摘 要 在经济转型时期，支撑中国经济发展的主要引擎需要从投资转变为创新， 从需求侧转移到供给侧。面对新形势，“大众创业，万众创新”口号地提出 正当其时，创业导向和产品创新越来越受热议。对企业来说，一方面，需要 加深对中国情境下独特的创业导向影响因素的认知；另一方面，需要分析和 识别从实施创业导向到公司业绩实现过程中产品创新可能起到的作用；此外， 还需要进一步探讨企业如何通过创业导向的动态调整来保持高业绩。所以， 在我国上市公司股权集中、普遍存在一股独大终极控制人背景下，探讨终极 控制人特征如何影响创业导向十分必要。此外，从创业导向的实施到公司业 绩的实现可能需要一系列的中间环节，而以前研究缺少对于企业产品创新过 程特征的关注；最后，在探讨创业导向-公司业绩关系方面，以前研究多基于 静态视角，缺少对创业导向动态调整的关注。 本文结合制度理论、代理理论、资源基础理论和权变理论，以创业导向 为核心，从影响因素和经济后果两个层面，探究终极控制人特征、创业导向 和公司业绩的关系。基于文献分析，本研究首先对相关理论进行阐述，并对 核心概念进行界定，包括终极控制人特征、创业导向、产品质量以及公司业 绩。随后，基于终极控制人特征（包括所有权性质和两权分离）与创业导向 （包括整体创业导向和创业导向选择倾向）直接关系以及创业导向、产品质 量与公司经营业绩关系提出一系列研究假设。然后，基于先动性和竞争侵略 性维度组合演进路径分析创业导向与公司业绩的动态关系。 本研究运用层次回归和案例研究法进行实证分析。以创业板上市公司为 样本，运用层次回归法，对终极控制人特征与创业导向关系假设进行检验。 利用企业问卷调查数据，运用层次回归法，验证创业导向、产品质量与公司 经营业绩关系的假设。最后，采用描述性案例研究，验证初创型和在位大企 的创业导向维度组合演进路径及其与公司业绩的动态关系。 实证结果表明：（1）相比于非国有性质和存在两权分离，终极控制人为 国有性质和不存在两权分离时，具有更弱整体创业导向强度；相比于非国有 性质和不存在两权分离，终极控制人为国有性质和存在两权分离时，具有更 强资产增值型创业导向选择倾向；（2）创业导向维度与公司经营业绩呈现出 多样化的关系；创业导向维度与产品质量呈现出不一致的多样化关系；产品 质量对创业导向和公司经营业绩关系存在部分中介效应。（3）创业导向维度哈尔滨工业大学管理学博士学位论文 - II - 组合演进路径方面，一般演进路径反映企业不同阶段发展困境，分别在初创 型企业猎豹移动和大企业海尔中体现，猎豹移动高先动性和低竞争侵略性组 合-高先动性和高竞争侵略性组合-低先动性和高竞争侵略性组合演进路径， 体现从获得立足之地到快速发展的过程；海尔低先动性和高竞争侵略性组合- 高先动性和高竞争侵略性组合-高先动性和低竞争侵略性组合演进路径，体现 从聚焦主流业务，到发现未来新增长点的过程。企业演进路径内部差异反映 企业对关键问题解决方式差异，表现为在高先动性和竞争侵略性组合阶段演 进方向的反复，不同于猎豹移动，蓝港案例展示初创型企业从获得立足之地 到实现快速成长过程的反复性；同样，与海尔不同，万家乐案例展示大企业 从聚焦现有机会到发现未来增长机会过程的不确定性。（4）先动性和竞争侵 略性组合与公司业绩的关系具有强动态性和波动性。强动态性表现为，一般 演进路径上的先动性和竞争侵略性组合可以持续提高公司业绩；波动性表现 为同一类企业内部在相同发展阶段的相同先动性和竞争侵略性组合可能会形 成不同企业业绩趋势。 本研究不仅在理论层面丰富了创业导向相关研究内容，拓宽了研究思路 和方向，也为政府监管者和企业管理者提供实践启示。 关键词：终极控制人；所有权性质；两权分离；创业导向；公司业绩Abstract - III - Abstract In economic transformation stage, the main driving forces that supporting national economy have been shifted from investment to innovation, from demand front to supply front. It’s the right time to put forward the slogan mass entrepreneurship and innovation, entrepreneurial orientation and product innovation arouse hot discussion. As for enterprises, on one hand, they need to deeply identify unique antecedents of entrepreneurial orientation in Chinese context;on the other hand, they need to verify the role of product innovation in the whole process from entrepreneurial orientation to firm operating performance. What’s more, in order to maintain superior firm performance, they need to investigate the dymanic adjustments of entrepreneurial orientation in different development stages. Therefore, under Chinese backgroud that charaterized by concentrated ownership and universal single dominant ultimate controller, it is of great importance to examine how ultimate controllers’ characteriztics affect entrepreneurial orientation. In addition, in process that transform entrepreneurial orientation to superior operating performance, firms need a serises of middle links. However, previous studies ignore potential role of firms’ product innovation processes characteristics. At last, in terms of entrepreneurial orientation and firm performance relationship, most literatures are based static perspective and there is a lack of researches to investigate dynamic relationships between entrepreneurial orientation and firm performance. Based on institutional theory, agency theory, resource-based theory and contingency theory, this paper