenranta Lahti University of Technology Lut	Finland	45	1.04%	3.066	68.1	27
	Summary of the set		484	12.22%	34.010	70.27	90

Abbreviations: R, ranking; N, total number of articles considering only the search vectors; % Tt, percentage of articles over the total number of articles on the search vectors; TC-EO, total citations considering only the search vectors; PC-EO, average citations per article for the search vectors; h-EO, h-index considering only the search vectors. Source: Web of Science data (2025).

, ranked according to their influence in the field, measured by the number of articles, total citations, average citations per article, and h-index, all related to the “EO” search vector.

From Table 7, it can be observed that the 10 institutions that have published at least 45 articles related to the search concepts account for 12.22% of the total articles published on the topic, indicating a slight institutional concentration. Additionally, these institutions collectively maintain an h-index of 90, with an average of 70.27 citations per article and a total of 34.010 citations. This total includes citations both within each institution and across multiple institutions, as some articles result from co-authorships involving more than one institution.

It is also established that the most productive institution is Xi’an Jiaotong University, with 66 articles, while the most influential institution is Jönköping University, which has accumulated 9.246 citations and also maintains the highest average number of citations per article, with 192.6 citations per publication. Next, a scientometric analysis of co-authorships among the most influential institutions researching “EO” is conducted. For this purpose, institutions that have published at least 20 articles on the search concepts were selected. Based on these parameters, VOSviewer software identifies eight clusters and selects 44 of the 3.260 organizations that have published on the topic. These clusters are detailed in

Table 8. Co-citation clusters of the most highly cited scientific productions on Entrepreneurial Orientation (EO).

Cluster 1—red (7 items)	Cluster 2—green (7 items)	Cluster 3—blue (6 items)	Cluster 4—yellow (6 items)
lappeenranta univ techr	free univ bozen bolzano	loughborough univ	erasmus univ
univ birmingham	univ durham	univ beira interior	indiana univ
univ bradford	univ innsbruck	univ extremadura	jonkoping int business sc
univ kent	univ lancaster	univ n carolina	macquare univ
univ leeds	univ liechtenstein	univ utara malaysia	syracuse univ
univ manchester	univ sci & technol china	whu otto beisheim sch	texas tech univ
univ tehran	zhejiang univ
Cluster 5—lilac (5 items)	Cluster 6—sky blue (5 items)	Cluster 7—orange (5 items)	Cluster 8—brown (3 items)
brock univ	harbin inst technol	lulea univ technol	st louis univ
jiangsu univ	northwestern polytech univ	univ castilla la mancha	suny albany
jilin univ	shanghai jiao tong univ	univ glasgow	univ alabama
kwame nkrumah univ	tongji univ	univ vaasa
univ leicester	xi an jiao tong univ	univ valencia

Source: Own data created with VOSviewer software (2025).

, where the institutions with the highest number of co-authorships within each cluster are highlighted in bold and italics. Additionally, Figure 4 presents a graphical representation of the connections between the different institutions, with distinct colors representing each of the nine clusters.

The graph in Figure 4 illustrates the eight clusters in different colors. In the first cluster, represented in red, it is the University of Leeds (10) that maintains the highest number of co-authorships. In the second cluster, represented in green, it is Lancaster University that maintains the highest number of co-authorships with 13 other institutions. In the third cluster, shown in blue, it is Loughborough University that maintains the highest number of co-authorships with 14 other institutions. In the fourth cluster, represented in yellow, it is Indiana University that maintains the highest number of co-authorships with 12 other institutions. In the fifth cluster, represented in purple, it is the University of Leicester that maintains the highest number of co-authorships with 13 other institutions. In the sixth cluster, represented in light blue, it is Xi’an Jiaotong University that maintains the highest number of co-authorships with six other institutions. In the seventh cluster, shown in orange, it is the University of Vaasa that maintains the highest number of co-authorships with seven other institutions. Finally, in the eighth cluster, represented in brown, it is the University of Alabama that maintains the highest number of co-authorships with six other institutions.

4.5. Countries

Regarding the main affiliation countries, based on the 4.314 analyzed articles, researchers have produced this knowledge with a high geographical concentration, as 66.09% of the articles originate from the 10 most productive countries out of a total of 114 countries that have published at least 1 article related to the search concepts.

