Search results

The purpose of this paper is to suggest that different start-up motivations make entrepreneurs pursue different kinds of new business performance, which in this study are expressed in financial terms (i.e. return on assets). The authors posit that so-called extrinsic motivation urges entrepreneurs to be more short-term oriented, while their intrinsic motivation encourages a longer-term business vision. Additionally, this paper explores how intrinsic and extrinsic entrepreneurship motivations combine and produce financial dilemmas for entrepreneurs.

The analyses are based on 300 entrepreneurs across diverse industries in Belgium. Data was collected for this study through structured interviews with entrepreneurs combined with a company questionnaire. Financial data was obtained through a government database.

Results confirm that extrinsic entrepreneurship motivation boosts new business short-term financial performance, whereas intrinsic motivation contributes to the firm’s longer-term financial returns. This paper also shows that a mix of intrinsic and extrinsic motivations directs entrepreneurs toward different profitability levels during the organization’s survival and early-establishment phase.

Research on entrepreneurship has not yet corroborated that motivations can be personally conflicting, thereby saddling the entrepreneur with dilemmas that may manifest into different levels of business performance.

The purpose of this paper is to contribute to understanding the impact of entrepreneurial team composition on new venture performance. Different types of entrepreneurship motivation among founding team members are defined. Using a relatively recent theory as a framework (i.e. self-determination theory), the authors group these motives into two categories: autonomous and controlled motivation. The business impact of the level of each type of motivation within the team, as well as the impact of having team members with different motivational drivers, is examined. New venture performance is modelled in two different ways: financial performance (i.e. return on assets) and innovation performance.

The analyses are based on 66 founding teams active in diverse activity sectors. The teams represent a total of 142 business founders. Data was collected through structured interviews, a company questionnaire and a secondary data source (i.e. certified financial statements).

The results confirm that the level of autonomous motivation within the team contributes to start-up financial performance, whereas the level of controlled motivation hampers innovation performance. No direct effects of diversity of team member motivation on start-up performance were discovered.

This is one of the first papers to study multiple firm performance effects of the composition of entrepreneurial founding teams in terms of motivation.

Across two studies, the current research investigates whether individuals high in maverickism, which incorporates tendencies of creativity, risk-taking, goal-orientation and disruption are likely to make poorer ethical decisions and whether political skill promotes or hinders good ethical judgment.

Participants completed an online questionnaire and an ethical dilemma.

Results with UK (Study 1, N = 300) and Australian workers (Study 2, N = 217) revealed that political skill significantly moderated the maverickism-unethical decision-making relationship. Unethical decision-making was highest for those high in maverickism and political skill.

Results highlight that for individuals high in maverickism, political skill facilitates rather than reduces the breaching of ethical norms.

Results show that while political skill has traditionally been seen as adaptive in organizations, being politically skilled can contribute to engaging in unethical behavior.

This research provides a new and interesting view of how being politically skilled can negatively impact ethical behavior and identifies another individual difference variable, maverickism, which predicts unethical behavior.

The purpose of this paper is to identify what work-related factors influence the continued participation of older workers in the workforce.

A systematic quantitative literature review of the workforce participation literature identified 27 publications from 1995 to 2016 that examined the impact of work-related factors on older workers’ intention to continue working.

Results show that work demands, learning and development opportunities, job autonomy, recognition and respect, mentoring opportunities, supportive organisational climate and social support were significant factors that predicted older workers’ workforce participation decisions. Interestingly, less evidence was found to support flexible work arrangements or salary as inducers of workforce participation. Results also show an overrepresentation of cross-sectional studies involving participants from western countries employed in healthcare and social assistance sectors.

Organisations should adjust their policies and practices to accommodate the needs of older workers, focusing specifically on increasing factors that encourage participation and removing obstacles to participation.

Increasing the participation rates of older workers is a key goal for governments and organisations worldwide. This research identifies some specific factors that are likely to encourage continued participation.

A systematic evaluation of the extant research draws new conclusions and insights as to what work factors are more likely to influence the participation decisions of older workers.

Maverickism is the tendency of an individual to be socially competent, creative, goal focussed, risk-taking and disruptive. Previous research with the five-factor model (FFM) shows that individuals high in maverickism exhibit both functional and dysfunctional tendencies. The purpose of this paper is to compare and contrast the descriptive FFM with the process-oriented hybrid model of learning in personality (HMLP), in the prediction of maverickism.

Employing a cross-sectional design with 490 full-time workers the authors use the NEO-International Personality Item Pool and the Learning Styles Profiler to examine differences in the FFM and HMLP in the prediction of maverickism.

Results with the FFM, identify extraversion, openness and (low) agreeableness as significant predictors of maverickism. All factors of the HMLP (except conscientious learning) significantly predict maverickism. Hierarchal regression analysis shows that the HMLP accounts for an additional 21 percent of variance in maverickism over and above that of the FFM.

The authors have tested and built theory by identifying not only what predicts maverickism, but also how the learning processes of the HMLP interrelate to predict maverickism.

Managers interested in developing the maverick potential of their employees will find this study useful because it identifies what to look for in maverick workers.

Individuals high in maverickism have the potential for radical innovation. Understanding how to identify and develop these individuals may lead to larger societal benefits.

The authors are the first to use the HMLP to test maverickism. The research highlights the importance of both personality and learning processes in maverickism.

The purpose of this research is to examine whether personality and motivational driver differences exist across three generations of working Australians: Baby Boomers, Gen Xs, and Gen Ys.

Using the Occupational Personality Questionnaire and the Motivation Questionnaire, the study examined cross‐sectional differences in personality and motivational drivers across three generations.

The results are not supportive of the generational stereotypes that have been pervasive in the management literature and the media. Specifically, few meaningful differences were found between the three generations. Moreover, even when differences have been observed, these have related more to age than generation.

One of the key limitations is the use of cross‐sectional data. To further explore this issue, it would be interesting to undertake a longitudinal study to assess personality preferences and motivational drivers of the different generations, when the participants are at the same age or the same point in their career.

The research emphasizes the importance of managing individuals by focusing on individual differences rather than relying on generational stereotypes, which may not be as prevalent as the existing literature suggests.

Managers and HR professionals may find the lack of differences across generations interesting and refreshing, in contrast with the popular management literature.