Introduction

Business enterprises are now being challenged by a number of factors that make them hard to compete against. To effectively deal with and manage resources, the business enterprise must continually act strategically. Business enterprises indeed adopt many strategies, among them is the entrepreneurial orientation which includes innovativeness, risk-taking, pro-activeness, autonomy, and competitive aggressiveness. An organization should have an entrepreneurial orientation. So, the entrepreneur approach is that the organization has a plan to identify and launch projects. The EO is an idea and thought about entrepreneurship that can be realized through the organization.

The entrepreneur orientation is insufficient without the Strategy of a Thinking (TS) which includes problems sensitivity and flexibility of thoughts. Creative behavior is not a response that is submissive to challenges; it is not a behavior that results in an output deemed original and useful (Puccio & Cabra, 2011). The effects of organizational change of an entrepreneurial orientation will be felt at all levels of an organization.

Numerous studies have been conducted on entrepreneurial orientation. However, the materialistic phase and other aspects of performance are ignored. Therefore, this research assumes that entrepreneurial orientation enhances the significant relationship between entrepreneurial orientation and creative behavior.

Methodology

The Problem of the Study and its Questions

The world economy has been affected by the competitive business climate and rapid changes in lifestyles. A Jordanian economy is in the same stream as the one in which the government is closely implementing changes to achieve economic and social welfare. The most effective methods to pursue are to pay attention and provide interest in entrepreneurship. Challenges facing the adoption of entrepreneurship in medium-sized business enterprises is to include the entrepreneurial attitude of such enterprises and the creative behavior of their managers.

Therefore, the main question of this study is

What's the Impact of Entrepreneurial Orientations on Supporting Creative Behavior of Managers in the Medium-Sized Enterprises in Amman City-Jordan?

- Depending on the former main question, the following sub-questions are:-

- What is the level of the entrepreneurial orientation and supporting creative behavior of managers in the medium-sized enterprises in Amman City- Jordan?

- Is there a statistically significant impact for entrepreneurial orientation on supporting creative behavior of managers in the medium-sized enterprises in Amman City-Jordan?

The Study Objectives

This study aims to concentrate on two-dimensional objectives:

Theoretical Objectives

1- Explain the terms and concept related to entrepreneurial orientation.

2- Clarify the concept and principle of creative behavior.

Practical Objectives

1- Describe the states of the entrepreneurial orientation and creative behavior of managers in the medium-sized enterprise in Amman City-Jordan.

2- Investigate the statistically significant impact of entrepreneurial orientation on supporting the creative behavior of managers in the medium-sized enterprise in Amman City-Jordan.

3- To Offer a set of recommendations to the enterprises, managers, and concerned persons to enhance the benefits of the entrepreneurial orientation and creative behavior of managers.

The Study Importance

Theoretical Importance

The study contributes to enriching the theoretical framework of research and studies that deal with entrepreneurial orientation and its dimensions (risk-taking, pro-activeness, autonomy, and competitive aggressiveness) in supporting the creative behavior of managers. The researchers hope to pave the way for others to add to the theoretical literature.

Practical Importance

This study is important because it brings together prominent scientific themes, which bring to light the entrepreneurial and creative behaviours of managers. The results can bridge the gap between reality and the ideal. Based on the research, recommendations can be made to assist managers in improving entrepreneurial orientation.

The Study Model

A study model as shown in figure (1) is developed following the relevant literature and the theory of entrepreneurship (Mishra & Zachary, 2014). The model shows the relationships between entrepreneurial orientation and creative behavior of managers:-

The Study Hypotheses

To achieve the study objectives, the study hypotheses have been suggested to be null hypotheses, as follows

Main Hypothesis

H There is no statistically significant impact at the significance level (α≤ 0.05), for Entrepreneurial Orientations in terms of dimensions (risk-taking, pro-activeness, autonomy, and competitive aggressiveness) on supporting the Creative behavior of managers in terms of dimensions (problem sensitivity and flexibility of thoughts).

Two sub-hypotheses are emanated from the main hypothesis:

H (I) There is no statistically significant impact at the significance level (α≤ 0.05), for entrepreneurial orientations in terms of dimensions (risk-taking, pro-activeness, autonomy, and competitive aggressiveness) on supporting the (problem sensitivity).

H (II): There is no statistically significant impact at the significance level (α≤ 0.05), for entrepreneurial orientations in terms of dimensions (risk-taking, pro-activeness, autonomy, and competitive aggressiveness) on supporting the (flexibility of thoughts).

The study Theoretical Framework and Literature Review

The Conception of Entrepreneurial Orientation

A large number of research studies have explored entrepreneurial orientation in management literature (Covin & Lumpkin, 2011). Entrepreneurial orientation makes many enterprises consider it as a strategy. As a result, effective enterprise management is an important part of strategy-making processes. (Miller & Fresien, 1982) defines the entrepreneurial firm as one that takes risks, innovates, and is proactive. EO is the strategic orientation organizations use to adapt to changing business environments and have a sustainable competitive edge over rivals in the marketplace. Entrepreneurial orientation is often associated with entrepreneurs' planning and organizing tasks and has become an important topic in the domain of entrepreneurship (Covin, Greene & Slevin, 2006).

Enterprises are described as being entrepreneurial when they support and manifest entrepreneurial behavior with sufficient regularity to become a defining organizational characteristic and attribute (Covin & Wales, 2019). Enterprises are described as having an entrepreneurial orientation when the behavior shows to be a defining organizational characteristic and attribute (Wales, 2016). They aim to outdo each other on something special.

As far as the entrepreneurial orientation is concerned, it is defined as the entrepreneurial behavior of an organization reflected in organizational activities, strategies and processes (Lumpkin & Dess, 1996); and therefore (Avlonitis & Salavou, 2007) indicates that the entrepreneurial orientation is an organizational phenomenon that reflects the managerial capacity through which companies take a proactive approach. Thus, leadership is presented to have qualities of an attitude of risk-taking, innovativeness, proactivity, autonomy, and competitive aggressiveness. However, a further conceptualization of EO has recently been advanced (Anderson et al., 2015) that defines entrepreneurial behaviors related to innovation and pro-activity and risk management jointly and across the board comprise the conceptual domain of the EO firm.

There must be three elements in organizations that have an entrepreneurial orientation (Sakarneh, 2008):

1- Entrepreneurial individuals without there would be no creativity.

2- The organizational dimension associated with vision, confidence, idealism, creativity.

3- The environmental dimension associated with market diversity.

Entrepreneurial Orientation Dimensions

EO dimension has its foundation in strategic literature and was used as a reference to the strategic management approach of businesses with entrepreneurial tendencies (Eggers et al., 2013). Many of the authors identified the many different dimensions of entrepreneurial orientation as follows:

Risk-taking

Risk attitude is one of the main elements of entrepreneurial orientation; entrepreneurs need to have a good risk attitude to start a business. Consequently, risky behaviour is defined as a strategy that reflects the organization's desire to get into a risky business (AL-Naiami, 2014). Also, (Otache, 2015) believes that risk tolerance is the tendency of the organization to invest opportunities by allocating necessary materials. Therefore, risk-taking is the reason entrepreneurs do not get caught up in actions that get them in trouble.

