30 Years of Entrepreneurial Team Research: Review and Suggestions for Developing the Field

Stephanie Schoss; Malte Brettel; Rene Mauer

doi:doi:10.11648/j.sjbm.20210903.13

| Peer-Reviewed

30 Years of Entrepreneurial Team Research: Review and Suggestions for Developing the Field

Stephanie Schoss, Malte Brettel, Rene Mauer

Published in Science Journal of Business and Management (Volume 9, Issue 3)

Received: 7 June 2021 Accepted: 1 July 2021 Published: 13 July 2021

Views: Downloads:

Download PDF

Share This Article

Twitter
Linked In
Facebook

Abstract

This article provides a detailed review of entrepreneurial team (ET) research over 30 years across the fields of entrepreneurship, management, organizational science and psychology. 145 articles from 24 journals were identified, analyzed, and classified in the comprehensive, overarching Upper Echelons Input-Mediator-Outcome framework. This overview contributes by organizing ET research into its sub-domains, analyzing their historic developments and trends, providing guidance for positioning future research, and offering trend-based suggestions how the field can be further developed. Our analysis shows that 30 years ago, ET research was mainly concerned with the formation of ETs, and linking the founding team to venture success. During the last two decades, the focus shifted to deeper analyses of particular mediating variables, such as cognitive and affective emerging states. The most influential articles (by weighted citation) belong to the sub-domain of team composition, which has also become the most frequently studied field during the last 10 years. Authors around the world and from other scientific fields (especially management and organizational science) are now contributing to this domain, which was earlier confined mainly to entrepreneurship scholars from North America. The most widely addressed issues of concern are the lack of theoretical studies and longitudinal data, a bias towards the technology industry, the unavailability of primary data from new ventures, and conflicting findings, especially in the main trending sub-domain of team composition research and in particular on the impact of personality aspects and behavioural dynamics.

Published in	Science Journal of Business and Management (Volume 9, Issue 3)
DOI	10.11648/j.sjbm.20210903.13
Page(s)	162-177
Creative Commons	This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright	Copyright © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Science Publishing Group

Keywords

Entrepreneurship, Entrepreneurial Team Research, Input-Mediator-Output Framework, Literature Review, Content Analysis

