1. Trang chủ
  2. » Kinh Doanh - Tiếp Thị

Research handbook on entrepreneurial teams theory and practice

304 14 0

Đang tải... (xem toàn văn)

Tài liệu hạn chế xem trước, để xem đầy đủ mời bạn chọn Tải xuống

THÔNG TIN TÀI LIỆU

Cấu trúc

  • Front Matter

  • Copyright

  • Contents

  • List of contributors

  • Foreword

  • 1. Introduction

  • PART I LEARNING FROM THEORY AND PRACTICE

  • 2. Entrepreneurial teams research in movement

  • 3. Urban legends or sage guidance: a review of common advice about entrepreneurial teams

  • PART II: DEVELOPING ENTREPRENEURIAL TEAMS

  • 4. Entrepreneurial team formation: the role of the family

  • 5. Entrepreneurs’ perspectives on the structuring phase of the entrepreneurial team

  • 6. Which deep-level diversity compositions of new venture teams lead to success or failure?

  • 7. How owner-manager team size influences the potential economic contribution of owner-managed businesses

  • 8. Dispositional antecedents of shared leadership emergent states on entrepreneurial teams

  • PART III CONTEXTUALIZING ENTREPRENEURIAL TEAMS

  • 9. Family entrepreneurial teams

  • 10. Te Ohu Umanga Māori: temporality and intent in the Māori entrepreneurial team

  • 11. Ethnic diversity in entrepreneurial teams and the role of culture shock on performance

  • 12. Women empowerment through Government Loaned Entrepreneurship Teams (GLETs) in Kenya

  • 13. Entrepreneurial teams in social entrepreneurship: when team heterogeneity facilitates organizational hy bridity