Pro-activeness

An enterprise can recognize market opportunities, identify resources, and use them to compete with competitors who recognize the same opportunities (Otache & Mahmood, 2015). Besides, Senior management's willingness to respond to patient's needs and satisfaction, as is new. As a result, the organization is now using more follow-up behaviours as a pioneer and leader in its field rather than as a follower.

Autonomy

According to (Lumpkin et al., 2009), autonomy is about allowing staff members to move independently and assertively to make decisions and take entrepreneurial actions. The entrepreneurial autonomy allows the members to set their own goals, values, and beliefs. It has been found that autonomy motives have both intrinsic and instrumental aspects. An intrinsic value of autonomy is that entrepreneurs have the freedom to choose their strategy and work methods. On the other hand, an instrumental value of autonomy is that they have the freedom to have their own time and be responsible (Van Gelderen & Jansen, 2006). Therefore, respondents need the ability to do certain things or ways (Geleren, 2016).

Competitive Aggressiveness

(Lumpkin & Dess, 2001) defined competitive aggressiveness of an organization as the intensification of effort to outrival industry rivals. In response to that factor, the profitable businesses will adopt competitive and aggressive behaviours like competing with lower cost, increasing sales promotion, and combating for the distribution channels or imitating the competitor's actions and or products (Dess, Lumpkin & Eisner, 2007). Competitive aggressiveness is the response of the enterprise to deal with competitors perfectly and fruitfully.

The Importance of Entrepreneurial Orientation

The topic of the research should firstly have specific relevance. Entrepreneurship is of real importance and is demonstrated in the acceleration of economic development through the generation of new ideas and turning them into profitable risks. Entrepreneurial orientation is a strategic management theme that has been developed in an organization as a strategic direction to overcome problems and improve performance (Karacoglu et al., 2012). Accordingly, several reasons have encouraged organizations orientation toward entrepreneurship (Shah & Bhutta, 2013)

A. Creativity skills provide an opportunity for employees to improve their skills and foster a workplace environment that promotes performance improvement.

B. Highlights the managerial thought gap of knowledge via the relationship between the concepts of entrepreneurship and competition.

C. Helps organizations in dealing with threats and the risks of competitive organizations in the industry.

D. Crystallizes new visions of the administrative leaders to confirm the entrepreneurial trends and the importance of adopting leadership patterns that fit those trends seeking change and believing in the consequences.

Thus, EO aims to enhance creativity and upgrade skills and performance and to give interest to knowledge management. Besides, it should cater to the internal and external elements of the leadership.

The Types of Entrepreneurial Orientation

Many kinds of EO can be underlined as incremental and radical orientation entrepreneurial.

Incremental Orientation Entrepreneurial

An entrepreneurial orientation adopted by higher management through the gradual improvement of products or services doesn't require new ideas and doesn't need new skills (Bojica et al., 2011).

Radical Orientation Entrepreneurial

Entrepreneurial orientation adopted by higher management through which he refers to the integrated process with all administrative functions (Bojica et al., 2011).

The Concept of Creative Behavior

Definition of the Creative Behavior

Creative behavior includes an individual's ability to use concepts and ideas to create work to the highest level (Noruzy et al., 2013; Harrison, 2013) also indicated that creative behaviour can lead an individual to master scientific thinking methods, and can adapt to those around him and the emerging circumstances of society. However, it contributes to the recent competitive environment (Jelda & Abwi, 2006). Thus, creative behaviour is the ever-developing characteristics the individual has including the ability to respond creatively to the problem.

Practices of the Creative Behavior

Note the difference between creativity and creative behavior. Creativity is the appearance of something new that may be a commodity or service provided by the enterprise or adopted for the first time, but creative behaviour is the behaviour that precedes creativity in its final form (Al-Shawarwa, 2012). This behaviour may be novel when it is first instilled in the institution.

The creativity in the workplace includes

1) Changing an organization by its adoption of a change, which contributes to its publication in the organization, and the acceptance of that change, and the use of new methods and modalities, and the rejection of monotony in the work, and the restrictions of individual thinking, and adaptation of ideas to organizational challenges, and taking risks; and

2) Adapting an organization by accepting orders that restrict thought and making these orders flexible, to solve problems, and taking risks. Creative behavior involves the capacity for accepting change, going into overdrive, and taking risks.

The Dimensions of Creative Behavior

There are many dimensions of creative behavior, but in this study, two dimensions will be adopted as follows:

Problem Sensitivity

The problem sensitivity consists of identifying, in the full phase and aspects and over-sensitivity to any problem; in addition to being able to scientifically invent solutions to the problems in the workplace and organization; and (Al-Rahahleh, 2010) indicated that it clearly, accurately identifies and determines the problem vision and the problem vision.

Flexibility of Thoughts

The flexibility of thinking is to generate and unify many concepts and phrases around them. Thus, a unified idea opens up prospects for solving many of the problems and achieving many goals. Consequently, flexible thinking is the ability in one period to find a large number of distinctive ideas, according to (Hassan, 2004), because a person can divert a person's way of thinking from the situation to another to handle the problem, meaning that the individual can adapt rapidly to new developments and situations.

Flexibility is categorized into two kinds (Al-Bahr, 2010)

1. Spontaneous flexibility: Includes the capability of providing various information spontaneously, which does not belong to one category or one source. It points to the individual's flexibility without having to do this.

2. The flexibility of adaptation: The capacity of a person to change his or her direction when looking for a solution to a given problem, and it is possible to consider the positive side of mental adaptation: The flexible person who is mentally adapted is opposed to the mentally strict person.

The Importance of Creative Behavior

Important reasons why the organization needs creative behavior is as follows (Boumedienne, 2013)

A. Creative management is essential in all activities of the organization to raise its efficiency and productivity, and thus improve its outputs, whether products or services.

B. Modern organizations live in changing and complex conditions that have imposed the need for creative management.

C. Increasing administrative and organizational problems within modern organizations impose change and development that requires creativity

The Medium-Size Enterprise

Medium-sized enterprises play an important role in economies. Medium-sized enterprises are vital to accelerating the development of the economy. Definitions, purpose, and challenges facing medium-sized enterprises in Jordan.

The Concept of Medium-Size Enterprise

The definition of Medium enterprise cannot be the same; it varies from one country to another. In the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, for examples, the SMEs Board of Directors (1438) defined the medium-sized enterprises as a business operates from 50 to 249 Rs or sells of 40 and less than 200 million Rs. In Bahrain, the medium enterprise is that business that employs 10 to 99 workers. The Central Bank of Jordan (2011) has featured the definition of the medium-sized enterprise as the enterprise which has a value of the assets of 1 to 3 million Jordanian dinars or the annual revenue of 1 to 3 million Jordanian dinars; besides, the number of employees is 20 to 100.