References

[1]	Albornoz, C. A. (2008). Towards a set of trainable content on entrepreneurship education: a review of entrepreneurship literature from an educational perspective. Journal of Technology Management and Innovation, 3, pp. 86-98.
[2]	Amit, R., Glosten, L. and Muller, E. (1990). Entrepreneurial ability, venture investments, and risk sharing. Management Science, 36, pp. 1233-1246.
[3]	Arthur, W., Bell, S. T. and Edwards, B. D. (2007). A Longitudinal examination of the comparative criterion-related validity of additive and referent-shift consensus operationalizations of team efficacy. Organizational Research Methods, 10, pp. 35-58.
[4]	Beckman, C. M. (2006). The influence of founding team company affiliations on firm behavior. Academy of Management Journal, 49, pp. 741-758.
[5]	Beckman, C. M. and Burton, M. D. (2008). Founding the future: path dependence in the evolution of top management teams from founding to IPO. Organization Science, 19, pp. 3-24.
[6]	Beckman, C. M., Burton, M. D. and O'reilly, C. (2007). Early teams: the impact of team demography on VC financing and going public. Journal of Business Venturing, 22, pp. 147-173.
[7]	Bergh, D. D., Perry, J. and Hanke, R. (2006). Some predictors ofSMJ article impact. Strategic Management Journal, 27, pp. 81-100.
[8]	Berry, L. L. and Parasuraman, A. (1993). Building a new academic field—the case of services marketing. Journal of Retailing, 69, pp. 13-60.
[9]	Bird, B. J. (1989). Entrepreneurial Behaviour. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman and Company.
[10]	Birley, S. (1985). The role of networks in the entrepreneurial process. Journal of Business Venturing, 1, pp. 107-117.
[11]	Boone, S., Andries, P. and Clarysse, B. (2019). Does team entrepreneurial passion matter for relationship conflict and team performance? On the importance of fit between passion focus and venture development stage. Journal of Business Venturing, pp. 105984. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusvent.2019.105984.
[12]	Bouncken, R. B. (2004). Cultural diversity in entrepreneurial teams: findings of new ventures in Germany. Creativity and Innovation Management, 13, pp. 240-253.
[13]	Busenitz, L., Moesel, D. D., Fiet, J. O. and Barney, J. B. (2003). Entrepreneurship research in emergence: past trends and future directions. Journal of Management, 29, pp. 285-308.
[14]	Busenitz, L. W., Fiet, J. O. and Moesel, D. D. (2005). Signaling in venture capitalist-new venture team funding decisions: does it indicate long-term venture outcomes? Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 29, pp. 1-12.
[15]	Cardon, M. S., Wincent, J., Singh, J. and Drnovsek, M. (2009). The nature and experience of entrepreneurial passion. Academy of Management Review, 34, pp. 511-532.
[16]	Cardon, M. S., Glauser, M., Murnieks, C. Y. (2017). Passion for what? Expanding the domains of entrepreneurial passion. Journal of Business Venturing, 8, pp. 24-32.
[17]	Chaganti, R. S., Watts, A. D., Chaganti, R. and Zimmerman-Treichel, M. (2008). Ethnic-immigrants in founding teams: effects on prospector strategy and performance in new Internet ventures. Journal of Business Venturing, 23, pp. 113-139.
[18]	Chowdhury, S. (2005). Demographic diversity for building an effective entrepreneurial team: is it important? Journal of Business Venturing, 20, pp. 727-746.
[19]	Clarysse, B. and Moray, N. (2004). A process study of entrepreneurial team formation: the case of a research-based spin-off. Journal of Business Venturing, 19, pp. 55-79.
[20]	Cooper, A. C. and Bruno, A. V. (1977). Success among high-technology firms. Business Horizons, 20, pp. 16-22.
[21]	Coultas, C. W., Driskell, T., Burke, C. S. and Salas, E. (2014). A conceptual review of emergent state measurement. Small Group Research, 45, pp. 671-703.
[22]	Dai, Y., Gukdo, B. and Fangsheng, D. (2019). The direct and indirect impact of gender diversity in new venture teams on innovation performance. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 43, pp. 419-436.
[23]	De Carolis, D. M., Litzky, B. E. and Eddleston, K. A. (2009). Why networks enhance the progress of new venture creation: the influence of social capital and cognition. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 33, pp. 527-545.