Table 9. Countries associated with scientific production on Entrepreneurial Orientation (EO), based on authors’ institutional affiliations.

R	Countries/Regions	NP	% Tt	TC-EO	PC-EO	h-EO
1	United States	808	18.73%	64.409	79.71	117
2	People’s Republic of China	615	14.26%	15.805	25.70	60
3	England	490	11.36%	22.324	45.56	77
4	Spain	399	9.25%	16.149	40.47	61
5	Germany	269	6.24%	15.894	59.09	62
6	Italy	243	5.63%	8.314	34.21	47
7	Australia	209	4.84%	6.350	30.38	45
8	India	196	4.54%	2.884	14.71	30
9	Malaysia	184	4.27%	3.244	17.63	31
10	France	167	3.87%	6.205	37.16	42
	Summary	2.851	66.087%	128.410	45.04	151

Abbreviations: R, ranking; NP, total number of articles related to “EO”; % Tt, percentage of articles from the search vectors over the total number of articles from the same search vectors; TC-EO, total citations considering only the search vectors; PC-EO, average citations per article on the search vectors; h-IC, h-index in “EO”. Source: Web of Science data (2025).

details the 10 countries that have developed and published more than 160 articles related to “EO”. Collectively, these 10 countries achieve an h-index of 151, with an average of 45.04 citations per article and a total of 128.410 citations, representing 81.2% of all citations in the dataset.

Based on the data presented in Table 9, it is conclusively determined that the United States is the most productive and most influential country, having generated 808 articles, received 64.409 citations related to the “EO” concept, and maintaining the highest h-index (107). The graph in Figure 5 represents country co-authorship networks, illustrating how 38 out of 114 countries, each with at least 40 co-authored articles, are grouped into six clusters, which are detailed in

Table 10. International co-authorship clusters in scientific research on Entrepreneurial Orientation (EO).

Cluster 1 (red, 13)	Cluster 2 (green, 8)	Cluster 3 (blue, 8)	Cluster 4 (yellow, 7)
Australia	Brazil	Austria	England-36
India	Canada	Belgium	Finland
Indonesia	Colombia	Denmark	Ghana
Malaysia	Mexico	France	Iran
New Zealand	Portugal	Germany-31	Scotland
Pakistan	Russia	Italy	South Africa
Peoples r china-35	Spain	Netherlands	Sweden
Poland	Usa-37	Switzerland
Saudi arabia
Taiwan
Thailand
Turkey
U arab emirates
Cluster 5 (purple, 1)	Cluster 6 (sky blue, 1)
South korea-15	Vietnam-11

Source: Own data based on VOSviewer (2025).

. For each cluster, the most prominent countries, based on the number of co-authorships with other countries, are highlighted in bold and italics.

The graph in Figure 5 displays each of the clusters identified with different colors, and the size of the circle depends on the number of articles published by each country. Thus, it can be established that in Cluster 1, represented in red, China holds the largest number of co-authorships (35) and is connected with most of the other clusters. In Cluster 2, represented in green, the United States is the dominant country, with 37 co-authorships. In Cluster 3, shown in blue, Germany is the leading country, with 31 co-authorships. In Cluster 4, represented in yellow, the most predominant country is England, which maintains co-authorships with 36 other countries. In Cluster 5, displayed in purple, it is solely composed of South Korea, with 15 co-authorships. Finally, in Cluster 6, the only member is Vietnam, which is connected with 11 countries.

4.6. Scientometric Analysis of Keywords

Of the 7.903 author keywords included in articles published in the Web of Science, 34 appear at least 50 times and are used recurrently, as shown in Figure 6. This figure identifies five clusters, which are detailed below in

Table 11. Co-occurrence clusters based on authors’ use of keywords in Entrepreneurial Orientation (EO) research.

Cluster 1 13 items—red	export performance–family business–family firm–human capital–individual entrepreneuri–innovation–international entreprene–international performance–internationalization–resource-based view–sme–smes–social capital
Cluster 2 6 items—green	absorptive capacity–entrepreneurial orientation–family firms–firm performance –innovation performance–open innovation
Cluster 3 6 items—blue	business performance –competitive advantage–dynamic capabilities–learning orientation–market orientation–strategic orientation
Cluster 4 5 items—yellow	entrepreneurship–environmental dynamis–financial performance–green entrepreneurial orientation–sustainability
Cluster 5 4 items—purple	innovativeness–performance–proactiveness–risk-taking

Source: Web of Science data (2025).

