Suchergebnisse

This Doctoral Thesis focuses on the study of individual behaviours as a result of organizational affiliation. The objective is to assess the Entrepreneurial Orientation of individuals proving the existence of a set of antecedents to that measure returning a structural model of its micro-foundation. Relying on the developed measurement model, I address the issue whether some Entrepreneurs experience different behaviours as a result of their academic affiliation, comparing a sample of 'Academic Entrepreneurs' to a control sample of 'Private Entrepreneurs' affiliated to a matched sample of Academic Spin-offs and Private Start-ups. Building on the Theory of the Planned Behaviour, proposed by Ajzen (1991), I present a model of causal antecedents of Entrepreneurial Orientation on constructs extensively used and validated, both from a theoretical and empirical perspective, in sociological and psychological studies. I focus my investigation on five major domains: (a) Situationally Specific Motivation, (b) Personal Traits and Characteristics, (c) Individual Skills, (d) Perception of the Business Environment and (e) Entrepreneurial Orientation Related Dimensions. I rely on a sample of 200 Entrepreneurs, affiliated to a matched sample of 72 Academic Spin-offs and Private Start-ups. Firms are matched by Industry, Year of Establishment and Localization and they are all located in the Emilia Romagna region, in northern Italy. I've gathered data by face to face interviews and used a Structural Equation Modeling technique (Lisrel 8.80, Joreskog, K., & Sorbom, D. 2006) to perform the empirical analysis. The results show that Entrepreneurial Orientation is a multi-dimensional micro-founded construct which can be better represented by a Second-Order Model. The t-tests on the latent means reveal that the Academic Entrepreneurs differ in terms of: Risk taking, Passion, Procedural and Organizational Skills, Perception of the Government, Context and University Supports. The Structural models also reveal that the main differences between the two groups lay in the predicting power of Technical Skills, Perceived Context Support and Perceived University Support in explaining the Entrepreneurial Orientation Related Dimensions.

We study how becoming an entrepreneur affects academic scientists' research. We propose that entrepreneurship will shift scientists' attention away from intradisciplinary research questions and toward new bodies of knowledge relevant for downstream technology development. This will propel scientists to engage in exploration, meaning they work on topics new to them. In turn, this shift toward exploration will enhance the impact of the entrepreneurial scientist's subsequent research, as concepts and models from other bodies of knowledge are combined in novel ways. Entrepreneurship leads to more impactful research, mediated by exploration. Using panel data on the full population of scientists at a large research university, we find support for this argument. Our study is novel in that it identifies a shift of attention as the mechanism underpinning the beneficial spillover effects from founding a venture on the production of public science. A key implication of our study is that commercial work by academics can drive fundamental advances in science.

Extant theory suggests that candidates with an unfocused identity—those spanning different categories—suffer from a valuation penalty because evaluators are confused by their profile and concerned they lack the required skills. We argue that unfocused candidates may be penalized for another reason; they threaten established social boundaries. This happens in contexts where evaluators act as gatekeepers for social entities, such as professions. We test how the penalty applied to unfocused candidates varies in an academic accreditation process, a setting where evaluators decide on admitting candidates to an academic discipline and where candidates' prior performance is observable. We find using data on the 2012 national scientific qualification in Italian academia that the valuation penalty applied to unfocused (multidisciplinary) candidates was most pronounced for the most high-performing candidates. High-performing yet ill-fitting candidates threaten the distinctiveness and knowledge domain of the discipline and are hence penalized by evaluators. High-performing multidisciplinary candidates suffered the greatest penalty in small and distinctive academic disciplines and when accreditors were highly typical members of their discipline. Our theory and findings suggest that the categorical imperative may be driven not only by cognitive or capability considerations as typically argued in the literature but also, by attempts to maintain social boundaries.Supplemental Material: The e-companion is available at https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2022.1610 .