[24]	De Mol, E., Cardon, M. S., De Jong, B., Khapova, S. N. and Elfring, T. (2019). Entrepreneurial passion diversity in new venture teams: an empirical examination of short- and long-term performance implications. Journal of Business Venturing, pp. 105965. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusvent.2019.105965.
[25]	Eisenhardt, K. M. and Schoonhoven, C. B. (1990). Organizational growth: linking founding team, strategy, environment, and growth among U.S. semiconductor ventures, 1978-1988. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35, pp. 504-529.
[26]	Elo, S. and Kyngäs, H. (2007). The qualitative content analysis process. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 62, pp. 107-115.
[27]	Ensley, M. D., Hmieleski, K. M. and Pearce, C. L. (2006). The importance of vertical and shared leadership within new venture top management teams: implications for the performance of startups. The Leadership Quarterly, 17, pp. 217-231.
[28]	Ensley, M. D., Pearson, A. and Pearce, C. L. (2003). Top management team process, shared leadership, and new venture performance: a theoretical model and research agenda. Human Resource Management Review, 13, pp. 329-346.
[29]	Ensley, M. D. and Pearson, A. W. (2005). An exploratory comparison of the behavioral dynamics of top management teams in family and nonfamily new ventures: cohesion, conflict, potency, and consensus. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 29, pp. 267-284.
[30]	Foo, M.-D. (2011). Teams developing business ideas: how member characteristics and conflict affect member-rated team effectiveness. Small Business Economics, 36, pp. 33-46.
[31]	Foo, M.-D., Sin, H.-P. and Yiong, L.-P. (2006). Effects of team inputs and intrateam processes on perceptions of team viability and member satisfaction in nascent ventures. Strategic Management Journal, 27, pp. 389-399.
[32]	Foo, M.-D., Uy, M. A. and Baron, R. A. (2009). How do feelings influence effort? An empirical study of entrepreneurs’ affect and venture effort. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, pp. 1086-1094.
[33]	Foo, M. D., Kam Wong, P. and Ong, A. (2005). Do others think you have a viable business idea? Team diversity and judges' evaluation of ideas in a business plan competition. Journal of Business Venturing, 20, pp. 385-402.
[34]	Forbes, D. P., Borchert, P. S., Zellmer-Bruhn, M. E. and Sapienza, H. J. (2006). Entrepreneurial team formation: an exploration of new member addition. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 30, pp. 225-248.
[35]	Francis, D. H. and Sandberg, W. R. (2000). Friendship within entrepreneurial teams and its association with team and venture performance. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 25, pp. 5-26.
[36]	Franke, N., Gruber, M., Harhoff, D. and Henkel, J. (2006). What you are is what you like—similarity biases in venture capitalists' evaluations of start-up teams. Journal of Business Venturing, 21, pp. 802-826.
[37]	Franke, N. and Schreier, M. (2008). A meta-ranking of technology and innovation management/ entrepreneurship journals. Die Betriebswirtschaft, 68, pp. 185-216.
[38]	Furrer, O., Thomas, H. and Goussevskaia, A. (2008). The structure and evolution of the strategic management field: a content analysis of 26 years of strategic management research. International Journal of Management Reviews, 10, pp. 1-23.
[39]	Gartner, W. B., Shaver, K. G., Gatewood, E. and Katz, J. A. (1994). Finding the entrepreneur in entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 18, pp. 5-9.
[40]	Ginsberg, A. and Venkatraman, N. (1985). Contingency perspectives of organizational strategy: a critical review of the empirical research. Academy of Management Review, 10, pp. 421-434.
[41]	Harper, D. A. (2008). Towards a theory of entrepreneurial teams. Journal of Business Venturing, 23 (6), pp. 613-626.
[42]	Harrison, D. A., Price, K. H. and Bell, M. P. (1998). Beyond relational demography: time and the effects of surface- and deep-level diversity on work group cohesion. Academy of Management Journal, 41, pp. 96-107.
