INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
Exploring the Interplay between Organizational Culture,  
Intrapreneurship, and Performance in Young and Mature Startups  
Mahmoud Menyaoui1, Pr. Lassaad Lakhal2  
¹Lamided Laboratory, Higher Institute of Management, Sousse  
²Lamided Laboratory, Faculty of Economic and Management Sciences, Sousse  
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.91100174  
Received: 10 November 2025; Accepted: 20 November 2025; Published: 03 December 2025  
ABSTRACT  
In a rapidly evolving entrepreneurial landscape, Tunisian startups must rely on their ability to innovate and adapt  
quickly. This study examines how organizational culture shapes intrapreneurship and business performance  
while considering startup age as a moderating factor. By analyzing data from 91 Tunisian startups using  
structural equation modeling, we demonstrate that organizational culture fosters intrapreneurship and enhances  
overall performance. However, intrapreneurship does not act as a direct mediator between culture and  
performance.  
Startup age plays a crucial role in these dynamics: younger startups benefit more from a strong entrepreneurial  
culture but struggle to translate it into measurable performance, whereas more mature startups are better at  
converting innovation into tangible results. These findings provide valuable insights into how startups should  
structure their internal culture based on their stage of development.  
Keywords: Organizational Culture, Intrapreneurship, Startup Performance, Startup Age, Structural Equation  
Modeling (PLS-SEM), Corporate Entrepreneurship  
INTRODUCTION  
Startups operate in environments characterized by high uncertainty. Their ability to survive and thrive largely  
depends on how well they innovate and adapt to change (Audretsch & Klepper, 2016). In Tunisia, the  
entrepreneurial landscape has gained momentum thanks to reforms such as the 2018 Startup Act, yet significant  
challenges remain. Limited access to funding, regulatory instability, and increasing competition continue to  
hinder the growth of young ventures (World Bank, 2020).  
Intrapreneurship—defined as entrepreneurial initiatives driven by employees within an organization (Sharma &  
Chrisman, 1999)—has emerged as a strategic tool for startups looking to maintain their competitive edge. A  
strong organizational culture that promotes autonomy, experimentation, and risk-taking plays a crucial role in  
fostering intrapreneurial behaviors (Antoncic & Hisrich, 2003). However, while the link between organizational  
culture and intrapreneurship is well established, its direct impact on business performance remains a topic of  
debate (Morris et al., 2017).  
One key factor often overlooked in this discussion is the age of the startup. Early-stage startups tend to operate  
with flexible structures, making decisions quickly and adapting on the go. In contrast, more mature startups have  
more defined processes and stability but may struggle with organizational inertia (Hannan & Freeman, 1984).  
This raises an important question: How does a startup’s age influence the relationship between  
organizational culture, intrapreneurship, and performance?  
This study seeks to address the following research questions:  
1. How does organizational culture shape intrapreneurial behavior in Tunisian startups?  
Page 2184  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
2. What is the relationship between intrapreneurship and startup performance?  
3. Does the age of a startup moderate these relationships?  
By exploring these questions, this research aims to expand existing literature on intrapreneurship by introducing  
a time-based perspective that has often been overlooked.  
LITERATURE REVIEW AND HYPOTHESES  
Organizational Culture and Intrapreneurship  
Organizational culture plays a crucial role in shaping how employees engage with their work environment, take  
initiative, and contribute to innovative projects (Teece, 2007). In startups, where structures tend to be flexible  
and resources limited, corporate culture is a key driver of intrapreneurial behavior. A culture that promotes  
autonomy, risk-taking, and learning through experimentation creates a space where employees feel empowered  
to explore new ideas without the fear of failure (Bau & Wagner, 2015).  
A culture that fosters innovation is built on several key elements. First, a commitment to continuous  
improvement and openness to change encourages startups to challenge existing practices and seek new  
solutions. Second, risk tolerance is essential, as it allows employees to propose and test unconventional ideas,  
even if the outcomes are uncertain (Antoncic & Hisrich, 2003). Finally, collaboration and teamwork help  
create synergies between employees, enabling knowledge sharing and facilitating the successful execution of  
intrapreneurial projects.  