. In this table, the most frequently occurring keyword in each cluster is highlighted in bold and italics.

Table 11 groups the articles at the cluster level, recognizing the various focuses around which the studied articles are developed. In the graph, each cluster is assigned a specific color for identification. From the analysis of the graph, it can be observed that in Cluster 1, represented in red, the keyword “SMEs” is the most used, with 32 occurrences. In Cluster 2, represented in green, the term “entrepreneurial orientation” is predominant, with 32 occurrences. In Cluster 3, shown in blue, the term “market orientation” is the most prominent, with 30 occurrences. In Cluster 4, represented in yellow, the term “entrepreneurship” stands out with 28 occurrences. Finally, in Cluster 5, displayed in purple, the keyword “innovativeness” is the most frequent, with 29 occurrences.

Table 12. Author keywords with the highest frequency of co-occurrence in Entrepreneurial Orientation (EO) research.

N°	Keyword	Occurrence
1	entrepreneurial orientation	1.339
2	SMEs	299
3	innovation	285
4	performance	269
5	firm performance	225
6	market orientation	222
7	entrepreneurship	210
8	innovativeness	135
9	family firms	118
10	dynamic capabilities	114

Source: Own elaboration based on Web of Science data (2025).

provides a detailed breakdown of the top 10 author keywords with the highest occurrences, listed in descending order.

5. Discussion

This research conducted a scientometric and bibliometric analysis of the literature on the “EO” concept. “EO” has been classified as an attractive concept by various researchers, experiencing exponential growth over the last decade. This type of analysis generates a robust database using WoS-indexed journals to study the increase and progression of the literature on the “EO” concept. It is important to note that the primary perspective of this study was not to illustrate the scientific productivity of the “EO” concept in relation to other concepts but rather to examine its development and influence within the academic community.

Regarding article publications, a total of 4.314 articles were identified, reaching its highest point in 2024 with 700 articles. The concentration of scientific production is observed in the last eight years, accounting for 80.66% of the total. Studies indicate an exponential growth in scientific production related to the “EO” concept. This demonstrates a growing interest in the concept in recent years, suggesting the continued relevance of “EO”.

In addition to the above, a total of 158.131 citations were identified, reaching its peak in 2024 with 33.126 citations. Citations are concentrated in the last eight years, accounting for 85.31% of the total. Citation analysis demonstrates significant growth in the most recent period, indicating that the knowledge domain is undergoing a quantitative expansion of referenced information. This implies a strengthening of this concept.

Based on the frequent citation patterns, 10 articles were identified with more than 1.000 citations each, followed by 14 articles with more than 500 but fewer than 1.000 citations. Additionally, 60 articles were found to have more than 250 but fewer than 500 citations each. These articles represent a significant proportion of the total citations, highlighting their impact, relevance, and significance within the academic community. Their high citation count demonstrates the influence and interest that the concept has generated among researchers and the academic world. The results support the idea that these articles fundamentally contribute to the advancement of knowledge in the field of “EO” research.

Regarding the most cited articles within the scientific production, Lumpkin and Dess (1996) stand out with their article titled “Clarifying the Entrepreneurial Orientation Construct and Linking it to Performance,” which has accumulated 4.941 citations, accounting for 3.12% of the total citations. This article was published in the “Academy of Management Review” (Q1) by Acad Management. The study addresses the concept of “EO” and its relationship with business performance. The authors identify three key dimensions of “EO”: innovation, risk taking, and proactiveness. These dimensions are considered fundamental to understanding how a company can adapt and thrive in changing and competitive environments. In second place is the article by Rauch et al. (2009), titled “Entrepreneurial Orientation and Business Performance: An Assessment of Past Research and Suggestions for the Future,” which has received 1.831 citations, accounting for 1.15% of the total. This study was published in “Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice” (Q1) by SAGE Publications Inc. The article examines previous research on the relationship between “EO” and business performance and offers suggestions for future studies in this field. Third, “Entrepreneurial Orientation and Small Business Performance: A Configurational Approach” by Wiklund and Shepherd (2005) has garnered 1.692 citations, representing 1.06% of total citations. These three most cited articles collectively account for 8.464 citations, corresponding to 5.35% of the total citations. These studies demonstrate the vast and extensive recognition they have achieved in the “EO” domain, significantly contributing to strengthening knowledge in this research field. Their impact is crucial for the development and refinement of the understanding of “EO”.