  • Index

Nội dung

Research Handbook on Entrepreneurial Teams Theory and Practice Edited by Cyrine Ben-Hafaïedh IÉSEG School of Management (LEM-CNRS), France Thomas M Cooney Dublin Institute of Technology, Ireland Cheltenham, UK • Northampton, MA, USA Cyrine Ben-Hafaïedh and Thomas M Cooney - 9781784713195 Downloaded from Elgar Online at 03/28/2017 06:05:01PM via University of Liverpool www.ebook3000.com BEN-HAFAIEDH_9781784713195_t.indd 08/12/2016 15:06 © Cyrine Ben-Hafạedh and Thomas M Cooney 2017 All rights reserved No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, ­mechanical or photocopying, recording, or otherwise without the prior ­permission of the publisher Published by Edward Elgar Publishing Limited The Lypiatts 15 Lansdown Road Cheltenham Glos GL50 2JA UK Edward Elgar Publishing, Inc William Pratt House Dewey Court Northampton Massachusetts 01060 USA A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Library of Congress Control Number: 2016949964 This book is available electronically in the Business subject collection DOI 10.4337/9781784713263 ISBN 978 78471 319 (cased) ISBN 978 78471 326 (eBook) Typeset by Servis Filmsetting Ltd, Stockport, Cheshire 01 Cyrine Ben-Hafaïedh and Thomas M Cooney - 9781784713195 Downloaded from Elgar Online at 03/28/2017 06:05:01PM via University of Liverpool BEN-HAFAIEDH_9781784713195_t.indd 08/12/2016 15:06 Contents List of contributorsvii Foreword  Mike Wright xv  1 Introduction Cyrine Ben-­Hafaïedh and Thomas M Cooney PART I  LEARNING FROM THEORY AND PRACTICE   Entrepreneurial teams research in movement Cyrine Ben-­Hafaïedh   3 Urban legends or sage guidance: a review of common advice about entrepreneurial teams Phillip H Kim and Howard E Aldrich 11 45 PART II  DEVELOPING ENTREPRENEURIAL TEAMS   Entrepreneurial team formation: the role of the family Giovanna Campopiano, Tommaso Minola and Lucio Cassia   5 Entrepreneurs’ perspectives on the structuring phase of the entrepreneurial team L Martin Cloutier, Sandrine Cueille and Gilles Recasens 73 96   6 Which deep-­level diversity compositions of new venture teams lead to success or failure? Stephanie Schoss, René Mauer and Malte Brettel 121   7 How owner-­manager team size influences the potential economic contribution of owner-­managed businesses Jonathan Levie and Johan P de Borst 144   8 Dispositional antecedents of shared leadership emergent states on entrepreneurial teams Wencang Zhou and Donald Vredenburgh 164 v Cyrine Ben-Hafaïedh and Thomas M Cooney - 9781784713195 Downloaded from Elgar Online at 03/28/2017 06:05:01PM via University of Liverpool www.ebook3000.com BEN-HAFAIEDH_9781784713195_t.indd 08/12/2016 15:06 vi  Research handbook on entrepreneurial teams PART III CONTEXTUALIZING ENTREPRENEURIAL TEAMS   Family entrepreneurial teams Allan Discua Cruz, Elias Hadjielias and Carole Howorth 10  Te Ohu Umanga Māori: temporality and intent in the Māori entrepreneurial team Mānuka Hēnare, Billie Lythberg, Amber Nicholson and Christine Woods 11 Ethnic diversity in entrepreneurial teams and the role of culture shock on performance Jean-ưFranỗois Lalonde 12 Women empowerment through Government Loaned Entrepreneurship Teams (GLETs) in Kenya Mary Wanjiru Kinoti, Moses Kibe Kihiko and Thomas M Cooney 187 208 231 252 13 Entrepreneurial teams in social entrepreneurship: when team heterogeneity facilitates organizational hybridity Frédéric Dufays and Benjamin Huybrechts 273 Index 289 Cyrine Ben-Hafaïedh and Thomas M Cooney - 9781784713195 Downloaded from Elgar Online at 03/28/2017 06:05:01PM via University of Liverpool BEN-HAFAIEDH_9781784713195_t.indd 08/12/2016 15:06 Contributors Howard E Aldrich is Kenan Professor of Sociology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, USA Howard’s main research interests are ­entrepreneurship, entrepreneurial team formation, gender and entre­ ­ preneur­ ship, and evolutionary theory His book Organizations Evolving (Sage, 1999) was co-­winner of the Max Weber Award from the Organizations, Occupation and Work section of the American Sociological Association His latest book An Evolutionary Approach to Entrepreneurship: Selected Essays was published by Edward Elgar Publishing in 2011 Cyrine Ben-­Hafaïedh is Assistant Professor of Entrepreneurship and Strategy, IÉSEG School of Management (LEM-­CNRS), Paris, France Cyrine’s doctoral thesis focused on the topic of entrepreneurial team formation and won two Best Dissertation Awards Her research now centres on entrepreneurial teams and collective entrepreneurship, and she explores these topics through various contexts (e.g., ambition, academic, social, etc.) Her work has been published in peer-­reviewed journals and books, and she has received several Best Conference Paper Awards She serves as a reviewer for several international journals in the field, and she has won a number of Best Reviewer Awards (including two from the Academy of Management Entrepreneurship Division) Cyrine is currently the Country Vice-­President for France in the European Council for Small Business and Entrepreneurship Malte Brettel is Professor of Business Administration and Entrepreneur­ ship at RWTH Aachen University, Germany, where he is also running the entrepreneurship centre Malte is also Adjunct Professor for Entrepreneur­ ship at WHU – the Otto-­Beisheim School of Management in Germany and is co-­founder of several successful businesses Giovanna Campopiano is Assistant Professor at the Chair of Business Administration and Family Entrepreneurship, Witten Institute for Family Business (WIFU), University of Witten/Herdecke, Germany Giovanna mainly focuses her research on management issues in family business, looking in particular at the involvement of the family in the business and its effect on firm performance, corporate social responsibility, sustainability issues and entrepreneurial activities She has published her research in academic journals such as Family Business Review, Journal of Business vii Cyrine Ben-Hafaïedh and Thomas M Cooney - 9781784713195 Downloaded from Elgar Online at 03/28/2017 06:05:01PM via University of Liverpool www.ebook3000.com BEN-HAFAIEDH_9781784713195_t.indd 08/12/2016 15:06 viii  Research handbook on entrepreneurial teams Ethics, Journal of Small Business Management and Journal of Family Business Strategy She organizes a track in the Family Business Strategic Interest Group of the European Academy of Management (EURAM) conference and serves as reviewer for several journals in the field Lucio Cassia is Professor of Strategic and Global Management and Chair­ man of the Research Center for Young and Family Enterprise (CYFE) at the University of Bergamo, Italy Lucio teaches strategic management, corporate strategy, competition and growth and entrepreneurial strategy in graduate, postgraduate and PhD programmes He is currently leading research, education and consulting on entrepreneurship, business strategy and family business His main interests are on technology-­based start-­ups, high-­tech companies, innovation tools and patterns of growth of small and medium enterprises With particular focus on the topics of youth entre­preneur­ship, growth of family businesses, managerial succession and generational change, Lucio promoted and founded the CYFE Lucio has published ten books and over 150 papers in academic and professional journals L Martin Cloutier, PhD, is a full-professor in the Department of Management and Technology, School of Management (École des sciences de la gestion, ESG), at the University of Quebec at Montreal His research programme centres on investigating, in various contexts, problems and issues of concern to groups or collectives, using systems-based decisionmaking approaches and methods to modelling such as system dynamics (SD) and group concept mapping (GCM) With the co-authors of his chapter in this volume, he has examined the collective representations of entrepreneurial development and support actors and stakeholders for very small ventures in entrepreneurial support infrastructures and incubators in Canada and in France He has published 30 referred articles on managerial economic related problems using system-based approaches (R&D Management, International Journal of Technology Management, Drug Discovery Today, Journal of Economic Issues, International Journal of Wine Business Research, Industrial Management & Data Systems, Journal of Decision Systems and Revue Internationale PME) Thomas M Cooney is Professor of Entrepreneurship, at the College of Business, Dublin Institute of Technology (DIT), Ireland and Academic Director of the Institute for Minority Entrepreneurship at DIT Tom is also Visiting Professor at the University of Turku, Finland, editor of the journal Small Enterprise Research and policy advisor to the Irish government, European Commission, OECD and other international organizations His primary research interests are in entrepreneurial teams Cyrine Ben-Hafaïedh and Thomas M Cooney - 9781784713195 Downloaded from Elgar Online at 03/28/2017 06:05:01PM via University of Liverpool BEN-HAFAIEDH_9781784713195_t.indd 