Perceived risks and choices in entrepreneurs' new venture decisions

Though risk plays a central role in most entrepreneurial decision making, little empirical research has explicitly examined how the elements of risk, risk perceptions, and entrepreneurs' propensities to take risks influence choices among potentially risky entrepreneurial ventures. This experimental study asked a sample of entrepreneurs leading America's fastest growing firms to make choices among a series of hypothetical new ventures. The results indicate that such choices are influenced by the risks inherent in the new ventures, as evidenced by the pattern of outcomes anticipated in each venture, the entrepreneurs' differing perceptions of those risks, and differences in their personal propensities to take risks.The subjects in our sample of entrepreneurs tended not to choose ventures having a high degree of variability in their pattern of anticipated outcomes. This avoidance of outcome variability suggests that the sensitivity analyses commonly prescribed for examining new venture attractiveness may inhibit risk taking, and may deter potential investors from investing in their firms. New approaches to assessing and presenting new venture risk, other than the traditional best case/expected case/worst case approach, may be advisable, as well as sufficiently through market research to provide evidence of the degree to which market acceptance is likely for the venture's products or services.We also found an effect of differences in risk propensities among entrepreneurs on their new venture choices. This effect suggests not only that entrepreneurs should be wary of any biases they bring to their new venture decisions, but that prospective investors should consider the degree to which entrepreneurs in whom they choose to invest are well-matched to the investors' own risk-taking propensities.Finally, while our sample of entrepreneurs tended to shun high levels of variability in their new venture choices, they appeared willing to accept a considerable degree of hazard, or possible downside, in their new venture choices, presumably in pursuit of potentially significant gains. Entrepreneurs are advised to seek a clear understanding of the downside entailed in their proposed ventures, and develop strategies to mitigate the likelihood of adverse outcomes. Thus they will not jeopardize chances for near term success and attracting support of investors and others in later stages of the venture or in subsequent ventures.Our research did not attempt to examine how our subjects' choices would have played out in terms of performance, but the apparent biases which entrepreneurs' risk propensities bring to their assessment of proposed new ventures is a potentially important issue that merits further scrutiny. On one hand, such biases may lead to patterns of suboptimal decisions. On the other hand, our results suggest that investors should entrust their new venture investments to entrepreneurs whose risk propensities (and perhaps other personal characteristics) best match the needs of both the opportunity at hand and the investor's objectives. As many venture capitalists attest, the management of a proposed new venture should lie at the heart of their investment decision.     

Entrepreneurs as prime targets: Insights from Mexican ventures on the link between venture visibility and crime of varying severity

This study addresses entrepreneurs as targets of crime. Leveraging insights from strategic responses to institutional pressures as the main theoretical frame, coupled with supporting insights from routine activities theory and interview data from 14 entrepreneurs who have been victims of crime, we introduce entrepreneur-led ventures becoming targets of crime via their engagement in routine activities that increase venture visibility. We then conceptualize that crime severity pushes entrepreneurs toward venture visibility-reduction responses, such as truncating growth, relocating, or discontinuing the venture. Survey data from 87,486 legally registered entrepreneur-led ventures in Mexico provide strong support for the relationships in our theoretical model. We find that as routine venture activities increase, entrepreneurs encounter crime of increasing severity, with the routine venture activity of making transactions at a bank serving as the strongest attractor of crime. Building on these findings, we observe an indirect effect through crime severity such that the choice to relocate the venture is the most likely response to being targeted by criminals. Our results advance the literature at the intersection of crime and entrepreneurship, especially in developing economies, and offers venture visibility as a mechanism that shapes both criminals' targeting of ventures and entrepreneurs' attempts to reduce being targeted.     