[43]	Hewlett, S. A., Marshall, M., Sherbin, L. (2013). How diversity can drive innovation. Harvard Business Review.
[44]	Hmieleski, K. M. and Baron, R. A. (2009). Entrepreneurs' optimism and new venture performance: a social cognitive perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 52, pp. 473-488.
[45]	Hmieleski, K. M. and Ensley, M. D. (2007). A contextual examination of new venture performance: entrepreneur leadership behavior, top management team heterogeneity, and environmental dynamism. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 28, pp. 865-889.
[46]	Hoang, H. and Gimeno, J. (2010). Becoming a founder: how founder role identity affects entrepreneurial transitions and persistence in founding. Journal of Business Venturing, 25, pp. 41-53.
[47]	Kamm, J. B. and Nurick, A. J. (1993). The stages of team venture formation: a decision-making model. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 17, pp. 17-27.
[48]	Kamm, J. B., Shuman, J. C., Seeger, J. A. and Nurick, A. J. (1990). Entrepreneurial teams in new venture creation: a research agenda. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 14, pp. 7-17.
[49]	Keupp, M. M. and Gassmann, O. (2009). The past and the future of international entrepreneurship: a review and suggestions for developing the field. Journal of Management, 35, pp. 600-633.
[50]	Klotz, A. C., Hmieleski, K. M., Bradley, B. H. and Busenitz, L. W. (2014). New venture teams. Journal of Management, 40, pp. 226-255.
[51]	Lester, S. W., Meglino, B. M. and Korsgaard, M. A. (2002). The antecedents and consequences of group potency: a longitudinal investigation of newly formed work groups. Academy of Management Journal, 45, pp. 352-368.
[52]	Li, Y., Zhao, Y., Tan, J. and Liu, Y. (2008). Moderating effects of entrepreneurial orientation on market orientation-performance linkage: evidence from chinese small firms. Journal of Small Business Management, 46, pp. 113-133.
[53]	Lim, J. Y.-K., Busenitz, L. W. and Chidambaram, L. (2013). New venture teams and the quality of business opportunities identified: faultlines between subgroups of founders and investors. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 37, pp. 47-67.
[54]	Marks, M. A., Mathieu, J. E. and Zaccaro, S. J. (2001). A temporally based framework and taxonomy of team processes. Academy of Management Review, 26, pp. 356-376.
[55]	Maschke, K. and Zu Knyphausen-Aufseβ, D. (2012). How the entrepreneurial top management team setup influences firm performance and the ability to raise capital: a literature review. Business Research, 5, pp. 83-123.
[56]	Mathieu, J., Maynard, M. T., Rapp, T. and Gilson, L. (2008). Team effectiveness 1997-2007: a review of recent advancements and a glimpse into the future. Journal of Management, 34, pp. 410-476.
[57]	McClelland, D. (1961). The Achieving Society. Princeton, NJ: Van Nostrand.
[58]	McDougall, P. P., Shane, S. and Oviatt, B. M. (1994). Explaining the formation of international new ventures: the limits of theories from international business research. Journal of Business Venturing, 9, pp. 469-487.
[59]	McGrath, J. E. (1964). Social Psychology: A Brief Introduction. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
[60]	Milliken, F. J. and Martins, L. L. (1996). Searching for common threads: understanding the multiple effects of diversity in organizational groups. Academy of Management Review, 21, pp. 402-433.
[61]	Mosakowski, E. (1998). Entrepreneurial resources, organizational choices, and competitive outcomes. Organization Science, 9, pp. 625-643.
[62]	Murphy, P. J. (2011). A 2×2 nceptual foundation for entrepreneurial discovery theory. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 35, pp. 359-374.
[63]	Newman, A., Obschonka, M., Moeller, J. and Chandan, G. G. (2019). Entrepreneurial passion: a review, synthesis, and agenda for future research. Applied Psychology. doi: 10.1111/apps.12236.
[64]	Omri, A. and Boujelbene, Y. (2018). Success factors of entrepreneurial teams: modeling through the cognitive mapping. Journal of Entrepreneurship and Management, 7, pp. 1-9.