08/12/2016 15:06 Contributors  ­ix and entrepreneurship for disadvantaged/minority communities Further details of his work can be found at www.thomascooney.com Sandrine Cueille is a ‘Mtre de Conférences’ in Management Sciences, Université de Pau et des Pays de l’Adour, France Sandrine’s research programme focuses on the strategic practices of organizations e­ volving in complex environments, in particular on health care organizations and also on young entrepreneurial ventures benefiting from incubators and other types of business support Her current research interests are mainly centred on entrepreneurial ecosystems, entrepreneurial teams,  and growth patterns of recently created firms – notably high-tech companies Along with the co-authors of her chapter in this volume, she conducted studies on these topics using bottom-up mixed methods to capture the collective representations of entrepreneurial actors in order to encompass the systemic interactions and the complexity of the examined phenomena Johan P de Borst is a doctoral researcher at the Hunter Centre for Entre­ preneur­ship, Strathclyde Business School, University of Strathclyde, UK Johan is a fully funded doctoral researcher at Strathclyde where he is investigating the intersection of income, well-­being and personality of the microentrepreneur He holds an MBA from Babson College, USA and was the Babson European Scholarship Award winner in 2012 He also has extensive experience working with and in start-­ups including at Mass Challenge in Boston, and as a graduate of the Babson College Summer Venture Program, and is the author of The Stingy Startup, a book taught at undergraduate level Allan Discua Cruz is a Lecturer in Entrepreneurship in the Department of Entrepreneurship, Strategy and Innovation, Lancaster University Management School, UK Allan is a founding member of the Centre for Family Business at Lancaster University and a member of a business family He has published on the topics of family entrepreneurial teams and entrepreneurship in family business His current research focuses on entrepreneurial teams and social contexts of entrepreneurship Frédéric Dufays is a postdoctoral researcher at KU Leuven, Belgium He coordinates the Centre of Expertise for Cooperative Entrepreneurship Frédéric holds a PhD in Management from HEC Liège Management School of the University of Liège, Belgium, for which he received the support of the FRS-FNRS through a FRESH grant His research interests include social entrepreneurship as well as the emergence of hybrid organizations, among which cooperatives, as well as collective dynamics (teams and networks) in entrepreneurship Cyrine Ben-Hafaïedh and Thomas M Cooney - 9781784713195 Downloaded from Elgar Online at 03/28/2017 06:05:01PM via University of Liverpool www.ebook3000.com BEN-HAFAIEDH_9781784713195_t.indd 08/12/2016 15:06 x  Research handbook on entrepreneurial teams Elias Hadjielias is a Lecturer in Entrepreneurship, MBA Program Leader, and Director of CEDAR (Centre for Entrepreneurial Development, Alliance and Research) at UCLan Cyprus His research interests include collective entrepreneurship in family businesses, cooperation within and between family businesses, and entrepreneurial learning between family members in business Elias has also consulting experience in start-­ups and new venture development Mānuka Hēnare is an Associate Professor of Māori Business Development, Department of Management and International Business, University of Auckland Business School, New Zealand Mānuka is a consultant and researcher in the private sector with a speciality in Māori business enterprise and development economics He joined the University of Auckland Business School in 1996 where he is responsible for Māori business development Mānuka is also the Foundation Director of the Mira Szászy Research Centre for Māori and Pacific Economic Development and leads a number of multidisciplinary research project teams Carole Howorth is Professor of Entrepreneurship and Family Business, University of Bradford Management School, UK Carole is Associate Dean for Research at the University of Bradford She is Chair of the Global STEP Program for family enterprising and of the Academic Advisory Panel for the Institute for Family Businesses Research Foundation She was Founding Director of the Centre for Family Business at Lancaster University and currently serves on its Advisory Board Benjamin Huybrechts is Associate Professor, HEC Liège Management School, University of Liège, Belgium Benjamin holds the SRIW-­ Sowecsom Chair in Entrepreneurship and Social Innovation His research topics include novel hybrid organizational forms in the area of social enterprise, the emergence and diffusion of social innovation, and cross-­ sector partnerships and networks Moses Kibe Kihiko is a PhD candidate, School of Business, Mount Kenya University, Kenya Moses is a scholar, writer, book reviewer and book chapter contributor, holds a Master’s in Leadership Studies and is pursuing a PhD in Business Administration & Management He was the 2009 best overseas entrant of Ashridge Business School & Guardian Public annual writing competition and is a published author of Public Leadership: The Ten Defining Moments How Leaders Acquire and Handle Fame, Power and Glory (Miraclaire Publishing, 2010) and is currently working on a book entitled Engaging Corporate Social Responsibility Moses is a monthly columnist known as ‘The Scholar’ in Small Medium Enterprises Today (SMET) magazine and is the founder/CEO of Practicum Cyrine Ben-Hafaïedh and Thomas M Cooney - 9781784713195 Downloaded from Elgar Online at 03/28/2017 06:05:01PM via University of Liverpool BEN-HAFAIEDH_9781784713195_t.indd 10 08/12/2016 15:06 Contributors  ­xi Leadership Consultancy (PLC) and accepts training, consultancy, research and writing opportunities in various corporate, public and private firms in the areas of business and entrepreneurship, organizational development, management, leadership and strategy Phillip H Kim is Associate Professor of Entrepreneurship, Babson College, USA Phil studies, teaches, and advises on different aspects of how entrepreneurial ideas become reality His research has been published in leading entrepreneurship, management, and sociology journals His views on entrepreneurship and innovation have appeared in The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, Forbes, and other prominent media outlets Mary Wanjiru Kinoti is a Senior Lecturer and Associate Dean of Graduate Business Studies at the School of Business, University of Nairobi, Kenya She holds a PhD in Business Administration and is a seasoned university lecturer with her experience spanning almost two decades She has taught at the Kenya Institute of Management (KIM), Egerton University, Kenya and currently is based at the University of Nairobi where she lectures in marketing She is passionate about the marketing of small and medium enterprises, as well as green marketing and sustainable development courses Mary has authored several articles published in refereed journals and is also working on a number of books contextualized for Africa Jean-ưFranỗois Lalonde is Professor of Entrepreneurship, University of Sherbrooke, Canada, where he teaches entrepreneurship He is the author or co-­author of articles, book chapters, lectures and case studies in entrepreneurship His research focuses on the links between culture and entrepreneurship He is involved in the development of entrepreneurship in his community by helping young entrepreneurs and non-profit enterprises Jonathan Levie is Professor of Entrepreneurship and Director of Teaching and Knowledge Exchange at the Hunter Centre for Entrepreneurship, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, UK He is also the Ambition and Growth Research Theme Leader in the UK’s Enterprise Research Centre, co-­directs Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM) UK, and is a member of the Research and Innovation Committee of GEM He has published in the Journal of Management Studies, Research Policy, Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, Small Business Economics, Family Business Review, and Journal of Technology Transfer, among others His main current research areas are entrepreneurship ecosystems, venture growth, technology commercialization, and entrepreneurship policy Billie Lythberg is a Senior Research Fellow at the University of Auckland Business School, New Zealand Billie works at the junction of e­ conomics, Cyrine Ben-Hafaïedh and Thomas M Cooney - 9781784713195 Downloaded from Elgar Online at 03/28/2017 06:05:01PM via University of Liverpool www.ebook3000.com BEN-HAFAIEDH_9781784713195_t.indd 11 08/12/2016 15:06 xii  Research handbook on entrepreneurial teams anthropology and art history, specializing in ethnographic studies and object-­ centric research Her core research interests are Indigenous ­economies and aesthetics, with particular foci on Polynesian arts, entrepreneurship and ‘gift exchange’ She is especially interested in