Will the startup succeed in your eyes? Venture evaluation of resource providers during entrepreneurs' informational signaling

Experienced founders and investors are arguably the venture community members most likely to possess needed financial and social resources for startups. We present a model of venture evaluation where entrepreneurs solicit these resource providers for needed financial and social resources. Our model addresses how resource providers' venture investment propensity influences their evaluation of entrepreneurs' informational signals and how their venture evaluation predicts their willingness to provide financial and social resources. We test our model using real-time decisions and find resource providers with founding experience (both non-investor founders and investors with founding experience) leverage their investment propensity more than non-founder investors when evaluating new ventures. In addition, our post-hoc analysis reveals that resource providers' founding experience is associated with their willingness to confer social resources. Overall, this paper focuses on the perspective of resource providers and addresses how their investment propensity, types of venturing experience, and venture evaluation influence their willingness to render resource support to new ventures.     

Does money matter?: Wealth attainment as the motive for initiating growth-oriented technology ventures

The desire to attain personal wealth has long been regarded as the foremost motive for entrepreneurship. Other goals and values, however, may also contribute to entrepreneurial motivation. Thus, the extent to which money matters relative to other motives is an empirical question. In this study we examine the role of wealth as the motive for the decision to found new ventures. Three focal questions guide our research: 1) does money matter more relative to other decision dimensions in deciding to start a new high-technology venture? 2) does money matter more to entrepreneurs compared to non-entrepreneurs? and 3) does money matter in absolute terms, that is, does a decision model that focuses solely on the motive of wealth attainment parsimoniously predict entrepreneurs' start-up decisions?We conducted in-depth interviews with 51 entrepreneurs and a control group of 28 senior managers who decided not to start ventures (non-entrepreneurs) in the high-technology industry in British Columbia to address our research questions. The motives we examined are wealth attainment and an aggregate of other dimensions identified by entrepreneurs and managers. We considered three components of values: participants' ratings of the importance of various decision dimensions, their rating of the salience of these dimensions, and their satisfaction with prior levels of attainment on those decision dimensions. We assessed beliefs as participants' perceived probability of attaining their desired level of a particular decision dimension in each of three alternatives: the position held at the time the venture decision was made, the venture itself, and the next best career alternative at that time. The data were analyzed to compare entrepreneurs' values and beliefs regarding wealth with an aggregate of other decision dimensions (our relative hypotheses), and with those of non-entrepreneurs (our comparative hypotheses).Our findings do not support the common perception that money is the only, or even the most important, motive for entrepreneurs' decisions to start new ventures. Wealth attainment was significantly less important to entrepreneurs relative to an aggregate of 10 other decision dimensions, and entrepreneurs did not rate wealth as any more important than did non-entrepreneurs. Non-entrepreneurs rated wealth as no more important than other motives. Wealth attainment was also significantly less salient to entrepreneurs' decisions to venture than were other motives. Non-entrepreneurs reported that wealth was significantly more salient to their decision against founding a venture than other dimensions. In fact, non-entrepreneurs rated wealth attainment as significantly more salient to their decision against founding than entrepreneurs rated it for their decision to proceed with starting a high-technology business. A significant number of entrepreneurs started businesses even when they believed that doing so offered them a lower probability of obtaining their most desired level of wealth than did one of their other alternatives.Satisfaction ratings and stated beliefs also dispute classical predictions. Just prior to making the decision to venture, the entrepreneurs in our study were as satisfied with wealth as they were with other decision dimensions. The non-entrepreneurs were actually more satisfied with wealth attainment than with other dimensions. A comparison of the groups revealed no difference in satisfaction with wealth attainment levels. Entrepreneurs did believe that their chances of attaining their desired level of wealth were much greater through founding a new high-technology venture than through their other alternatives. This difference in beliefs, however, was not significantly greater than their optimistic beliefs about chances of attaining desired levels of other dimensions. It was significantly higher compared to the non-entrepreneurs' belief difference measures for wealth. In fact, the entrepreneurs' stated beliefs regarding the chances of attaining their desired levels of all dimensions were higher than those of the non-entrepreneurs, suggesting that entrepreneurs were simply more optimistic at the time of their decision than non-entrepreneurs.Salience findings suggest that these optimistic beliefs about wealth did not motivate the founding decision alone.We can distinguish those people who successfully started ventures by their regard for wealth as a less salient factor, and their beliefs in higher chances of a venture producing monetary and other returns. Other motives, such as innovation, vision, independence, and challenge were more important and much more salient to this sample of entrepreneurs.Our findings have implications for practice, teaching, and research. Venture capitalists who partially base their assessment of entrepreneurs on the extent to which they are motivated to make a great deal of money may benefit from reconsideration of this criterion. We have evidence of one group of high-technology entrepreneurs who achieved success without placing much decision weight on attainment of personal wealth. Nascent entrepreneurs and those who teach entrepreneurship can use this empirical finding to argue two main points: 1) not all entrepreneurs found a business for personal wealth reasons, and 2) one need not be motivated by personal wealth attainment to be a successful entrepreneur. Similarly, theoretical models that assume money is the primary motive for entrepreneurial activity require re-examination. Future research in entrepreneurship should focus less on wealth attainment and more on other motives for the venturing decision. A multiple-attribute decision model may be able to more fully explain venturing decisions.     

