Home Holding Friends Closer or Keeping Them at a Distance: The Intimacy with Founding Members and Its Effect on Entrepreneurs’ Effectual Problem Setting
Article
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

Holding Friends Closer or Keeping Them at a Distance: The Intimacy with Founding Members and Its Effect on Entrepreneurs’ Effectual Problem Setting

  • Zhi Yang and Jinglan Yang EMAIL logo
Published/Copyright: December 19, 2022
Entrepreneurship Research Journal
From the journal Entrepreneurship Research Journal Volume 14 Issue 3

Abstract

Whether founding with friends will affect entrepreneurs’ venturing model? Based on construal level theory, this study shows a fresh look into entrepreneurs’ intimacy with other founding members and its effects on their cognition of ongoing venturing projects. We argue that the stronger intimacy with other founding members shortens the perceived psychological distance between an entrepreneur and an ongoing project, thus lowering the entrepreneur’s construal level. The construal level mediates the effect on the problem space the entrepreneurs perceive. Using two-wave survey data from 162 Chinese founding teams, we find that the strong intimacy with other founding members results in less effectual problem setting through lower construal level. Moreover, the indirect effect is moderated by venturing team size in the way that a large venturing team size will weaken the effect. From the construal level theory perspective, our findings may explain why and how founding with friends may affect the venturing model choice and highlight the importance of entrepreneurs’ surrounding relationships within founding teams. This study also provides some potential practical implications for the entrepreneurs when founding with friends.

Keywords: entrepreneur; intimacy; construal level; psychological distance; effectual problem setting
Corresponding author: Jinglan Yang, School of Management, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei, 430074, China, E-mail:

Funding source: National Natural Science Foundation of China

Award Identifier / Grant number: NSFC 72172050

Funding source: National Natural Science Foundation of China

Award Identifier / Grant number: NSFC 72132001

  1. Research funding: This work was supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC 72172050, NSFC 72132001).

Appendix: Measurement Scales Used in Study

Overall model fit:

χ2 (161) = 327.28, CMIN/DF = 2.03; CFI = 0.93, IFI = 0.93, GFI = 0.84, RMSEA = 0.08.		 SFL
Construal level (CL): CR = 0.88, AVE = 0.72, HSV = 0.60
(1) We always focus on the implementation of our project rather than the big picture. 0.70
(2) We always care more about specific characteristics of our project. 0.92
(3) We always focus on having a detailed schedule rather than the general goal of our project. 0.90
Knightian uncertainty: CR = 0.89, AVE = 0.72
(1) We cannot predict our future venturing consequences. 0.82
(2) We do not know the probability of achieving a possible future venturing outcome. 0.88
(3) Future venturing consequences are fraught with uncertainty. 0.84
Goal ambiguity: CR = 0.88, AVE = 0.71
(1) Our venturing goals are ambiguous. 0.77
(2) Our venturing preferences are not given. 0.87
(3) We have not clearly defined what we want our venture outcome to be. 0.88
Isotropy: CR = 0.89, AVE = 0.73
(1) We do not always know what venturing information is worth paying attention to. 0.82
(2) We do not always know what venturing information is not worth paying attention to. 0.87
(3) We are not always certain which venturing information is relevant or not. 0.88
Effectual problem setting (EPS): CR = 0.92, AVE = 0.78, HSV = 0.60
(1) Knightian uncertainty 0.86
(2) Goal ambiguity 0.93
(3) Isotropy 0.87
Customer orientation (CO): CR = 0.90, AVE = 0.75, HSV = 0.07
(1) We usually do not process customer feedback quickly. 0.86
(2) We do not treat customer feedback as an important thing. 0.89
(3) There is buck-passing in our team for customer complaints. 0.84
Customer solution effectiveness (CSE): CR = 0.92, AVE = 0.67, HSV = 0.18
(1) Our solution has effectively meet customers’ practical requirements. 0.87
(2) Our solution has effectively integrated and customized technology and product designs for the customers. 0.82
(3) Our solution has provided the customers with comprehensive technical support service. 0.83
(4) The customers are very satisfied with our solution. 0.80
(5) The customers are very satisfied with our technical support service. 0.86

  1. SFL, standardized factor loading; CR, composite reliability; AVE, average variance extracted; HSV, highest shared variance with other constructs.