possibilities for reframing historical interactions and collaborations between Europeans and Polynesians, and their material, artefactual and philosophical legacies for contemporary communities She is an Affiliated Researcher at Cambridge University Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology (UK), and Contributing Editor to the Art of Oceania for Khan Academy, USA René Mauer is Chair of Entrepreneurship and Innovation, ESCP Europe Berlin, Germany René joined ESCP Europe’s Berlin campus for the Chair of Entrepreneurship and Innovation in 2015 He received a doctoral degree in the area of entrepreneurship from RWTH Aachen and has been involved in a variety of entrepreneurial projects His area of expertise is entrepreneurial decision-­making in venture and corporate contexts Tommaso Minola is Director of the Research Center for Young and Family Enterprise (CYFE) and Lecturer in the field of Technology Management, Entrepreneurship and Strategy within the Department of Management, Information and Production Engineering at the University of Bergamo, Italy Tommaso’s research interests focus on the embeddedness of entrepreneurship, embracing different aspects of the entrepreneurial process from intention and cognition, to behaviour and performances In particular Tommaso focuses on two distinctive domains of e­ mbeddedness – university and family He is TOFT Visiting Professor at Jönköping International Business School (Sweden) and National Representative for Italy in the GUESSS research consortium His work is published or forthcoming in several academic journals, including Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, Small Business Economics, Journal of Small Business Management, R&D Management, and The Journal of Technology Transfer He is member of several academic and professional associations, and reviewer for major international journals in the field Amber Nicholson is a PhD student at the University of Auckland Business School, New Zealand Amber, of Māori kinship group Ngāruahine, is a researcher at the Mira Szászy Research Centre for Māori and Pacific Economic Development Her current doctoral research, ‘Arohia ngā tapuwae o ngā tūpuna: Heed the footprints of the ancestors’, looks at the how the energy of ancestral landscapes shape business She completed a Bachelor of Commerce with First Class Honours in 2012 titled ‘A Cyrine Ben-Hafaïedh and Thomas M Cooney - 9781784713195 Downloaded from Elgar Online at 03/28/2017 06:05:01PM via University of Liverpool BEN-HAFAIEDH_9781784713195_t.indd 12 08/12/2016 15:06 276  Research handbook on entrepreneurial teams MODEL DEVELOPMENT Prior to the construction of the model, two elements need to be clarified First, it should be noted that the model presented here shows only one possible path directing ETs to embrace hybrid entrepreneurship Therefore, it does not imply that all ETs undertake hybrid entrepreneurship, nor that hybrid entrepreneurship is necessarily conducted by teams Second, for the purposes of this chapter, an entrepreneurial team is understood as being composed of two or more individuals who have a significant interest and engagement in the development of an entrepreneurial project, and who recognize each other as being part of the team The interest of team members is broadened from financial (Cooney, 2005) to include other forms of interest For example, social entrepreneurs often have an interest that the future venture will tackle a social need that they experience personally or experienced by someone in their close environment (Germak and Robinson, 2013) A mutual recognition criterion is also included to take stock of the mutual inclusion decision that is needed in the team formation process (Ben-­Hafaïedh, 2014) As a starting point (upper part of Figure 13.1), it is acknowledged that individuals are embedded in a network of interpersonal relations (Granovetter, 1985) from which they enact institutional logics (Berger and Luckmann, 1966 [1991]; Friedland and Alford, 1991) This social network evolves over time and depends on various socialization sources: family, education, professional experience, religion, and so on Because people prefer cognitive consonance, they tend to keep in touch with others who share similar meanings and values (McPherson et al., 2001) and so distinct networks may embody distinct institutional logics (Breiger and Mohr, 2004; Mohr and White, 2008) Consequently, heterogeneity of social networks and socialization trajectories among individuals are likely to be sources of distinctiveness of the logics enacted by them For a team to exist there must be a meeting of two or more individuals Arguably this meeting can potentially trigger the generation of entrepreneurial opportunities Indeed, drawing on the structural-­hole argument, ‘good ideas’ for entrepreneurship have been found in bridging distinct social networks thanks to the informational advantage it provides (Burt, 2004) Brokering between or binding distinct homogeneous groups may offer the possibility to select or generate ideas and innovations that are valued by all groups (Obstfeld, 2005; Tortoriello and Krackhardt, 2010) This brokerage/binding function is usually assumed in the literature to be done by a single individual However, it may happen that individuals representing the various groups form a team to collectively act as a broker, which is the case studied in this chapter Cyrine Ben-Hafaïedh and Thomas M Cooney - 9781784713195 Downloaded from Elgar Online at 03/28/2017 06:05:01PM via University of Liverpool BEN-HAFAIEDH_9781784713195_t.indd 276 08/12/2016 15:06 Entrepreneurial teams in social entrepreneurship  ­277 Interactional B Structural Individual Ge n er ati ng A HYBRIDITY In the entrepreneurial process Opportunity creation/identification Institutional logic(s) Opportunity evaluation Opportunity exploitation Individual Figure 13.1  A model of hybridity-­imbued entrepreneurial process By analogy, bridging institutional logics gives an informational advantage that may be transformed into an entrepreneurial opportunity Indeed, a meeting between individuals carrying distinct and eventually competing institutional logics may be a source of entrepreneurial opportunity through the complementarity between these logics (Marquis and Lounsbury, 2007) In social entrepreneurship more particularly, the bridging of (at least) a social-­welfare logic and a commercial logic may bring upfront entrepreneurial opportunities For such hybridity to be sustained throughout the entrepreneurial process of opportunity evaluation and exploitation by the team, then structural, individual and interpersonal factors are likely to play a role First, the structure of the network in which each team member is embedded is likely to influence the way in which logic conflict can be managed The network structure will determine the degree of freedom of individual team members with regard to the expected conformity to the institutional logic borne by their network In particular, network density is likely to play a role on the ability of an individual team member to deal with different institutional logics Indeed, a denser network (Individual B  in Figure 13.1) will allow for less deviation from Cyrine Ben-Hafaïedh and Thomas M Cooney - 9781784713195 Downloaded from Elgar Online at 03/28/2017 06:05:01PM via University of Liverpool www.ebook3000.com BEN-HAFAIEDH_9781784713195_t.indd 277 08/12/2016 15:06 278  Research handbook on entrepreneurial teams the established norms and values because of the more numerous interconnections between nodes that create more trust and enforcement (Degenne and Forsé, 1999) If the focal individual takes distance from the norms and values that are carried by the network by conforming to another institutional logic, they are likely to face punishment from this dense network (Granovetter, 2005) In contrast, centrality (Individual A on Figure 13.1) of a social network is likely to push the focal individual to face contradicting institutional values For instance, Greenwood and Suddaby (2006) disclosed that elites have very central networks (bridging organizational fields) and therefore need to deal with distinct institutional logics The second set of factors lies at the individual level Education and socialization are presumed to have an impact on the way an individual manages situations in which they face conflicting logics because the strategy they are likely to adopt depends on the extent to which an individual has previously been familiarized to this other logic (Pache and Santos, 2013) Familiarity with different institutional logics is acquired through the social interactions an individual has throughout their whole life (Morrison, 2002; Bukowski et al., 2007) Education has a special role in familiarizing an individual to several logics, as argued by Pache and Chowdhury (2012) who plea for social entrepreneurship education programmes that would help students to be able to bridge social-­welfare and commercial (and eventually public-­sector) institutional logics Hence, it is suggested