Do serial entrepreneurs run successively better-performing businesses?

This paper investigates whether – consistent with theories of entrepreneurial learning by doing and resource acquisition – serial entrepreneurs' performance follows a rising trajectory over successive venturing spells. Or whether – consistent with theories of selective learning from failure and hubris – serial entrepreneurs perform better after experiencing a bad spell (and worse after experiencing a good spell). We test competing hypotheses about serial entrepreneurs' performance trajectories using Panel Study of Income Dynamics (PSID) data, which track the dynamic performance of a sample of American serial entrepreneurs for up to one-quarter of a century. The findings show that serial entrepreneurs obtain temporary benefits from spells of venturing which eventually die away. This implies that venturing generates benefits which spill over from one venture into subsequent ones, and it can provide a rationale for public policies which encourage re-entries by entrepreneurs, even if those entrepreneurs performed poorly in their first ventures.     

Venture capitalists and serial entrepreneurs

Habitual entrepreneurship is receiving growing attention, much of which has focused on entrepreneurs who have started more than one venture. This paper examines the importance of habitual entrepreneurs to the venture capital industry, with particular emphasis on those who have exited from an initial investment in the venture capitalist's portfolio, termed serial entrepreneurs. As venture capital markets mature, increasing numbers of entrepreneurs are likely to exit from their initial enterprises, creating a pool of entrepreneurs with the potential for embarking on subsequent ventures. Venture capitalists making investments may invest both in entrepreneurs starting new ventures and those who purchase a venture through a management buy-out or buy-in. On this wider basis, the paper develops a classification of types of serial venture. A number of issues are raised for venture capitalists, notably the relative attractiveness of reinvesting in exited entrepreneurs and the policy they adopt in tracking and assessing such individuals.The paper addresses venture capitalists' perspectives on investing in serial entrepreneurs based on a representative sample of 55 UK venture capitalists (a response rate of 48.7%, and a follow-up survey of those who had more extensive experience of serial entrepreneurs (23 respondents). The results of the survey show that despite a strong preference for using an entrepreneur who had played a major role in a previous venture, the extent to which exiting entrepreneurs are funded from their own portfolio again is limited, though there is more extensive use of such individuals in a consultancy capacity. In screening entrepreneurs exiting from previous ventures for subsequent investments, venture capitalists scored attributes relating to commercial awareness, experience in a particular sector, and personal ambition of the entrepreneur most highly.Venture capitalists do make extensive use of serial entrepreneurs who have exited from other venture capitalists' portfolios, primarily to lead management buy-ins. Indications from the survey are that venture capitalists rarely assess entrepreneurs formally at the time of exit and that it is unusual to maintain formal links with entrepreneurs after they have exited. These apparent shortcomings suggest that perhaps investment opportunities are being missed. Those venture capitalists preferring serial entrepreneurs generally had a larger volume of funds under investment and were rather older than those venture capitalists who do not prefer to use serial entrepreneurs, reflecting the possibility that longer established venture capitalists have had more opportunity and experience in relation to second-time entrepreneurs.Investment appraisal factors were subject to a principal components analysis to identify underlying dimensions/relationships between them. With respect to the general investment appraisal factors, five factors were identified. Two factors were related to track record; one of these reflected ownership experience, while the other represented management experience. The third factor was related to personal attributes such as age, knowledge, and family background. The fourth factor represented links to the funding institution, and the final factor (a single variable factor) concerned financial commitment. The principal components analysis for screening factors on management buy-ins produced a single factor comprising all variables. These factors were then subject to a multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA), with preference for use of a serial entrepreneur as the independent variable. The results suggest that there are significant differences between venture capitalists who prefer serial entrepreneurs and those who do not in respect to their business ownership experience, the length of their entrepreneurial careers, and the number of their previous ventures.The results of the study have implications for practitioners. First, the findings emphasize the importance of not considering previous venture experience in isolation but in the context of other key investment criteria. Second, the lack of strongly greater performance from serial, versus novice, entrepreneurs further emphasizes the care to be taken in assessing experienced entrepreneurs. Third, the relatively low degree of formal and rigorous post-exit assessment and monitoring by venture capitalists suggests that important opportunities to invest in experienced entrepreneurs may be missed.     