On the other hand, regarding the most influential authors in “EO”, G. Tom Lumpkin of the University of Tennessee Knoxville is identified as leading the list, with 20 published articles and 10.205 citations. In second is Johan Wiklund from Syracuse University, with a total of 16 published articles and 7.001 citations. In third place is Jeffrey Covin from the University of Wyoming, with a total of 22 published articles and 4.082 citations. This notable influence can be explained by several key factors. The academic experience and career trajectory of these authors, combined with their affiliation with prestigious institutions, have provided them with a favorable academic environment for high-quality research. Additionally, their consistent thematic focus on fundamental areas of “EO”, such as innovation, proactiveness, and risk taking, has allowed them to deepen their expertise and establish themselves as recognized specialists. Their ability to build strategic collaboration networks with other researchers, often through co-authorships, has significantly enhanced the dissemination and impact of their work. Furthermore, their initial contributions with seminal articles, such as the influential work of Lumpkin and Dess (1996), have laid the conceptual foundations that continue to be widely used and cited, generating a cumulative effect in terms of recognition.

Among the journals that generate the highest scientific production, “Journal of Business Research” ranks first with 184 published articles, followed closely by “Sustainability” with 168 articles. In third place is the “Journal of Small Business Management” with 109 publications, while the fourth and fifth positions are occupied by the “International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal” and “International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior Research”, both with a total of 82 published articles. These results highlight the five most outstanding journals in the production of academic research articles on “EO” due to a combination of key factors that explain their prominence and productivity. These journals have a thematic focus that prioritizes relevant areas such as entrepreneurship, innovation, and business management, making them ideal destinations for the publication of EO-related research. They stand out for encompassing interdisciplinary perspectives, which attract studies that integrate “EO” with organizational dynamics and sustainability, expanding their reach and relevance. Furthermore, their high impact factor and presence in recognized indexes such as the Web of Science and Scopus consolidate their position as prestigious academic references. These metrics not only reflect their visibility and credibility in the academic community but also encourage researchers to prefer them to maximize the dissemination and impact of their work. Furthermore, their ability to adapt to emerging trends in scientific research ensures continuous and high-quality publication. Their role as platforms for academic exchange not only fosters knowledge creation but also strengthens the network of researchers interested in “EO”, establishing them as leaders in scientific production in this field.

Regarding the institutions associated with the highest volume of scientific production, based on the affiliations of authors publishing scientific articles, a total of 3.260 organizations, including institutions, universities, and companies, were identified. Leading the ranking is “Xi’an Jiaotong University” in China, with a total of 66 published articles. In second place is the “Universidad de Castilla-La Mancha” in Spain, with 59 articles, followed by the “University System of Ohio” in the United States, with 56 articles. Completing the ranking is “University da Beira Interior” in Portugal, with 55 articles, and “Loughborough University” in England, with 53 published articles. These results identify the most productive institutions and universities in terms of generating scientific knowledge on “EO”. Their prominence can be explained by several key factors, including their geographic location and access to advanced academic resources. This also includes research funding, technological infrastructure, and specialized libraries, which facilitate scientific production. Another determining factor is that these institutions have highly cited researchers and research programs focused on EO-related topics, increasing their visibility within the academic community. Furthermore, their active participation in international collaboration networks promotes co-authorship of high-impact studies and integration into research projects. Additionally, their focus on the internationalization of research, reflected in the high percentage of articles co-authored with institutions from other countries, reinforces their position as leaders in knowledge generation.

When analyzing the countries with the highest scientific production, based on the affiliations of authors publishing scientific articles, the United States stands out as the leading country in the field of “EO”, with 808 published articles. China follows in second place with 615 articles, while England ranks third with 490 articles, and Spain holds fourth place with 399 published articles. A detailed examination of scientific production and research creation reveals that this leadership is explained by several critical factors. In the case of the United States, its position is supported by the presence of a well-established and robust academic system, with globally recognized universities and a research culture focused on innovation and entrepreneurship. Additionally, its ability to attract funding and resources for research projects fosters high scientific productivity. Finally, as noted by Lumpkin and Dess (1996), an essential element for the high performance of U.S. businesses is entrepreneurial activity, positioning the country as a significant hub for analysis, innovation, and knowledge generation. China, on the other hand, has experienced rapid growth in scientific production due to government policies that prioritize academic research and its practical application, particularly in strategic areas such as business management and entrepreneurship. The United Kingdom and Spain stand out for their integration into international collaboration networks, which facilitate joint publications with researchers from different countries and enhance the visibility of their research. Furthermore, both countries have influential academic institutions and access to European resources that drive high-quality research in “EO”.