that individuals who have been exposed to different institutional logics are more likely to develop practices that are consistent with these various logics and to embrace hybridity in an entrepreneurial setting In his study of local community banks establishment, Almandoz (2012) observed that the institutional logics espoused by ET members and the interaction between them have an influence on the odds of hybrid organization creation Therefore, how each team member is acquainted to the logics carried by other team members determines the sustainability of hybridity in the entrepreneurial process Indeed, although logic distinctiveness may be a source of opportunity through the complementarity of institutional logics, it may also be a cause of conflict between team members that impedes the exploitation of a hybrid entrepreneurial opportunity This type of conflict is likely to arise when team members are ignoring or denying the relevance of other logics According to Pache and Santos (2013), those behaviours are most likely to occur when individuals are identified with one logic and have little or no familiarity with the other logic The competing logics are likely to be subject to power plays within the team (Vigoda-­Gadot and Vashdi, 2012), as well as causing leadership issues (Somech, 2006) Consequently, conflict between logics during the entrepreneurial process may end up in marginalizing or squeezing out one Cyrine Ben-Hafaïedh and Thomas M Cooney - 9781784713195 Downloaded from Elgar Online at 03/28/2017 06:05:01PM via University of Liverpool BEN-HAFAIEDH_9781784713195_t.indd 278 08/12/2016 15:06 Entrepreneurial teams in social entrepreneurship  ­279 of the logics present and result in the domination of one logic only Specific combinations in the team composition may also engender this situation If one team member has been socialized to a single logic, they are therefore identified with this logic and will be completely novice at other logics, and so they are likely to adopt a mix of compliance and defiance attitudes towards the enacted logic and the other logic (Pache and Santos, 2013) In the presently modelled two-­person team case, if the other member is socialized to the logic enacted by the first team member, that logic is likely to dominate over the other Thus, familiarity with other logics may reduce pressure in the conflict and in power struggles, and favour the construction of a unifying frame for the team, although hindering hybridity in the entrepreneurial process In contrast, a compartmentalization strategy may be used to avoid conflict when each member is novice at the logic of the other team member When both individuals are familiarized to some degree to other logics, compartmentalization or hybridization strategies are more likely to happen because team members want to be able to justify their behaviour towards their social network but are willing to compromise thanks to their former socialization towards other logics In this case, familiarity with other logics favours hybridity in the entrepreneurial process Therefore, the effect of familiarity with distinct logics through past socializations on hybridity in the entrepreneurial process needs to be understood taking into account the interactions between team members For an ET in the context of social entrepreneurship, it means that the extent to which team members are acquainted with social-­welfare logic when they enact a commercial logic (and inversely) is very important for sustaining the hybrid character of the entrepreneurial process Therefore the composition of the social ET matters if the team is to succeed in balancing the social and commercial dimensions of social entrepreneurship Overall, hybridity is imprinted in the entrepreneurial process as a result of the heterogeneity of the ET with regard to individual team members’ familiarity with and flexibility towards other logics (which they get from their education, socialization and social network structure, as well as from the manner in which heterogeneity is addressed within the interactions between team members) Hence, team composition is likely to play a significant role in shaping and sustaining the hybrid character of entrepreneurship As shown in Figure 13.1, the relationship between the social networks of individual team members and the hybridity in the entrepreneurial process is reciprocal It has been demonstrated above that the network structure and the institutional logics borne by the network influence the entrepreneurial process and its likelihood to enhance h ­ ybridity Several studies also show an evolution of an entrepreneur’s social network Cyrine Ben-Hafaïedh and Thomas M Cooney - 9781784713195 Downloaded from Elgar Online at 03/28/2017 06:05:01PM via University of Liverpool www.ebook3000.com BEN-HAFAIEDH_9781784713195_t.indd 279 08/12/2016 15:06 280  Research handbook on entrepreneurial teams due to actions undertaken during the entrepreneurial process (Hoang and Antoncic, 2003; Slotte-­Kock and Coviello, 2010) Indeed, entrepreneurs (in a team or individually) need to expand their network of contacts in order to get information to evaluate the opportunity and to acquire the necessary resources to exploit it In social entrepreneurship, this is particularly true for several reasons First, social entrepreneurs need to gain legitimacy from a wider variety of stakeholders than their commercial counterparts (Shaw and Carter, 2007), which requires regular interactions with those stakeholders to secure their support (Huybrechts et al., 2014) For instance, it is important for many social entrepreneurial projects to see the idea appropriated by the community, which necessitates exchanges with other people (Haugh, 2007) Second, social entrepreneurship is acknowledged to face greater difficulty with regard to resource acquisition, against which one possible solution is to expand the network in which resources may be found (Spear, 2006) As an illustration of some elements of the model, a real-­time case study is presented in the next section This case study has been constructed by interviewing (individually and collectively) members of a social ET engaged in the early stages of the entrepreneurial process of an organization that is not yet created ILLUSTRATIVE CASE STUDY: INTERGEN InterGen (anonymized name) is a social entrepreneurial project aimed at creating a day-­care centre for mentally handicapped grown-­ups next to an assisted-­living facility for elderly people The idea emerged in 2009 from a couple of parents, John and Mary, whose youngest daughter is mentally handicapped At that time, she was around 12 years old and entering secondary school This shift made the parents aware that they had to start thinking about her life after school Hence, they started to discuss the matter with other parents facing the same situation, who they met at their daughter’s school Realizing that the offer was almost non-­existent in the area, they formed a team of nine parents to envisage the creation of a centre that would welcome their children once grown up Although the education and work experience of all parents differ, they have similar status (intellectual professions, higher middle class), living area, age and share a concern for their handicapped child First, the team needed to acquire some knowledge regarding the legal and financial constraints imposed on a day-­care centre for mentally handicapped adults They started to explore a few ideas, among which farm rehabilitation and organic farming were considered by a few team members as a worthy option At the school of his eldest daughter, Cyrine Ben-Hafaïedh and Thomas M Cooney - 9781784713195 Downloaded from Elgar Online at 03/28/2017 06:05:01PM via University of Liverpool BEN-HAFAIEDH_9781784713195_t.indd 280 08/12/2016 15:06 Entrepreneurial teams in social entrepreneurship  ­281 John met Mike, marketing manager for a bank, who was looking for new professional challenges in the area of elderly nursing homes This meeting triggered the identification of an opportunity for a social entrepreneurial project that would meet the social need of improving the quality of life and the social integration of handicapped adults, whilst ensuring a long-­term financial viability that would safeguard the handicapped against the risk of not having enough to pay for the centre when their parents die The idea of building the day-­care centre next to an assisted-­living facility for elderly and allowing for both financial and human exchanges between the two structures did not reach a consensus within the team Two couples of parents argued that this was going too far in subordinating the project of a day-­care centre to a financial revenue-­generating activity and they left the project together with two other parents Indeed, they felt that such a project was sacrificing (1) the creation of activities adapted to their child as they considered farming as more suited to handicapped grown-­ups, and (2) the living environment they envisioned for their child as the elderly living