Networking Ability and the Financial Performance of New Ventures: Moderating Effects of Venture Size,Institutional Environment,and Their Interaction

Building on prior research, this study provides insights on the complex interaction between individual, organizational, and environmental factors in the field of new venture success. Specifically, we develop and test hypotheses on how venture size, institutional context, and their interaction moderate the effect of entrepreneurs' networking ability on the financial performance of new ventures. Based on a sample of 283 new ventures in Germany and Brazil—two countries that differ significantly in terms of their institutional frameworks—our analyses reveal moderating effects of venture size and the interaction between venture size and institutional environment.     

Missing the boat or sinking the boat: a study of new venture decision making

Taking two conceptualizations of risk, Dickson and Giglierano's [J. Mark. 50 (1986) 58] nautical analogy of entrepreneurial risk (sinking vs. missing the boat) to represent the likelihood of loss element of new venture risk, and March and Shapira's [Manage. Sci. 33 (1987) 1404] risk as hazard (boat size) to represent the magnitude of loss element of new venture risk, we investigated how two contextual factors, the suitability of entrepreneurs' skills and their sources of funds, and two individual differences factors, the entrepreneurs' risk propensities and their perceptions of risk, influence their new venture decision making. Metaphorically speaking, we found that most entrepreneurs would rather risk missing than sinking the boat, and that they preferred to pilot bigger craft than smaller ones. Perhaps surprisingly, our sample of highly successful entrepreneurs made relatively risk-averse choices, with 83% choosing either of the two ventures for which the chances for loss were lowest. We also found that the source of new venture funding—the entrepreneur's own money versus that of investors—influenced our subjects' choices between ventures whose chances for loss or gain differed. A similar effect was found for the entrepreneur's risk propensity. On the other hand, we found that the risk the entrepreneurs perceived in the choice set also influenced choices, but only where the magnitude of the new venture's potential gain or loss varied. When viewed in total, our study and results suggest a risk- and reward-based typology of new venture opportunities, one that may provide a conceptual foundation for future explorations of a variety of questions relevant for entrepreneurs and theorists alike.     

Can prosocial motivation harm entrepreneurs' subjective well-being?

