Search results

Social support from fellow team members has been neglected as a unique source of process gains in teams. This paper seeks to introduce the Model of Social Support within Teams (MSST) that explicates testable hypotheses on effects of team partners' affective and task‐related support on team performance.

A theoretical model is proposed that specifies the psychological mechanisms by which affective and task‐related support from fellow team members evoke process gains in teams compared with individual work. Moreover, moderators and potential limits of these beneficial effects are described. The model integrates results from experimental research on behaviour in small groups with findings from field studies on organisational citizenship behaviour, team cognition, and efficacy beliefs at the individual and team level.

It is predicted that affective support predominantly increases individual members' motivation, while task‐related support predominantly improves coordination within teams. Moreover, various moderators (team members' dispositions, task design, team characteristics) are considered.

According to this analysis, social support can be an effective measure to trigger process gains in teams, and thus to increase team performance and organisational success. Concrete interventions to foster social support in teams are derived from the model, among them task design, consideration of social attitudes in selection and staffing, and team training.

This paper introduces a theoretical model explicating a previously neglected source of process gains in teams. In contrast with other sources of process gains, social support relates to the interaction among team members and integrates both motivation and coordination gains.

Human health, food safety and environmental concerns are growing issues for policymakers, firms and the general public. Food without chemicals and pesticides is healthy for the human body and hence, relevant motives to promote organic food consumption needs to be explored. This study used three motivational factors, i.e. hedonic, gain and normative motivations proposed by goal-framing theory (GFT) that affect sustainable consumption. Considering the local scenario, constructs like normative triggers and knowledge have also been incorporated into the model. Therefore, this study attempts to explore whether normative triggers and motivations influence the intention to purchase organic food with the application of GFT

Data were collected from 467 consumers using the purposive sampling technique. The span of the collection of data collection was around five months. Partial least square structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) has been applied and after checking the validity and reliability indicators, bootstrapping has been used for hypotheses testing.

All the motivational factors were found significant and positive to consumers' intentions toward organic food. Moreover, normative triggers also influence intentions. The construct knowledge was not found in a direct relationship with intentions; however, a moderating role was established between gain motivations and intentions.

The study validated and extended the concepts presented in the GFT. Motivational constructs were found important and can be implied in low-cost product categories. The policymakers are suggested to take appropriate measures, based on empirical results.

The study provides an understanding of motivational factors, normative triggers and knowledge in the organic food consumption extent. This will help administrative authorities, marketers and producers of organic food in making their policies, communication strategies and production preferences.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the relative academic effectiveness of vocational education in three countries with early tracking systems: Austria, Croatia, and Hungary.

The authors use an instrumental variables approach to estimate vocational education’s relative academic effectiveness in terms of achievement on an international test, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development’s Program of International Student Assessment (PISA), and two possible indicators of non-cognitive outcomes – self-efficacy in mathematics and intrinsic motivation in mathematics, both also available from the PISA student survey.

The results show few, if any, differences in student gains from attending the vocational track in secondary school as opposed to the academic track. Specifically, the results show that attending the vocational or academic track results in similar achievement gains in the tenth grade and generally similar gains in self-efficacy and motivation in mathematics.

The study is unique because in the three countries, the authors can use a fuzzy regression discontinuity approach based on school systems’ age entrance date rules to estimate the gain in test scores over an academic year and to compare the gain for students in the vocational and academic tracks. The results contradict almost all other studies by showing that in these countries student academic gains in vocational education are about the same as in the academic track.

The recognition of opportunities for sustainable development is considered to be an essential part of sustainable entrepreneurship, but studies that address this phenomenon are scarce. A conceptual model which aims to explain the factors that lead to the recognition of sustainable opportunities was proposed by Patzelt and Shepherd (2011), but published research that tests this model empirically is limited. The purpose of this paper is to contribute to the sustainable entrepreneurship literature by empirically exploring Patzelt and Shepherd’s conceptual model in order to shed light on how sustainable entrepreneurs recognize opportunities for sustainable businesses in practice.

This paper adopts a qualitative research approach to address the aims of the study. In-depth semi-structured interviews were carried out with eight sustainable entrepreneurs based in Berlin. The data were analyzed by means of thematic analysis.

