|
|
Why Pretend to Start a Business? The Formation Mechanism of Symbolic Entrepreneurship:An Exploratory Study Based on Grounded Theory |
Liu Lihua,Wang Bingcheng |
(College of Economics and Management, Shandong University of Science and Technology, Qingdao 266590, China) |
|
|
Abstract With more people starting their own business, the phenomenon of "pretending to start a business" is also growing. This phenomenon doesn't reflect the basic characteristics of entrepreneurship such as innovation, adventure, and value creation, and wastes a lot of social and policy resources. This kind of entrepreneurship is called symbolic entrepreneurship in this study. Drawing on the research results of symbolic behavior, this study believes that symbolic entrepreneurship is a behavior choice driven by the entrepreneurial behavior′s symbolic significance which is essentially different from substantive entrepreneurship for creating value. Unfortunately, existing studies have focused on substantive entrepreneurial activities, and the relevant results can′t effectively explain the various forms of symbolic entrepreneurship in practice. There is a lack of in-depth discussion on the specific types, formation paths, and mechanisms of symbolic entrepreneurship.#br#To deeply understand the formation mechanism of symbolic entrepreneurship, this paper adopts an exploratory multiple-case study on 13 symbolic start-ups. Through the open coding of the main analysis data, 40 initial categories are summarized. Then, the initial categories are condensed into 11 main categories by axial coding. Finally, three paths of symbolic entrepreneurship are summarized according to the logical relationship of the main categories, and the formation mechanism of symbolic entrepreneurship is defined as the core category in the selective coding stage. According to the different external incentives and motives, symbolic entrepreneurship can be divided into three types: infectious entrepreneurship, strategic entrepreneurship and performance entrepreneurship.#br#Infectious entrepreneurship refers to the imitation behavior to repair the negative emotions generated by the entrepreneurial stimulation of partners. The entrepreneurial actions of partners trigger individual psychological comparison, awaken unhealthy emotions such as envy and jealousy, and cause the loss of psychological resources. To eliminate or alleviate psychological imbalance, individuals imitate partners' entrepreneurial behaviors. That is, the motivation of infectious entrepreneurship stems from the negative emotions aroused by partners' entrepreneurship, rather than the commercial value of entrepreneurial opportunities. Its entrepreneurial purpose is to show self-ability and social status through entrepreneurial behavior, adjust the relative position between itself and the comparison object, and rebuild a new psychological balance. In essence, it is a psychological resource recovery measure taken when psychological resources are lost.#br#Strategic entrepreneurship is an arbitrage behavior that uses the identity of entrepreneurs due to the information asymmetry between entrepreneurs and the government. Because of incomplete information and high supervision cost, the government cannot comprehensively, accurately and timely judge the actual process and expected effect of entrepreneurship, and usually determines the support strength based on the information provided by entrepreneurs. As a result, some individuals have the motivation to make an adverse selection by using information advantage. Driven by the arbitrage motivation, some individuals take entrepreneurship as a strategic means to obtain various policy "dividends" through the organizational form and behavior consistent with the institutional norms.#br#Performance entrepreneurship is an impression management behavior to meet social norms. In some regions or groups, the long-term commercial tradition or typical demonstration effect of entrepreneurship has promoted the formation of a cultural atmosphere highly recognized for entrepreneurship, which forms a generally recognized value orientation and social preference for entrepreneurial activities. Individuals have pressure to keep consistent with group values, traditional customs and public expectations. To obtain social recognition, individuals have the motivation to uphold their self-images and meet the expectations of the society for their role. Therefore, strategic entrepreneurship is a kind of resource conservation behavior to deal with external pressure and avoid the loss of psychological resources.#br#Based on social comparison theory information asymmetry theory, and impression management theory, this study analyzes the differences of three symbolic entrepreneurship in external incentives, entrepreneurial motivation and theoretical basis. It should be noted that the motivation formation of the three types of entrepreneurial behavior is not a single incentive, but a complex process of the joint action of multiple factors such as external environment, social network, and individual psychological characteristics. The main basis of classification is the difference between leading inducement and leading motivation.#br#This study defines the research boundary between symbolic entrepreneurship and substantive entrepreneurship from the perspective of symbolic and substantive significance of entrepreneurial behavior and analyzes the differences between them in entrepreneurial purpose, driving factors, behavioral characteristics and entrepreneurs' attitudes. In addition, it explains "pretending to start a business " from the social construction significance brought by entrepreneurial behavior. The study helps to expand the research scope of entrepreneurial typology and enrich the research on entrepreneurial motivation.#br#