[65]	Podsakoff, P. M., Mackenzie, S. B., Bachrach, D. G. and Podsakoff, N. P. (2005). The influence of management journals in the 1980s and 1990s. Strategic Management Journal, 26, pp. 473-488.
[66]	Rauch, A. and Frese, M. (2007). Let's put the person back into entrepreneurship research: a meta-analysis on the relationship between business owners' personality traits, business creation, and success. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 16, pp. 353-385.
[67]	Richard, O. C., Barnett, T., Dwyer, S. and Chadwick, K. (2004). Cultural diversity in management, firm performance, and the moderating role of entrepreneurial orientation dimensions. Academy of Management Journal, 47, pp. 255-266.
[68]	Ruef, M., Aldrich, H. E. and Carter, N. M. (2003). The structure of founding teams: homophily, strong ties, and isolation among U.S. entrepreneurs. American Sociological Review, 68, pp. 195-225.
[69]	Santos, S. C. and Cardon, M. S. (2019). What’s love got to do with it? Team entrepreneurial passion and performance in new venture teams. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 43, pp. 475-504.
[70]	Shepherd, D. A. and Krueger, N. F. (2002). An intentions–based model of entrepreneurial teams’ social cognition. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 27, pp. 167-185.
[71]	Sine, W. D., Mitsuhashi, H. and Kirsch, D. A. (2006). Revisiting burns and stalker: formal structure and new venture performance in emerging economic sectors. Academy of Management Journal, 49, pp. 121-132.
[72]	Stam, W. and Elfring, T. (2008). Entrepreneurial orientation and new venture performance: the moderating role of intra- and extraindustry social capital. Academy of Management Journal, 51, pp. 97-111.
[73]	Tahai, A. and Meyer, M. J. (1999). A revealed preference study of management journals’ direct influences. Strategic Management Journal, 20, pp. 279-296.
[74]	Talaulicar, T., Grundei, J. and Werder, A. V. (2005). Strategic decision making in start-ups: the effect of top management team organization and processes on speed and comprehensiveness. Journal of Business Venturing, 20, pp. 519-541.
[75]	Timmons, J. A. (1979). Careful self-analysis and team assessment can aid entrepreneurs. Harvard Business Review, 57, pp. 198-206.
[76]	Tranfield, D., Denyer, D. and Smart, P. (2003). Towards a methodology for developing evidence-informed management knowledge by means of systematic review. British Journal of Management, 14, pp. 207-222.
[77]	Ucbasaran, D., Lockett, A., Wright, M. and Westhead, P. (2003). Entrepreneurial founder teams: factors associated with member entry and exit. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 28, pp. 107-128.
[78]	Vanaelst, I., Clarysse, B., Wright, M., Lockett, A., Moray, N. and S'jegers, R. (2006). Entrepreneurial team development in academic spinouts: an examination of team heterogeneity. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 30, pp. 249-271.
[79]	Walske, J. M. and Zacharakis, A. (2009). Genetically engineered: why some venture capital firms are more successful than others. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 33, pp. 297-318.
[80]	Weick, K. E. (1995). What theory is not, theorizing is. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40, pp. 385-390.
[81]	West, G. P. (2007). Collective cognition: when entrepreneurial teams, not individuals, make decisions. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 31, pp. 77-102.
[82]	Wright, M., Hmieleski, K. M., Siegel, D. S. and Ensley, M. D. (2007). The role of human capital in technological entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 31, pp. 791-806.
[83]	Zacharakis, A. L. and Meyer, G. D. (1998). A lack of insight: do venture capitalists really understand their own decision process? Journal of Business Venturing, 13, pp. 57-76.
[84]	Zhao, H., Seibert, S. E. and Lumpkin, G. T. (2010). The relationship of personality to entrepreneurial intentions and performance: a meta-analytic review. Journal of Management, 36, pp. 381-404.
[85]	Zhou, W. (2016). When does shared leadership matter in entrepreneurial teams: the role of personality composition. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 12, pp. 153-169.