Seven clusters with the highest co-authorship associations in scientific article production were identified. Among them, the cluster with the highest number of co-authorships includes authors such as De Massis, Kraus, Lumpkin, Wales, Covin, and Wiklund, among others, who have collaborated multiple times. Additionally, the institutions with the highest co-authorship rates can be observed, with Loughborough University in the United Kingdom leading with 14 co-authorships. These institutions dominate in terms of co-authorship collaborations. The clusters with the highest co-authorship associations in EO-related scientific article production reflect the interconnection between authors and institutions that share common research objectives and areas of interest. These associations can be explained by several factors. First, the authors included in the largest clusters, such as De Massis, Kreiser, Kraus, and Lumpkin, are prominent figures in the field, making them focal points for collaboration. Their recurring publications with various co-authors enable them to build networks that drive scientific production. Additionally, the institutions associated with these clusters, such as “Loughborough University”, “Indiana University”, and “Leeds University”, are recognized research centers with access to advanced academic resources and programs that promote international cooperation. Their strategic position in academia allows researchers from different countries to work together, leveraging conferences, academic exchanges, and projects funded by international organizations. The presence of institutions from various countries, including Sweden, Spain, and Italy, suggests a broad geographic distribution, reflecting the globalization of academic research. These co-authorship networks facilitate knowledge generation and the dissemination of ideas through joint publications, thereby expanding the reach of EO-related research.

The co-authorship clusters among countries provide significant insights into global collaboration in the field of “EO”. The existence of five co-authorship clusters, which include countries such as England, China, Germany, France, the United States, and Australia, highlights their advanced academic systems and policies that promote international cooperation, facilitating collaborative research efforts. The geographical and thematic diversity of these networks enhances research by integrating unique perspectives based on both local and global contexts. These collaborations enable the dissemination of knowledge beyond borders, fostering the transfer of methodologies and innovative approaches. Moreover, they reflect the growing interest in studying “EO” within different contexts, including emerging economies, which broadens the relevance of the field. Collectively, these clusters strengthen scientific production and contribute to the global development of knowledge in “EO”.

Regarding the most cited articles, multiple studies and investigations stand out for their ability to expand, enrich, and significantly deepen the readers’ understanding and comprehension of the “EO” concept. Lumpkin and Dess (1996) demonstrate that the combination of an innovative mindset and a proactive strategy among leaders significantly fosters “EO”, establishing it as a fundamental pillar for effective business leadership. Additionally, Rauch et al. (2009) conclude that “EO” enhances business performance, showing a moderate and consistent correlation across different contexts and constructs. Moreover, the findings of Wiklund and Shepherd (2005) indicate that their study examined the relationship between knowledge-based resources and “EO”, highlighting its connection to improved performance through main effects and efficiency. Finally, Lumpkin and Dess (2001) conclude that proactiveness and competitive aggressiveness, as dimensions of “EO”, independently influence business performance, varying according to the environment and the industry life cycle.

The findings of this research clearly trace the conceptual and methodological evolution of research on Entrepreneurial Orientation (EO), revealing a significant transformation in its analytical approaches. Initially focused on the classical dimensions of innovation, proactiveness, and risk taking, the literature has gradually incorporated new theoretical perspectives that link EO to broader constructs, such as dynamic capabilities, learning orientation, organizational resilience, and competitive intelligence. This conceptual expansion reflects a growing need to understand EO as a contingent phenomenon, influenced by institutional, cultural, and technological contexts. For the academic community, this presents the challenge of adopting more integrative and sophisticated explanatory models that allow for EO to be examined from a multicausal and transdisciplinary perspective. For policymakers, the results highlight the importance of designing strategies that not only encourage business creation but also strengthen organizational capabilities oriented toward change, digitalization, and sustainability. This evolution signals a shift from individualistic views to systemic and multilevel approaches, in which EO is understood as an organizational attribute that integrates knowledge, culture, and innovation.