The definition of enterprise is the legal independent entity of the enterprise that is established for profit in which the owners invest capital and undertake all legal procedures to register the project as participants in the company (2017).

Businesses that have 20 to 100 employees, work according to the classification of the Prime Minister and Central Bank of Jordan and work in various sectors including food, electricity, electronics, apparel, jewelry, construction, building, automotive, heavy machinery, and other sectors.

The purpose of the enterprise is to maximize profits and can socially be intended to do some charity deals. The start-up's face of the enterprise in Jordan faces many challenges as follows:

A. Getting enough customers to make a profit is the biggest challenge facing modern facilities.

B. Some modern projects face cultural obstacles.

C. Financial management, marketing, governance, laws, taxes, and technology are also challenges that new business managers often face.

Literature Review

In general, several previous management studies dealt with the orientation of entrepreneurial using the various variables. This part covers studies that have similarities and differences with Arabic, and studies in foreign languages in chronological order from newest to oldest.

The Studies are

The Study of (A. A. Mahrous & M. A. Genedy, 2019) entitled:-"Connecting the Dots: The relationship between Intra-organizational, Entrepreneurial Orientation, Market Orientation, and Organizational Performance."

This study aimed to identify the organizational environment factors that affect EO and MO and examine the relationship between MO and organizational performance. Studies indicate that deep-locus factors such as planning, planning flexibility, planning horizon, integration, and organizational support affect entrepreneurial orientation practices. MO also mediates the relationship between entrepreneurial orientation and performance.

The Study of (Stanzin Mantok, Harjit Sekhon, Gurjeet Kaur Sahi& Paul Jones, 2019) entitled: "Entrepreneurial Orientation and the Mediating Role of Organizational Learning among Indian S-SMEs".

This study investigates the role of learning among S-SMEs, which comprises the majority of economic activity in an emerging developing economy. A Survey of firms in the district industrial centre was undertaken. The study collected survey information from owner/managers. Over 200 SMEs participated in the study and 192 usable surveys were received. This study shows factors that increase entrepreneurial orientation and its consequences on business performance. There is strong evidence supporting the view that entrepreneurial orientation is more linked to business performance when managerial resources are dedicated to building the learning environment. The results support entrepreneurs in recognizing the importance of competitor orientation during the emergence and development of entrepreneurial orientation.

The Study of (Md Uzzal Hossai, 2019) entitled: "The Role of Entrepreneurial Orientation to SME Performance in Bangladesh."

This study has investigated the relationship between entrepreneurial orientation and SME performance in Bangladesh. Data has been collected on Dhaka entrepreneurs. A pre-tested survey questionnaire was used to collect 193 entrepreneurs' information. Data were tested using correlation and hierarchical regression. The study covered five dimensions of risk-taking, innovativeness, pro-activity, competitive aggressiveness, and autonomy. Personality traits such as aggressiveness positively affect SME performance. This study shifts the focus from developed countries to an emerging economy to assess how different dimensions of EO influence SMEs in Bangladesh. The research reveals some implications for business managers and researchers.

The Study of (Aroyeun, Taiwo, Adefulu, Adesoga, Asikhia, &Olalekan, 2019) entitled: "Effect of Entrepreneurial Orientation on Performance of Selected Small and Medium Scale Enterprises in Ogun State Nigeria."

This study focuses on the effects of entrepreneurship on SMEs. The sample size was determined using Cochran's sample size calculation. A total of 386 questionnaires were filled out, 386 were returned. This represents a response rate of 93.69% of the questionnaire for entrepreneurial orientation and performance of small and medium enterprises. The study concluded that entrepreneurial orientation affected the performance of SMEs in Ogun State, Nigeria. The small and large business should see the entrepreneurial orientation dimensions as important for business performance and thus should embrace these dimensions to increase business performance. The government should support and encourage businesses to implement workshops and seminars to help their competitiveness and innovativeness. The incubation centres should nurture entrepreneurship.

The Study of (Mohammed Issa Albuainain, Sedeeq bll Ibrahim bll, &Emad Eddin Issa Ishaq, 2018) entitled: "The Effect of Entrepreneurial Orientation on Operational Performance at Bahraini Family Companies".

The study aimed to test whether entrepreneurial orientation affects operational performance at Bahraini family firms. Previous studies were used to create the study model and develop the hypotheses. As a target sample in various governorates in Bahrain. The response rate is (85%) analyzed through the AMOS 25 program. Many statistical methods were used to check the model, and it turned out that the correlation between the two variables is zero. The results were discussed and compared with other studies.

The Study of (Indy Bernodter & Jinia Mukerjee & Roy Thurik, 2018) entitled: "The Role of Effect in the Entrepreneurial Orientation".

The purpose of the study was to investigate the role of both positive and negative effects on entrepreneur risk orientation and entrepreneurial success. Our findings suggest that positive affect is positively associated with entrepreneurial orientation for sole proprietors, whereas negative affect is negatively associated with entrepreneurial orientation for sole proprietors. For entrepreneurship, results are mixed. The present study provides insight into the role of effect in entrepreneurial orientation. It also contributes to the literature on entrepreneurial success.

Method and Procedures of The Study

The Study Methodology

This study used Descriptive and Analytical Methods. The method used to gather data from this population is based on the literature review. The questionnaire will be distributed to collect data and then entered into the computer. Using this method is deemed as a necessary method as other methods such as interviews would be hard to use.

The Study Population and its Sample

The sample is selected by whether they are individuals, events, locations, or physical objects. The sample is concisely defined as a subset of the population (Sekaran and Bougie, 2016: 237). To achieve the objective of the study, a medium-sized enterprise in Amman city was selected from the total number of managers.

1. The population of the medium-sized enterprises' managers in Amman city in Jordan is (378), as declared before, there are some limitations concerning the resources and time of the research to deal with all population of those managers. Thus, there is a strong need for electing an appropriate size of sample which can represent perfectly the given population of the managers. According to (Scheaffer et al., 2011), to determine the size of any study sample, some information is required concerning the size of the population, the desired error level (e.g., 5%), and the desired level of confidence (e.g., 95%). In general, statisticians agree upon at least 30 elements for the sample size in quantitative research. Roscoe (1975) vigorously proposed the rules of thumb for determining sample size by saying that sample sizes larger than 30 and less than 500 are appropriate for most research. However, Sekaran & Bougie (2016: 263-264) pursued a list of the table which displays the sample size versus the given population and below is the mini table that serves the purpose of the study.

2. Therefore, according to the guidance of table (1), this study should include at least (191) managers of medium-sized enterprise in Amman city in Jordan. For more insurance, the researchers tested the determination of the sample size via using Richard Geiger's Equation which determined the suitable size of sample equivalent to (191) elements.

