Research SummaryWe evaluate the role of cultural tightness–looseness as an explanation for cross‐cultural variation in new firm formation rates. Modeling cultural tightness–looseness as an antecedent for individual entrepreneurial dispositions and informal institutions, we examine its impact on the number of new limited‐liability companies registered per 1000 people and the rate of new entrepreneurs in the working‐age population. Our findings show that cultural tightness–looseness explains 56% of the variation in new firm formation rates in a sample of 156 nations, and 71% of the variation in the rate of new entrepreneurs in the 50 US states, with greater cultural looseness corresponding to higher rates of entrepreneurship, on average. This effect is robust to various model specifications, measures, and controls for other cultural dimensions.Managerial SummaryOur study examines how cultural tightness–looseness impacts new firm formation rates across nations and US states. We find that cultural looseness, characterized by flexible social norms, significantly influences entrepreneurial activity. Specifically, it explains 56% of the variation in new firm formation rates across 156 nations and 71% of the variation in new entrepreneur rates in the 50 US states. Nations and states with looser cultures tend to have higher rates of entrepreneurship. These findings are robust across different model specifications, measures, and control variables. Managers and policymakers should consider the strength and enforcement of social norms as factors in fostering new firm formation.
{"title":"Why are some nations more entrepreneurial than others? Investigating the link between cultural tightness–looseness and rates of new firm formation","authors":"Valentina A. Assenova, Raphael Amit","doi":"10.1002/sej.1520","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/sej.1520","url":null,"abstract":"Research SummaryWe evaluate the role of cultural tightness–looseness as an explanation for cross‐cultural variation in new firm formation rates. Modeling cultural tightness–looseness as an antecedent for individual entrepreneurial dispositions and informal institutions, we examine its impact on the number of new limited‐liability companies registered per 1000 people and the rate of new entrepreneurs in the working‐age population. Our findings show that cultural tightness–looseness explains 56% of the variation in new firm formation rates in a sample of 156 nations, and 71% of the variation in the rate of new entrepreneurs in the 50 US states, with greater cultural looseness corresponding to higher rates of entrepreneurship, on average. This effect is robust to various model specifications, measures, and controls for other cultural dimensions.Managerial SummaryOur study examines how cultural tightness–looseness impacts new firm formation rates across nations and US states. We find that cultural looseness, characterized by flexible social norms, significantly influences entrepreneurial activity. Specifically, it explains 56% of the variation in new firm formation rates across 156 nations and 71% of the variation in new entrepreneur rates in the 50 US states. Nations and states with looser cultures tend to have higher rates of entrepreneurship. These findings are robust across different model specifications, measures, and control variables. Managers and policymakers should consider the strength and enforcement of social norms as factors in fostering new firm formation.","PeriodicalId":51417,"journal":{"name":"Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal","volume":"82 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.3,"publicationDate":"2024-10-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142541123","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Vartuhi Tonoyan, Robert Strohmeyer, Jennifer Jennings
Research SummaryWe examine a critical yet underexplored aspect of human resource management in nascent technology ventures: employee recruitment. Applying theories of gender stereotyping, we contend that female‐led technology startups face greater obstacles in attracting job applicants than their male counterparts. Evidence from a randomized online experiment conducted in 2020/2021 with 777 US job seekers substantiates this barrier, indicating that the disparities are partly rooted in gender‐stereotypical perceptions of female technology entrepreneurs as less competent, agentic, and warm, which contribute to less favorable assessments of their ventures' economic potential and employee empowerment potential. Startups with gender‐diverse leadership teams appear to overcome these biases. Confirmatory evidence comes from a 2024 replication study with 455 US job seekers, underscoring the need to address gender biases in the technological ecosystem.Managerial SummaryIn the competitive landscape of technology startups, attracting talent is key. Our study reveals that startups with female leaders face gender biases during recruitment, with job candidates perceiving female technology entrepreneurs as less competent, agentic, and warm—and their startup ventures as less likely to have what it takes to grow and to empower employees. Analysis from a randomized online experiment involving 777 US job seekers in 2020/2021 and a follow‐up study with 455 US job seekers in 2024 confirm such biases. Crucially, a gender‐balanced leadership team significantly counters such biases, enhancing the venture's appeal to potential hires. These insights highlight the need for technology startups to promote gender diversity within their leadership to dismantle stereotypes and attract a broader talent pool.