References

Aldrich, H. 2001. Organizations Evolving. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Search in Google Scholar

Aldrich, H. E., and P. H. Kim. 2007. “Small Worlds, Infinite Possibilities? How Social Networks Affect Entrepreneurial Team Formation and Search.” Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal 1 (1-2): 147–65, https://doi.org/10.1002/sej.8.Search in Google Scholar

Amidon, E., V. Kumar, and T. Treadwell. 1983. “Measurement of Intimacy Attitudes: The Intimacy Attitude Scale-Revisited.” Journal of Personality Assessment 47 (6): 635–9, https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa4706_9.Search in Google Scholar

Ancona, D. G., and D. F. Caldwell. 1992. “Bridging the Boundary: External Activity and Performance in Organizational Teams.” Administrative Science Quarterly 37: 634–65, https://doi.org/10.2307/2393475.Search in Google Scholar

Anderson, J. C., and D. W. Gerbing. 1988. “Structural Equation Modeling in Practice: A Review and Recommended Two-step Approach.” Psychological Bulletin 103 (3): 411–23, https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.103.3.411.Search in Google Scholar

Balkundi, P., and D. A. Harrison. 2006. “Ties, Leaders, and Time in Teams: Strong Inference about Network Structure’s Effects on Team Viability and Performance.” Academy of Management Journal 49 (1): 49–68, https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2006.20785500.Search in Google Scholar

Bar-Anan, Y., N. Liberman, and Y. Trope. 2006. “The Association between Psychological Distance and Construal Level: Evidence from an Implicit Association Test.” Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 135 (4): 609–22, https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.135.4.609.Search in Google Scholar

Baron, R. A. 2004. “The Cognitive Perspective: A Valuable Tool for Answering Entrepreneurship’s Basic “Why” Questions.” Journal of Business Venturing 19 (2): 221–39, https://doi.org/10.1016/s0883-9026(03)00008-9.Search in Google Scholar

Beckman, C. M. 2006. “The Influence of Founding Team Company Affiliations on Firm Behavior.” Academy of Management Journal 49 (4): 741–58, https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2006.22083030.Search in Google Scholar

Bowlby, J. 1977. “The Making and Breaking of Affectional Bonds: I. Aetiology and Psychopathology in the Light of Attachment Theory.” The British Journal of Psychiatry 130 (3): 201–210, https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.130.3.201.Search in Google Scholar

Bowlby, J. 1982. “Attachment and Loss: Retrospect and Prospect.” American Journal of Orthopsychiatry 52 (4): 664–78, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1939-0025.1982.tb01456.x.Search in Google Scholar

Bresman, H. 2010. “External Learning Activities and Team Performance: A Multimethod Field Study.” Organization Science 21 (1): 81–96, https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1080.0413.Search in Google Scholar

Busenitz, L. W., and J. B. Barney. 1997. “Differences between Entrepreneurs and Managers in Large Organizations: Biases and Heuristics in Strategic Decision-Making.” Journal of Business Venturing 12 (1): 9–30, https://doi.org/10.1016/s0883-9026(96)00003-1.Search in Google Scholar

Busenitz, L. W., J. O. Fiet, and D. D. Moesel. 2005. “Signaling in Venture Capitalist—New Venture Team Funding Decisions: Does it Indicate Long–Term Venture Outcomes?” Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice 29 (1): 1–12, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2005.00066.x.Search in Google Scholar

Cardon, M. S., D. A. Gregoire, C. E. Stevens, and P. C. Patel. 2013. “Measuring Entrepreneurial Passion: Conceptual Foundations and Scale Validation.” Journal of Business Venturing 28 (3): 373–96, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2012.03.003.Search in Google Scholar