Entrepreneurship research on prosocial motivation has outlined its positive impact on well-being, but still little is known about its power, which may have deleterious personal consequences under certain conditions. In this study, we ask whether prosocial motivation can harm entrepreneurs' subjective well-being when they run a commercial venture. Embedded within a contingency perspective informed by self-determination theory, we build on longitudinal survey data to explain the effect of prosocial motivation on entrepreneurs' overall life satisfaction. Our analysis demonstrates that prosocial motivation has a negative effect on entrepreneurs' life satisfaction due to increased levels of stress. However, our findings show that the negative effect of prosocial motivation dissipates when perceived autonomy at work is high compared to when it is low. Overall, our research raises questions on the role of prosocial motivation for entrepreneurs' subjective well-being and, in particular, discusses its potential “dark side” in the context of commercial entrepreneurship.Executive summaryCan there be a “dark side” in helping others? If so, how can we better understand under what conditions it emerges? Entrepreneurship research conventionally presents prosocial motivation as a positive driver for social venture creation and entrepreneurs' well-being. However, we have little knowledge about the consequences of prosocial motivation when we move outside the social entrepreneurship context. When prosocially motivated entrepreneurs lead a commercial venture, they face the difficult task of balancing the desire to help others with the financial requirements of the business. The challenge of simultaneously accomplishing commercial and prosocial goals can result in a stressful experience that is detrimental to the entrepreneur's well-being. In this study, we ask whether and under what circumstances prosocial motivation can harm entrepreneurs' well-being.Embedded in a contingency perspective informed by self-determination theory, this article expands our knowledge on the effects of prosocial motivation in the context of commercial entrepreneurship. We draw from original longitudinal survey data on 186 entrepreneurs in the United Kingdom to demonstrate that prosocial motivation causes entrepreneurs stress and through that stress has a negative effect on their life satisfaction. We also show that the negative effect of prosocial motivation diminishes when the degree of autonomy entrepreneurs perceive in the pursuit of daily work tasks is high. To explore the uniqueness of the entrepreneurial context, we run a comparative analysis with a sample of 544 employees. This analysis confirms that stress fully mediates the negative relationship between prosocial motivation and subjective well-being, but for employees, this negative effect disappears when their level of intrinsic motivation—the desire to expend effort based on enjoyment of the work itself—is high.Building on our findings, we generate several important contributions. First, we help develop an understanding of the “dark side” of prosocial motivation by demonstrating that under certain circumstances, the desire to help others can be detrimental to entrepreneurs' subjective well-being. Second, we expand knowledge about the link between prosocial motivation and well-being by considering the boundary conditions (perceived autonomy and intrinsic motivation) that influence the dynamics of their relationship. Third, we set the stage for further investigations that aim to clarify the relationship between motivation and perceived autonomy and its effect on personal outcomes across different work domains.The key insight of the study is that prosocial motivation creates a dilemma for entrepreneurs when operating a commercial business such that the desire to help others outside the context of immediate work tasks can harm their personal well-being. We also find that the perception of autonomy is key for commercial entrepreneurs to be able to realize their prosocial motivation without creating stressful situations. Extending our understanding of the conditions that shape the relationship between prosocial motivation and well-being among entrepreneurs would help in developing a more holistic notion of prosocial business venturing, one that includes the role of both commercial and social enterprising activities in contributing to personal and societal well-being.     

Surviving the emotional rollercoaster called entrepreneurship: The role of emotion regulation

The entrepreneurial journey is often experienced as an emotional rollercoaster, but we know very little about how entrepreneurs can ride it most effectively to increase their ventures' chances of survival. We investigate how entrepreneurs' habitual use of cognitive reappraisal and expressive suppression – two well-established types of emotion regulation – impact on the likelihood of their venture surviving. Drawing on a sample of 183 technology ventures, we find that both regulation types are generally associated with a lower survival likelihood, but that these effects depend on the venture's performance. Our study contributes to the literatures on emotions and new venture survival in entrepreneurship and to the emotion regulation literature.     