In emerging economies, where institutional frameworks can be unstable and access to funding is often  
constrained, organizational culture becomes even more critical. It can act as a compensatory mechanism,  
fostering agility and resilience in companies operating under uncertain conditions (Peng et al., 2008). For  
instance, in environments where businesses must navigate shifting regulations or bureaucratic hurdles, a culture  
that values flexibility and innovation provides a competitive advantage.  
Leadership also plays a crucial role in reinforcing a strong intrapreneurial culture. Startup leaders who actively  
encourage entrepreneurial thinking and empower their teams create an environment where employees feel  
ownership over their ideas (Dess & Lumpkin, 2005). Transparent communication and participative management  
further strengthen employee engagement, leading to a workplace where intrapreneurial initiatives thrive.  
Based on these considerations, we propose the following hypothesis:  
H1: An organizational culture that fosters innovation, autonomy, and risk-taking positively influences  
intrapreneurship.  
Intrapreneurship and Startup Performance  
Intrapreneurship is widely recognized as a driver of growth and competitive differentiation for startups. It enables  
businesses to seize new opportunities, refine internal processes, and develop innovative products or services that  
align with market needs (Zahra, 1991). However, while intrapreneurship is often associated with superior  
performance, its actual impact varies depending on several factors.  
First, intrapreneurship contributes to value creation by helping startups anticipate market trends and adopt a  
proactive approach to change (Covin & Slevin, 1991). This forward- thinking mindset allows businesses to  
identify untapped opportunities and implement strategic innovations, ultimately strengthening their market  
position.  
However, fostering intrapreneurial initiatives is not without challenges. In some cases, these initiatives can lead  
to significant costs, consuming financial and human resources without guaranteeing immediate returns (March,  
1991). For instance, a startup investing heavily in a disruptive innovation without first validating market demand  
may struggle to turn that investment into commercial success.  
Page 2185  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
Additionally, the impact of intrapreneurship on performance depends on organizational maturity. A well-  
structured startup with clear processes for evaluating and scaling innovations is more likely to reap the benefits  
of intrapreneurial efforts. In contrast, a younger or less structured company may find its initiatives fragmented  
or misaligned with strategic goals, reducing their overall effectiveness (Guth & Ginsberg, 1990).  
Given these nuances, while intrapreneurship is often linked to positive business outcomes, it is crucial to assess  
the conditions that enhance or hinder its success. Therefore, we propose the following hypothesis:  
H2: Intrapreneurship has a positive effect on startup performance.  
The Moderating Role of Startup Age  
The age of a startup can influence the relationship between organizational culture, intrapreneurship, and  
performance. In the early stages, startups tend to have a flexible structure that allows for rapid experimentation  
and iteration. However, this agility often comes at the expense of well-established processes and resource  
availability, making it more challenging to implement intrapreneurial initiatives effectively (Hannan & Freeman,  
1984).  
During their initial years, startups typically focus on financial viability and customer acquisition.  
Intrapreneurial efforts may be seen as secondary priorities, as they divert resources toward uncertain projects.  
Even when an organizational culture supports innovation and risk-taking, the real impact on performance may  
be limited due to a lack of experience, capital, or operational stability.  
On the other hand, more mature startups benefit from greater organizational structure and easier access to  
funding, which allows them to integrate intrapreneurship into long-term growth strategies. They are more likely  
to have the resources and strategic frameworks needed to translate internal initiatives into meaningful business  
outcomes. However, as startups age, they also face the risk of organizational inertia—where rigid processes  
and hierarchical decision-making slow down innovation and experimentation (Aldrich & Fiol, 1994).  
The role of startup age is therefore complex:  
Younger startups benefit significantly from a strong organizational culture that fosters entrepreneurship,  
but their lack of structure and resources can limit the tangible impact of intrapreneurship on performance.  
Older startups are better positioned to leverage intrapreneurial efforts, but they must actively maintain an  
agile and innovation-driven mindset to avoid stagnation.  
Considering these insights, we propose the following hypothesis:  
H3: Startup age moderates the relationship between organizational culture, intrapreneurship, and  
performance.  