TABLE 1 GUIDANCE OF DETERMINING THE SAMPLE SIZE OF A GIVEN POPULATION
N	S	N	S	N	S	N	S
100	80	200	132	300	169	500	217
110	86	210	136	320	175	550	226
120	92	220	140	340	180	600	234
130	97	230	144	360	186	650	242
140	103	240	148	380	191	700	248
150	108	250	152	400	196	750	254
160	113	260	155	420	201	800	260
170	118	270	159	440	205	850	265
180	123	280	162	460	210	900	269
190	127	290	165	480	214	1000	278

3. In the process of conducting the field study, (191) questionnaires were distributed to the managers of medium-sized enterprises in Amman city in Jordan. Out of this number, (30) were unreturned and (27) questionnaires were incomplete (missing responses). The researchers exerted great efforts, hard work, and extra financial cost supported by the assistant administrator followers to obtain the achieved response rate. Thus, a total number of (134) questionnaires was usable for subsequent analysis, giving a response rate of 70.15%.

Table 2 SUMMARY OF SAMPLE SIZE INGREDIENTS AND RESPONSE RATE
Questionnaire Administrated	191
Unreturned Questionnaire	30
Uncompleted Questionnaire	27
Usable Questionnaire	134
Response rate (134 / 191)	70.15%

The Study Tool

For a collection of the study data, a questionnaire consisted of the following sections was used:

First Section: Includes necessary demographic information about the respondent (age, academic qualification, years of experience, and job title).

Second Section: Represents variable of the Entrepreneurial Orientation.

Third Section: It represents the variable of Creative Behavior of Managers.

Likert-Scale was used to measure organizational justice and its effect on the improvement of performance efficiency of the industrial companies.

A scale was used for evaluation of organizational justice dimensions and evaluation level of performance efficiency divided into three levels, where the cut degree was calculated by dividing the difference between the higher value of scale (5) and the lowest value (1) into three levels, i.e. cut degree was (1-5/3=1.33). The three levels of evaluation are as follows:

The validity and reliability of the study were measured as follows:

Low evaluation  degree	Average evaluation degree	High evaluation degree
2.33 – 1	3.67 - 2.34	5 - 2.68

Validity of Tool

The questionnaire was presented to a number of referees from faculty members in the Jordanian universities who are technically and academically qualified to verify the validity of the content of the questionnaire’s paragraphs and give an opinion on each paragraph of the questionnaire and its consistency with the study variables and dimensions. Upon reviewing the referees’ opinions, the contents of five paragraphs were modified, one paragraph was excluded and two paragraphs were combined so that they were clearly understood by the respondents.

Reliability of Tool

The reliability coefficient was measured according to Cronbach’s Coefficient Alpha to test the internal consistency of the questionnaire’s paragraphs and all variables’ dimension, as shown in table (3) below:

Table 3 RESULTS OF TESTING RELIABILITY OF THE STUDY TOOL (INTERNAL CONSISTENCY OF THE QUESTIONNAIRE ITEMS)
Variable Name	No. of Paragraphs	Cronbach's Alpha (N = 134)
Entrepreneurial Orientation	20	0.887
Risk-taking	5	0.815
Pro-activeness	5	0.739
Autonomy	5	0.766
Competitive aggressiveness	5	0.726
Creative Behavior	20	0.902
Problem sensitivity	10	0.847
Flexibility of thoughts	10	0.814
Total Paragraphs	40	0.94

Results of Analysis and Testing Hypotheses

Entrepreneurial Orientation Dimensions Evaluation

For notification, the first question of the study is: What are the levels of the entrepreneurial orientation and creative behavior of managers in the medium-sized enterprises in Amman City in Jordan?

To answer the first part of the first question of the study concerning the state of entrepreneurial orientation, the researchers calculated the arithmetic means and the standard deviations of managers' estimations of the medium-sized enterprises in Amman City in Jordan. The evaluation of the managers of the entrepreneurial orientation is based on the dimensions represented by risk-taking, pro-activeness, autonomy, and competitive aggressiveness.

Entrepreneurial Orientation Dimensions

Table 4 indicates that the value of the total weighted average mean related to the Entrepreneurial Orientation was 4.02 and standard deviation of 0.57. The result indicates that the managers viewed that, the medium-sized enterprises in Amman City in Jordan positively practice the entrepreneurial orientation and at a high level.

Table 4 ARITHMETIC MEAN AND THE STANDARD DEVIATIONS OF THE ENTREPRENEURIAL ORIENTATION DIMENSIONS (INDEPENDENT VARIABLES)(N = 134)
No.	Dimensions	Mean	Standard Deviations	Relative Importance	Assessment Level
1	Risk-Taking	3.95	0.73	3	High
2	Pro- Activeness	4.29	0.49	1	High
3	Self- Autonomy	3.93	0.67	4	High
4	Competitive Aggressiveness	4.02	0.57	2	High
	Entrepreneurial Orientation	4.04	0.5	_	HIGH

Source: The field study of the researcher, 2019.

To clarify and comprehend the status of the different paragraphs of the entrepreneurial orientation dimensions in details, the results shown in Table 4-8 were ranked as follows:

- Dimension no. 2 which is pro-activeness; has an average mean value of (4.29) and a standard deviation of (0.49) and hence, it was assessed at a high level.

- Dimension no. 4 which is competitive aggressiveness; has an average mean value of (4.02) and a standard deviation of (0.57) and hence, it was assessed at a high level.

- Dimension no. 1 which is risk-taking states; has an average mean value of (3.95) and a standard deviation of (0.73) and hence, it was assessed at a high level.

- Dimension no. 3 which is self-autonomy; has an average mean value of (3.93) and a standard deviation of (0.67) and hence, it was assessed at a high level.

The results indicate that the managers viewed the different dimensions related to the entrepreneurial orientation are practiced positively and at high levels in the medium-sized enterprises in Amman City in Jordan.

Results of Evaluating the Creative Behavior Dimensions

What is the evaluating level of the creative behavior dimensions of managers in the medium-sized enterprises in Amman City in Jordan?

To answer the second question of the study, the researchers calculated the arithmetic means and the standard deviations estimations regarding their evaluation of the creative behavior dimensions represented by the (Problem Sensitivity, and Flexibility of Thoughts) which are as follows:

Creative Behavior Dimensions

Table 5 indicates that the value of the total weighted average mean related to the Creative Behavior was (4.13) and standard deviation of (0.48). The result indicates that the managers viewed that, the medium-sized enterprises in Amman City in Jordan positively practice the creative behavior dimensions and at a high level.