The Corridor Principle

This article discusses how many entrepreneurs create multiple ventures, and thereby apparently lengthen the duration of their entrepreneurial careers. A new concept, called the Corridor Principle, is proposed as a possible explanation of the multiple venture phenomenon. The Corridor Principle states that the mere act of starting a venture enables entrepreneurs to see other venture opportunities they could neither see nor take advantage of until they had started their initial venture.The Corridor Principle presents an alternative model to the linear single venture career model, embodied by such celebrity entrepreneurs as Ray Kroc of MacDonald' s and Kenneth Olsen of Digital Equipment Corp. Six hypotheses test expectations about the timing and duration of entrepreneurial careers, as well as the relationship between entrepreneurial career length and the creation of multiple ventures.The findings strongly support: • the position that entrepreneurship is a dynamic, multi-venture process for a great many entrepreneurs the rule, rather than the exception. • the existence of a positive correlation between finding at least a second venture and realizing a longer entrepreneurial career. Though there are a variety of explanations for this, and the patterns include both sequential and overlapping ventures, the net effect of creating multiple ventures appears to produce a longer entrepreneurial career. • the position that significant numbers of entrepreneurs create their second venture very early in their entrepreneurial careers especially when contrasted to the group of ex-entrepreneurs, who create multiple ventures (if at all) at a slower rate and later in their careers.Overall, these observations reinforce the notion of the Corridor Principle. Though who can and cannot take advantage of the Corridor Principle is not entirely revealed by the data, some indication exists that an entrepreneurs ability to use Corridor Principle strategy to prolong his or her career is related both to age at startup, and to conscious anticipation and preparation for an entrepreneurial career.The main implications for entrepreneurship practitioners, advisors, researchers, teachers and students are these: Whether studying the entrepreneurial process or planning to start an entrepreneurial career, a long-term view should be taken, one that includes the likely possibility of multiple ventures. The minimum economic returns of earlier ventures can be lower than previously thought if these ventures provide entry to subsequent ventures that possess higher (more acceptable) returns to the entrepreneur. The evidence thus far available indicates that the creation of subsequent ventures occurs relatively quickly when corridors of opportunity become visible and attainable after earlier ventures are established. The likelihood of career failure, as opposed to venture failure, may be lowered if one selects earlier ventures based on their potential to reveal follow-on-venture opportunities that the entrepreneur can investigate and possibly pursue.     

Take the money or run? Investors' ethical reputation and entrepreneurs' willingness to partner

Drawing on the multi-principal–agent perspective, this research models the influence of venture capitalists' reputation for ethical behavior on entrepreneurs' willingness to partner decisions. We test our model using a two-study design. Study one, a conjoint experiment, revealed that explicit knowledge of past unethical behavior negatively affects entrepreneurs' willingness to partner. Interaction effects revealed that factors previously shown to influence the entrepreneurs' evaluations—investor value-add and investment track record—become largely contingent upon and often subjugated by investors' ethical reputation. Study two, a traditional between-subjects scenario experiment, revealed that when entrepreneurs develop their own perceptions about the ethicality of an investor's prior behaviors, the ethical dimension remains highly influential. Further, we find that as the consequences of rejecting funding become more severe (e.g., possible bankruptcy), entrepreneurs become increasingly willing to partner with unethical investors. We also find that high fear of failure entrepreneurs are less willing to partner with unethical investors than their low fear of failure counterparts.     

The right touch of pitch assertiveness: Examining entrepreneurs' gender and project category fit in crowdfunding

Scholars have devoted significant attention to the role of entrepreneurs' communication, and gender in crowdfunding. Yet, how female and male entrepreneurs can effectively configure their assertive communication style and the role gender norms within project categories play in shaping crowdfunders' evaluations of entrepreneurs' communication style remains unanswered. To address this, we conduct an exploratory qualitative comparative case analysis (QCA) of 1600 entrepreneurs who pitched their ventures on Kickstarter. From prior research, we identified four distinct kinds of assertive language (certain, power, social, tentative) and explore how female and male entrepreneurs' configurations of assertive language relate to crowdfunding success and failure in male-dominated and female-dominated contexts. We found six pitch assertiveness themes, two associated with success, two associated with failure, and two where success versus failure depends on nuanced considerations of the entrepreneur's gender and the gendering of the context. Our study extends our understanding of communication and gender in crowdfunding.     