Cite This Article

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Stephanie Schoss, Malte Brettel, Rene Mauer. (2021). 30 Years of Entrepreneurial Team Research: Review and Suggestions for Developing the Field. Science Journal of Business and Management, 9(3), 162-177. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.sjbm.20210903.13

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Stephanie Schoss; Malte Brettel; Rene Mauer. 30 Years of Entrepreneurial Team Research: Review and Suggestions for Developing the Field. Sci. J. Bus. Manag. 2021, 9(3), 162-177. doi: 10.11648/j.sjbm.20210903.13

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Stephanie Schoss, Malte Brettel, Rene Mauer. 30 Years of Entrepreneurial Team Research: Review and Suggestions for Developing the Field. Sci J Bus Manag. 2021;9(3):162-177. doi: 10.11648/j.sjbm.20210903.13

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.sjbm.20210903.13,
  author = {Stephanie Schoss and Malte Brettel and Rene Mauer},
  title = {30 Years of Entrepreneurial Team Research: Review and Suggestions for Developing the Field},
  journal = {Science Journal of Business and Management},
  volume = {9},
  number = {3},
  pages = {162-177},
  doi = {10.11648/j.sjbm.20210903.13},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.sjbm.20210903.13},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.sjbm.20210903.13},
  abstract = {This article provides a detailed review of entrepreneurial team (ET) research over 30 years across the fields of entrepreneurship, management, organizational science and psychology. 145 articles from 24 journals were identified, analyzed, and classified in the comprehensive, overarching Upper Echelons Input-Mediator-Outcome framework. This overview contributes by organizing ET research into its sub-domains, analyzing their historic developments and trends, providing guidance for positioning future research, and offering trend-based suggestions how the field can be further developed. Our analysis shows that 30 years ago, ET research was mainly concerned with the formation of ETs, and linking the founding team to venture success. During the last two decades, the focus shifted to deeper analyses of particular mediating variables, such as cognitive and affective emerging states. The most influential articles (by weighted citation) belong to the sub-domain of team composition, which has also become the most frequently studied field during the last 10 years. Authors around the world and from other scientific fields (especially management and organizational science) are now contributing to this domain, which was earlier confined mainly to entrepreneurship scholars from North America. The most widely addressed issues of concern are the lack of theoretical studies and longitudinal data, a bias towards the technology industry, the unavailability of primary data from new ventures, and conflicting findings, especially in the main trending sub-domain of team composition research and in particular on the impact of personality aspects and behavioural dynamics.},
 year = {2021}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - 30 Years of Entrepreneurial Team Research: Review and Suggestions for Developing the Field
AU  - Stephanie Schoss
AU  - Malte Brettel
AU  - Rene Mauer
Y1  - 2021/07/13
PY  - 2021
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.sjbm.20210903.13
DO  - 10.11648/j.sjbm.20210903.13
T2  - Science Journal of Business and Management
JF  - Science Journal of Business and Management
JO  - Science Journal of Business and Management
SP  - 162
EP  - 177
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2331-0634
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.sjbm.20210903.13
AB  - This article provides a detailed review of entrepreneurial team (ET) research over 30 years across the fields of entrepreneurship, management, organizational science and psychology. 145 articles from 24 journals were identified, analyzed, and classified in the comprehensive, overarching Upper Echelons Input-Mediator-Outcome framework. This overview contributes by organizing ET research into its sub-domains, analyzing their historic developments and trends, providing guidance for positioning future research, and offering trend-based suggestions how the field can be further developed. Our analysis shows that 30 years ago, ET research was mainly concerned with the formation of ETs, and linking the founding team to venture success. During the last two decades, the focus shifted to deeper analyses of particular mediating variables, such as cognitive and affective emerging states. The most influential articles (by weighted citation) belong to the sub-domain of team composition, which has also become the most frequently studied field during the last 10 years. Authors around the world and from other scientific fields (especially management and organizational science) are now contributing to this domain, which was earlier confined mainly to entrepreneurship scholars from North America. The most widely addressed issues of concern are the lack of theoretical studies and longitudinal data, a bias towards the technology industry, the unavailability of primary data from new ventures, and conflicting findings, especially in the main trending sub-domain of team composition research and in particular on the impact of personality aspects and behavioural dynamics.
VL  - 9
IS  - 3
ER  -

Copy | Download

Author Information

Stephanie Schoss

Institute for Innovation and Entrepreneurship (WIN), RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany
Malte Brettel

Institute for Innovation and Entrepreneurship (WIN), RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany
Rene Mauer

ESCP Europe Wirtschaftshochschule Berlin, Jean-Baptiste Say Institute for Entrepreneurship, Berlin, Germany

Download PDF

Sections

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Stephanie Schoss, Malte Brettel, Rene Mauer. (2021). 30 Years of Entrepreneurial Team Research: Review and Suggestions for Developing the Field. Science Journal of Business and Management, 9(3), 162-177. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.sjbm.20210903.13