Table 5 ARITHMETIC MEAN AND THE STANDARD DEVIATIONS OF THE CREATIVE BEHAVIOR DIMENSIONS (INDEPENDENT VARIABLES) (N = 134)
No.	Dimensions	Mean	Standard Deviations	Relative Importance	Assessment Level
1	Problem Sensitivity	4.12	0.53	2	High
2	Flexibility of Thoughts	4.14	0.5	1	High
	Creative Behavior	4.13	0.48	_	HIGH

Source: The field study of the researcher, 2019.

To clarify and comprehend the status of the different paragraphs of the creative behavior dimensions in details, the results shown in Table 5 were ranked as follows:

- Dimension no. 2 which is the flexibility of thoughts; it has an average mean value of (4.14) and standard deviation of (0.50) and hence, it was assessed at a high level.

- Dimension no. 4 which is the problem sensitivity; has an average mean value of (4.12) and standard deviation of (0.53) and hence, it was assessed at a high level.

The results indicate that the managers viewed the different dimensions related to the creative behavior are practiced positively and at high levels in the medium-sized enterprises in Amman City in Jordan.

Multicollinearity

Multicollinearity occurs when any single predictor variable is highly correlated with another set of predictor variables (Graham, 2003). In this study, the researchers did two types of testing for Multicollinearity between the independent variables; tolerance value and Variance Inflation Factor (VIF). The common cut off threshold is a tolerance value of (0.10), which corresponds to a VIF value of less than the critical value (10) (Hair et al., 2006). According to the multiple regression analysis data presented in Table 6; the results in the concerned table showed that the tolerance values were between (0.387 and 0.631), and the Variance Inflation Factor (VIF) values were in the range of (1.585 to 2.586). Given that the tolerance value is substantially greater than (0.10) and the VIF value is less than the critical value (10), it can be concluded that the Multicollinearity does not exist among the independent variables.

Table 6 RESULTS OF TOLERANCE AND VIF TEST FOR TESTING THE MULTICOLLINEARITY (N=134)
Variable	Tolerance	VIF	Critical Value
Risk- taking	0.606	1.651	10
Pro-activeness	0.414	2.415	10
Autonomy	0.631	1.585	10
Competitive aggressiveness	0. 387	2.586	10

Source: The field study of the researcher, 2021

The correlation is also carried to ensure the relationship between independent variables as shown in Table 7; such coefficients correlation revealed that the strength of the relationship between different variables was ranged between intermediate and strong which indicate that multicollinearity does not exist among the independent variables.

Table 7 CORRELATIONS AMONG INDEPENDENT VARIABLES FOR TESTING THE MULTICOLLINEARITY (N=134)
Variables	Risk-Taking	Pro-Activeness	Self-Autonomy	Competitive Aggressiveness
Risk-Taking	1	0.613**	0.345**	0.532**
Pro-Activeness	0.613**	1	0.466**	0.713**
Self-Autonomy	0.345**	0.466**	1	0.606**
Competitive Aggressiveness	0.532**	0.713**	0.606**	1
Entrepreneurial Orientation	0.732**	0.767**		0.800**

Source: The researcher 2021.

Testing The Main Hypothesis

H1 There is no a statistically significant impact at the significance level (α ≤ 0.05) for the Entrepreneurial Orientations(risk-taking, pro-activeness, self-autonomy, and competitive aggressiveness) on supporting the Creative Behavior of managers (problem sensitivity and flexibility of thoughts)of managers in the medium-sized enterprise in Amman City in Jordan.

Table 8 shows the results of the Multiple Linear Regressions Analysis for the main hypothesis in measuring the impact of the entrepreneurial orientations (risk-taking, pro-activeness, self-autonomy, and competitive aggressiveness) on supporting creative behavior.

Table 8 RESULT OF MULTIPLE LINEAR REGRESSION TO TEST THE ENTREPRENEURIAL ORIENTATION DIMENSIONS ON CREATIVE BEHAVIOR (MAIN HYPOTHESIS) T- TABULATED VALUE WITH (129) DEGREE OF FREEDOM AT (Α =0.05) = 1.96 F- TABULATED VALUE WITH TWO DEGREES OF FREEDOM (5, 214) AT (Α=0.05) = 2.21
Entrepreneurial Orientation Dimensions	Unstandardized Coefficients		Standardized Coefficients	Calculated (t) value	Sig.
	B	Standard Error	Beta (β)
Constant (B0)	0.991	0.226		4.393	0
Risk-Taking	0.159	0.044	0.241	3.625	0
Pro-Activeness	0.15	0.079	0.153	1.902	0.059
Self-Autonomy	0.124	0.047	0.172	2.686	0.009
Competitive Aggressiveness	0.342	0.07	0.407	4.882	0
Calculated (F) value = 60.838		Significance (F) = 0.000
Correlation Coefficient (R) = 0.808		Determination Coefficient (R2) = 0.654

Table 8 illustrates the following results:

1. The validity of Multiple Linear Regression is confirmed, and the calculated (F) value equals to (60.838) is greater than (F) tabulated value (2.21), and supported by the statistically significant (Sig.) value (0.000) is less than the (α=0.05).

2. The determination coefficient (R2) value (0.654) indicates that the change in the entrepreneurial orientations (risk-taking, pro-activeness, self-autonomy, and competitive aggressiveness) in general, explains (65.4%) of the changes in the creative behavior of managers in the medium-sized enterprise in Amman City in Jordan.

3. The significance of the coefficient (β) is proven for three dimensions which are (risk-taking, self-autonomy, and competitive aggressiveness), which is supported by its (T) calculated values (3.625, 2.636, and 4.882) respectively are greater than (T) tabulated value (1.96). As well as, the (Sig.) values for the mentioned dimensions are less than (a=0.05). Therefore, the null hypothesis (H0) is rejected, and the alternative hypothesis (H1) is accepted that stated (There is a statistically significant impact at the significance level (α ≤ 0.05) for the Entrepreneurial Orientations (risk-taking, pro-activeness, self-autonomy, and competitive aggressiveness) on supporting the Creative Behavior of managers (problem sensitivity and flexibility of thoughts) of managers in the medium-sized enterprise in Amman City in Jordan. Consequently, the significance of the coefficient (β) is not proven for the one dimension which is pro-activeness. Therefore, there is no statistically significant impact at the significance level (α ≤ 0.05) of the entrepreneurial orientations (pro-activeness) on supporting the creative behavior of the managers in the medium-sized enterprise in Amman City in Jordan.

4. The result of the stepwise regression classified the independent variables depending on which variables have the most effects on the dependent variable, as well as excluding the variables that do not have not a high effect.

The results in Table 9 illustrate that the stepwise regression classified the independent variables into four models, as follows:

Table 9 RESULTS OF THE STEPWISE REGRESSION OF THE MAIN HYPOTHESIS
Model	Variables	R	R2	F	Sig.
1	Risk- Taking	0.611	0.374	78.762	0
2	Risk- Taking	0.717	0.515	68.456	0
	Pro-Activeness
3	Risk- Taking	0.768	0.59	62.241	0
	Pro-Activeness
	Self-Autonomy
4	Risk-Taking	0.808	0.65	60.838	0
	Pro-Activeness
	Self-Autonomy
	Competitive Aggressiveness

1. The first one includes (risk-taking) which has the highest contribution to the dependent variable (creative behaviour) by (37.4%).