Venture capitalists' decision criteria in new venture evaluation

What criteria do venture capitalists use to make venture investment decisions? The criteria venture capitalists use to make their venture investment decisions are of interest for several reasons. First, venture capitalists are conspicuously successful in their investment decisions. The success rate of venture capital-backed ventures is significantly higher than the success rate of new ventures generally (Dorsey 1979: Davis and Stetson 1984). A better understanding of the criteria used could lead to a better understanding of the reasons for this success.Second, a better understanding of the criteria for successful new ventures could lead to an improvement in the success rate of new ventures. Although there is no clear agreement on the precise rate, the failure rate among new ventures is generally viewed as significantly higher than the average failure rate (Dun and Bradstreet 1984; Van de Ven 1980; Shapero 1981).Finally, venture capitalists' investment criteria are of enormous import to entrepreneurs seeking venture funding. Such entrepreneurs require a significant infusion of capital in order to grow their businesses, and knowledge of the criteria sought by venture capitalists can aid entrepreneurs in gaining the necessary financing.This study attempts to uncover the criteria used by venture capitalists through semistructured interviews and verbal protocol analysis of venture capitalists' evaluations of actual venture proposals. Sixteen verbal protocols—in which the participants “think aloud” as they review business proposals— were made of venture capitalists' venture evaluation decisions.The findings of this study suggest that venture capitalists screen and assess business proposals very rapidly: the subjects in this study reached a GO/NO-GO decision in an average of less than six minutes on initial screening and less than 21 minutes on proposal assessment. In venture capitalists' initial proposal screening, key criteria identified include fit with the venture firm's lending guidelines and the long-term growth and profitability of the industry in which the proposed business will operate. In the second stage of proposal assessment, the source of the business proposal also played a major role in the venture capitalists' interest in the plan, with proposals previously reviewed by persons known and trusted by the venture capitalist receiving a high level of interest.In addition to the specific criteria identified and how they were used in reaching GO/NO-GO decisions, the findings of this study also were surprising for the lack of importance venture capitalists attached to the entrepreneur/entrepreneurial team and the strategy of the proposed venture during these early stages of the venture evaluation process.     

How On‐the‐Job Embeddedness Influences New Venture Creation and Growth

This study aims to answer why some employees choose to start their own ventures, whereas others choose to seek jobs in other organizations after leaving their current employment. Drawing insights from knowledge‐based view and social capital theory, we examine the impact of on‐the‐job embeddedness on the decision of employee entrepreneurship, industry choice, and new venture growth. We argue that on‐the‐job embeddedness provides key resources for employees to start new ventures and grow them. We test our hypotheses with Panel Study of Entrepreneurial Dynamics (PSED) data. Our results show that on‐the‐job embeddedness increases the probability of employees becoming entrepreneurs. Once they decide to become entrepreneurs, those employees with high on‐the‐job embeddedness are more likely to start new ventures in the industry in which they worked before. Moreover, employees' on‐the‐job embeddedness has a positive impact on new venture growth.     

Moving on: Narrative identity reconstruction after entrepreneurial failure

Despite increasing interest in the narratives of entrepreneurial failure, the understanding of how entrepreneurs reconstruct their identity as they advance from experiences of failure to new ventures remains partial. Based on a narrative analysis of 49 entrepreneurs' experiences, we uncover three narrative types used by entrepreneurs when moving on: shielding, transformation, and authenticity. In particular, we elaborate on how the entrepreneurs employ specific discursive practices in their narratives to deal with three central aspects of identity reconstruction: construction of responsibility, identity transition, and identity validation. Thus, our analysis elucidates the narrative underpinnings of dealing with failure and deepens our understanding of entrepreneurial identity construction in the context of moving on.     