{"title":"Working for Jessica or Michael? Implications of gender stereotypes for job application intentions at technology startups","authors":"Vartuhi Tonoyan, Robert Strohmeyer, Jennifer Jennings","doi":"10.1002/sej.1522","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/sej.1522","url":null,"abstract":"Research SummaryWe examine a critical yet underexplored aspect of human resource management in nascent technology ventures: employee recruitment. Applying theories of gender stereotyping, we contend that female‐led technology startups face greater obstacles in attracting job applicants than their male counterparts. Evidence from a randomized online experiment conducted in 2020/2021 with 777 US job seekers substantiates this barrier, indicating that the disparities are partly rooted in gender‐stereotypical perceptions of female technology entrepreneurs as less competent, agentic, and warm, which contribute to less favorable assessments of their ventures' economic potential and employee empowerment potential. Startups with gender‐diverse leadership teams appear to overcome these biases. Confirmatory evidence comes from a 2024 replication study with 455 US job seekers, underscoring the need to address gender biases in the technological ecosystem.Managerial SummaryIn the competitive landscape of technology startups, attracting talent is key. Our study reveals that startups with female leaders face gender biases during recruitment, with job candidates perceiving female technology entrepreneurs as less competent, agentic, and warm—and their startup ventures as less likely to have what it takes to grow and to empower employees. Analysis from a randomized online experiment involving 777 US job seekers in 2020/2021 and a follow‐up study with 455 US job seekers in 2024 confirm such biases. Crucially, a gender‐balanced leadership team significantly counters such biases, enhancing the venture's appeal to potential hires. These insights highlight the need for technology startups to promote gender diversity within their leadership to dismantle stereotypes and attract a broader talent pool.","PeriodicalId":51417,"journal":{"name":"Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal","volume":"21 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.3,"publicationDate":"2024-10-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142490849","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Research SummaryFor more than a century, Frank Knight's Risk, Uncertainty, and Profit has significantly influenced entrepreneurship theory development by exploring the nature of uncertainty and the epistemic limits of entrepreneurial action. Knight's work highlights how economic actors cannot fully predict the consequences of their actions. Despite its broad influence, debates persist regarding the nature of Knightian uncertainty. This study addresses these debates through a comprehensive analysis of RUP and Knight's other published and unpublished writings to offer new insights into the nature and meaning of Knightian uncertainty, revealing Knight's holistic theory that integrates “real indeterminism,” “partial knowledge,” and “subjective beliefs.” This analysis provides much needed construct clarity to advance contemporary theories of entrepreneurial action and the role of uncertainty in business venturing processes.Managerial SummaryThis article revisits Frank Knight's foundational work, Risk, Uncertainty, and Profit, a cornerstone in entrepreneurship research for over a century. We highlight Knight's holistic approach to uncertainty, which integrates the concepts of real indeterminism (the inherent unpredictability of future events), partial knowledge (the incomplete understanding of the present and future), and subjective beliefs (individual perceptions and interpretations). The study offers new perspectives on how Knightian uncertainty influences entrepreneurial decision‐making and action, highlighting how this unique type of uncertainty plays a critical role in the business venturing process. These insights provide valuable contributions to contemporary theories of entrepreneurship, emphasizing the complexity and multifaceted nature of navigating uncertainty in business.
