Search results

The purpose of this research is to explore how one unsanctioned community sport organization (CSO), AM Hockey, sought to acquire legitimacy in a highly institutionalized minor hockey marketplace at various points in its organizational life cycle.

This study was guided by instrumental case study methodology. Twenty (20) AM Hockey stakeholders from a variety of roles (e.g. executives, program directors and coaches) were interviewed. Document analysis was also utilized to supplement the interviewees. Internal and public documents reflective of the CSO's creation and growth were obtained.

Findings revealed that the CSO had to navigate distinct phases of evolution including the Building, Growth, Competition and Stabilization phases. Although the four life cycle phases identified in this study share similarities with the phases identified by Lester et al. (2003), findings indicated that institutional work mechanisms must be understood in their context as they can vary over the life cycle of an organization. Therefore, start-up sports organizations must approach the pursuit of legitimacy as a continual process rather than something acquired and defended through maintenance work.

Developing legitimacy remains a central challenge for CSOs that seek to deliver alternative sport programming, yet it continues to be understudied. Ultimately, the long-term viability of an unsanctioned CSO in a federated sports system relies, in part, on its ability to continually determine the actions needed to achieve legitimacy within its environment.

Pregnant employees experience considerable interpersonal discrimination. This study explores the range of possible reactions of observers to pregnancy self-disclosure, interpersonal discrimination and various allyship interventions, and the attentional processes that lead to those reactions. Consequently, it uncovers socio-cognitive processes underlying support for and backlash toward pregnancy in the workplace.

This study used a thought-listing technique to explore observers’ spontaneous thoughts related to pregnancy. Working adults were randomly assigned to read through one of the six scenarios depicting pregnancy self-disclosure, interpersonal discrimination and male allyship interventions (i.e. stating the organization’s anti-discrimination policy, confronting the transgressor by calling out sexism, pivoting the conversation to highlight the strengths of the pregnant employee and a hybrid intervention combining highlighting strengths and confrontation) after which participants listed the top three thoughts that came to their mind (1,668 responses). Responses were thematically analyzed to explore spontaneous reactions toward the pregnant employee, transgressor and ally in the scenario.

Surprisingly, across all scenarios, the most sexist thoughts emerged during pregnancy self-disclosure, even in the absence of any transgression. After a transgression occurred, any allyship intervention was better than none in eliciting lesser sexist backlash against the pregnant employee. Stating the organization’s anti-discrimination policy was most beneficial for the pregnant employee in eliciting the least sexist backlash but at the cost of generating unfavorable impressions of the ally. Calling out the transgressor’s bias elicited the most sexist backlash toward the pregnant employee, yet it created favorable impressions of the ally. In contrast, highlighting the strengths of the pregnant employee created the most favorable impression of the ally while eliciting a few sexist thoughts about the pregnant employee. Overall, the hybrid intervention was the most effective at balancing the competing goals of generating support for the pregnant employee, creating favorable impressions of the ally, as well as holding the transgressor accountable.

This study demonstrates that the type of allyship intervention critically redirects the attentional focus of observers to certain aspects of a discrimination episode and relevant schemas which can generate support or backlash toward targets, transgressors and allies, thereby advancing or obstructing equity and inclusion in organizations.

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.