facility implied that it would be located in an urban or semi-­urban place to be close to transportation and other services elderly people need Nowadays, the team is stabilized around three parents of handicapped children, among whom are John and Mary, a friend of theirs who specializes in communication and fundraising, and Mike The project is also stabilized and a consensus on what values are borne by the team and the discourse to hold towards various stakeholders has progressively been enacted Roles within the team are distributed informally according to what each one volunteers to Over time, some tasks have crystallized around one or the other member For instance, John is identified as the leader, doing the administrative tasks, and communicating with formal institutions Mary is treasurer for the day-­to-­day fundraising activities She is also identified by the team as the guardian of the social mission for the handicapped Mike is taking care of the financial strategy, making sure that the project is economically viable, and of the set-­up of the assisted-­ living facility for elderly people It can be highlighted from this case that a social entrepreneurial opportunity may be generated by the meeting of two needs and distinct institutional logics Whereas the complementarity of the market and the social-­welfare logics carries opportunities, it also seems clear that the conflict in these logics puts constraints on and may even hinder the entrepreneurial process Indeed, this conflict has caused the composition of the entrepreneurial team to evolve with the exit of some members and the entry of others to manage the balance between the logics in a consistent way across all members Such a consistency is achieved through interpersonal negotiation The exit of some members reflects the failure of the ET Cyrine Ben-Hafaïedh and Thomas M Cooney - 9781784713195 Downloaded from Elgar Online at 03/28/2017 06:05:01PM via University of Liverpool www.ebook3000.com BEN-HAFAIEDH_9781784713195_t.indd 281 08/12/2016 15:06 282  Research handbook on entrepreneurial teams to reach an agreement in these negotiations This failure may result from the inability of individuals to compromise because of their poor familiarity with other logics present For InterGen, the evolution of the team composition particularly illustrates a weak crystallization of the team around the initial opportunity (Condor and Chabaud, 2012) because of diverging framing or interpretations thereof, as well as diverging visions of what the social need (of their child) entails, resulting in diverging understandings of how to combine institutional logics As a result, neither compromise nor compartmentalization could be achieved to sustain hybrid entrepreneurship by the initial ET Hence, tensions could only be solved through a change in the project, or a change in the team, which was the adopted solution With regard to the roles, it can be noted that the InterGen team attempted to exploit the strengths of each member, with some of them playing the tacit role of ‘logic guardians’ They ensure that the other logic does not squeeze out the logic that they represent Even though this might create tensions, it also ensures the sustained character of hybridity This informal role distribution can constitute one solution for dealing with hybridity in ETs Overall, team composition imprints hybridity to the entrepreneurial process whilst team functioning and organization allow team members to sustain hybridity throughout the entrepreneurial process DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION This chapter has developed a model of social entrepreneurship undertaken by teams understood as hybrid entrepreneurship, building its hybridity on the heterogeneity of an ET and on the interactions between team members Together with the illustrative case study and the broader application to social entrepreneurship, it makes several theoretical contributions Further, despite some limitations, it has significant implications for theory and practice Regarding theoretical contributions, this chapter first confirms that the composition of entrepreneurial teams, beyond demographic characteristics or skills of team members, can play a major role in shaping the entrepreneurial process In other words, it makes clear that value heterogeneity (McPherson et al., 2001) influences entrepreneurial action and outcomes by showing how team composition contributes to shaping and sustaining the hybrid character of the social entrepreneurial process Further, by articulating multiple levels of analysis and integrating dynamism between team members (Humphrey and Aime, 2014), this chapter adds to the microfoundations of team entrepreneurship Indeed, it shows the Cyrine Ben-Hafaïedh and Thomas M Cooney - 9781784713195 Downloaded from Elgar Online at 03/28/2017 06:05:01PM via University of Liverpool BEN-HAFAIEDH_9781784713195_t.indd 282 08/12/2016 15:06 Entrepreneurial teams in social entrepreneurship  ­283 r­ elationship between the macro-­structure in which an individual is embedded and the ET, and the mediating effect of interactions between team members Inevitably, such a model contains inherent limitations The deductive approach adopted throughout this chapter requires one to schematize and therefore fails to reflect the many shades that can be observed in practice For example, teams may be composed of more than two members (as illustrated by the InterGen case), which is likely to change the suggested outcomes through power plays (Mangen and Brivot, 2015) Another major simplification resides in the assumption that individuals are identified principally with one logic, disregarding the possibility for the team to include hybrid individual members As a theoretical implication, connecting the field of social entrepreneurship to the field of ETs highlights that studies on team status ­homogeneity/heterogeneity (McPherson et al., 2001) appear insufficient to explain a team composition’s influence on the entrepreneurial process Consequently, this chapter suggests that integrating greater complexity in research on team composition is required, particularly with regard to values or logics, and to interactions between team members In addition, the chapter underlines the impact of socialization and social networks of individual team members in the ET formation process, including the likelihood of sustained hybridity Thereby, it contributes to the literature by going beyond the classical opposition between the strategic and the homophily approaches of ET formation (Ben Hafaïedh-­ Dridi, 2010) Indeed, by looking at logic heterogeneity and familiarity, the model suggests that social networks are important antecedents to the generation of an opportunity for hybrid entrepreneurship, as well as for the evaluation and the eventual exploitation that might occur The dynamic character of the model also points at the importance in considering social networks evolution over time as they are likely to change because of the entrepreneurial process (Slotte-­Kock and Coviello, 2010) Therefore, there is an influence by social networks on the process that itself affects the social network In this way, this chapter follows Giddens’s (1984) proposition in positioning the ET and its members as agents in a dual relationship with the structure In the same way that Lechler (2001) demonstrated it for technology ventures, the model implies that interactions between team members during the team formation process and beyond are likely to have profound impacts on the (social) ET’s performance and success This is exemplified by the InterGen case for which the entrepreneurial team had to adjust its composition to solve value misunderstandings and thereby to overcome barriers hindering the project to go forward As a consequence, interactions should be integrated in future research on ET outcomes Overall, the chapter also implies that selecting norms, values or Cyrine Ben-Hafaïedh and Thomas M Cooney - 9781784713195 Downloaded from Elgar Online at 03/28/2017 06:05:01PM via University of Liverpool www.ebook3000.com BEN-HAFAIEDH_9781784713195_t.indd 283 08/12/2016 15:06 284  Research handbook on entrepreneurial teams i­­nstitutional logics, as the research object allows one to better understand the interactions taking place within an ET (and their outcomes) The literature on conflict in teams demonstrates (Ensley and Pearce, 2001) that these interactions have a major influence on team performance As a consequence, the model presented makes the case for a closer analysis of individual history of value enactment prior to participation in the team This could contribute to uncovering sources of conflict in an ET and strategies individual members use to solve these For practitioners, this chapter helps them to better understand and anticipate interactions with team members bearing distinct institutional logics It makes clear that logic distinctiveness may create conflicts hindering the entrepreneurial process Hence, depending on team composition and individual members’ familiarity with distinct logics, several strategies exist to manage and/or avoid these conflicts Practitioners, regardless of whether they act in support of hybrid entrepreneurship or if they are entrepreneuring themselves, should therefore not overlook the background of individual team members, in particular with regard to values and socialization to logics Further, the chapter highlights the potential added value and pitfalls of entrepreneuring in teams in institutionally complex settings such as social entrepreneurship It has shown that the potential generation of opportunities exists in bridging networks and institutional logics by forming a heterogeneous team However, this opportunity may fade because of the need to conform to some logic to remain in line with one team member’s social network strong expectations or the unwillingness to familiarize and/or to compromise with distinct logics Hence, practitioners may be encouraged to exploit team heterogeneity as a way to sustain hybridity throughout the entrepreneurial process ACKNOWLEDGEMENT This research has been carried out in the framework of an Interuniversity Attraction Pole funded by the Belgian Science Policy Office under the title ‘If Not For Profit, For What and How?’ REFERENCES Almandoz, J (2012), ‘Arriving at the starting line: The impact of community and ­financial  logics on new banking ventures’, Academy of Management Journal, 55 (6), 1381–406 Battilana, J and M Lee (2014), ‘Advancing research on hybrid organizing – Insights from the study of social enterprises’, The Academy of Management Annals, (1), 397–441 Cyrine Ben-Hafaïedh and Thomas M Cooney - 9781784713195 Downloaded from Elgar Online at 03/28/2017 06:05:01PM via University of Liverpool BEN-HAFAIEDH_9781784713195_t.indd 284 08/12/2016 15:06 Entrepreneurial teams in social entrepreneurship  ­285 Beckman, C.M (2006), ‘The influence of founding team company affiliations on firm behavior’, Academy of Management Journal, 49 (4), 741–58 Beckman, C.M., M.D Burton and C O’Reilly (2007), ‘Early teams: The impact of team demography on VC financing and going public’, Journal of Business Venturing, 22 (2), 147–73 Ben Hafaïedh-­Dridi, C (2010), ‘Entrepreneurial team formation: Any rationality?’, Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research, 30 (10), accessed 22 March 2013 at http://digitalknowledge babson.edu/fer/vol30/iss10/1 Ben Hafaïedh, C (2014), ‘Entrepreneurial team formation: Taking into consideration the  mutuality of the decision-­ making process’, paper presented at RENT XXVIII conference  – Research in Entrepreneurship and Small Business, Luxemburg, 19–21 ­ November, 2014 Berger, P and T Luckmann (1966 [1991]), The Social Construction of Reality A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge, New York: Penguin Books Breiger, R.L and J.W Mohr (2004), ‘Institutional logics from the aggregation of organizational networks: Operational procedures for the analysis of counted data’, ­ Computational & Mathematical Organization Theory, 10 (1), 17–43 Bukowski, W.M., M Brendgen and F Vitaro (2007), ‘Peers and socialization: Effects on externalizing and internalizing problems’, in J.E Grusec and P.D Hastings (eds), Handbook of Socialization: Theory and Research, New York: The Guilford Press, pp. 355–81 Burt, R.S (2004), ‘Structural holes and good ideas’, American Journal of Sociology, 110 (2), 349–99 Condor, R and D Chabaud (2012), ‘La formation de l’équipe entrepreneuriale autour du projet de création d’entreprise: Constats et enjeux’ [Entrepreneurial team formation round the enterprise creation project: Acknowledgments and challenges], Revue de l’Entrepreneuriat, 11 (2), 31–52 Cooney, T.M (2005), ‘Editorial: What is an entrepreneurial team?’, International Small Business Journal, 23 (3), 226–35 Corner, P.D and M Ho (2010), ‘How opportunities develop in social entrepreneurship’, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 34 (4), 635–59 Defourny, J and P Develtere (1999), ‘The social economy: The worldwide making of a third sector’, in J Defourny, P Develtere and B Fonteneau (eds), L’économie sociale au Nord et au Sud, Bruxelles: De Boeck, pp. 25–56 Degenne, A and M Forsé (1999), Introducing Social Networks, translated by Arthur Borges, London: Sage Doherty, B., H Haugh and F Lyon (2014), ‘Social enterprises as hybrid organizations: A review and research agenda’, International Journal of Management Reviews, 16 (4), 417–36 Dufays, F and B Huybrechts (2014), ‘Connecting the dots for social value: A review on social networks and social entrepreneurship’, Journal of Social Entrepreneurship, (2), 214–37 Dufays, F and B Huybrechts (2016), ‘Where hybrids come from? Entrepreneurial team heterogeneity as an avenue for the emergence of hybrid organizations’, International Small Business Journal, 34 (6), 777–96 Eisenhardt, K.M and C.B Schoonhoven (1990), ‘Organizational growth: Linking founding team, strategy, environment, and growth among U.S semiconductor ventures, ­1978–1988’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 35 (3), 504–29 Ensley, M.D and C.L Pearce (2001), ‘Shared cognition in top management teams: Implications for new venture performance’, Journal of Organizational Behavior, 22 (2), 145–60 Forbes, D.P., P.S Borchert, M.E Zellmer-­Bruhn and H.J Sapienza (2006), ‘Entrepreneurial team formation: An exploration of new member addition’, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 30 (2), 225–48 Fowler, A (2000), ‘NGDOs as a moment in history: Beyond aid to social entrepreneurship or civic innovation’, Third World Quarterly, 21 (4), 637–54 Cyrine Ben-Hafaïedh and Thomas M Cooney - 9781784713195 Downloaded from Elgar Online at 03/28/2017 06:05:01PM via University of Liverpool www.ebook3000.com BEN-HAFAIEDH_9781784713195_t.indd 285 08/12/2016 15:06 286  Research handbook on entrepreneurial teams Friedland, R and R.R Alford (1991), ‘Bringing society back in: Symbols, practices, and institutional contradictions’, in W.W Powell and P.J DiMaggio (eds), The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, pp. 232–63 Germak, A.J and J.A Robinson (2013), ‘Exploring the motivation of nascent social entrepreneurs’, Journal of Social Entrepreneurship, (1), 5–21 Giddens, A (1984), The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration, Oxford: Polity Press Granovetter, M (1985), ‘Economic action and social structure: The problem of embeddedness’, American Journal of Sociology, 91 (3), 481–510 Granovetter, M (2005), ‘The impact of social structure on economic outcomes’, Journal of Economic Perspectives, 19 (1), 35–50 Greenwood, R and R Suddaby (2006), ‘Institutional entrepreneurship in mature fields: The Big Five accounting firms’, Academy of Management Journal, 49 (1), 27–48 Greenwood, R., M Raynard and F Kodeih et al (2011), ‘Institutional complexity and organizational responses’, Academy of Management Annals, (1), 317–71 Haugh, H (2007), ‘Community-­led social venture creation’, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 31 (2), 161–82 Hoang, H and B Antoncic (2003), ‘Network-­based research in entrepreneurship: A critical review’, Journal of Business Venturing, 18 (2), 165–87 Hoang, H and J Gimeno (2010), ‘Becoming a founder: How founder role identity affects entrepreneurial transitions and persistence in founding’, Journal of Business Venturing, 25 (1), 41–53 Humphrey, S.E and F Aime (2014), ‘Team microdynamics: Toward an organizing approach to teamwork’, Academy of Management Annals, (1), 443–503 Huybrechts, B., S Mertens and J Rijpens (2014), ‘Explaining stakeholder involvement in social enterprise governance through resources and legitimacy’, in J Defourny, L. Hulgård and V Pestoff (eds), Social Enterprise and the Third Sector: Changing European Landscapes in a Comparative Perspective, New York: Routledge, pp. 157–76 Johnson, V (2007), ‘What is organizational imprinting? Cultural entrepreneurship in the founding of the Paris Opera’, American Journal of Sociology, 113 (1), 97–127 Klotz, A.C., K.M Hmieleski, B.H Bradley and L.W Busenitz (2014), ‘New venture teams: A review of the literature and roadmap for future research’, Journal of Management, 40 (1), 226–55 Lechler, T (2001), ‘Social interaction: A determinant of entrepreneurial team venture success’, Small Business Economics, 16 (4), 263–78 Lee, M (2014), ‘Mission and markets? The viability of hybrid social ventures’, paper, accessed 28 January 2014 at http://www.rotman.utoronto.ca/-­ /media/Files/Programs-­ and-­Areas/Strategy/papers/The%20Viability%20of%20Hybrid%20Social%20Ventures_ Matthew%20Lee.pdf Lee, M and J Battilana (2013), ‘How the zebra got its stripes: Imprinting of individuals and hybrid social ventures’, Harvard Business School Working Paper No 14-­005, accessed September 2013 at http://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Pages/download.aspx?name=14–005.pdf Mangen, C and M Brivot (2015), ‘The challenge of sustaining organizational hybridity: The role of power and agency’, Human Relations, 68 (4), 659–84 Marquis, C and M Lounsbury (2007), ‘Vive la résistance: Competing logics and the consolidation of U.S community banking’, Academy of Management Journal, 50 (4), 799–820 McPherson, M., L Smith-­Lovin and J.M Cook (2001), ‘Birds of a feather: Homophily in social networks’, Annual Review of Sociology, 27 (1), 415–44 Meyer, J.W and B Rowan (1977), ‘Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony’, American Journal of Sociology, 83 (2), 340–63 Mohr, J.W and H.C White (2008), ‘How to model an institution’, Theory and Society, 37 (5), 485–512 Morrison, E.W (2002), ‘Newcomers’ relationships: The role of social network ties during socialization’, Academy of Management Journal, 45 (6), 1149–160 Cyrine Ben-Hafaïedh and Thomas M Cooney - 9781784713195 Downloaded from Elgar Online at 03/28/2017 06:05:01PM via University of Liverpool BEN-HAFAIEDH_9781784713195_t.indd 286 08/12/2016 15:06 Entrepreneurial teams in social entrepreneurship  ­287 Nelson, T (2003), ‘The persistence of founder influence: Management, ownership, and performance effects at initial public offering’, Strategic Management Journal, 24 (8), 707–24 Obstfeld, D (2005), ‘Social networks, the Tertius Iungens orientation, and involvement in innovation’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 50 (1), 100–30 Oliver, C (1991), ‘Strategic responses to institutional processes’, Academy of Management Review, 16 (1), 145–79 Pache, A.-­C and I Chowdhury (2012), ‘Social entrepreneurs as institutionally embedded entrepreneurs: Toward a new model of social entrepreneurship education’, Academy of Management Learning & Education, 11 (3), 494–510 Pache, A.-­C and F Santos (2010), ‘When worlds collide: The internal dynamics of organizational responses to conflicting institutional demands’, Academy of Management Review, 35 (3), 455–76 Pache, A.-­C and F Santos (2013), ‘Embedded in hybrid contexts: How individuals in organizations respond to competing institutional logics’, in M Lounsbury and E Boxenbaum (eds), Institutional Logics in Action, Part B, Bingley, UK: Emerald Group Publishing Limited, pp. 3–35 Powell, W.W and J.A Colyvas (2008), ‘Microfoundations of institutional theory’, in R.  Greenwood, C Oliver, R Suddaby and K Sahlin-­ Andersson (eds), The Sage Handbook of Organizational Institutionalism, London: Sage, pp. 276–98 Ruef, M., H.E Aldrich and N.M Carter (2003), ‘The structure of founding teams: Homophily, strong ties, and isolation among U.S entrepreneurs’, American Sociological Review, 68 (2), 195–222 Schieb-­Bienfait, N., B Charles-­Pauvers and C Urbain (2009), ‘Emergence entrepreneuriale et innovation sociale dans l’économie sociale et solidaire: Acteurs, projets et logiques d’action’ [Entrepreneurial emergence and social innovation in the social and solidarity economy: Actors, projects and logics of action], Innovations, 2009/2 (30), 13–39 Shaw, E and S Carter (2007), ‘Social entrepreneurship: Theoretical antecedents and empirical analysis of entrepreneurial processes and outcomes’, Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 14 (3), 418–34 Slotte-­Kock, S and N Coviello (2010), ‘Entrepreneurship research on network processes: A review and ways forward’, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 34 (1), 31–57 Somech, A (2006), ‘The effects of leadership style and team process on performance and innovation in functionally heterogeneous teams’, Journal of Management, 32 (1), 132–57 Spear, R (2006), ‘Social entrepreneurship: A different model?’, International Journal of Social Economics, 33 (5/6), 399–410 Steffens, P., S Terjesen and P Davidsson (2012), ‘Birds of a feather get lost together: New venture team composition and performance’, Small Business Economics, 39 (3), 727–43 Thornton, P.H and W Ocasio (2008), ‘Institutional logics’, in R Greenwood, C Oliver, R Suddaby and K Sahlin-­ Andersson (eds), The Sage Handbook of Organizational Institutionalism, London: Sage, pp. 99–129 Thornton, P.H., W Ocasio and M Lounsbury (2012), ‘The institutional logics perspective: A new approach to culture, structure, and process’, Oxford: Oxford University Press Tortoriello, M and D Krackhardt (2010), ‘Activating cross-­boundary knowledge: The role of Simmelian ties in the generation of innovations’, Academy of Management Journal, 53 (1), 167–81 Vigoda-­Gadot, E and D.R Vashdi (2012), ‘Politics in and around teams: Toward a t­ eam-­level conceptualization of organizational politics’, in G.R Ferris and D.C Treadway (eds), Politics in Organizations: Theory and Research Considerations, New York: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group, pp. 287–322 Cyrine Ben-Hafaïedh and Thomas M Cooney - 9781784713195 Downloaded from Elgar Online at 03/28/2017 06:05:01PM via University of Liverpool www.ebook3000.com BEN-HAFAIEDH_9781784713195_t.indd 287 08/12/2016 15:06 Cyrine Ben-Hafaïedh and Thomas M Cooney - 9781784713195 Downloaded from Elgar Online at 03/28/2017 06:05:01PM via University of Liverpool BEN-HAFAIEDH_9781784713195_t.indd 288 08/12/2016 15:06 Index academic spin-offs 15, 21, 34 Belbin team roles see roles Big Five personality types 55, 166 business opportunity 31, 146 cognition 20, 33, 165 cognitive biases 15, 55 cohesion 77, 110, 256 collective entrepreneurship 11, 12, 37, 221 communication 2, 21, 130 community 221 complementarity 50, 53 conflict 21, 22, 24, 33, 61, 130, 146 contexts 5, 22, 34–6, 49, 158–9, 246, 252, 254–5 co-preneurship 35, 48, 62 creativity 19, 164, 237, 246 cultural values 209, 216, 223, 237 culture shock 33, 231, 237 decision-making 49 deep-level diversity see diversity, personality diversity 18, 20, 32, 51, 121, 123, 166, 168, 231, 274 education 18, 158 effectuation 31 emergent state 22, 33, 165 empathy 138 employees 14, 100, 115, 201 entrepreneurial team composition of 20, 46, 56, 99, 121, 166, 193, 209, 220, 282 definition of 12–14, 98, 112, 121, 144, 164, 190, 213, 259, 276 development of 14, 97 formation of 15, 29–30, 73, 85, 193, 208 prevalence of 2, 11 size of 27, 144, 158 environment 18, 23 equity 16, 17, 31 ethnicity 15, 18, 54, 233 see also context experience 17–19, 21, 23, 25, 47, 51, 55–6, 61, 194, 196 fairness 17, 25, 27 family entrepreneurship 3, 5, 34, 58, 73, 85, 187, 202, 211 family capital 75, 85 family cohesion 75–7, 197 financial capital 79, 87, 112 founder 12, 14 founding team 48 see also entrepreneurial team friendship 58 gender 5, 35, 252 group concept mapping 97, 102–6 growth 1, 11, 114, 145, 147, 158 high technology 32, 144 homophily 15, 30, 53, 148, 194, 274 human capital 26, 75, 79, 100, 148, 216 human resource management 110 hybridity 273, 279 see also social entrepreneurship identity 76, 234 IMOI 22, 26, 27, 165 indigenous entrepreneurship 5, 208, 213, 215, 224 innovation 16, 147 input–mediator–output–input see IMOI input–process–output 21, 134, 164 see also IMOI institutional logics 6, 274, 278 interaction 195 International Personality Item Pool 134 289 Cyrine Ben-Hafaïedh and Thomas M Cooney - 9781784713195 Downloaded from Elgar Online at 03/28/2017 06:05:01PM via University of Liverpool www.ebook3000.com BEN-HAFAIEDH_9781784713195_t.indd 289 08/12/2016 15:06 290  Research handbook on entrepreneurial teams leadership 16, 22, 111, 165 shared leadership 4, 22, 164, 170 learning 33 resources 18, 76, 90, 100, 115, 146 risk-taking 16 roles 16, 31, 61, 134, 282 Māori 208, 216 mediators 21, 25, 32, 33 methodology 7, 37, 80, 97, 124, 149, 171, 229–30, 235, 259 motivation 22, 30, 75, 234 social capital 32, 75, 78, 194 social entrepreneurship 6, 34, 273 stewardship 193, 213 strategic behaviour 15, 30, 76 see also resources strategy 17, 18 structuring 96 students 75, 125 success 3, 15, 121, 131, 136–7, 256 see also performance networks 16, 24, 34, 52, 56, 78, 276 new venture team see entrepreneurial team norms 16, 22, 30, 76, 101, 112, 189, 202 opportunity 31, 146, 277 owner 12, 144 performance 11, 17, 19, 23, 24, 27, 147 see also success personality 3, 20–21, 25, 32, 122, 124, 164, 166, 170 portfolio entrepreneurship 190, 197, 200 practitioners 1, 15, 21, 46, 138, 159, 179, 270–71 top management team 1, 13, 26, 121 traits see personality trust 15, 46, 58, 76, 189, 195, 200, 241, 264 turnover 25–6, 196 upper echelons theory 18, 121 venture capitalist 24, 25, 27, 29, 32, 101, 121, 122, 127, 135, 138, 139 vision 52, 102 Cyrine Ben-Hafaïedh and Thomas M Cooney - 9781784713195 Downloaded from Elgar Online at 03/28/2017 06:05:01PM via University of Liverpool BEN-HAFAIEDH_9781784713195_t.indd 290 08/12/2016 15:06 ... 08/12/2016 15:06 vi  Research handbook on entrepreneurial teams PART III CONTEXTUALIZING ENTREPRENEURIAL TEAMS   Family entrepreneurial teams Allan Discua Cruz, Elias Hadjielias and Carole Howorth... Lythberg, Nicholson and Woods on Māori entrepreneurial teams is a wonderful extension of this concept The authors argue that Māori entrepreneurial teams harmonize the collective intent and complementary... xii  Research handbook on entrepreneurial teams anthropology and art history, specializing in ethnographic studies and object-­ centric research Her core research interests are Indigenous ­economies

Ngày đăng: 08/01/2020, 08:25

TỪ KHÓA LIÊN QUAN