Developing a scale to measure liabilities and assets of newness after start-up

Nagy, Brian G.; Blair, Eden S.; Lohrke, Franz T.

doi:10.1007/s11365-012-0219-2

Cited by 23 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 58 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Some studies looked for justification on evidence related to the effectiveness of much smaller observations to variables ratios. For example, Nagy et al (2014) justified the small sample size used in their investigation based on the findings of Barrett and Kline (1981), concluding that the difference in ratios 1.25:1 and 31:1 was not a significant contributor to results obtained in the factor stability. Additionally, Arrindell and van der Ende (1985) concluded that ratios of 1.3:1 and 19.8:1 did not impact the factor stability.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…Only some of the authors recognized this flaw. For example, Nagy et al (2014) reported that "the sample size employed in conducting the exploratory factor analysis is another potential limitation of the study," Rosenthal (2011) described, "the current study was limited by the relatively small nonprobability sample of university students," and Ho and Lin (2010) recognized that "the respondent sample size was small." Based in these results, we emphasize that future research should seek a larger sample size (minimum ratio of 10:1) to increase the credibility of the results and thus obtain a more exact outcome in the psychometric analysis.…”

Section: Ten Main Limitations Reported In the Scale Development Procementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Scale development: ten main limitations and recommendations to improve future research practices

Morgado

Meireles

Neves

et al. 2017

Psicol. Refl. Crít.

403

387

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The scale development process is critical to building knowledge in human and social sciences. The present paper aimed (a) to provide a systematic review of the published literature regarding current practices of the scale development process, (b) to assess the main limitations reported by the authors in these processes, and (c) to provide a set of recommendations for best practices in future scale development research. Papers were selected in September 2015, with the search terms "scale development" and "limitations" from three databases: Scopus, PsycINFO, and Web of Science, with no time restriction. We evaluated 105 studies published between 1976 and 2015. The analysis considered the three basic steps in scale development: item generation, theoretical analysis, and psychometric analysis. The study identified ten main types of limitation in these practices reported in the literature: sample characteristic limitations, methodological limitations, psychometric limitations, qualitative research limitations, missing data, social desirability bias, item limitations, brevity of the scale, difficulty controlling all variables, and lack of manual instructions. Considering these results, various studies analyzed in this review clearly identified methodological weaknesses in the scale development process (e.g., smaller sample sizes in psychometric analysis), but only a few researchers recognized and recorded these limitations. We hope that a systematic knowledge of the difficulties usually reported in scale development will help future researchers to recognize their own limitations and especially to make the most appropriate choices among different conceptions and methodological strategies.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Ten Main Limitations Reported In the Scale Development Procementioning

confidence: 99%

Scale development: ten main limitations and recommendations to improve future research practices

Morgado

Meireles

Neves

et al. 2017

Psicol. Refl. Crít.

403

387

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Under this framework, scholars have studied stakeholders’ support (Becker‐Blease and Sohl 2015; Nagy et al . 2014; Shepherd 1999) and their perceptions of organizations’ age and other dimensions of newness related to the challenges of adaptation (Choi and Shepherd 2005). Findings indicate that the older the organization, the greater the chance that stakeholders will support it, but also that stakeholders perceive certain features of newness (e.g.…”

Section: New Venture Survival: Analysis Of the Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

New Venture Survival: A Review and Extension

Soto-Simeone

Sirén

Antretter

2020

Int J Management Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper provides an evaluative overview of the new venture survival literature. Since Stinchcombe's primary attempt to explain the mortality rates of new ventures, different research fields, including entrepreneurship, management and sociology, have devoted considerable attention to the antecedents of new venture survival. Despite this lively research commitment, a comprehensive review of the literature on new venture survival-as one of the most essential performance measures for new ventures-is missing. Covering 54 years of research, this paper provides an overview of the factors affecting new venture survival and highlights important methodological aspects in this research field. The review concludes by discussing opportunities for future research.

show abstract

“… 2. Though proxy measurement of legitimacy is not ideal (e.g., B. G. Nagy, Blair, & Lohrke, 2014), it is appropriate given our broad research question and study design. …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Proposing a Financial Legitimacy Threshold in Emerging Ventures

Rutherford

Tocher

Pollack

et al. 2016

Group & Organization Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Two decades of informative research has asserted that legitimacy attainment is essential to the survival and growth of emerging ventures, yet little empirical research has been conducted to either (a) validate the notion that emerging ventures transition from pre-legitimacy to legitimacy, or (b) identify when such a transition happens for the average new venture. Hence, the present research seeks to begin bridging this substantial gap by introducing and testing the notion that a financial legitimacy threshold (FLT) exists within emerging ventures. Using attainment of financing as a proxy for initial legitimacy, we test our hypothesis that an FLT exists on two large, independent data sets—the 1998 ( N = 3,033) and 2003 ( N = 3,751) Surveys of Small Business Finances. Results indicate that emerging ventures tend to finally transition to legitimacy and, thus, substantially shed external liabilities of newness at 12 years of age, six employees, and $379,000 in sales. Our findings that an FLT exists advance the literature by (a) suggesting that new venture legitimacy is a dichotomous variable that emerging firms either do or do not possess, and (b) articulating a point in size, age, and revenue that average emerging ventures must achieve before they are able to substantially neutralize external newness liabilities via legitimacy attainment.

show abstract

Developing a scale to measure liabilities and assets of newness after start-up

Cited by 23 publications

References 58 publications

Scale development: ten main limitations and recommendations to improve future research practices

Scale development: ten main limitations and recommendations to improve future research practices

New Venture Survival: A Review and Extension

Proposing a Financial Legitimacy Threshold in Emerging Ventures

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About