研究摘要 一个多世纪以来，弗兰克-奈特（Frank Knight）的《风险、不确定性与利润》（Risk, Uncertainty, and Profit）通过探讨不确定性的本质和创业行动的认识论局限，对创业理论的发展产生了重大影响。奈特的著作强调了经济行为者如何无法完全预测其行为的后果。尽管奈特的著作影响广泛，但有关奈特不确定性本质的争论却一直存在。本研究通过全面分析《RUP》和奈特其他已出版和未出版的著作，对奈特不确定性的性质和含义提出了新的见解，揭示了奈特整合了 "真实不确定性"、"部分知识 "和 "主观信念 "的整体理论，从而解决了这些争论。本文重温了弗兰克-奈特的奠基之作《风险、不确定性与利润》，该书是一个多世纪以来创业研究的基石。我们强调了奈特对不确定性的整体处理方法，该方法整合了真实不确定性（未来事件固有的不可预测性）、片面知识（对现在和未来的不完全理解）和主观信念（个人感知和解释）等概念。这项研究为奈特式不确定性如何影响创业决策和行动提供了新的视角，强调了这种独特的不确定性如何在创业过程中发挥关键作用。这些见解为当代创业理论做出了宝贵贡献，强调了在企业中驾驭不确定性的复杂性和多面性。
{"title":"Chance, probability, and uncertainty at the edge of human reasoning: What is Knightian uncertainty?","authors":"David M. Townsend, Richard A. Hunt, Judy Rady","doi":"10.1002/sej.1516","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/sej.1516","url":null,"abstract":"Research SummaryFor more than a century, Frank Knight's <jats:italic>Risk</jats:italic>, <jats:italic>Uncertainty</jats:italic>, <jats:italic>and Profit</jats:italic> has significantly influenced entrepreneurship theory development by exploring the nature of uncertainty and the epistemic limits of entrepreneurial action. Knight's work highlights how economic actors cannot fully predict the consequences of their actions. Despite its broad influence, debates persist regarding the nature of Knightian uncertainty. This study addresses these debates through a comprehensive analysis of <jats:italic>RUP</jats:italic> and Knight's other published and unpublished writings to offer new insights into the nature and meaning of Knightian uncertainty, revealing Knight's holistic theory that integrates “real indeterminism,” “partial knowledge,” and “subjective beliefs.” This analysis provides much needed construct clarity to advance contemporary theories of entrepreneurial action and the role of uncertainty in business venturing processes.Managerial SummaryThis article revisits Frank Knight's foundational work, <jats:italic>Risk</jats:italic>, <jats:italic>Uncertainty</jats:italic>, <jats:italic>and Profit</jats:italic>, a cornerstone in entrepreneurship research for over a century. We highlight Knight's holistic approach to uncertainty, which integrates the concepts of real indeterminism (the inherent unpredictability of future events), partial knowledge (the incomplete understanding of the present and future), and subjective beliefs (individual perceptions and interpretations). The study offers new perspectives on how Knightian uncertainty influences entrepreneurial decision‐making and action, highlighting how this unique type of uncertainty plays a critical role in the business venturing process. These insights provide valuable contributions to contemporary theories of entrepreneurship, emphasizing the complexity and multifaceted nature of navigating uncertainty in business.","PeriodicalId":51417,"journal":{"name":"Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal","volume":"126 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.3,"publicationDate":"2024-08-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141880154","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Research SummaryVenture capital firms (VCs) sometimes continue to hold significant equity stakes in entrepreneurial ventures after venture IPO. The information economics view suggests that retaining equity signals VC commitment and venture quality. This study conceptualizes retaining equity as holding an exchange option, the option to exchange VCs' own valuation of IPO ventures for the market's valuation. Holding this option allows VCs to benefit from the ventures' upside potential. Since exit amounts to giving up the option, the option value represents an opportunity cost of exit. VCs may delay exit if this option is sufficiently valuable. The study examines two key conditions that interact to increase the value of this option: uncertainty and positive private information. This study contributes to research on VC exit and real options.Managerial SummaryWhen do VCs retain equity rather than exit after venture IPO? Researchers have addressed the impact of signaling, cash constraints, human capital constraints, blockholding, VC fund performance, portfolio diversification and institutional features. We identify a previously unrecognized driver: to retain the opportunity to benefit from an IPO venture's upside potential that is yet to be fully recognized or realized. We submit that VCs' incentive to retain equity increases with uncertainty in the venture's industry, and VCs' positive private information as indicated by venture patent applications and positive market surprises in the venture's industry. We find largely supportive evidence for the positive joint effect of uncertainty and private information on the decision to retain equity within the first year or even two years after IPO lockup expiration.