The findings indicate that sustainable entrepreneurs are influenced in their identification of sustainable opportunities by their knowledge of natural and communal environments, by their motivation to develop gains for themselves and others, and by entrepreneurial knowledge. These findings largely support the model proposed by Patzelt and Shepherd (2011). Furthermore, they extend this model by shedding light on some of the factors that comprise its components, as this study found that spending time abroad and socialization enhance entrepreneurs’ knowledge of natural and communal environments; a desire to be self-employed, aspects of one’s personality and one’s personal circumstances are sources of motivation, while prior jobs and prior projects create entrepreneurial knowledge.

Only two other studies have empirically tested Patzelt and Shepherd’s (2011) model, and these have led to disparate results. The first was conducted by Choongo et al. (2016), who did not find any evidence to support this model. The second was carried out by Muñoz and Dimov (2017), who addressed the model partially. This paper therefore makes four major contributions. First, it is the first to offer preliminary empirical support for each component of Patzelt and Shepherd’s (2011) conceptual model. Second, it extends their model by identifying some of the factors comprising its components. Third, it reflects on possible reasons why extant research has led to disparate findings. Fourth, it proposes avenues of research to resolve the unanswered questions arising from these studies. This paper therefore makes a contribution to the literature on sustainable entrepreneurship and serves as a stepping stone for further theory development and empirical research on sustainable opportunity recognition.

The purpose of this paper is to report on new research that explores the effect of co‐worker friendship and performance norms on the Köhler motivation gain effect.

Females worked at a motor persistence task with either a more capable coactor or with a more capable team‐mate (where the group's task had conjunctive task demands; i.e. the performance of the weaker team‐mate defined the group's score). The co‐workers (coactors or team‐mates) were either friends or strangers. Participants were also led to believe that their co‐workers and peers endorsed social norms prescribing either high or low level of effort at the task.

Compared to comparable individual control workers, the inferior‐ability coactors showed a significant motivation gain (attributable to social‐comparison processes); this gain was not moderated by either friendship or performance norms. Inferior‐ability members of the collaborative teams worked significantly harder than the coactors (attributable to the indispensability of their efforts under these work conditions), but only when their partners were friends or the performance norms prescribed high effort.

The research focuses on short‐term laboratory groups of females working together for a very brief period. The applicability of the findings to more typical work teams will require further research.

The research suggests that the task motivation of particular team members (namely, those with the least ability) can be increased by strengthening social ties between team‐mates and promoting high effort social norms.

The research adds to a growing literature that identifies when and why members of work groups will work harder than comparable individual workers.

Entrepreneurial support programs, like incubators and accelerators, often offer mentorship to new ventures. However, existing research on mentoring has mainly focused on the entrepreneur's perspective, leaving researchers with limited understanding of why experienced mentors provide support to new ventures. This study aimed to explore mentors' motives in mentor–venture relationships and their impact on the advisory process. It also examined different types of mentors (social and commercial) and their motivations for assisting and supporting new ventures.

The present study utilizes a qualitative research approach to investigate the motivations and mechanisms through which new venture mentors assist founders in their growth and success. In-depth interviews were conducted with 18 mentors supporting both social and commercial ventures. These mentors were selected from ten accelerator and incubator programs situated in Belgium. The interviews aimed to gain insights into the mentors' motivations and their experiences in the role of mentors.

Based on the social exchange theory and the norm of reciprocity, this study identified two main motives of mentors: “gaining back” reflecting mentors’ self-interest in deriving benefits from the relationship and “paying back” representing their altruistic reasons for supporting new ventures. Additionally, the study identified mentor functions that primarily involved providing career-related support to new ventures. Moreover, the research revealed intriguing similarities and differences in the motivations and mentoring functions between mentors of social and commercial ventures.

Future research should explore the evaluation process and criteria used by mentors and new ventures when selecting each other for a productive mentoring relationship. Additionally, further investigation is needed to examine the firm-level impact of various mentoring services on the performance of social and commercial new ventures at different stages of development. Comparing mentor motives and functions across diverse geographical settings would address the limitation of the study and provide a more comprehensive understanding of the topic.

The findings of the study can inform policymakers, accelerator and incubator program managers and new ventures seeking mentors and support initiatives. They can use the insights to design effective mentoring programs that align with the specific needs and motivations of mentors and new ventures. Understanding the different motives and functions of mentors can help in the selection of appropriate mentors who can provide the necessary support and expertise to new ventures.