Challenges in predicting new firm performance

Research examining predictors of new firm performance is clearly of interest to entrepreneurs and to those who provide advice and funds for their ventures. A growing body of research has examined the influence upon performance of such variables as entrepreneurs' characteristics, processes of founding, venture attributes, and environmental characteristics. However, considered as a whole, this research has shown mixed results and limited findings to date.This paper considers some of the challenges that arise in attempting to predict new firm performance. A key factor is the heavy dependence of new ventures upon environmental developments, many of which may be very difficult to predict. All firms are impacted by the environment, but new ventures have a concentration of risk upon a few products or services, narrow markets, and a few key resources. Thus, well-conceived ventures can fail because of unforeseen environmental shocks and the lack of “deep pockets” to ride out hard times. These same factors can cause new firm performance to swing widely, confounding attempts to identify predictors of good or poor performance.There are also challenges because many entrepreneurs pursue personal goals, some of which are noneconomic in nature. Thus, decisions about whether to found ventures, about how vigorously to grow them, or about whether or not to close down marginal businesses are all influenced by the personal values of entrepreneurs.The diversity of ventures, encompassing firms that differ greatly in scale and potential, complicates the task of determining predictors of performance. It may be that the influence of a particular variable, such as management experience, varies by type of venture. Previous research has also used a variety of performance measures, making comparisons across studies more difficult. Little has been done to determine whether the factors that enhance one measure of performance, such as survival, are the same as those that lead to others, such as growth or profitability.Previous research has been hampered by inadequate theoretical frameworks and, in some cases, by inappropriate methods of analysis. In addition, past research often could have been characterized by a tendency to examine variables that were easy to study, rather than those that were important.Despite limited success to date, we should not forsake research on predictors of new venture performance. The challenges discussed probably put limits on our ability to predict performance of individual ventures. However, the field of study is young and there is much that can be done to add to our understanding. The paper then develops recommendations for future research, noting that each of the challenges considered raises specific research opportunities.     

Start‐up Motivations and Growth Intentions of Minority Nascent Entrepreneurs

Firm growth is widely considered to be a measure of success for entrepreneurial businesses. Data indicate that there are systematic differences between minority and nonminority‐owned firms with respect to growth. Black entrepreneurs are 50 percent more likely to engage in start‐up activities than white entrepreneurs, however, black‐owned firms are smaller and less profitable than their white‐owned counterparts. Following the effort–performance–outcome–logic of expectancy theory and using data from the Panel Study of Entrepreneurial Dynamics (PSED), our paper investigates the differences between black and white entrepreneurs' motivations to start and intentions to grow a new venture. Findings indicate that there are significant differences in motivations between black and white entrepreneurs both in starting and in their intentions to grow the new venture. Implications for future research are discussed.     

The extent and nature of opportunity identification by experienced entrepreneurs

Guided by insights from cognitive theories, this article explores the links between entrepreneurs' prior business ownership experience and their opportunity identification behavior. Hypotheses were tested using data from 630 entrepreneurs. Experienced entrepreneurs identified more opportunities and exploited more innovative opportunities with greater wealth creation potential. Entrepreneurs that had owned more than 4.5 businesses, however, identified fewer opportunities. The nature of prior business ownership experience also shaped opportunity identification behavior. An inverse U-shaped relationship was detected between the proportion of failed businesses relative to the number of businesses owned and the number of opportunities identified in a given period. Business failure experience was not associated with the innovativeness of exploited opportunities.     

Attributions to intuition in the venture founding process: Do entrepreneurs actually use intuition or just say that they do?

Even though entrepreneurs often cite the use of intuition as a basis for their venturing decisions, verifying that entrepreneurs are actually using intuition is very difficult. We distinguish between entrepreneurs' attributions to intuition and their actual use of intuition. We propose characteristics of entrepreneurs that increase the likelihood that they will attribute intuition as a basis for decisions during the venture founding process. We then delineate characteristics that make the development and effective use of entrepreneurial intuition more likely. Theoretical implications for researchers studying intuition and practical implications for entrepreneurs using intuition are discussed.