{"title":"Venture capital exit after venture IPO","authors":"Yong Li, Tailan Chi, Sai Lan, Qing Wang","doi":"10.1002/sej.1515","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/sej.1515","url":null,"abstract":"Research SummaryVenture capital firms (VCs) sometimes continue to hold significant equity stakes in entrepreneurial ventures after venture IPO. The information economics view suggests that retaining equity signals VC commitment and venture quality. This study conceptualizes retaining equity as holding an exchange option, the option to exchange VCs' own valuation of IPO ventures for the market's valuation. Holding this option allows VCs to benefit from the ventures' upside potential. Since exit amounts to giving up the option, the option value represents an opportunity cost of exit. VCs may delay exit if this option is sufficiently valuable. The study examines two key conditions that interact to increase the value of this option: uncertainty and positive private information. This study contributes to research on VC exit and real options.Managerial SummaryWhen do VCs retain equity rather than exit after venture IPO? Researchers have addressed the impact of signaling, cash constraints, human capital constraints, blockholding, VC fund performance, portfolio diversification and institutional features. We identify a previously unrecognized driver: to retain the opportunity to benefit from an IPO venture's upside potential that is yet to be fully recognized or realized. We submit that VCs' incentive to retain equity increases with uncertainty in the venture's industry, and VCs' positive private information as indicated by venture patent applications and positive market surprises in the venture's industry. We find largely supportive evidence for the positive joint effect of uncertainty and private information on the decision to retain equity within the first year or even two years after IPO lockup expiration.","PeriodicalId":51417,"journal":{"name":"Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal","volume":"24 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.3,"publicationDate":"2024-07-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141726161","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Research SummaryWe investigate why a corporate investor makes more corporate venture capital (CVC) investments in certain areas than in others. Focusing on firms' different technological capabilities across distinct technology domains, we argue that a corporate investor's technological capabilities in a given domain affect its likelihood of investing in (1) ventures within the domain in an inverted U‐shaped manner and (2) ventures operating in other technologically complementary domains in a positive manner. We further claim that these two suggested relationships between technological capabilities and the likelihood of CVC investments are shaped by the technology growth rate of the focal domain. We test these arguments in the US medical sector, where incumbent firms are active in CVC investments as a means to acquire external knowledge.Managerial SummaryWe argue that firms exhibit different patterns in their choice of CVC investment areas based on their technological capabilities within a given technology domain. Our findings in the US medical sector indicate that firms are most likely to invest in ventures within domains where their technological capabilities are moderate—neither too weak nor too strong. This suggests that CVC investments serve gap‐filling purposes for technology intermediates. Moreover, corporate investors tend to invest in ventures within domains that are technologically complementary to their areas of strength. However, when a given domain experiences rapid growth, technology leaders in that domain shift their CVC investment focus from complementary areas to that domain to maintain their leading position.
研究摘要我们研究了为什么企业投资者在某些领域的企业风险资本（CVC）投资多于其他领域。我们以企业在不同技术领域的不同技术能力为重点，认为企业投资者在某一领域的技术能力会影响其投资于（1）该领域内风险企业的可能性，呈倒 U 型；（2）在其他技术互补领域运营的风险企业的可能性，呈正向。我们还认为，技术能力与风险投资可能性之间的这两种关系受重点领域技术增长率的影响。我们在美国医疗行业检验了这些论点，该行业中的在位企业积极进行 CVC 投资，以此获取外部知识。我们在美国医疗行业的研究结果表明，企业最有可能投资于其技术能力适中的风险投资领域--既不会太弱，也不会太强。这表明，风险投资公司的投资起到了填补技术中间产品空白的作用。此外，企业投资者倾向于投资与其优势领域在技术上互补的领域内的风险企业。然而，当某一领域出现快速增长时，该领域的技术领先者会将其 CVC 投资重点从互补领域转向该领域，以保持其领先地位。
{"title":"Where to invest? Effects of technological capabilities on corporate venture capital investments","authors":"Wonsang Ryu, Joonhyung Bae, Thomas H. Brush","doi":"10.1002/sej.1513","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/sej.1513","url":null,"abstract":"Research SummaryWe investigate why a corporate investor makes more corporate venture capital (CVC) investments in certain areas than in others. Focusing on firms' different technological capabilities across distinct technology domains, we argue that a corporate investor's technological capabilities in a given domain affect its likelihood of investing in (1) ventures within the domain in an inverted U‐shaped manner and (2) ventures operating in other technologically complementary domains in a positive manner. We further claim that these two suggested relationships between technological capabilities and the likelihood of CVC investments are shaped by the technology growth rate of the focal domain. We test these arguments in the US medical sector, where incumbent firms are active in CVC investments as a means to acquire external knowledge.Managerial SummaryWe argue that firms exhibit different patterns in their choice of CVC investment areas based on their technological capabilities within a given technology domain. Our findings in the US medical sector indicate that firms are most likely to invest in ventures within domains where their technological capabilities are moderate—neither too weak nor too strong. This suggests that CVC investments serve gap‐filling purposes for technology intermediates. Moreover, corporate investors tend to invest in ventures within domains that are technologically complementary to their areas of strength. However, when a given domain experiences rapid growth, technology leaders in that domain shift their CVC investment focus from complementary areas to that domain to maintain their leading