Search results

This study aims to develop conceptual arguments about intrapreneurship relative to role theory.

The challenge to the intrapreneurship concept is that no single or combination of personality traits, individual characteristics or attitudes can fulfill the causes of the phenomenon, as these factors are context-bound. One explanation for individual- and macro-level contrasting outcomes is the diverging effect of expectations. The structural and interactionist perspective of sociology is used to understand the intrapreneurship concept because intrapreneurs live within a society and shape their course per the expectations of others.

Intrapreneurs have been trying to infer about what is seen as crucial individually related to interactions within the existing context; more importantly, acting in an intrapreneurship role can be defined and learned by expectations.

With the convenient expectations from other members, families or environments, organization members will value the innovation and self-direction of intrapreneurship more highly that such a taste for an acting role may be an important factor in the decision to become an intrapreneur.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, the paper emphasized for the first time that the consequences of exposure to social expectations for the development of intrapreneur roles, particularly the broad portfolios of skills and motivation, are relevant to intrapreneurship. Previous approaches depend on individuals, organizations or the environment to have different approaches to likely employees to be intrapreneurs. The paper first argues that context is important for understanding how and why context can be linked to individual intrapreneurs and how intrapreneurship can be defined as roles rather than a task or unique potential entrepreneurs.

This study aims to develop theoretical arguments about the factors promoting nascent intrapreneurship relative to role theory. These arguments principally draw on contributions from interactional and structural sociology. Fixed theoretical tools for intrapreneurship are not quite enough. So, structural and interactionist perspective of sociology is necessary to understand the intrapreneurship concept because intrapreneurs live in a society and shape their course per the expectations of others. Previous approaches depend on individual, organizations or environment to push potential employees to be intrapreneurs. Expectations may be a keystone for intrapreneurship because intrapreneurs have been trying to explain or make progress about what is seen as crucial; more importantly, they learn their roles.

This is a conceptual paper about explaining intrapreneurship. Foregoing literature has been trying to explain the phenomenon by individual, organizational or environment endeavors to transform employees to be intrapreneurs. Role theory stems from interactional and structural sociology. Promoting the internal entrepreneur process by overcoming resistance to switching to a more structured management approach and adopting management systems and processes in a timely way is still a vague approach. So, the structural and interactionist perspective of sociology is necessary to understand the concept because intrapreneurship is a contextual factor rather than activity.

Expectations can convey what others consider particularly important or necessary. Intrapreneurship is a type of personal entrepreneur role influenced by expectations.

Intrapreneurship is not solely entrepreneurship in organizations but is also governed by the specific combinations of circumstances generally outside of the organizational environment, such as families, coworkers and friends.

The present paper seeks to answer three primary research questions: how differentiation among subunits changes intrapreneurship role expectations, how the intrapreneurs’ role has been affected from unlike expectations and are group or team-level expectations on intrapreneurs’ roles distinctive than organization and individual levels.