2. The second model contains the (risk-taking and pro-activeness) which have the second-highest contribution to the dependent variable (creative behaviour) by (51.5%).

3. The third model contains the (risk-taking, pro-activeness, and self-autonomy) which have the third-highest contribution to the dependent variable (creative behaviour) by (59.0%).

4. The fourth model contains the (risk-taking, pro-activeness, self-autonomy, and competitive aggressiveness) which have the fourth highest contributor to the dependent variable (creative behaviour) by (65.0%).

Furthermore, the stepwise regression embodied all sub independent variables because the contributions of all variables were significant.

Testing the 1^st Sub hypothesis

H1 There is no statistically significant impact at the significance level (α ≤ 0.05) for the Entrepreneurial Orientations (risk-taking, pro-activeness, self-autonomy, and competitive aggressiveness) on supporting the Creative Behavior of managers (Problem Sensitivity) of managers in the medium-sized enterprise in Amman City in Jordan.

Table 10 shows the results of the Multiple Linear Regressions Analysis for the 1st sub hypothesis in measuring the impact of the entrepreneurial orientations (risk-taking, pro-activeness, self-autonomy, and competitive aggressiveness) on supporting creative behavior (problem sensitivity).

TABLE 10 RESULT OF MULTIPLE LINEAR REGRESSION TO TEST THE ENTREPRENEURIAL ORIENTATION DIMENSIONS ON PROBLEM SENSITIVITY (1ST SUB HYPOTHESIS) T- TABULATED VALUE WITH (129) DEGREE OF FREEDOM AT (Α =0.05) = 1.96 F- TABULATED VALUE WITH TWO DEGREES OF FREEDOM (5, 214) AT (Α =0.05) = 2.21
Entrepreneurial Orientation Dimensions	Unstandardized Coefficients		Standardized Coefficients	Calculated (t) value	Sig.
	B	Standard Error	Beta (β)
Constant (B0)	0.967	0.277		3.492	0.001
Risk-Taking	0.165	0.054	0.226	3.056	0.003
Pro-Activeness	0.118	0.097	0.109	1.220	0.225
Self-Autonomy	0.048	0.058	0.060	0.827	0.410
Competitive Aggressiveness	0.448	0.086	0.482	5.208	0.002
Calculated (F) value = 43.064		Significance (F) = 0.000
Correlation Coefficient (R) = 0.756		Determination Coefficient (R2) = 0.572

The results in Table 10 illustrate that the stepwise regression classified the independent variables into four models, as follows:

1. The validity of Multiple Linear Regression is confirmed, and the calculated (F) value equals to (43.064) is greater than (F) tabulated value (2.21), and supported by the statistically significant (Sig.) value (0.000) is less than the (α =0.05).

2. The determination coefficient (R2) value (0.481) indicates that the change in the entrepreneurial orientations (risk-taking, pro-activeness, self-autonomy, and competitive aggressiveness), in general, explains (57.2%) of the changes on supporting creative behavior (problem sensitivity) of managers in the medium-sized enterprise in Amman City in Jordan.

3. The significance of the coefficient () is proven for two dimensions which are (risk-taking and competitive aggressiveness), which is supported by its (T) calculated values (3.056 and 5.208) respectively are greater than (T) tabulated value (1.96). As well as, the (Sig.) values for the mentioned dimensions are less than (α=0.05). So, the null hypothesis (H01) is rejected, and the alternative hypothesis (H11) is accepted that stated (There is a statistically significant impact at the significance level (α ≤ 0.05) for the Entrepreneurial Orientations(risk-taking and competitive aggressiveness) on supporting the Creative Behavior of managers (Problem Sensitivity)of managers in the medium-sized enterprise in Amman City in Jordan. Consequently, the significance of the coefficient () is not proven for the two dimensions which are pro-activeness and self-autonomy. Therefore, there is no statistically significant impact at the significance level (α ≤ 0.05) of the entrepreneurial orientations (pro-activeness and self-autonomy) on supporting the creative behavior (problem sensitivity) of the managers in the medium-sized enterprise in Amman City in Jordan.

4. The result of the stepwise regression classified the independent variables depending on which variables have the most effects on the dependent variable, as well as excluding the variables that do not have a high effect.

The results in Table 11 illustrate that the stepwise regression classified the independent variables into four models, as follows:

Table 11 RESULTS OF THE STEPWISE REGRESSION OF 1ST SUB HYPOTHESIS
Model	Variables	R	R2	F	Sig.
1	Risk- Taking	0.571	0.321	63.803	0.000
2	Risk- Taking	0.665	0.443	53.029	0.000
	Pro-Activeness
3	Risk- Taking	0.694	0.482	40.282	0.000
	Pro-Activeness
	Self-Autonomy
4	Risk-Taking	0.756	0.572	43.064	0.000
	Pro-Activeness
	Self-Autonomy
	Competitive Aggressiveness

1. The first one includes (risk-taking) which has the highest contribution to the dependent variable (creative behaviour) by (32.1%).

2. The second model contains the (risk-taking and pro-activeness) which have the second-highest contribution to the dependent variable (creative behaviour) by (44.3%).

3. The third model contains the (risk-taking, pro-activeness, and self-autonomy) which have the third-highest contribution to the dependent variable (creative behaviour) by (57.2%).

4. The fourth model contains the (risk-taking, pro-activeness, self-autonomy, and competitive aggressiveness) which have the fourth highest contributor to the dependent variable (creative behaviour) by (57.2%).

Furthermore, the stepwise regression embodied all sub independent variables because the contributions of all variables were significant.

Testing the 2^nd Sub-hypothesis:

H2 There is no a statistically significant impact at the significance level (α ≤ 0.05) for the Entrepreneurial Orientations(risk-taking, pro-activeness, self-autonomy, and competitive aggressiveness) on supporting the Creative Behavior of managers (Flexibility of Thoughts)of managers in the medium-sized enterprise in Amman City in Jordan.

Table 12 shows the results of the Multiple Linear Regressions Analysis for the 2nd sub hypothesis in measuring the impact of the entrepreneurial orientations (risk-taking, pro-activeness, self-autonomy, and competitive aggressiveness) on supporting creative behavior (flexibility of thoughts).