Summary of Hypotheses  
Hypothesis  
H1  
Description  
An organizational culture that fosters innovation, autonomy, and risk-taking positively  
influences intrapreneurship.  
Intrapreneurship has a positive effect on startup performance.  
H2  
H3  
Startup age moderates the relationship between organizational culture, intrapreneurship, and  
performance.  
This section highlights the significance of organizational culture in fostering intrapreneurship while recognizing  
that its impact on performance is not uniform across all startups. By incorporating startup age as a moderating  
Page 2186  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
factor, this research provides a more nuanced understanding of the conditions under which intrapreneurship  
drives business success. Future studies could further explore how external factors, such as industry type or  
market conditions, influence these dynamics.  
METHODOLOGY  
Research Approach and Study Design  
This study adopts a quantitative approach to examine the relationships between organizational culture,  
intrapreneurship, and startup performance, while considering the moderating role of startup age. The goal is  
to identify patterns and potential causal links among these variables, providing empirical insights into their  
interactions within an emerging entrepreneurial ecosystem.  
A quantitative methodology was chosen to ensure measurable and generalizable results across Tunisian  
startups. While a qualitative approach could have provided deeper insights into underlying mechanisms, the  
nature of our research question requires statistical validation of the hypothesized relationships.  
Data Collection and Sampling  
Data was collected through an online survey conducted between November and January, targeting Tunisian  
startups from various industries. This collection method was chosen to reach a broad range of entrepreneurs  
and managers while offering flexibility in participation.  
The final sample consists of 91 officially registered startups under Tunisia’s Startup Act, a government  
initiative designed to support and structure the country’s entrepreneurial ecosystem. The sampling method  
follows a non-probabilistic approach, relying on the availability and willingness of entrepreneurs to  
participate. While this method does not ensure complete representativeness of the Tunisian startup landscape, it  
provides a reliable snapshot of actively innovative and intrapreneurial firms.  
Measurement of Variables  
To ensure the reliability and validity of the findings, the study’s key dimensions were measured using  
established scales from academic literature:  
Organizational Culture: This variable was assessed using the scale developed by  
Bau & Wagner (2015), which captures core dimensions such as innovation orientation, risk  
tolerance, autonomy, and collaboration. These elements are recognized as critical drivers of intrapreneurship  
within startups.  
Intrapreneurship: We applied the Gawke et al. (2019) scale, which distinguishes different aspects of  
intrapreneurial initiatives, including decision-making autonomy, innovation capability, and opportunity  
exploration. This multidimensional approach allows for a more comprehensive understanding of  
intrapreneurial behaviors within startups.  
Startup Performance: A multidimensional performance measurement approach was adopted,  
considering both financial indicators (revenue growth, profitability), non-financial indicators (innovation,  
customer satisfaction), and organizational factors (adaptive capacity, internal skill development).  
Additionally, startup age was included as a moderating variable to analyze its influence on the relationships  
between organizational culture, intrapreneurship, and performance. This variable was measured in years  
since the company’s official founding.  
Page 2187  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
Methodological Summary  
Aspect  
Description  
Quantitative, exploratory  
Online survey  
Study Type  
Data Collection Method  
Sample  
91 Tunisian startups  
Bau & Wagner (2015) for organizational culture, Gawke et al. (2019) for  
intrapreneurship  
Measurement Scales  
Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM)  
Analysis Method  
Statistical Tools  
Bootstrapping (5,000 resamples), reliability and validity assessments  
This methodological framework ensures a robust and structured approach to analyzing the role of  
organizational culture in fostering intrapreneurship and improving startup performance, while considering how  
these effects evolve based on the company's stage of development.  
FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION  
Our study highlights a significant relationship between organizational culture and intrapreneurship (β = 0.622, p  
< 0.05). These results confirm that startups fostering innovation, autonomy, and risk-taking tend to see more  
entrepreneurial initiatives emerging from their employees. This aligns with existing literature, which emphasizes  
the central role of company culture in shaping internal entrepreneurial behavior (Bau & Wagner, 2015; Antoncic  
& Hisrich, 2003).  
