Search results

The purpose of this paper is to examine the reasons behind the significant gender gaps observed in entrepreneurial interest among adolescents. Specifically, the authors aim to test multiple models that analyze direct and indirect relationships between work and leadership experience, presence of a parental role model, self‐efficacy, and interest by teens in becoming entrepreneurs.

A sample of over 5,000 middle and high school students participated in the larger study from which the data were drawn. Participants completed measures of entrepreneurial self‐efficacy, entrepreneurial intentions, work and leadership experience, and parental entrepreneurial role model. The authors analyzed the data using structural equation modeling.

While the study confirmed previous empirical findings regarding the antecedents of entrepreneurial self‐efficacy and entrepreneurial intentions, significant differences across gender emerged. First, while boys and girls hold jobs outside of school in comparable numbers, this work experience is much more powerful in generating self‐efficacy among boys. Additionally, the findings indicated that self‐efficacy seemed to have a stronger effect on entrepreneurial interest for girls than for boys, and that having an entrepreneurial mother or father had a significant and positive effect on girls' (but not boys') levels of the entrepreneurial interest.

Common method variance and other typical limitations of cross‐sectional self‐report surveys are acknowledged. Future research should use longitudinal and multi‐method approaches to overcome such limitations.

Findings suggest that feeling like they are able to succeed as entrepreneurs might count more for girls than for boys when considering career options, and demonstrate the value of entrepreneurial role models for young girls, especially those who already have the confidence and perceived skills to launch their own future ventures.

The paper documents research that represents one of the few large‐scale studies of US teens examining entrepreneurial intentions and antecedents across gender.

This paper brings in relevant entrepreneurial behavior theory to understand the ownership decisions founders make during the nascent stage of new venture creation, and how such decisions impact the viability of the firm.

The authors examine the behavior and decision making of 137 lead founders during the nascent stage of new venture creation. Psychological ownership and environmental uncertainty are measured of lead founders when dividing up firm ownership among the founding team. Using a longitudinal approach, these nascent-stage decisions are then analyzed to understand the impact on the new venture one year later.

Counter to prior research suggesting teams are better off with identical wages and ownership, the authors find such harmony (i.e. “kumbaya”) pursuit to be a detriment to new venture emergence. Specifically, this study finds that nascent ventures are better off with an unequal ownership split among the founding team members. These findings suggest that nascent firms with an unequal split are more likely to move beyond the nascent stage and launch a functional business.

Although the results of this study offer a valuable contribution to lead founders and new businesses, the study looked at each startup independent of another and is therefore not able to draw any conclusions related to competitiveness.

Lead founders and founding teams frequently divide ownership evenly among the founders. This paper shows that, while convenient, the decision to divide ownership equally can hamper a nascent firm as it moves toward the launch phase of the startup process. These results should motivate founders to think deeply regarding the ownership structure decision and, at the very least, consider the possible negative costs associated with the pursuit of founding team unity.

While scholars have brought attention to the nascent stage, few have identified and analyzed the decisions that take place during this critical time of the new venture development process. Furthermore, even is less is known of the impact nascent decisions have on startup launch. This study sheds light on these areas.

The development of qualitative research methods addresses the need to explore, understand and interpret complex and subjective phenomena across various fields of study. These methods are guided by methodological frameworks, and data collection involves taking several precautions for observation or interviews. While these guidelines facilitate an emphasis on the objective aspects of discourse, accounting for subjectivity and emotions proves more challenging. However, these subjectivity and emotions are deemed as significant sources of information. In this chapter, we propose an innovative data collection method centred around creating collages and engaging in group discussions to decipher their meaning. Collage serves as a visual medium, and we recommend utilising semiotic analysis tools to comprehend its significance. To gain a more precise understanding of the value of collage as a data collection method, we studied a collage workshop organised by CREE. Through image analysis and exchanges, our findings reveal that collage acts as a physical medium that fosters exchanges, deepens ideas and restricts digressions. Additionally, collage allows for the expression and discussion of emotions linked to the image rather than the individual. The space of intersubjective reflexivity facilitated by collage enables a profound comprehension, critical assessment and augmentation of ideas and the interpretation of emotions without compromising the sensitivity of the author. This chapter’s main contribution is evidently manifested here.