investigates the relationships between ultimate controllers’ characteristics, entrepreneurial orientation and firm performance from antecedents and consequences levels. Based on literature review, this study introduces theories firstly, then defines key concepts, including characteristics of ultimate controller, entrepreneurial orientation, product quality and firm performance. Then this paper presents a series of hypothses on relationship between ultimate controllers’ characteristics(nature of ownership and separation of two rights) and entrepreneurial orientation(whole strength and preference), empirical relationship of entrepreneurial orientation, product quality and firm哈尔滨工业大学管理学博士学位论文 - IV - operating performance. At last, basing on firms’ evolutionary paths of proactiveness and competitive aggressiveness, thia paper investiges dynamic relationships between entrepreneurial orientation firm performance. Hierarchical regressions and case studies are used to conduct empirical analysis. Using data from firms of Growth Enterprise Market, this study conducts hierarchical regression to examines hypothses about relationships between ultimate controllers’ characteristics and entrepreneurial orientation. Collecting data from firms’ questionaire, this study conducts hierarchical regerssion to verify hypothses about entrepreneurial orientation, product quality and firm operating performance. At last, this study conducts descriptive case study to verify new venture and large firms’ evolutionary paths and their dynamic relationships with firm performance. The empirical results reveal that (1) comparing with non-stated owned firms and firms with separation of two rights, firms that ultimately controlled by stated-owned firms and firms with no separation of two rights have lower whole entrepreneurial orientation strength; comparing with non-stated owned firms and firms with no separation of two rights, firms that ultimately controlled by state-owned firms and firms with separation of two rights have strong asset aggressive entrepreneurial orientation preferences;(2) entrepreneurial orientation dimensions have various relationship with firm operating performance and product quality;product quality has partial mediating effects on relationship between entrepreneurial orientation and firm operating performance. (3)General evolutionary paths on combinations of proactiveness and competitive aggressiveness reflect firms’ development dilemma in different stages, they are presented by new venture Cheetah and large firm Haier cases. Cheetah’s general path is high proactiveness and low competitive aggressiveness-high proactivenes and high competitive aggressiveness-low proactiveness and high competitive aggressiveness, this path captures the process from gaining foothold to rapid growth; however Haier’s general path is low proactiveness and high competitive aggressiveness-high proactiveness and high competitive aggressiveness-high proactiveness and low competitive aggressiveness, this path captures the process from focusing on mainstream business to discovering future growth points. Inter-differences of firms’ evolutionary paths reflect various ways to solve keyAbstract - V - problems and are present