No abstract

We know that organizations of different but related kinds greatly influence each other’s evolution. Although empirical findings abound, the theories behind them are still being developed. We advance a model of ecological interdependence between emergent and established populations. Our model is based on three main ideas. First, we consider related populations to be those that overlap in identity and resource space and that simultaneously exhibit competitive and mutualistic relationships, the latter leading to legitimacy transfer. Second, we build on the idea that legitimated forms codify prescriptive sanctions for deviations from identity blueprints, and predict that when an emergent population overlaps with an established one in identity space, its early proliferation will manifest violations of established social identities and will trigger prescriptive sanctions. Third, we rely on the notion of a focused identity to argue that organization-level changes affect external perceptions of the population’s collective identity, and hamper legitimacy. Analysis of the survival rates of financial cooperatives in Singapore—a population overlapping the identity and resources of commercial banks—confirms our predictions.

Manuscript Type Empirical Research Questions/Issue This study examines variation among firms in different countries in terms of how corporate boards are structured for effective governance. We discuss the fiduciary role of boards along two dimensions: (1) boards as wealth protectors and (2) boards as wealth creators. We explore how external governance mechanisms affect the emphasis placed on these two board role dimensions. Research Findings/Insights Using data from 23 countries and 19 industries, we show that board structure choices depend upon national institutional characteristics. Specifically, Investor Protection, Rule of Law, and Open Markets institution act as complements or substitutes to how a board is structured to emphasize two different aspects of corporate governance. The results hold while controlling for firm, industry, and other country level effects. Theoretical/Academic Implications We offer a more nuanced understanding of the linkages between internal/firm and external/institution level governance mechanisms by studying them in tandem. Our results imply that external governance mechanisms within a nation alter the costs and benefits of designing boards for a certain fiduciary role. This finding contributes to the governance bundles literature by articulating how governance mechanisms from both firm and nation levels configure together to form national governance bundles. Practitioner/Policy Implication As opportunities and constraints differ by country due to distinct institutional characteristics, firms varyingly structure their boards in accordance with the environment. They emphasize stronger wealth protection and/or wealth creation, or neither. This paper contributes to public policy by presenting how corporate laws and de/regulating markets may affect board structure choices.

Entrepreneurs have two key aims in managing their ego-networks: extending reach to valuable resources and facilitating resource acquisition. This study provides a synthesis of the brokerage, cohesion, and embeddedness literatures to develop and present a multilevel theoretical framework and analytical model that treat both aims jointly. It makes three contributions. First, it highlights a trade-off that entrepreneurs face in allocating their available networking time and energy while pursuing these two aims. Second, it explores the central role of two types of embeddedness-relational and structural-in resolving this trade-off. Third, it helps entrepreneurs decide when to embed a particular dyadic connection relationally or structurally. We show that entrepreneurs can better balance their dual aim by structurally embedding some ties rather than trying to relationally embed all. The resultant network is one that meshes characteristics of brokerage and cohesive ego-network structures.

No abstract

No abstract

Why do some potential entrepreneurs promptly engage in entrepreneurial behavior while others do not pursue their entrepreneurial intentions or delay acting? This study investigated whether potential entrepreneurs’ mindset shapes engaging in entrepreneurial behavior and the time until they do so. Over a 16-month period, holding more of a growth (vs. fixed) mindset positively predicted taking various entrepreneurial actions and doing so sooner. Interestingly, these effects vanished when individuals faced a less challenging context for entrepreneurship. Post-hoc exploratory analyses revealed that the COVID-19 pandemic magnified the impact of mindsets on entrepreneurial behavior. These findings pave the way for preliminary research on the viability of growth mindset interventions for fostering entrepreneurial behavior.

No abstract