TABLE 12 THE RESULT OF MULTIPLE LINEAR REGRESSION TO TEST THE ENTREPRENEURIAL ORIENTATION DIMENSIONS ON FLEXIBILITY OF THOUGHTS (2ND SUB HYPOTHESIS) T- TABULATED VALUE WITH (129) DEGREE OF FREEDOM AT (Α =0.05) = 1.96 F- TABULATED VALUE WITH TWO DEGREES OF FREEDOM (5, 214) AT (Α =0.05) = 2.21
Entrepreneurial Orientation Dimensions	Unstandardized Coefficients		Standardized Coefficients	Calculated (t) value	Sig.
	B	Standard Error	Beta (β)
Constant (B0)	1.014	0.253		4.015	0.000
Risk-Taking	0.154	0.049	0.266	3.123	0.002
Pro-Activeness	0.182	0.089	0.180	2.059	0.042
Self-Autonomy	0.200	0.053	0.269	3.799	0.000
Competitive Aggressiveness	0.236	0.079	0.272	3.007	0.003
Calculated (F) value = 46.648		Significance (F) = 0.000
Correlation Coefficient (R) = 0.769		Determination Coefficient (R2) = 0.591

The results in Table 12 illustrate that the stepwise regression classified the independent variables into four models, as follows:

1. The validity of Multiple Linear Regression is confirmed, and the calculated (F) value equals to (46.648) is greater than (F) tabulated value (2.21), and supported by the statistically significant (Sig.) value (0.000) is less than the (α=0.05).

2. The determination coefficient (R2) value (0.591) indicates that the change in the entrepreneurial orientations (risk-taking, pro-activeness, self-autonomy, and competitive aggressiveness), in general, explains (59.1%) of the changes on supporting creative behavior (flexibility of thoughts) of managers in the medium-sized enterprise in Amman City in Jordan.

3. The significance of the coefficient () is proven for four dimensions which are (risk-taking, pro-activeness, self-autonomy and competitive aggressiveness), which is supported by its (T) calculated values (3.123, 2.059, 3.799, and 3.007) respectively are greater than (T) tabulated value (1.96). As well as, the (Sig.) values for the mentioned dimensions are less than (α=0.05). So, the null hypothesis (H02) is rejected, and the alternative hypothesis (H12) is accepted that stated (There is a statistically significant impact at the significance level (α ≤ 0.05) for the Entrepreneurial Orientations(risk-taking and competitive aggressiveness) on supporting the Creative Behavior of managers (flexibility of thoughts)of managers in the medium-sized enterprise in Amman City in Jordan. Consequently, the significance of the coefficient ()is proven for all the dimensions which are (risk-taking, pro-activeness, self-autonomy and competitive aggressiveness). Therefore, there is a statistically significant impact at the significance level (α ≤ 0.05) of the entrepreneurial orientations (risk-taking, pro-activeness, self-autonomy and competitive aggressiveness) on supporting the creative behavior (flexibility of thoughts) of the managers in the medium-sized enterprise in Amman City in Jordan.

4. The result of the stepwise regression classified the independent variables depending on variables that have the most effects on the dependent variable, as well as excluding the variables that do not have a high effect.

The results in Table 13 illustrate that the stepwise regression classified the independent variables into four models, as follows:

Table 13 RESULTS OF THE STEPWISE REGRESSION OF THE 2ND SUB HYPOTHESIS
Model	Variables	R	R2	F	Sig.
1	Risk- Taking	0.574	0.330	64.932	0.000
2	Risk- Taking	0.679	0.461	55.973	0.000
	Pro-Activeness
3	Risk- Taking	0.750	0.563	55.734	0.000
	Pro-Activeness
	Self-Autonomy
4	Risk-Taking	0.769	0.591	46.48	0.000
	Pro-Activeness
	Self-Autonomy
	Competitive Aggressiveness

1. The first one includes (risk-taking) which has the highest contribution to the dependent variable (creative behaviour) by (33.0%).

2. The second model contains the (risk-taking and pro-activeness) which have the second-highest contribution to the dependent variable (creative behaviour) by (46.1%).

3. The third model contains the (risk-taking, pro-activeness, and self-autonomy) which have the third-highest contribution to the dependent variable (creative behaviour) by (56.3%).

4. The fourth model contains the (risk-taking, pro-activeness, self-autonomy, and competitive aggressiveness) which have the fourth highest contributor to the dependent variable (creative behaviour) by (59.1%).

Furthermore, the stepwise regression embodied all sub independent variables because the contributions of all variables were significant.

Conclusion and Recommendations

Main Results

1. The medium-sized enterprises in Amman City in Jordan positively practise the entrepreneurial orientation and at a high level.

2. The medium-sized enterprises in Amman City in Jordan positively practise the creative behavior dimensions and at a high level. There is a strong relationship between entrepreneurial orientation dimensions (risk-taking, pro-activeness, self-autonomy, and competitive aggressiveness) and creative behaviour (problem sensitivity and flexibility of thoughts). i.e there is a strong relationship between entrepreneurial orientation and creative behaviour of managers in the medium-sized enterprises in Amman City in Jordan.

3. There is a statistically significant impact at the significance level (α ≤ 0.05) for the entrepreneurial orientations (risk-taking, pro-activeness, self-autonomy, and competitive aggressiveness) on supporting the creative behavior of managers (problem sensitivity and flexibility of thoughts)of managers in the medium-sized enterprise in Amman City in Jordan.

4. There is no statistically significant impact at the significance level (α ≤ 0.05) of the entrepreneurial orientations (pro-activeness) on supporting the creative behavior of the managers in the medium-sized enterprise in Amman City in Jordan.

5. There is a statistically significant impact at the significance level (α ≤ 0.05) for the entrepreneurial orientations (risk-taking and competitive aggressiveness) on supporting the creative behavior of managers (Problem Sensitivity)of managers in the medium-sized enterprise in Amman City in Jordan.

6. There is no statistically significant impact at the significance level (α ≤ 0.05) of the entrepreneurial orientations (pro-activeness and self-autonomy) on supporting the creative behavior (problem sensitivity) of the managers in the medium-sized enterprise in Amman City in Jordan.

7. There is a statistically significant impact at the significance level (α ≤ 0.05) for the entrepreneurial orientations (risk-taking and competitive aggressiveness) on supporting the Creative Behavior of managers (flexibility of thoughts) of managers in the medium-sized enterprise in Amman City in Jordan.

8. There is a statistically significant impact at the significance level (α ≤ 0.05) of the entrepreneurial orientations (risk-taking, pro-activeness, self-autonomy, and competitive aggressiveness) on supporting the creative behavior (flexibility of thoughts) of the managers in the medium-sized enterprise in Amman City in Jordan.

Recommendations

1. Working to increase policies and programs in support of entrepreneurship at the level of institutions and medium-sized enterprises to work to increase opportunities for development and growth, which leaves a positive impact to increase state revenues in general.

2. Stimulating the work of entrepreneurial and medium projects to address poverty, unemployment, and education.

3. Improving legislation and tax exemptions for medium-sized enterprises.

4. Developing financing programs to increase access to finance and grant soft loans.

5. Providing training programs to support the entrepreneurial capabilities of managing medium enterprises.

6. Encouraging research, development, and innovation by stimulating new projects and building an environment suitable for their growth.