Chen, H. S., R. K. Mitchell, K. H. Brigham, R. Howell, and R. Steinbauer. 2018. “Perceived Psychological Distance, Construal Processes, and Abstractness of Entrepreneurial Action.” Journal of Business Venturing 33 (3): 296–314, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2018.01.001.Search in Google Scholar

Collins, N. L., and B. C. Feeney. 2000. “A Safe Haven: An Attachment Theory Perspective on Support Seeking and Caregiving in Intimate Relationships.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 78 (6): 1053–73, https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.78.6.1053.Search in Google Scholar

Collins, N. L., and B. C. Feeney. 2004. “An Attachment Theory Perspective on Closeness and Intimacy.” In Handbook of Closeness and Intimacy, 163–187. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Search in Google Scholar

Collins, N. L., and S. J. Read. 1990. “Adult Attachment, Working Models, and Relationship Quality in Dating Couples.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 58 (4): 644–63, https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.58.4.644.Search in Google Scholar

De Carolis, D. M., and P. Saparito. 2006. “Social Capital, Cognition, and Entrepreneurial Opportunities: A Theoretical Framework.” Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice 30 (1): 41–56, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2006.00109.x.Search in Google Scholar

De Jong, J. P., and O. Marsili. 2015. “Founding a Business Inspired by Close Entrepreneurial Ties: Does it Matter for Survival?” Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice 39 (5): 1005–25, https://doi.org/10.1111/etap.12086.Search in Google Scholar

Deshpandé, R., J. U. Farley, and F. E. Webster. 1993. “Corporate Culture, Customer Orientation, and Innovativeness in Japanese Firms: A Quadrad Analysis.” Journal of Marketing 57 (1): 23–37, https://doi.org/10.2307/1252055.Search in Google Scholar

Dew, N., S. Read, S. D. Sarasvathy, and R. Wiltbank. 2009. “Effectual versus Predictive Logics in Entrepreneurial Decision-Making: Differences between Experts and Novices.” Journal of Business Venturing 24 (4): 287–309, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2008.02.002.Search in Google Scholar

Dou, X., X. Zhu, J. Q. Zhang, and J. Wang. 2019. “Outcomes of Entrepreneurship Education in China: A Customer Experience Management Perspective.” Journal of Business Research 103: 338–47, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.01.058.Search in Google Scholar

Edwards, J. R., and L. S. Lambert. 2007. “Methods for Integrating Moderation and Mediation: A General Analytical Framework Using Moderated Path Analysis.” Psychological Methods 12 (1): 1–22, https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989x.12.1.1.Search in Google Scholar

Eesley, C. E., D. H. Hsu, and E. B. Roberts. 2014. “The Contingent Effects of Top Management Teams on Venture Performance: Aligning Founding Team Composition with Innovation Strategy and Commercialization Environment.” Strategic Management Journal 35 (12): 1798–817, https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2183.Search in Google Scholar

Efrat‐Treister, D., M. A. Daniels, and S. L. Robinson. 2020. “Putting Time in Perspective: How and Why Construal Level Buffers the Relationship between Wait Time and Aggressive Tendencies.” Journal of Organizational Behavior 41 (3): 294–309, https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2433.Search in Google Scholar

Ensari, N., and N. Miller. 2002. “The Out-Group Must Not Be So Bad after All: The Effects of Disclosure, Typicality, and Salience on Intergroup Bias.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 83 (2): 313–29, https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.83.2.313.Search in Google Scholar

Fisher, R., and J. Langan-Fox. 2009. “Passion and Uncertainty in Successful Entrepreneurial Action.” In 6th AGSE International Research Conference.Search in Google Scholar

Florida, R., and M. Kenney. 1988. “Venture Capital and High Technology Entrepreneurship.” Journal of Business Venturing 3 (4): 301–19, https://doi.org/10.1016/0883-9026(88)90011-0.Search in Google Scholar

Foo, M. D., H. P. Sin, and L. P. Yiong. 2006. “Effects of Team Inputs and Intrateam Processes on Perceptions of Team Viability and Member Satisfaction in Nascent Ventures.” Strategic Management Journal 27 (4): 389–99, https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.514.Search in Google Scholar