Additionally, we observe a direct and significant impact of organizational culture on startup performance (β =  
0.544, p < 0.05). Startups that embrace experimentation and collaboration appear better equipped to navigate  
market shifts and optimize their internal processes. This finding supports Teece's (2007) work, which suggests  
that an innovation-friendly culture enhances a company’s ability to develop dynamic capabilities in unstable  
environments.  
However, despite the clear link between culture and performance, our analysis does not show a statistically  
significant relationship between intrapreneurship and performance (β = -0.042, p > 0.05). This lack of direct  
correlation raises questions about the actual contribution of intrapreneurial initiatives to startup success.  
Table 1 — Main Empirical Results of the PLS-SEM Model  
Tested Relationship  
Coefficient p-value Significance Interpretation  
β
Significant  
Significant  
A
culture promoting innovation,  
Organizational Culture 0.622  
→ Intrapreneurship  
p < 0.05  
p < 0.05  
p > 0.05  
autonomy, and risk-taking strongly  
enhances intrapreneurship.  
Startups with an innovation-oriented  
culture  
performance.  
Organizational Culture 0.544  
achieve  
better  
overall  
→
Startup  
Performance  
Not  
significant  
Intrapreneurship does not directly  
improve performance; benefits may be  
Intrapreneurship  
→ –0.042  
Startup Performance  
Page 2188  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
delayed or poorly executed.  
Qualitatively —  
Age  
Observed  
Younger startups benefit from culture  
but struggle to convert intrapreneurship  
into performance; mature startups do so  
more effectively.  
Startup  
(Moderation)  
confirmed  
Understanding the Disconnect Between Intrapreneurship and Performance  
One key takeaway from this study is that while intrapreneurship is encouraged by a strong organizational culture,  
it does not always translate into immediate performance gains. Several factors may explain this phenomenon.  
Table 2 — Narrative Summary of Key Findings  
Dimension  
Key Result  
Explanation  
Strong positive influence on Confirms culture as the central driver of internal  
intrapreneurship and performance innovation.  
Organizational  
Culture  
No direct effect on performance  
Impact requires time, structure, and strategic  
alignment.  
Intrapreneurship  
Driven more by culture than by Performance depends on organizational capabilities  
intrapreneurship alone and agility.  
Startup  
Performance  
Influences the effectiveness of Young startups: high creativity, low execution.  
Startup Age  
intrapreneurship  
Mature startups: stronger conversion into  
performance.  
Time Lag in Intrapreneurial Impact  
Intrapreneurial initiatives often require a period of adaptation before yielding tangible outcomes. Unlike standard  
operational processes, intrapreneurship involves phases of experimentation, testing, and adjustments before a  
project can be fully leveraged. As a result, its effects on performance may be delayed and not immediately  
reflected in traditional success metrics such as financial profitability or revenue growth (March, 1991).  
Strategic Misalignment  
Not all intrapreneurial initiatives align with the company’s strategic priorities. In resource- constrained startups,  
it is crucial for innovation efforts to be closely linked to market needs and business goals. When there is a  
misalignment, resources may be invested in creative but non-strategic projects that fail to generate measurable  
value in the short term (Covin & Slevin, 1991).  
Risk Aversion in Emerging Markets  
The success of intrapreneurial projects heavily depends on how companies manage risk and tolerate failure. In  
emerging economies like Tunisia, where institutional and economic uncertainties are high, businesses may  
hesitate to allocate significant resources to high-risk projects. This cautious approach can limit the scalability of  
intrapreneurial initiatives, reducing their potential impact on performance (Morris et al., 2017).  
The Moderating Effect of Startup Age  
Another key finding from our study is the moderating role of startup age. Our analysis indicates that younger  
startups, despite benefiting from a dynamic organizational culture, struggle to translate intrapreneurial efforts  
into measurable performance outcomes. Conversely, more mature startups are better positioned to leverage  
intrapreneurship as a driver of business success.  
Page 2189  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
Several factors may explain this pattern.  
