Search results

The study responds to the calls for multilevel approaches in entrepreneurship research and seeks to answer whether the relationships between personal values and entrepreneurship remain stable across different economic conditions, using the unemployment rate as a moderator. It pays attention to the solo self-employed and women, as these groups are particularly vulnerable when crises occur.

We use Schwartz's theory of human values, which has been understudied in entrepreneurship and follow a correlational research design with micro and macro variables. Multilevel logistic regression is applied to the data from the large sample of 151,032 individuals participating in six waves of the European Social Survey. Solo self-employed are distinguished from those employing others, and analyses are run separately for men and women to understand gender differences.

The findings show that self-direction and achievement are positively, and benevolence and security negatively related to entrepreneurship. The high unemployment rate lowers the positive relationships with self-direction and achievement and mitigates the negative relationship with security, but only for the solo self-employed and not for employers. Results mostly hold for both genders.

The study suggests that security-related values should not be omitted from entrepreneurship research focused on entrepreneurs' values. It also emphasizes the need to distinguish between various subgroups of entrepreneurs and their motivation, which is important for efficient active labor market policies.

The study utilizes multilevel analyses that account for individual- and country-level influences on entrepreneurial activity. It contributes to understanding how economic context influences value salience and supports the applicability of Schwartz's theory of human values in entrepreneurship.

Many individuals start a new firm each year, mainly intending to become independent or improve their financial situation. For most of them, the first years of operations mean a substantial investment of time, effort and money with highly insecure outcomes. This study aims to explore how entrepreneurs running new firms perform financially compared with the established ones and how this situation influences their well-being.

A questionnaire survey was completed in 2021 and 2022 by a representative sample of N = 1136 solo self-employed and microentrepreneurs in the Czech Republic, with dependent self-employed excluded. This study used multiple regressions for data analysis.

Early-stage entrepreneurs are less satisfied with their financial situation, have lower disposable income and report more significant financial problems than their established counterparts. The situation is even worse for the subsample of startups. However, this study also finds they do not have lower well-being than established entrepreneurs. While a worse financial situation is generally negatively related to well-being, being a startup founder moderates this link. Startup founders can maintain a good level of well-being even in financial struggles.

The results suggest that policies should focus on reducing the costs related to start-up activities. Further, policy support should not be restricted to new technological firms. Startups from all fields should be eligible to receive support, provided that they meet the milestones of their development. For entrepreneurship education, this study‘s results support action-oriented approaches that help build entrepreneurs’ self-efficacy while making them aware of cognitive biases common in entrepreneurship. This study also underscores that effectuation or lean startup approaches help entrepreneurs develop their startups efficiently and not deprive themselves of resources because of their unjustified overconfidence.

This study contributes to a better understanding of the financial situation and well-being of founders of new firms and, specifically, startups. The personal financial situation of startup founders has been a largely underexplored issue. Compared with other entrepreneurs, this study finds that startup founders are, as individuals, in the worst financial situation. Their well-being remains, however, on a comparable level with that of other entrepreneurs.

This study aims to examine the impact of coworking spaces (CWS) on the wellbeing and entrepreneurial satisfaction of remotely working micro-entrepreneurs, highlighting the role of these spaces beyond conventional work locations. It specifically investigates how CWS foster a supportive ecosystem for micro-entrepreneurs, supporting their professional journey.

Employing a mixed-methodological approach, this study uses nearest-neighbor matching and multiple regressions based on quantitative surveys from a representative sample of micro-entrepreneurs, including those working from CWS, and a qualitative focus group with frequent CWS users. This comprehensive approach allows for a nuanced exploration of the impacts of CWS on micro-entrepreneurs' wellbeing and satisfaction.

The study finds that micro-entrepreneurs experience significant benefits from utilizing CWS, most notably in terms of wellbeing and work–life balance. These spaces provide valuable support through community building, networking opportunities and structured work environments. The benefits of CWS are particularly pronounced for women and micro-entrepreneurs with young children, aiding in boundary management and mitigating the challenges of social isolation.

We provide clear implications for remotely working micro-entrepreneurs, especially women with young children at home, on why to use CWS as their primary locations. The findings also offer insights for policymakers and CWS providers, underlining the importance of designing CWS environments that meet micro-entrepreneurs' diverse needs.

This study contributes to the existing literature by providing a detailed examination of the utilization of CWS among micro-entrepreneurs and the impact of CWS on their wellbeing and entrepreneurial satisfaction.

Bullying affects at least one-third of the workers through either direct exposure or witnessing, both of which lead to compromised health, and as a result, reduced organizational effectiveness or productivity. However, there is very little evidence that organisations provide effective protection from bullying, and in fact, the converse appears to the case. The purpose of this paper to explore the role of both individual and organisational power in the creation and maintenance of the problem. Such an approach moves away from the specific practice of identifying “bullying” that typically engages targets and perpetrators in a dance that is really just around the edges (Sullivan, 2008) of a larger problem; a culture that permits the abuse of power and ill-treatment of workers, in both practices and through organisational politics.

This paper elucidates key problems with organisational response as identified in the literature and critically examines weak organisational response to workplace bullying using the power theory, arguing that while overt approaches to addressing bullying appear to be underpinned by a simplistic, functionalist understanding of power, practices on the ground are better explained by more sophisticated “second-dimension” theorists.

There is a need for organisations to move beyond the current individualistic understanding of bullying towards a more nuanced understanding of how anti-bullying policies and procedures are themselves an exercise in institutional power protecting and reinforcing dominant power structures.

The literature from which this paper is drawn is limited to studies published in English.

The authors advocate a realistic assessment of the role of both individual and organisational power in the creation and maintenance of workplace bullying, as a way forward to plan appropriate intervention.

Workplace bullying is problematic for organisations at several levels, and therefore for society.

That power is relevant to workplace bullying has been apparent since the work of Brodsky in 1976 and Einarsen's early work, this paper builds on a the more nuanced work of McKay (2014), D'Cruz and Noronha (2009), Liefooghe and MacDavey's (2010) and Hutchinson et al. (2010), exploring the organisational response to the raising of bullying issues by individual employees as an exercise of power.