position.","PeriodicalId":51417,"journal":{"name":"Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal","volume":"19 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.3,"publicationDate":"2024-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141624795","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Research SummaryUsing data from 1899 Kickstarter campaigns (2009–2019), we examine the impact of simultaneous emission of interdimensional signals of human capital and social causes on crowdfunding campaign success. We argue and demonstrate that backers respond positively to human capital signals, as reflected by prior work and entrepreneurial experiences, as they communicate the competencies of the entrepreneurs. Conversely, signaling a high level of commitment to social causes communicates competing demands, thereby reducing entrepreneurs' ability to secure funding. Moreover, when emitted jointly, interaction of these two signals negatively affects campaign success. Our theory and findings provide nuanced insights regarding simultaneously emitted interdimensional signals in crowdfunding context with a structured incentive system, thereby increasing our understanding about the ambiguous nature of bundling human capital with high social cause signals.Managerial SummaryWhen evaluating new ventures in the public sphere, potential backers simultaneously process the complex information emitted by founders (i.e., signals). These signals communicate the unobservable qualities of the founders. In this article, we investigate the independent and joint effects of two signals on crowdfunding campaign outcomes: founder's human capital and their commitment to social causes. We show that while human capital increases campaign success, a high commitment to social cause decreases this likelihood. We further demonstrate that when these two signals are emitted simultaneously, balancing issues between the signals reduce the chances of attaining campaign success in crowdfunding. These findings emphasize the importance for crowdfunding founders and campaign designers to communicate coherent and well aligned signals to ensure campaign success.
{"title":"Are we on the same wavelength? Interdimensional signal set and crowdfunding success","authors":"Ankita Kulkarni, Daniel Tzabbar, Jade Y. Lo","doi":"10.1002/sej.1514","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/sej.1514","url":null,"abstract":"Research SummaryUsing data from 1899 Kickstarter campaigns (2009–2019), we examine the impact of simultaneous emission of interdimensional signals of human capital and social causes on crowdfunding campaign success. We argue and demonstrate that backers respond positively to human capital signals, as reflected by prior work and entrepreneurial experiences, as they communicate the competencies of the entrepreneurs. Conversely, signaling a high level of commitment to social causes communicates competing demands, thereby reducing entrepreneurs' ability to secure funding. Moreover, when emitted jointly, interaction of these two signals negatively affects campaign success. Our theory and findings provide nuanced insights regarding simultaneously emitted interdimensional signals in crowdfunding context with a structured incentive system, thereby increasing our understanding about the ambiguous nature of bundling human capital with high social cause signals.Managerial SummaryWhen evaluating new ventures in the public sphere, potential backers simultaneously process the complex information emitted by founders (i.e., signals). These signals communicate the unobservable qualities of the founders. In this article, we investigate the independent and joint effects of two signals on crowdfunding campaign outcomes: founder's human capital and their commitment to social causes. We show that while human capital increases campaign success, a high commitment to social cause decreases this likelihood. We further demonstrate that when these two signals are emitted simultaneously, balancing issues between the signals reduce the chances of attaining campaign success in crowdfunding. These findings emphasize the importance for crowdfunding founders and campaign designers to communicate coherent and well aligned signals to ensure campaign success.","PeriodicalId":51417,"journal":{"name":"Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal","volume":"13 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.3,"publicationDate":"2024-07-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141557143","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Research SummaryThis study explores how traditional craft produces novelty, which appears to be at odds with its emphasis on continuation. While prior research has explored how tradition is rediscovered and revived from the past, traditional craft can produce intrinsic novelty potentially through its own repetitive acts. This study examines a Japanese cuisine Kaiseki, which is traditional but simultaneously innovative. The analysis of a well‐known chef's design processes reveals that the chef designs novel dishes by responding to what has been done before, making something better and differently and thereby going beyond the limit of the tradition; Kaiseki tradition is re‐enacted through such practices. A process philosophy of Gills Deleuze is engaged to explain our concept of “tradition as capacity” as well as “tradition as object.”Managerial SummaryTradition is now seen as important source of value. This study explains how craft can be both traditional and innovative. Typically, innovation has been explained by recombination with new technologies and restoration and reinterpretation to reinvigorate identity rooted in the past, this study sheds light on the intrinsic novelty within the practices of craft. This novelty is evident in traditional Japanese cuisine, called Kaiseki, which is traditional but also innovative because customers seek novel exquisite experience as they do in any Michelin Guide starred restaurants. Through the analysis of a chef's practices, we propose a new conceptualization of tradition as capacity. The creative force of this tradition as capacity is important for creating new opportunities and novel values.
