Search results

This study has conducted exploratory research to understand who should comprise the members of a resilient supply chain for promoting an entrepreneurial ecosystem of a startup project and to determine the mechanisms for the balanced coexistence of all stakeholders. This is necessary to ensure mutual benefits for all stakeholders, each of whom has multidimensional interests. Additionally, this supply chain must be able to withstand any potential disruption risks.

This research has employed a mixed-design approach. In this context, the study conducted an extensive qualitative and quantitative investigation, including 30 interviews and a survey involving 180 potential stakeholders in this supply network, respectively in the capital city of Bangladesh, Dhaka. The analysis of the interviews utilized principles of matrix thinking, while structural equation modeling (SEM) through LISREL was employed to understand cause-and-effect relationships.

Network, platform and governance—these three independent constructs have the potential to contribute to the dependent construct, a resilient supply chain, aimed at promoting an entrepreneurial ecosystem for startup projects. It has been revealed that the management of such projects depends on the rules and regulations within the ecosystem. An excellent governance mechanism is essential for this purpose. To facilitate coexistence, the establishment of a platform is crucial, where cooperation among all members is mandatory.

For practitioners, three distinctive but closely interdependent issues are explored and resolved in this philanthropic study. It has unfolded the elements of any startup project with essential settings.

The identification of the structural dynamics of potential stakeholders within the entrepreneurial ecosystem of startups is largely absent in existing literature. Therefore, there is a need to comprehensively investigate the entire network, including their roles, responsibilities and associations. This study makes a significant and novel contribution to the existing literature. Academics and practitioners alike have ample opportunities to learn from this new aspect of relationships across three distinct areas: the entrepreneurial ecosystem, startup projects and the development of a resilient supply chain.

This paper aims to determine the impact of perceived virtuality on team dynamics and outcomes by adopting the Input-Mediators-Outcome (IMO) framework. Further, it also investigates the mediating role of team processes and emergent states.

The authors collected survey data from 315 individuals working in virtual teams (VTs) in the information technology sector in India using both offline and online questionnaires. They performed the analysis using Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modelling (PLS-SEM).

The authors investigated two sets of hypotheses – both direct and indirect (or mediation interactions). Results show that psychological empowerment and conflict management are significant in managing VTs. Also, perceived virtuality impacts team outcomes, i.e. perceived team performance, team satisfaction and subjective well-being.

The interplay between the behavioural team process (conflict management) and the emergent state (psychological empowerment) was examined. The study also helps broaden our understanding of the various psychological variables associated with teamwork in the context of VTs.

Findings from this study will aid in assessing the consequences of virtual teamwork at both individual and organisational levels, such as guiding the design and sustainability of VT arrangements, achieving higher productivity in VTs, and designing effective and interactive solutions in the virtual space.

The study examined the interplay between behavioural team processes (such as conflict management) and emergent states (such as psychological empowerment). The study also theorises and empirically tests the relationships between perceived virtuality and team outcomes (i.e. both affective and effectiveness). It may serve as a guide to understanding team dynamics in VTs better.

This exploratory study attempts to enhance the current understanding of the research and practice of VTs within a developing economy.

The purpose of this study is to empirically examine how individuals’ hybrid entrepreneurial venturing activities (HEVA) influence key characteristics associated with one’s wage work, namely creativity and job satisfaction.

Through a cross-sectional self-administered survey design, data were gathered from 465 US-based useable responses via Amazon Mechanical Turk and analyzed using structural equation modeling (SEM).

Findings show individuals reporting higher levels of HEVA – such as creating, founding, starting or running – tend to also exhibit higher levels of creativity and job satisfaction in their workplaces. Findings further reveal that income negatively moderates the relationship between creativity and wage work job satisfaction.

By providing a better understanding of how engaging in HEVA can impact creativity and job satisfaction, this study has important implications for (1) managers seeking to influence key employee outcomes and (2) employees considering such entrepreneurial activities.

This paper adds to the growing scholarly and practitioner interest in hybrid entrepreneurship and its outcomes. Specifically, the paper adds new insights regarding how engaging in HEVA can influence individual skills (i.e. creativity) or organizational goals (i.e. employee job satisfaction). In doing so, the paper also uses insights from the intrinsic/extrinsic motivation literature to suggest how extrinsic motivators (such as income) can interact with intrinsically motivated behaviors (such as creativity) in influencing employee outcomes in wage work. Finally, the paper contributes to the growing interest in applying the empowerment perspective within entrepreneurship research by exploring where and how empowerment may occur.

Managers must make numerous strategic decisions in order to initiate and implement a business model innovation (BMI). This paper examines how managers perceive the management team interacts when making BMI decisions. The paper also investigates how group biases and board members’ risk willingness affect this process.

Empirical data were collected through 26 in-depth interviews with German managing directors from 13 companies in four industries (mobility, manufacturing, healthcare and energy) to explore three research questions: (1) What group effects are prevalent in BMI group decision-making? (2) What are the key characteristics of BMI group decisions? And (3) what are the potential relationships between BMI group decision-making and managers' risk willingness? A thematic analysis based on Gioia's guidelines was conducted to identify themes in the comprehensive dataset.

First, the results show four typical group biases in BMI group decisions: Groupthink, social influence, hidden profile and group polarization. Findings show that the hidden profile paradigm and groupthink theory are essential in the context of BMI decisions. Second, we developed a BMI decision matrix, including the following key characteristics of BMI group decision-making managerial cohesion, conflict readiness and information- and emotion-based decision behavior. Third, in contrast to previous literature, we found that individual risk aversion can improve the quality of BMI decisions.

This paper provides managers with an opportunity to become aware of group biases that may impede their strategic BMI decisions. Specifically, it points out that managers should consider the key cognitive constraints due to their interactions when making BMI decisions. This work also highlights the importance of risk-averse decision-makers on boards.

This qualitative study contributes to the literature on decision-making by revealing key cognitive group biases in strategic decision-making. This study also enriches the behavioral science research stream of the BMI literature by attributing a critical influence on the quality of BMI decisions to managers' group interactions. In addition, this article provides new perspectives on managers' risk aversion in strategic decision-making.