Early-Stage Startups Prioritize Survival  
Startups in their early phases are primarily focused on achieving stability and validating their business model.  
Given the challenges of acquiring customers and optimizing operations, these companies often prioritize short-  
term, high-impact actions. Intrapreneurial initiatives, while encouraged, may take a backseat to more immediate  
survival-driven activities (Hannan & Freeman, 1984).  
Mature Startups Have Better Organizational Structures  
More established startups tend to have structured processes and well-distributed resources, allowing them to  
integrate intrapreneurial efforts more effectively into their broader strategy. Over time, these firms develop  
innovation management and project evaluation mechanisms, reducing failure rates and maximizing the benefits  
of intrapreneurial initiatives (Aldrich & Fiol, 1994).  
However, the relationship between startup age and intrapreneurship is not linear. While mature startups benefit  
from better execution of intrapreneurial projects, they also face the risk of organizational inertia. As companies  
grow, they tend to formalize processes and implement controls that, while necessary for efficiency, may slow  
down decision-making and stifle creativity (Zahra & Covin, 1995).  
Contextualizing the Link Between Intrapreneurship and Performance  
Our findings suggest that the connection between intrapreneurship and performance is highly dependent on a  
company’s development stage. Startups in early phases must carefully structure their intrapreneurial efforts to  
ensure they contribute directly to growth, while more mature firms must balance structure and flexibility to avoid  
innovation stagnation.  
Our study confirms certain aspects of existing research while providing new insights. The positive relationship  
between organizational culture and intrapreneurship is consistent with De Jong & Den Hartog’s (2010) findings,  
which highlight the importance of a work environment conducive to innovation. Similarly, our results support  
Teece’s (2007) argument that a strong innovation culture is a strategic asset that enhances dynamic capabilities.  
However, our findings challenge the widely accepted notion that intrapreneurship directly enhances  
performance. While some studies suggest a straightforward positive effect (Covin & Slevin, 1991), our results  
indicate that this relationship is more complex, influenced by organizational structure and strategic alignment.  
This highlights the need for startups to carefully design and evaluate their intrapreneurial initiatives, ensuring  
they are well-integrated within their broader business strategy.  
Table 3 — Reasons Why Intrapreneurship Does Not Directly Increase Performance  
Explanatory Factor  
Time-lag effect  
Observed Effect  
Intrapreneurial projects need time before producing measurable  
results.  
Some initiatives do not match market priorities or business goals.  
Ideas exist but cannot be executed due to lack of structure or capital.  
High uncertainty limits investment in experimental projects.  
Strategic misalignment  
Resource constraints in young startups  
Risk aversion (especially in emerging  
markets)  
Managerial Implications  
These insights offer actionable recommendations for startup leaders and policymakers:  
Page 2190  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
1. Cultivating an Intrapreneurial Culture with Strategic Alignment Encouraging internal  
entrepreneurship is beneficial, but startups must ensure that new initiatives align with their market positioning  
and long-term goals. Innovation without strategic direction can lead to wasted efforts and diluted impact.  
2. Implementing  
Project  
Evaluation  
Mechanisms  
Startups  
should establish clear processes to track and measure the outcomes of intrapreneurial projects. Regular  
assessments can help refine strategies and increase the likelihood of successful innovation implementation.  
3. Adapting Innovation Strategies to the Startup’s Growth Stage  
o
Early-stage startups should focus on initiatives that offer quick, tangible benefits, ensuring they contribute  
directly to market traction and revenue generation.  
o
Mature startups have more room to invest in long-term innovation, allowing them to take calculated risks  
that drive sustained growth.  
This study underscores the need for a nuanced approach to intrapreneurship, taking into account the unique  
characteristics of startups and their evolution over time. Startup age emerges as a critical factor, shaping both  
the relevance and effectiveness of internal entrepreneurial efforts.  
By recognizing these dynamics, entrepreneurs and policymakers can design more tailored innovation strategies  
that maximize both short-term and long-term benefits. While organizational culture remains a powerful enabler  
of intrapreneurship, its real impact depends on how well startups align their internal initiatives with their  
growth trajectory.  
