Saurav Pathak

How culture moulds the effects of self-efficacy and fear of failure on entrepreneurship

We use data from the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor and the Global Leadership and Organizational Behavior Effectiveness study for 42 countries to investigate how the effects of individuals self-efficacy and of fear of failure on entrepreneurial entry are contingent on national cultural practices. Using multi-level methodology, we observe that the positive effect of self-efficacy on entry is moderated by the cultural practices of institutional collectivism and performance orientation. Conversely, the negative effect of fear of failure on entry is moderated by the cultural practices of institutional collectivism and uncertainty avoidance. We discuss the implications for theory and methodological development in culture and entrepreneurship.

What motivates entrepreneurial entry under economic inequality? The role of human and financial capital

Based on a multilevel analysis of nearly 120,000 observations across 31 countries between 2001 and 2008, we provide novel insights into the moderating effects that economic inequality may have on the distinct roles that human and financial capital play on different types of entrepreneurship. As inequality increases, both forms of capital become weaker deterrents of entry into necessity entrepreneurship, whereas for opportunity entrepreneurship, only financial capital becomes a stronger predictor of entry. We also show that, regardless of inequality levels, both human and financial capital exhibit decreasing marginal returns on the likelihood of entry into necessity entrepreneurship, and that in the case of opportunity entrepreneurship, financial capital exhibits increasing marginal returns. However, inequality does impact the magnitude of marginal returns. Additionally, our statistical analysis provides quantitative support to extant literature arguing that higher levels of economic inequality foster both types of entrepreneurship albeit having a stronger impact on necessity entrepreneurship, and that human and financial capital have distinct effects on entry into necessity versus opportunity entrepreneurship. All these findings have pertinent policy implications and shed light on the under-researched role of inequality on entrepreneurship.

Political Empowerment, Rule of Law, and Women's Entry into Entrepreneurship

Womens political leadership may contribute to womens entrepreneurship by removing existing constraints on the economic behavior of women, assuming these changes are then enforced. We examine the association of womens political power and a countrys rule of law with womens entrepreneurial entry, using the lobal ntrepreneurship onitor dataset combined with other indicators. Both variables are positively associated with womens entry into entrepreneurship, and the association between political empowerment. Entry into entrepreneurship is moderated by rule of law, with higher levels of womens political power having greater effects in countries with higher levels of rule of law. Implications are discussed.

Informal Institutions and Their Comparative Influences on Social and Commercial Entrepreneurship: The Role of In-Group Collectivism and Interpersonal Trust

We use insights from institutional theory to study how societal collectivism and societal trust facilitate or constrain the emergence of social entrepreneurship (SE) and commercial entrepreneurship (CE). Using 58,918 individual‐level responses obtained from the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM) survey of 27 countries and supplementing with country‐level data obtained from the World Values Survey (WVS) and the Global Leadership and Organizational Behavior Effectiveness (GLOBE) study, our results from multilevel analyses demonstrate that while societal collectivism decreases the likelihood of CE, it increases that of SE. Further, while societal trust influences both SE and CE positively, the strength of this positive influence is felt more strongly on SE than CE.

Inbound foreign direct investment and domestic entrepreneurial activity

There is an interesting and lively debate going on in the academic literature intersecting trade policy and entrepreneurship. Several studies have shown that inbound foreign direct investment (FDI) has a negative effect on rates of entrepreneurship, while others find the opposite – a higher rate of new firm creation associated with increased inbound FDI. We study the phenomenon using a cross-country analysis of data on entrepreneurs from 38 countries and from 2001 to − 2008. Results indicate that inbound FDI has negative associations with five types of entrepreneurship (nascent, new, early-stage, established, and high-growth) measured by the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor survey. In our discussion, we argue that our study supports the contention that studies counting new limited liability company registrations do not always measure the same thing as entrepreneurial entries (self-reports), leading to different, even opposite results when subjected to empirical analysis.

Economic Inequality and Social Entrepreneurship

This article explores the extent to which income inequality and income mobility—both considered indicators of economic inequality and conditions of formal regulatory institutions (government activism)—facilitate or constrain the emergence of social entrepreneurship. Using 77,983 individual-level responses obtained from the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM) survey of 26 countries, and supplementing with country-level data obtained from the Global Competitiveness Report of the World Economic Forum, our results from multilevel analyses demonstrate that country-level income inequality increases the likelihood of individual-level engagement in social entrepreneurship, while income mobility decreases this likelihood. Further, income mobility negatively moderates the influence of income inequality on social entrepreneurship, such that the condition of low income mobility and high income inequality is a stronger predictor of social entrepreneurship. We discuss implications and limitations of our study, and we suggest avenues for future research.

A Multi-Level Empirical Study of Ethnic Diversity and Shadow Economy as Moderators of Opportunity Recognition and Entrepreneurial Entry in Transition Economies

Our multi-level model about the relationship between opportunity recognition and entrepreneurial entry in transition economies suggests that ethnic fractionalization along with the size of the shadow economy are moderators of individual-level opportunity recognition. Whereas ethnic diversity increases entrepreneurial entries, a large informal sector appears to decrease them. We also find that opportunity recognition may be a more important predictor of entry when ethnic diversity is low and when the shadow economy is small. Thus, our study contributes to the literature examining the influence of contextual factors on entrepreneurial entry. Succinctly, ethnic diversity can substitute for opportunity recognition, whereas the informal economy increases its importance. Consequently, it appears that ethnic heterogeneity in transition economies may be a valuable driver of entrepreneurial entry even in the absence of opportunity recognition, while the size of the informal economy makes opportunity recognition dearer.

Inward foreign direct investment: Does it enable or constrain domestic technology entrepreneurship?

Whether or not foreign direct investment (FDI) is essential for domestic technological and economic development remains a contentious question. The controversy is illustrated by comparing the Celtic and Asian Tigers experiences from 1995 to 2000. Based on IMF and World Bank data in constant prices, Ireland and China averaged an annual growth rate of 8% in GDP per capita. However, FDI per capita grew at an average pace of 98% per year in Ireland, while in China it decreased by 1% -- absolute values averaged US

Entrepreneurship in Transition Economies: The Role of Corruption and Individual Attributes.

3,397 versus US

Culturally Endorsed Leadership Styles and Entrepreneurial Behaviors in Asia

144, respectively. This suggests that, rather than a one-policy-fits-all approach, customized policies are more appropriate; and, if any generalization can be made, it should be based on a country’s stage of economic development.