Fornell, C., and D. F. Larcker. 1981. “Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error.” Journal of Marketing Research 18 (1): 39–50, https://doi.org/10.2307/3151312.Search in Google Scholar

Fraley, R. C., J. P. Garner, and P. R. Shaver. 2000. “Adult Attachment and the Defensive Regulation of Attention and Memory: Examining the Role of Preemptive and Postemptive Defensive Processes.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 79 (5): 816–26, https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.79.5.816.Search in Google Scholar

Fraley, R. C., and N. G. Waller. 1998. “Adult Attachment Patterns: A Test of the Typological Model.” In Attachment Theory and Close Relationships, 77–114. New York: Guilford Press.Search in Google Scholar

Francis, D. H., and W. R. Sandberg. 2000. “Friendship within Entrepreneurial Teams and its Association with Team and Venture Performance.” Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice 25 (2): 5–26, https://doi.org/10.1177/104225870002500201.Search in Google Scholar

Gartner, W. B. 1988. “Who Is an Entrepreneur? Is the Wrong Question.” American Journal of Small Business 12 (4): 11–32, https://doi.org/10.1177/104225878801200401.Search in Google Scholar

Grégoire, D. A., and N. Cherchem. 2020. “A Structured Literature Review and Suggestions for Future Effectuation Research.” Small Business Economics 54 (3): 621–39, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-019-00158-5.Search in Google Scholar

Greve, A., and J. W. Salaff. 2003. “Social Networks and Entrepreneurship.” Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice 28 (1): 1–22, https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-8520.00029.Search in Google Scholar

Gurung, R., B. Sarason, and I. Sarason. 1997. “Close Personal Relationships and Health Outcomes: A Key to the Role of Social Support.” In Handbook of Personal Relationships: Theory, Research and Interventions, 2nd ed., 547–73. Chichester: Wiley.Search in Google Scholar

Hair, J. F., M. Sarstedt, T. M. Pieper, and C. M. Ringle. 2012a. “An Assessment of the Use of Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling in Marketing Research.” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 40 (3): 414–33, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-011-0261-6.Search in Google Scholar

Hair, J. F., M. Sarstedt, C. M. Ringle, and J. A. Mena. 2012b. “The Use of Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling in Strategic Management Research: A Review of Past Practices and Recommendations for Future Applications.” Long Range Planning 45 (5-6): 320–40, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2012.09.008.Search in Google Scholar

Hair, J. F.Jr., G. T. M. Hult, C. Ringle, and M. Sarstedt. 2016. A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM). Tousand Oaks, CA: Sage publications.Search in Google Scholar

Harms, R., and H. Schiele. 2012. “Antecedents and Consequences of Effectuation and Causation in the International New Venture Creation Process.” Journal of International Entrepreneurship 10 (2): 95–116, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10843-012-0089-2.Search in Google Scholar

Hayes, A. F. 2013. Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis: A Regression-Based Approach. New York: Guilford publications.Search in Google Scholar

Hazan, C., and D. Zeifman. 1999. “Pair Bonds as Attachments: Evaluating the evidence.” In Handbook of Attachment: Theory, Research, and Clinical Applications, 336–54. New York, NY, US: Guilford Press.Search in Google Scholar

Hewlin, P. F., T. L. Dumas, and M. F. Burnett. 2017. “To Thine Own Self Be True? Facades of Conformity, Values Incongruence, and the Moderating Impact of Leader Integrity.” Academy of Management Journal 60 (1): 178–99, https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2013.0404.Search in Google Scholar

Hong, J., and A. Y. Lee. 2010. “Feeling Mixed but Not Torn: The Moderating Role of Construal Level in Mixed Emotions Appeals.” Journal of Consumer Research 37 (3): 456–72, https://doi.org/10.1086/653492.Search in Google Scholar

Hong, J., and J. Lu. 2016. “Assessing the Effectiveness of Business Incubators in Fostering SMEs: Evidence from China.” International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management 20 (1-2): 45–60, https://doi.org/10.1504/ijeim.2016.075298.Search in Google Scholar