Ultimately, fostering intrapreneurship should not be seen as a one-size-fits-all solution but rather as an evolving  
process that requires strategic adaptation at different stages of business development.  
CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS  
This study highlights the crucial role that organizational culture plays in fostering intrapreneurship and shaping  
the performance of Tunisian startups. The way a company defines its values, structures its processes, and  
implements internal practices significantly impacts employees' ability to innovate and take initiative. However,  
this influence is not uniform across all businesses—it varies depending on the startup’s stage of development.  
Our findings suggest that early-stage startups benefit the most from a culture centered on innovation and  
autonomy. Their flexibility and openness to change create an ideal environment for intrapreneurship. However,  
these young businesses often lack the necessary resources and structures to convert their intrapreneurial efforts  
into measurable success. Without a well-defined framework, even the most promising ideas risk failing to  
generate a tangible impact on overall performance.  
Conversely, more mature startups, with well-established structures and operational processes, are generally  
better positioned to harness the potential of intrapreneurship. These businesses can integrate innovative  
initiatives into a coherent strategy for long-term growth. However, they must remain cautious of organizational  
inertia. Overly rigid processes and excessive formalization can stifle initiative-taking and slow down innovation.  
To sustain an entrepreneurial mindset, these companies must strike a balance between maintaining structure and  
preserving flexibility.  
These insights provide valuable guidance for both startup founders and policymakers. To maximize the impact  
of intrapreneurship, strategies must be adapted based on the startup’s stage of growth.  
For early-stage startups, it is crucial to implement support mechanisms that help transform innovative ideas  
into viable projects. This could involve mentorship programs, incubators, and easier access to funding  
to provide the necessary structure and resources for intrapreneurial initiatives to thrive. Startup founders  
should also focus on establishing an organizational framework that encourages initiative- taking while  
ensuring a degree of structure to align efforts with strategic goals.  
Page 2191  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
For scaling startups, the challenge lies in preventing "bureaucratic drag" that can slow down innovation.  
These businesses must strike a balance between structured processes and organizational agility.  
Encouraging a governance model that supports experimentation and continuous learning can sustain  
intrapreneurial activity. Tools such as innovation labs, internal entrepreneurship incentives, and  
participatory governance models can help keep the innovation engine running within these companies.  
For policymakers and institutional stakeholders, adapting support programs and funding mechanisms  
based on startup maturity is essential. Young startups need venture capital funding and incubators, while  
more advanced companies benefit from collaborations with industrial players, large corporations, and  
research institutions to scale their growth and amplify the impact of intrapreneurial initiatives.  
Beyond the findings of this study, several avenues for future research emerge. First, a deeper investigation into  
the role of institutional environments in shaping the relationship between organizational culture,  
intrapreneurship, and performance would be valuable. Public policies, economic stability, and access to funding  
play a critical role in the success of intrapreneurial ventures, and considering these factors would enhance our  
understanding of how startups navigate their ecosystems.  
Another important aspect is the sectoral impact on these dynamics. High-tech industries, where innovation  
cycles are rapid, may exhibit different intrapreneurial patterns compared to more traditional sectors that rely on  
incremental process improvements. A comparative analysis across industries would refine strategic  
recommendations for startup leaders.  
Finally, adopting a longitudinal research approach would provide deeper insights into how intrapreneurial  
practices evolve over time. Rather than offering a one-time snapshot, tracking startups over several years could  
reveal how their organizational culture transforms and how intrapreneurship contributes (or fails to contribute)  
to long-term success.  
This research underscores the significance of organizational culture in fostering intrapreneurship within Tunisian  
startups while emphasizing that its effectiveness is closely tied to the company’s stage of growth. To fully  
leverage intrapreneurship, young startups need to structure their initiatives and secure necessary resources,  
whereas more mature companies must actively work to preserve agility and avoid stagnation.  
From a practical standpoint, these findings advocate for a differentiated approach to managing innovation and  
supporting startups. Aligning internal strategies and public policies with a company's life cycle is a key factor in  
building a dynamic and sustainable entrepreneurial ecosystem.  