{"title":"Tradition, entrepreneurship, and innovation: The craft of Japanese fine dining","authors":"Yutaka Yamauchi, Daniel Hjorth","doi":"10.1002/sej.1512","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/sej.1512","url":null,"abstract":"Research SummaryThis study explores how traditional craft produces novelty, which appears to be at odds with its emphasis on continuation. While prior research has explored how tradition is rediscovered and revived from the past, traditional craft can produce intrinsic novelty potentially through its own repetitive acts. This study examines a Japanese cuisine <jats:italic>Kaiseki</jats:italic>, which is traditional but simultaneously innovative. The analysis of a well‐known chef's design processes reveals that the chef designs novel dishes by responding to what has been done before, making something better and differently and thereby going beyond the limit of the tradition; <jats:italic>Kaiseki</jats:italic> tradition is re‐enacted through such practices. A process philosophy of Gills Deleuze is engaged to explain our concept of “tradition as capacity” as well as “tradition as object.”Managerial SummaryTradition is now seen as important source of value. This study explains how craft can be both traditional and innovative. Typically, innovation has been explained by recombination with new technologies and restoration and reinterpretation to reinvigorate identity rooted in the past, this study sheds light on the intrinsic novelty within the practices of craft. This novelty is evident in traditional Japanese cuisine, called <jats:italic>Kaiseki</jats:italic>, which is traditional but also innovative because customers seek novel exquisite experience as they do in any Michelin Guide starred restaurants. Through the analysis of a chef's practices, we propose a new conceptualization of tradition as capacity. The creative force of this tradition as capacity is important for creating new opportunities and novel values.","PeriodicalId":51417,"journal":{"name":"Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal","volume":"27 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.3,"publicationDate":"2024-07-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141545952","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Emanuela Rondi, Vittoria Magrelli, Francesco Debellis, Alfredo De Massis
Research SummaryCraft firms characterized by a humanistic approach to work face a tension between adhering to pure craft principles and embracing industrialization. This challenge is heightened in family‐controlled craft firms, striving to uphold tradition while adapting to change. This study examines how craft work evolves along the trajectory of entrepreneurial development through a case study of Thun, a third‐generation family craft firm. We identify a set of mechanisms and four configurations—pure, technical, narrative, and ecosystemic—through which craft work evolves over time. These configurations not only preserve traditions, but also infuse them with entrepreneurial spirit, reinterpretation, and deep innovation. This study contributes to the craft work literature by moving beyond static perspectives and revealing the dynamic interplay between different craft configurations.Managerial SummaryCraft firms, which emphasize a humanistic approach to work, often struggle with the tension between preserving traditional craftsmanship and embracing industrialization. Our study of Thun, a third‐generation family craft firm, provides practical insights for managers by identifying a set of mechanisms and four configurations—pure, technical, narrative, and ecosystemic—that show how craft work can evolve over time. Managers can use these configurations to balance tradition and innovation, and inject entrepreneurial spirit into craft processes. Our findings underscore the importance of managing this balance for sustainable competitiveness and fostering an entrepreneurial firm culture that supports both artisanal and industrial production. Our study also provides a practical guide for craft firms seeking to evolve strategically, ensuring the integration of tradition with contemporary entrepreneurial development.