7. Encouraging the management of medium-sized enterprises to increase autonomy as a dimension of entrepreneurial orientation.

References

1. Anand, N. (2016). Examining the relationship between entrepreneurial orientation, the strategic decision-making process and organizational performance: A study of Singapore SMEs, Unpublished thesis of doctor of philosophy, The University of Western Australia.
2. Nuiami, A.L., Mohammad, S.I., Wael, M., Abdelrahman, M.A., Moh`d, H., & Abu Joma, M. (2014), "Empirical Study of Moderator Effect of Entrepreneurial Orientation On the Relationship between Environmental Turbulence and Innovation Performance in five- Star Hotels in Jordan", International Journal of Business Administration, 5(2).
3. Qahtani, A., & Salem, A. (2002). The Organizational Obstacles to Creativity at Administrative Development Employees in the government Bodies in Saudi Arabia. Journal of Administrative Sciences, 14(2).
4. Alqhiwi, L. (2015). Organizational Justice and its Impact on Improvement the Performance Efficiency of the Industrial Companies A Case Study of Jordanian Potash Company. Dirasat, Administrative Sciences, 42(1).
5. Rahahleh, A.L., & Abdul, R.S. (2010). Organization theory. Amman, Arab Society Publishing House and distribution, P (216).
6. Shawarwa, A.L., & Faisal, M.D. (2012). The impact of the organizational climate on the creative behavior of employees in Jordanian private Universities. Amman Arab University Jordan.
7. Anderson, B.S., Kreiser, P.M., Kuratko, D.F., Hornsby, J.S., & Eshima, Y. (2015), Reconceptualizing entrepreneurial orientation. Strategic Management Journal, 36(10), 1579-1596.
8. Aroyeun, A., Taiwo, A., Adefulu, T., Adesoga, A., Asikhia, M., & Olalekan, D. (2019), Effect of Entrepreneurial Orientation on Performance of Selected Small and Medium Scale Enterprises in Ogun State Nigeria.  International Journal of Business and Management Invention, 16-27.
9. Avlonitis, G.J, & Salavou, H.E. (2007). Entrepreneurial orientation of SMEs, product innovativeness, and performance. J.Bus.Res, 60,566-575.
10. Bilal, K.S. (2008). "Entrepreneurship Strategies and their role in achieving competitiveness Advantages of Telecommunications Companies in Jordan". Isra Private University, Department of Business Administration, Faculty of Administrative and Financial Sciences, Jordan.
11. Bojica, A.M., Fuentes, M.M, & Gómez-Gras, J.M. (2011), "Radical and incremental entrepreneurial orientation: The effect of knowledge acquisition". Journal of Management & Organization, 17(3), 326-343.
12. Boumediene, B., & Balkabeer, S. (2013). Field Studies in Business Administration. Amman: Dar Al Yazouri Scientific Publishing and Distribution, P(183).
13. Covin, K., & Limpkin, L. (2011). Entrepreneurial orientation theory, and research: Reflection on a needed construct. Entrepreneurship theory and practice, 35(5), 855-872. 
14. Covin, J.G., & Wales, W.J.(2019). Crafting high-impact entrepreneurial orientation research: Some suggested guidelines. Entrepreneurship: Theory & Practice, 43(1), 3-18.
15. Covin, J., Green, K., & Slevin, D.P. (2006). Strategic process effects on the entrepreneurial orientation-sales growth rate relationship. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 30(1), 57-81.
16. Gregory, G., Lumpkin, G.T. & Eisner, B. (2007). “Strategic Management: Creating Competitive Advantage”. McGraw-Hill, Barded New York.
17. Eka, Z.S., & Ali, M. (2019). Development of Entrepreneurial Orientation. International Journal of Applied Business & International Management, 4(1), 31-37.
18. Graham, M.H. (2003). Confronting multicollinearity in multiple ecological regression. Ecology, 84(11), 2809-2815.
19. Harrison, J. (2013). The Effects of Instructor Transformational Leadership and Verbal Immediacy on Learner Autonomy and Creativity in Online Contexts. Pro Quest LLC, PhD. Dissertation, Regent University.
20. Hassan, R., & Hatem, A. (2004). Administrative creativity and its relationship to job performance" On security agencies at King Abdul-Aziz International Airport. Unpublished master thesis, in Saudi Administrative Sciences, 35-36.
21. Indy, B., Jinia, M., & Roy T. (2018). "The role of affect in entrepreneurial orientation". Small Business Economics, pp 1–22.
22. Karacaoglu, K., Bayrakdaroglu, A., & San, F.B. (2012). The impact of corporate entrepreneurship on firms financial performance: Evidence from Istanbul stock exchange firms. International Business Research, 6(1), 163-176.
23. Lumpkin, G.T., & Dess, G.G. (1996). Clarifying the entrepreneurial orientation construct and linking it to performance. Academy of Management Journal, 21(1), 135-172.
24. Lumpkin, G.T., & Dess, G.G. (2001). Linking two dimensions of entrepreneurial orientation to firm performance: the moderating role of environment and industry life cycle. Journal of Business Venturing, 16, 429 -451.
25. Mahrous, A. & Genedy, M. (2019). Connecting the dots: The relationship among intra-organizational environment, entrepreneurial orientation, market orientation and organizational performance. Journal of Entrepreneurship in Emerging Economies, 11 (1), 2-21.
26. Uzzal, H. (2019). The Role of Entrepreneurial Orientation to SME Performance in Bangladesh. International Journal of Entrepreneurship, 23.
27. Miller, D. (1983). The correlates of entrepreneurship in three types of firms. Management Science, 29(7), 770-791.
28. Mohammed, I.A., Sedeeq, B.L., & Emad, E.I.I. (2018). The Role of Marketing in Understanding and Controlling Cost of Quality. Journal of Economic and Management Sciences, 151-166.
29. Noruzy, A., Dalfard, V.M., Azhdari, B., et al. (2013). Relations between transformational leadership, organizational learning, knowledge management, organizational innovation, and organizational performance: An empirical investigation of manufacturing firms. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 64, 1073-1085.
30. Otache, I., & Mahmood R. (2015). Entrepreneurial Orientation and Performance of Nigerian Banks: The Mediating Effect of Teamwork. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences.
31. Sekaran, U., & Bougie, R. (2016). Research Methods for Business: A Skill-Building Approach (7th edition), Chichester, West Sussex, United Kingdom, John Wiley & Sons.
32. Shah, S., Zulfiqar, A., & Bhutta, N. (2013). Corporate entrepreneurship and agency cost: A theoretical perspective. Open Journal of Accounting, 2, 79-86.
33. Van, G., & Jansen, P.G.W. (2006). Autonomy as a startup motive. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 13(1), 23-32.
34. Wales, J.W. (2016). Entrepreneurial orientation: A review and synthesis of promising research directions. International Small Business Journal, 34 (1), 3-15.