Ultimately, while organizational culture is a powerful driver of innovation and growth, its true impact depends  
on continuous adaptation. The balance between structure and flexibility must be carefully maintained to create  
an environment where intrapreneurship thrives. Rather than being an end goal, intrapreneurship should be seen  
as an evolving process that requires tailored support mechanisms at each stage of a startup’s development.  
REFERENCES  
1. Antoncic, B., & Hisrich, R. D. (2003). Intrapreneurship: Construct refinement and cross- cultural  
validation. Journal of Business Venturing, 18(5), 581-603.  
2. Audretsch, D. B., & Klepper, S. (2016). A patent on life? Entrepreneurship, technology, and economic  
growth. Harvard University Press.  
3. Autio, E., Kenney, M., Mustar, P., Shane, S. A., & Wennberg, K. (2014). What makes an  
entrepreneurial ecosystem? Academy of Management Perspectives, 28(1), 6-19.  
4. Barney, J. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management,  
17(1), 99-120.  
5. Bau, C., & Wagner, S. (2015). Organizational culture and entrepreneurial orientation in SMEs.  
Journal of Small Business Management, 53(4), 1182-1201.  
6. Bryman, A. (2012). Social research methods. Oxford University Press.  
7. Burgelman, R. A., & Christensen, C. M. (2004). [Titre de l'article ou du chapitre]. [Nom de la revue ou  
Page 2192  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November 2025  
du livre], [Volume](Numéro), pages.  
8. De Jong, J. P., & Den Hartog, D. N. (2010). Measuring leadership styles: Development and validation of  
the Multifactor Leadership Inventory 2.0. Journal of Personnel Psychology, 9(1), 1-20.  
9. Dreher, A., & Gassebner, M. (2013). Greasing the wheels? The impact of corruption on economic  
growth. Public Choice, 154(3), 389-412.  
10. Eisenhardt, K. M., & Martin, J. A. (2000). Dynamic capabilities: What are they? Strategic Management  
Journal, 21(10-11), 1105-1121.  
11. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2010). Multivariate data analysis. Pearson  
Education International.  
12. Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2017). A primer of partial least squares  
structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). Sage publications.  
13. Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture's consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and  
organizations across nations. Sage publications.  
14. Kim, W. C., & Mauborgne, R. (2005). Blue ocean strategy: How to create uncontested market space  
and make the competition irrelevant. Harvard Business School Press.  
15. Morris, M. H., Kuratko, D. M., & Covin, J. G. (2017). Corporate entrepreneurship & innovation.  
Cengage learning.  
16. North, D. C. (1990). Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. Cambridge university  
press.  
17. Peng, M. W., Wang, D., & Jiang, Y. (2008). Corporate social responsibility and emerging economies.  
Journal of Business Ethics, 79(3), 281-293.  
18. Porter, M. E. (1985). Competitive advantage: Creating and sustaining superior performance. Free Press.  
19. Porter, M. E. (1990). The competitive advantage of nations. Free Press. Republic of Tunisia. (2018). Loi  
sur les Startups.  
20. Ries, E. (2011). The lean startup: How today's entrepreneurs use continuous innovation to create  
radically successful businesses. Crown Business.  
21. Sharma, P., & Chrisman, J. J. (1999). Toward a reconciliation of the definitional issues in the field of  
corporate entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship theory and practice, 23(4), 19-39.  
22. Teece, D. J. (2007). Explicating dynamic capabilities: the nature and microfoundations of  
(sustainable) competitive advantage. Strategic Management Journal, 28(13), 1319-1350.  
23. Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management.  
24. Strategic management journal, 18(7), 509-533.  
25. Webb, J. W., Ireland, R. D., Hitt, M. A., & Brush, C. G. (2020). Strategic entrepreneurship: Creating a  
new mindset. Sage Publications.  
26. Winter, S. G. (2003). Capabilities and dynamic capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 24(10), 991-  
995.  
27. World Bank. (2020). Tunisia Economic Monitor, Spring 2020: Supporting Sustainable Recovery.  
World Bank.  
Page 2193  
www.rsisinternational.org