Kamm, J. B., J. C. Shuman, J. A. Seeger, and A. J. Nurick. 1990. “Entrepreneurial Teams in New Venture Creation: A Research Agenda.” Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice 14 (4): 7–17, https://doi.org/10.1177/104225879001400403.Search in Google Scholar

Klotz, A. C., K. M. Hmieleski, B. H. Bradley, and L. W. Busenitz. 2014. “New Venture Teams: A Review of the Literature and Roadmap for Future Research.” Journal of Management 40 (1): 226–55, https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206313493325.Search in Google Scholar

Koutstaal, W., and D. L. Schacter. 1997. “Gist-based False Recognition of Pictures in Older and Younger Adults.” Journal of Memory and Language 37 (4): 555–83, https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.1997.2529.Search in Google Scholar

Krueger, N. 1993. “The Impact of Prior Entrepreneurial Exposure on Perceptions of New Venture Feasibility and Desirability.” Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice 18 (1): 5–21, https://doi.org/10.1177/104225879301800101.Search in Google Scholar

Kuypers, B. C., D. Davies, and K. H. Glaser. 1986. “Developmental Arrestations in Self-Analytic Groups.” Small Group Behavior 17 (3): 269–302, https://doi.org/10.1177/104649648601700302.Search in Google Scholar

Lazar, M., E. Miron-Spektor, R. Agarwal, M. Erez, B. Goldfarb, and G. Chen. 2020. “Entrepreneurial Team Formation.” The Academy of Management Annals 14 (1): 29–59, https://doi.org/10.5465/annals.2017.0131.Search in Google Scholar

Li, M. 2021. “Uses and Abuses of Statistical Control Variables: Ruling Out or Creating Alternative Explanations?” Journal of Business Research 126: 472–88, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.12.037.Search in Google Scholar

Liberman, N., and J. Förster. 2009. “Distancing from Experienced Self: How Global-Versus-Local Perception Affects Estimation of Psychological Distance.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 97 (2): 203–16, https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015671.Search in Google Scholar

Liberman, N., and Y. Trope. 1998. “The Role of Feasibility and Desirability Considerations in Near and Distant Future Decisions: A Test of Temporal Construal Theory.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 75 (1): 5–18, https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.75.1.5.Search in Google Scholar

Lowe, R. A., and A. A. Ziedonis. 2006. “Overoptimism and the Performance of Entrepreneurial Firms.” Management Science 52 (2): 173–86, https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1050.0482.Search in Google Scholar

McGowan, P. 2020. “Use of Effectuation by Established Micro Businesses: Short-Term Gain, Long-Term Pain?” Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing 36 (1): 60–71, https://doi.org/10.1108/jbim-01-2020-0055.Search in Google Scholar

Meeks, B. S., S. S. Hendrick, and C. Hendrick. 1998. “Communication, Love and Relationship Satisfaction.” Journal of Social and Personal Relationships 15 (6): 755–73, https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407598156003.Search in Google Scholar

Miller, R. S., and H. M. Lefcourt. 1982. “The Assessment of Social Intimacy.” Journal of Personality Assessment 46 (5): 514–8, https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa4605_12.Search in Google Scholar

Moran, P. 2005. “Structural vs. Relational Embeddedness: Social Capital and Managerial Performance.” Strategic Management Journal 26 (12): 1129–51, https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.486.Search in Google Scholar

Neter, J., M. H. Kutner, C. J. Nachtsheim, and W. Wasserman. 1996. “Applied Linear Statistical Models.” Journal of the American Statistical Association 81 (396): 1126–7.10.2307/2289108Search in Google Scholar

Parker, S. C. 2009. “Can Cognitive Biases Explain Venture Team Homophily?” Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal 3 (1): 67–83, https://doi.org/10.1002/sej.55.Search in Google Scholar

Patel, P. C., and S. Terjesen. 2011. “Complementary Effects of Network Range and Tie Strength in Enhancing Transnational Venture Performance.” Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal 5 (1): 58–80, https://doi.org/10.1002/sej.107.Search in Google Scholar