{"title":"The evolution of craft work in the strategic development of a family enterprise","authors":"Emanuela Rondi, Vittoria Magrelli, Francesco Debellis, Alfredo De Massis","doi":"10.1002/sej.1503","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/sej.1503","url":null,"abstract":"Research SummaryCraft firms characterized by a humanistic approach to work face a tension between adhering to pure craft principles and embracing industrialization. This challenge is heightened in family‐controlled craft firms, striving to uphold tradition while adapting to change. This study examines how craft work evolves along the trajectory of entrepreneurial development through a case study of Thun, a third‐generation family craft firm. We identify a set of mechanisms and four configurations—pure, technical, narrative, and ecosystemic—through which craft work evolves over time. These configurations not only preserve traditions, but also infuse them with entrepreneurial spirit, reinterpretation, and deep innovation. This study contributes to the craft work literature by moving beyond static perspectives and revealing the dynamic interplay between different craft configurations.Managerial SummaryCraft firms, which emphasize a humanistic approach to work, often struggle with the tension between preserving traditional craftsmanship and embracing industrialization. Our study of Thun, a third‐generation family craft firm, provides practical insights for managers by identifying a set of mechanisms and four configurations—pure, technical, narrative, and ecosystemic—that show how craft work can evolve over time. Managers can use these configurations to balance tradition and innovation, and inject entrepreneurial spirit into craft processes. Our findings underscore the importance of managing this balance for sustainable competitiveness and fostering an entrepreneurial firm culture that supports both artisanal and industrial production. Our study also provides a practical guide for craft firms seeking to evolve strategically, ensuring the integration of tradition with contemporary entrepreneurial development.","PeriodicalId":51417,"journal":{"name":"Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal","volume":"68 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.3,"publicationDate":"2024-05-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140903289","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Research SummaryBuilding on business model research and the social entrepreneurship literature, we conceptually develop a set of business model choices for social ventures. These choices specify the scope of venture beneficiaries, the extent that customers and beneficiaries overlap, and how social meaning is attached to the venture's value proposition. Concurrent configurations of these choices give rise to four types of social business models: (1) Social Stimulators, (2) Social Providers, (3) Social Producers, and (4) Social Intermediaries. We illustrate this typology using data from seven social ventures and formulate propositions about the implications these business model choices have for a venture's value creation and value capture potential. We then discuss contributions to the literature on social ventures and social entrepreneurship, and the literature on business models.Managerial SummaryIn this article, we propose a framework outlining key business model choices for social ventures. These choices include the scope of target beneficiaries of the venture, the degree of overlap between customers and beneficiaries, and how the venture communicates its social mission through its value proposition. By combining these choices in different ways, we identify four distinct types of social business models which we call Social Stimulators, Social Providers, Social Producers, and Social Intermediaries. To bring this framework to life, we have examined data from seven real‐world social ventures, offering concrete examples to illustrate each type. For each of these four types of social business models, we have also formulated propositions about how the business model choices impact a venture's value creation and value capture potential.
{"title":"Doing good while making profits: A typology of business models for social ventures","authors":"Lien De Cuyper, Bart Clarysse, Mike Wright","doi":"10.1002/sej.1502","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/sej.1502","url":null,"abstract":"Research SummaryBuilding on business model research and the social entrepreneurship literature, we conceptually develop a set of business model choices for social ventures. These choices specify the scope of venture beneficiaries, the extent that customers and beneficiaries overlap, and how social meaning is attached to the venture's value proposition. Concurrent configurations of these choices give rise to four types of social business models: (1) Social Stimulators, (2) Social Providers, (3) Social Producers, and (4) Social Intermediaries. We illustrate this typology using data from seven social ventures and formulate propositions about the implications these business model choices have for a venture's value creation and value capture potential. We then discuss contributions to the literature on social ventures and social entrepreneurship, and the literature on business models.Managerial SummaryIn this article, we propose a framework outlining key business model choices for social ventures. These choices