【顶级期刊SMJ创业研究速递】2019年4月中英文摘要汇总

Top management team nationality diversity, corporate entrepreneurship, and innovation in multinational firms    [SMJ 2月]

高管团队国籍多样性，公司创业与跨国企业创新

作者：

Christophe Boone1 | Boris Lokshin2 | Hannes Guenter2 | René Belderbos3

1 Antwerp Centre of Evolutionary Demography (ACED), Department of Management, Faculty of Applied Economics, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium

2 Department of Organization and Strategy, School of Business and Economics, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands

3 Department of Management, Strategy, and Innovation, Faculty of Economics and Business, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium

摘要：

本文综合了高阶理论和创新与跨国公司(MNCs)方面的文献开发出了何时以及为什么高管团队(TMTs)国籍多样性影响公司创业的解释框架，并且由全球知识来源多样性和跨国公司创新绩效提供证据。基于20个国家的165家制造业跨国公司的面板数据，本文验证了高管团队(TMTs)国籍多样性对公司创业的正效应，而创新只有在高管团队社会分层低、跨国公司位于国家权力距离较低的母国两者对公司创业的正效应。本文打开了高管团队对嵌入于不同文化情境中激发跨国公司创业与创新的战略角色。

We integrate insights from upper echelon theory and the literature on innovation and multinational corporations (MNCs) to develop a framework explaining when and why nationality diversity in top management teams (TMTs) affects corporate entrepreneurship—as evidenced by diversity in global knowledge sourcing—and through this innovation performance in MNCs. In a panel of 165 manufacturing MNCs based in 20 countries, we confirm that the positive effects of TMT nationality diversity on corporate entrepreneurship and innovation are only unleashed in TMTs with low social stratification and in MNCs located in home countries that are low in national power distance. Our study contributes to opening up the black box of the upper echelon's strategic role in spurring entrepreneurship and innovation in MNCs embedded in different cultures.

When does advice impact startup performance? [SMJ 3月]

什么时候建议会影响初创公司绩效？

作者：

Aaron Chatterji1,2 | Solène Delecourt3 | Sharique Hasan1 | Rembrand Koning4

1 Fuqua School of Business, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina

2 NBER, Cambridge, Massachusetts

3 Stanford Graduate School of Business, Stanford, California

4 Harvard Business School, Boston, Massachusetts

摘要：

为什么一些创业者成功而其他人失败了？本文揭示了创业者是否收到关于管理他们的员工的建议影响其创业公司的绩效。本文在印度进行了一项随机实地试验，共有100家高增长技术公司，其创始人从其他管理风格各异的企业家那里获得了亲身建议。本文发现创业者从同行其他创业者获得关于管理员工的正式方法的建议——制度化常规会议，一贯地设置目标以及给员工提供频繁的反馈——在2年之后相比那些从其他创业者获得关于管理员工的非正式方法增长了28%，并且失败概率降低了10%。拥有MBA学位和孵化器经验的创业者没有回答该问卷，表明正式训练会限制同行建议的传播。

Why do some entrepreneurs thrive while others fail? We explore whether the advice entrepreneurs receive about managing their employees influences their startup's performance. We conducted a randomized field experiment in India with 100 high-growth technology firms whose founders received in-person advice from other entrepreneurs who varied in their managerial style. We find that entrepreneurs who received advice from peers with a formal approach to managing people—instituting regular meetings, setting goals consistently, and providing frequent feedback to employees—grew 28% larger and were 10 percentage points less likely to fail than those who got advice from peers with an informal approach to managing people, 2 years after our intervention. Entrepreneurs with MBAs or accelerator experience did not respond to this intervention, suggesting that formal training can limit the spread of peer advice.

Entrepreneurship, innovation, and political competition: How the public sector helps the sharing economy create value  [SMJ 4月]

创业，创新，政治竞争：公共部门如何帮助分享经济创造价值

作者：

Yongwook Paik1 | Sukhun Kang2 | Robert Seamans3

1 Organization & Strategy Area, KAIST College of Business, Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology, Seoul, Korea

2 Strategy and Entrepreneurship Area, London Business School, London, U.K.

3 Department of Management and Organizations, Stern School of Business, New York University, New York

摘要：

随着最近共享经济的增长，监管机构必须经常在私人和公共利益之间取得适当的平衡，以最大限度地创造价值。在这篇文章中，本文政治竞争是解释城市是否适应或禁止共享平台的关键因素，并且这种关系在人口较多的城市和失业率较高的城市中得到缓和。本文使用包含2011-2015期间美国各城市共乘禁令的档案数据来检验本文的论点。本文还通过半结构化访谈补充这些数据。研究发现广泛支持了本文的论点，同时减轻潜在的内生性问题。我们的研究对非市场战略，创业和创新以及公共与私人部门合作文献具有重要意义。此外，我们的研究结果为共享经济的政策辩论提供了信息。

With the recent growth of the sharing economy, regulators must frequently strike the right balance between private and public interests to maximize value creation. In this article, we argue that political competition is a critical ingredient that explains whether cities accommodate or ban ridesharing platforms and that this relationship is moderated in more populous cities and in cities with higher unemployment rates. We test our arguments using archival data covering ridesharing bans in various U.S. cities during the 2011–2015 period. We supplement these data with semistructured interviews. We find broad support for our arguments while mitigating potential endogeneity concerns. Our study has important implications for nonmarket strategy, entrepreneurship and innovation, and public-private partnership literatures. In addition, our findings inform policy debates on the sharing economy.

END

作者：刘志阳，系上海财经大学商学院副院长、创业学院执行副院长、中国社会创业研究中心主任

本期我们分享了【顶级期刊SMJ创业研究速递】2019年4月中英文摘要汇总。如果您感兴趣并想进一步了解，欢迎阅读《创业画布》。

点击“阅读原文”或扫描右侧二维码购买《创业画布》

文章荐读：

- 图文编辑：王陆峰 -

阅读更多精彩内容

长按扫码关注我们