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Stephanie Schoss; Malte Brettel; Rene Mauer. 30 Years of Entrepreneurial Team Research: Review and Suggestions for Developing the Field. Sci. J. Bus. Manag. 2021, 9(3), 162-177. doi: 10.11648/j.sjbm.20210903.13

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Stephanie Schoss, Malte Brettel, Rene Mauer. 30 Years of Entrepreneurial Team Research: Review and Suggestions for Developing the Field. Sci J Bus Manag. 2021;9(3):162-177. doi: 10.11648/j.sjbm.20210903.13

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.sjbm.20210903.13,
  author = {Stephanie Schoss and Malte Brettel and Rene Mauer},
  title = {30 Years of Entrepreneurial Team Research: Review and Suggestions for Developing the Field},
  journal = {Science Journal of Business and Management},
  volume = {9},
  number = {3},
  pages = {162-177},
  doi = {10.11648/j.sjbm.20210903.13},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.sjbm.20210903.13},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.sjbm.20210903.13},
  abstract = {This article provides a detailed review of entrepreneurial team (ET) research over 30 years across the fields of entrepreneurship, management, organizational science and psychology. 145 articles from 24 journals were identified, analyzed, and classified in the comprehensive, overarching Upper Echelons Input-Mediator-Outcome framework. This overview contributes by organizing ET research into its sub-domains, analyzing their historic developments and trends, providing guidance for positioning future research, and offering trend-based suggestions how the field can be further developed. Our analysis shows that 30 years ago, ET research was mainly concerned with the formation of ETs, and linking the founding team to venture success. During the last two decades, the focus shifted to deeper analyses of particular mediating variables, such as cognitive and affective emerging states. The most influential articles (by weighted citation) belong to the sub-domain of team composition, which has also become the most frequently studied field during the last 10 years. Authors around the world and from other scientific fields (especially management and organizational science) are now contributing to this domain, which was earlier confined mainly to entrepreneurship scholars from North America. The most widely addressed issues of concern are the lack of theoretical studies and longitudinal data, a bias towards the technology industry, the unavailability of primary data from new ventures, and conflicting findings, especially in the main trending sub-domain of team composition research and in particular on the impact of personality aspects and behavioural dynamics.},
 year = {2021}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - 30 Years of Entrepreneurial Team Research: Review and Suggestions for Developing the Field
AU  - Stephanie Schoss
AU  - Malte Brettel
AU  - Rene Mauer
Y1  - 2021/07/13
PY  - 2021
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.sjbm.20210903.13
DO  - 10.11648/j.sjbm.20210903.13
T2  - Science Journal of Business and Management
JF  - Science Journal of Business and Management
JO  - Science Journal of Business and Management
SP  - 162
EP  - 177
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2331-0634
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.sjbm.20210903.13
AB  - This article provides a detailed review of entrepreneurial team (ET) research over 30 years across the fields of entrepreneurship, management, organizational science and psychology. 145 articles from 24 journals were identified, analyzed, and classified in the comprehensive, overarching Upper Echelons Input-Mediator-Outcome framework. This overview contributes by organizing ET research into its sub-domains, analyzing their historic developments and trends, providing guidance for positioning future research, and offering trend-based suggestions how the field can be further developed. Our analysis shows that 30 years ago, ET research was mainly concerned with the formation of ETs, and linking the founding team to venture success. During the last two decades, the focus shifted to deeper analyses of particular mediating variables, such as cognitive and affective emerging states. The most influential articles (by weighted citation) belong to the sub-domain of team composition, which has also become the most frequently studied field during the last 10 years. Authors around the world and from other scientific fields (especially management and organizational science) are now contributing to this domain, which was earlier confined mainly to entrepreneurship scholars from North America. The most widely addressed issues of concern are the lack of theoretical studies and longitudinal data, a bias towards the technology industry, the unavailability of primary data from new ventures, and conflicting findings, especially in the main trending sub-domain of team composition research and in particular on the impact of personality aspects and behavioural dynamics.
VL  - 9
IS  - 3
ER  -

Copy | Download