The study highlights the importance of mentorship in the development of entrepreneurial ecosystems. Accelerator and incubator programs play a crucial role in connecting new ventures with mentors who have the right motivation and expertise, contributing to the growth and success of new ventures and the overall entrepreneurial ecosystem. By identifying both altruistic and self-interest motivations in mentoring relationships, the study emphasizes the dual dimensions that characterize the mentor–venture relationship. This understanding can foster stronger collaborations and reciprocal exchanges between mentors and new ventures, ultimately benefiting both parties.

This research contributes to the entrepreneurship literature by exploring the mentor–new venture relationship from mentors' perspective. It expands the existing research on mentor–protégé relationships, broadening the understanding of mentoring dynamics in different organizational settings. The findings offer insights grounded in social exchange theory and provide directions for future research on mentor–venture relationships, resource exchange and relationship development. The study also holds practical implications for policymakers and program managers involved in fostering mentoring initiatives for new ventures.

Whereas motivation and coordination losses in teams have been investigated for quite some time, systematic research on performance gains in teams (often called “synergetic effects”) only emerged recently. The purpose of the present paper is to clarify the concept of process gains (or synergy) in teams, and to introduce recent findings from basic psychology that can be very valuable for the management of high performing teams.

Based on the definition of synergy as process gain during teamwork compared with a clear baseline (team potential), this review develops specific requirements for the empirical demonstration of synergetic effects in teams. Moreover, a brief history of research on process gains in teams is provided, followed by an outlook on current and future trends in this field.

Although this research is still in its pioneering days, various triggers of process gains in teams have been already derived theoretically and/or demonstrated empirically, among them social support from fellow team members, perceived indispensability for the team outcome, the development and/or selection of experts for task and team processes, use of multiple perspectives and information, team learning, and social identification processes.

Understanding the preconditions and underlying mechanisms of process gains in teams enables managers to trigger performance levels of teams that exceed what can be expected based on the individual team members' capabilities alone. Moreover, the estimation of a team's potential provides a helpful standard for the assessment of the ongoing team performance.

Process gains in teams and related laboratory research have been largely neglected in the managerial literature so far. This paper and the current special issue are among the first to introduce a clear definition of process gains in teams, and to suggest concrete trigger factors of synergetic effects in teams based on systematic research.

The purpose of this paper is to challenge the assumption that process losses of individuals working in teams are unavoidable. The paper aims to challenge this assumption on the basis of social identity theory and recent research.

The approach adopted in this paper is to review the mainstream literature providing strong evidence for motivation problems of individuals working in groups. Based on more recent literature, innovative ways to overcome these problems are discussed.

A social identity‐based analysis and recent findings summarized in this paper show that social loafing can be overcome and that even motivation gains in group work can be expected when groups are important for the individual group members' self‐concepts.

The paper provides human resource professionals and front‐line managers with suggestions as to how individual motivation and performance might be increased when working in teams.

The paper contributes to the literature by challenging the existing approach to reducing social loafing, i.e. individualizing workers as much as possible, and proposes a team‐based approach instead to overcome motivation problems.

International student enrollment in the U.S. higher education system has recently experienced profound growth. This research examines leadership-oriented differencesbetween international and domestic students and focuses on their growth in capacity associated with participation in co-curricular leadership programs. Similarly-sized gains emerged after participation, suggesting that these leadership programs create equal growth effects across both groups. However, the factors that predicted international students’ increases in leadership skill were different than their domestic peers, suggesting that developing effective leaders among college students across national background is a non-uniform, complexprocess. Recommendations include the suggestion for partnerships between international student scholar units and leadership educators, specialized workshops for international students, and creating nuanced curricula based on the various pathways that students take to becoming an effective leader.

Not all companies deal with green supply chain management (GSCM) in the same way. The purpose of this paper is to understand a company’s GSCM motivation and how this motivation is linked to stakeholder pressures, a company’s GSCM practices and performance.

The authors report the findings of a survey on GSCM motivations.

Clear differences are seen in why companies are motivated to pursue GSCM. Based on these different motivations, this paper explains differences in perceived stakeholder pressure and performance.

GSCM motivation is a sensitive topic and as such might cause respondents to provide socially desired answers. However, the analyses show clear variances in the answers, indicating that the measures put forth by the authors are valid.

This study shows that to achieve sustainable GSCM, companies can be motivated in various ways. Also, stakeholders can learn from this study: they need to focus their attention toward companies whom they have the highest impact on.

First, this study tests a framework for GSCM motivations and shows that motivation mediates the relationship between stakeholder pressures and performance. Second, this study shows that these differences in motivation impact performance outcomes.