include the scope of target beneficiaries of the venture, the degree of overlap between customers and beneficiaries, and how the venture communicates its social mission through its value proposition. By combining these choices in different ways, we identify four distinct types of social business models which we call Social Stimulators, Social Providers, Social Producers, and Social Intermediaries. To bring this framework to life, we have examined data from seven real‐world social ventures, offering concrete examples to illustrate each type. For each of these four types of social business models, we have also formulated propositions about how the business model choices impact a venture's value creation and value capture potential.","PeriodicalId":51417,"journal":{"name":"Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal","volume":"26 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.3,"publicationDate":"2024-05-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140845968","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Research SummaryWhat drives platform complementors to adopt boundary resources? We address this question by drawing on optimal distinctiveness. We suggest that competitors' adoption of a platform boundary resource on the one hand increases the legitimacy of the resource, but on the other hand decreases a focal complementor's ability to differentiate by adopting it. We therefore hypothesize an inverted U‐shaped relationship between prior and future adoption of a platform boundary resource. In a dataset of health and fitness apps on the Apple iOS platform and through three online experiments, we find support for this relationship and for the existence of two important complementor‐specific contingencies that moderate this relationship. This paper expands our understanding of how optimal distinctiveness drives the dynamics of platform‐mediated markets.Managerial SummaryIn platform markets, complementors face a dilemma: which of the available platform boundary resources should they adopt? We show that a focal complementor's decision to adopt a boundary resource is the result of a strategic trade‐off between the desire to be both legitimate and to be differentiated from competitors. The result is that initially many complementors adopt the boundary resource and it becomes viewed as increasingly attractive by other platform complementors. However, over time as many complementors have adopted the boundary resource, the remaining complementors begin to shy away from adopting it because they worry that doing so might hurt their ability to be differentiated on the platform. These results are shaped by the complementors' performance and how dedicated they are to the platform.
研究摘要是什么促使平台互补者采用边界资源？我们通过借鉴最佳独特性来解决这个问题。我们认为，竞争对手对平台边界资源的采用一方面增加了该资源的合法性，但另一方面却降低了焦点补充者通过采用该资源实现差异化的能力。因此，我们假设平台边界资源的先前采用与未来采用之间存在倒 U 型关系。通过苹果 iOS 平台上的健康和健身应用程序数据集以及三个在线实验，我们发现这种关系得到了支持，并且存在两个重要的补充者特定或然因素来缓和这种关系。本文拓展了我们对最佳独特性如何驱动平台中介市场动态的理解。管理总结在平台市场中，互补者面临着两难选择：他们应该采用哪种可用的平台边界资源？我们的研究表明，焦点互补者决定采用哪种边界资源，是在既要合法又要区别于竞争对手这两种愿望之间进行战略权衡的结果。其结果是，最初许多互补者会采用边界资源，其他平台互补者也会认为边界资源越来越有吸引力。然而，随着时间的推移，随着许多补充者采用了边界资源，剩下的补充者开始回避采用边界资源，因为他们担心这样做可能会损害他们在平台上的差异化能力。这些结果是由补充者的表现以及他们对平台的专注程度决定的。
{"title":"How optimal distinctiveness shapes platform complementors' adoption of boundary resources","authors":"Hye Young Kang, Stine Grodal","doi":"10.1002/sej.1501","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/sej.1501","url":null,"abstract":"Research SummaryWhat drives platform complementors to adopt boundary resources? We address this question by drawing on optimal distinctiveness. We suggest that competitors' adoption of a platform boundary resource on the one hand increases the legitimacy of the resource, but on the other hand decreases a focal complementor's ability to differentiate by adopting it. We therefore hypothesize an inverted U‐shaped relationship between prior and future adoption of a platform boundary resource. In a dataset of health and fitness apps on the Apple iOS platform and through three online experiments, we find support for this relationship and for the existence of two important complementor‐specific contingencies that moderate this relationship. This paper expands our understanding of how optimal distinctiveness drives the dynamics of platform‐mediated markets.Managerial SummaryIn platform markets, complementors face a dilemma: which of the available platform boundary resources should they adopt? We show that a focal complementor's decision to adopt a boundary resource is the result of a strategic trade‐off between the desire to be both legitimate and to be differentiated from competitors. The result is that initially many complementors adopt the boundary resource and it becomes viewed as increasingly attractive by other platform complementors. However, over time as many complementors have adopted the boundary resource, the remaining complementors begin to shy away from adopting it because they worry that doing so might hurt their ability to be differentiated on the platform. These results are shaped by the complementors' performance and how dedicated they are to the platform.","PeriodicalId":51417,"journal":{"name":"Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal","volume":"16 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.3,"publicationDate":"2024-03-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140317172","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：