|
Received: 29 November 2021
|
|
|
|
|
[1] 林强,姜彦福,张健. 创业理论及其架构分析[J]. 经济研究,2001,47(9):85-94,96.[2] SEGAL S. Corporate value of enterprise risk management: the next step in business management [M]. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 2011.[3] ANDERSON N, POTOCNIK K, ZHOU J. Innovation and creativity in organizations: a state-of-the-science review, prospective commentary, and guiding framework[J]. Journal of Management, 2014, 40(5): 1297-1333.[4] 张玉利,杨俊,任兵. 社会资本、先前经验与创业机会——一个交互效应模型及其启示[J].管理世界,2008,24(7):91-102.[5] SHANE S, VENKATARAMAN S. The promise of entrepreneurship as a field of research[J]. Academy of Management Review, 2000,25(1):217-226.[6] 刘志阳,赵陈芳,杨俊. 中国创业学:学科、学术和话语体系[J]. 外国经济与管理,2021,43(12):51-67.[7] HOBFOLL S E, FREEDY J, LANE C, et al. Conservation of social resources: social support resource theory[J]. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 1990,7(4):465-478.[8] 江诗松,何文龙,路江涌. 创新作为一种政治战略:转型经济情境中的企业象征性创新[J].南开管理评论,2019,22(2):104-113.[9] DANDRIDGE T C, MITROFF I, JOYCE W F. Organizational symbolism:a topic to expand organizational analysis [J]. Academy of Management Review, 1980,5(1):77-82.[10] ZOTT C, HUY Q N. How entrepreneurs use symbolic management to acquire resources[J]. Administrative Science Quarterly, 2007,52(1):70-105. [11] WESTPHAL J D, ZAJAC E J. The symbolic management of stockholders: corporate governance reforms and shareholder reactions[J]. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1998,43(1):127-153.[12] 韦慧民,潘清泉. 新生创业者象征行为研究评介[J]. 工业技术经济,2013,32(5):153-160.[13] 薛红志,杨俊. 基于象征性行动的新企业资源整合机制研究[J]. 外国经济与管理,2009,31(6):1-9.[14] CLARKE J. Revitalizing entrepreneurship: how visual symbols are used in entrepreneurial performances[J]. Journal of Management Studies, 2011, 48(6):1365-1391.[15] 于晓宇,陈依. 创业中的印象管理研究综述与未来展望[J]. 管理学报,2019,16(8):1255-1264.[16] 段锦云,王朋,朱月龙. 创业动机研究:概念结构、影响因素和理论模型[J]. 心理科学进展,2012,20(5):698-704.[17] 曾照英,王重鸣. 关于我国创业者创业动机的调查分析[J].科技管理研究,2009,29(20):85-287.[18] BARON R A, DEW N, SARASVATHY S D, et al. Effectual versus predictive logics in entrepreneurial decision making: differences between experts and novices[J]. Journal of Business Venturing, 2009, 24(4):287-309.[19] 苏晓华,陈嘉茵,张书军,等. 求财还是求乐——创业动机、决策逻辑与创业绩效关系的探索式研究[J]. 科学学与科学技术管理,2018,39(2):116-129.[20] RYAN R M, DECI E L. Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being[J]. American Psychologist, 2000, 55(1):68-78.[21] 杨婵,贺小刚,王博霖. 精英身份与农民创业:趋名还是逐利[J]. 南方经济,2021(4):69-85.[22] KURATKO D F, HORNSBY J S, NAFFZIGER D W. An examination of owner's goals in sustaining entrpreneruship[J]. Journal of Small Business Management, 1997,35(1):24-32.[23] HMIELESKI K M, CORBETT A C. The contrasting interaction effects of improvisational behavior with entrepreneurial self-efficacy on new venture performance and entrepreneur work satisfaction[J]. Journal of Business Venturing, 2008, 23(4):482-496.[24] 程建青,罗瑾琏,李树文,等. 创业动机与主观幸福感:社会规范的调节作用[J]. 科技进步与对策,2020,37(6):46-52.[25] BARON R A, MARKMAN G D. Beyond social capital:how social skills can enhance entrepreneurs′ success[J]. Academy of Management Executive, 2000,14(1):106-116.[26] SHEPHERD D, HAYNIE J M. Birds of a feather don′t always flock together: Identity management in entrepreneurship[J]. Journal of Business Venturing, 2009,24(4):316-337.[27] 王炳成,王敏,张士强. 实践出真知:商业模式创新失败的影响研究[J]. 研究与发展管理,2019,31(4):91-102.[28] 文崇一,肖新煌. 中国人:观念与行为[M]. 南京:江苏教育出版社,2006.[29] MENON T, THOMPSON L. Envy at work [J]. Harvard Business Review, 2010,88(4): 74-79.[30] 韩晓燕,迟毓凯. 自发社会比较中的威胁效应及自我平衡策略[J]. 心理学报,2012,44(12):1628-1640.[31] WOOD J V. Theory and research concerning social comparison of personal attributes[J]. Psychological Bulletin, 1989,106:231-248.[32] TAI K, NARAYANAN J, MCALLISTER D J. Envy as pain: rethinking the nature of envy and its implications for employees and organizations[J]. Academy of Management Review, 2012,37(1): 107-129.[33] 车诚,吴国华,张志红.社会比较倾向对消费者购买决策的影响——基于情感—理性决策视角[J/OL].中国管理科学, https://doi.org/10.16381/j.cnki.issn1003-207x.2020.1711.[34] 刘得格,李文东,陈文晶. 恶意妒忌和善意妒忌的影响因素与作用机制[J]. 心理科学进展,2017,25(2):342-357.[35] 张超,官建成. 基于政策文本内容分析的政策体系演进研究——以中国创新创业政策体系为例[J].管理评论,2020,32(5):138-150.[36] AKERLOF G A. A theory of social custom, of which unemployment may be one consequence[J]. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 1980, 94(4):749-775.[37] ASHFORTH B E, GIBBS B W. The double-edge of organizational legitimation[J]. Organization Science, 1990,1(2):177-194.[38] 郑馨,周先波,张麟. 社会规范与创业——基于62个国家创业数据的分析[J]. 经济研究,2017,52(11):59-73. |
|
|
|