The comparison between research trends in Entrepreneurial Orientation (EO) and adjacent fields such as innovation, sustainability, and digital entrepreneurship makes it possible to identify emerging synergies and opportunities for theoretical integration. In recent years, a growing convergence has been observed between EO and approaches such as open innovation, the development of digital platforms, organizational digital transformation, and the adoption of disruptive technologies. Simultaneously, the sustainability perspective has been progressively incorporated into EO studies, generating analytical frameworks centered on “sustainable entrepreneurial orientation,” which integrate economic, social, and environmental objectives. This convergence reflects the need to reformulate entrepreneurship in response to contemporary challenges such as climate change, global digitalization, and structural inequality. However, conceptual differences between these fields persist: while innovation tends to prioritize approaches focused on technological processes, EO maintains a behavioral and strategic orientation centered on entrepreneurial decision making. Systematically analyzing these points of intersection would not only enrich the theoretical framework of EO but also help establish bridges with other disciplines. This, in turn, would facilitate the formulation of more integrated public policies that promote innovative, sustainable, and technologically prepared entrepreneurial initiatives in highly dynamic environments.

6. Conclusions

This research presents limitations directly related to its methodological approach, focused on bibliometric and scientometric analyses. The selection criterion was based exclusively on scientific texts indexed in the Web of Science database, considering the eight indexes that make up its core collection (SSCI, ESCI, SCI-EXPANDED, BKCI-SSH, A&HCI, CPCI-SSH, BKCI-S, and CPCI-S). Although this database provides broad and high-quality coverage, its selective nature implies a partial view of the academic landscape, as it excludes other relevant sources of knowledge, such as specialized repositories or alternative databases. This restriction affects the diversity and breadth of the analyzed corpus, limiting the representation of valuable studies not indexed in the WoS. Likewise, the reliance on automated tools for data processing imposes additional constraints, making it difficult to perform a qualitative assessment of the content and a critical validation of the included articles.

Likewise, it was not feasible to conduct more exhaustive control over the content of the examined articles, although this limitation is due to the preliminary nature of the study, whose purpose is to provide a broad overview of the academic production related to the concept of “EO”. In future research, it would be appropriate to consider the implementation of additional strategies to assess the quality and reliability of the selected documents, with the aim of further strengthening the robustness of the study.

Expanding the scope and incorporating complementary analyses that include articles from other scientific databases—such as Scopus, Dimensions, or Google Scholar—would be not only feasible but also highly enriching for future research. These platforms offer broader and more diverse coverage compared to the Web of Science, integrating interdisciplinary literature and sources from under-represented regions. Furthermore, the application of more advanced analytical techniques, such as text mining, semantic network analysis, or topic modeling, would allow for the identification of discursive patterns, emerging lines of inquiry, and thematic clusters within the field of Entrepreneurial Orientation (EO). This expanded methodological approach would facilitate a more precise characterization of both the conceptual and contextual development of EO, opening new avenues for exploring topics that remain under-represented in the current literature.

Indeed, the recommendations derived from this study highlight the growing relevance of Entrepreneurial Orientation (EO) not only within academia but also in practical contexts such as the corporate sector, government institutions, nonprofit organizations, and the broader entrepreneurial ecosystem. Based on the findings obtained, new perspectives arise for research focused on specific applications in sectors such as digital business, startups, cultural industries, and technology-based organizations. Of particular interest is the analysis of EO within contemporary organizational models, including platform-based enterprises, which demand adaptive capabilities, strategic agility, and a sustained orientation toward innovation. These contexts represent key opportunities to validate the impact of EO on performance, scalability, and organizational sustainability.

Likewise, EO can significantly influence various organizational and behavioral dimensions, such as disruptive innovation, organizational resilience, digital transformation, and adaptability to highly volatile markets. Future studies could more specifically address the interactions between EO and emerging variables such as environmental sustainability, strategic intelligence, transformational leadership, or customer orientation in digital ecosystems. To this end, mixed research methods could be employed, integrating bibliometric analysis with case studies, in-depth interviews, or longitudinal surveys. This approach would enable the identification not only of quantitative correlations but also of causal and contextual mechanisms that explain how EO contributes to value generation and organizational survival in rapidly changing environments.