Podsakoff, P. M., S. B. MacKenzie, J.-Y. Lee, and N. P. Podsakoff. 2003. “Common Method Biases in Behavioral Research: A Critical Review of the Literature and Recommended Remedies.” Journal of Applied Psychology 88 (5): 879–903, https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879.Search in Google Scholar

Podsakoff, P. M., and D. W. Organ. 1986. “Self-reports in Organizational Research: Problems and Prospects.” Journal of Management 12 (4): 531–44, https://doi.org/10.1177/014920638601200408.Search in Google Scholar

Podsakoff, N. P., W. Shen, and P. M. Podsakoff. 2006. “The Role of Formative Measurement Models in Strategic Management Research: Review, Critique, and Implications for Future Research.” Research Methodology in Strategy and Management 3: 197–252, https://doi.org/10.1016/s1479-8387(06)03008-67.Search in Google Scholar

Preacher, K. J., D. D. Rucker, and A. F. Hayes. 2007. “Addressing Moderated Mediation Hypotheses: Theory, Methods, and Prescriptions.” Multivariate Behavioral Research 42 (1): 185–227, https://doi.org/10.1080/00273170701341316.Search in Google Scholar

Read, S., N. Dew, S. D. Sarasvathy, M. Song, and R. Wiltbank. 2009a. “Marketing under Uncertainty: The Logic of an Effectual Approach.” Journal of Marketing 73 (3): 1–18, https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.73.3.1.Search in Google Scholar

Read, S., M. Song, and W. Smit. 2009b. “A Meta-Analytic Review of Effectuation and Venture Performance.” Journal of Business Venturing 24 (6): 573–87, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2008.02.005.Search in Google Scholar

Reyt, J.-N., B. M. Wiesenfeld, and Y. Trope. 2016. “Big Picture Is Better: The Social Implications of Construal Level for Advice Taking.” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 135: 22–31, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2016.05.004.Search in Google Scholar

Rosh, L., L. R. Offermann, and R. Van Diest. 2012. “Too Close for Comfort? Distinguishing between Team Intimacy and Team Cohesion.” Human Resource Management Review 22 (2): 116–27, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2011.11.004.Search in Google Scholar

Rotter, J. B. 1980. “Interpersonal Trust, Trustworthiness, and Gullibility.” American Psychologist 35 (1): 1–7, https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066x.35.1.1.Search in Google Scholar

Sarasvathy, S. D. 2001. “Causation and Effectuation: Toward a Theoretical Shift from Economic Inevitability to Entrepreneurial Contingency.” Academy of Management Review 26 (2): 243–63, https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2001.4378020.Search in Google Scholar

Sarasvathy, S. D. 2004. “Making it Happen: Beyond Theories of the Firm to Theories of Firm Design.” Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice 28 (6): 519–31, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2004.00062.x.Search in Google Scholar

Sarasvathy, S. D. 2008. Effectuation: Elements of Entrepreneurial Expertise. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.10.4337/9781848440197Search in Google Scholar

Sarasvathy, S. D., and N. Dew. 2005. “New Market Creation through Transformation.” Journal of Evolutionary Economics 15 (5): 533–65, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00191-005-0264-x.Search in Google Scholar

Sarasvathy, S. D., N. Dew, S. Read, and R. Wiltbank. 2008. “Designing Organizations that Design Environments: Lessons from Entrepreneurial Expertise.” Organization Studies 29 (3): 331–50, https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840607088017.Search in Google Scholar

Schaefer, M. T., and D. H. Olson. 1981. “Assessing Intimacy: The PAIR Inventory.” Journal of Marital and Family Therapy 7 (1): 47–60, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-0606.1981.tb01351.x.Search in Google Scholar

Seidman, B. T., W. L. Marshall, S. M. Hudson, and P. J. Robertson. 1994. “An Examination of Intimacy and Loneliness in Sex Offenders.” Journal of Interpersonal Violence 9 (4): 518–34, https://doi.org/10.1177/088626094009004006.Search in Google Scholar

Shapero, A., and L. Sokol. 1982. “The Social Dimensions of Entrepreneurship.” In Encyclopedia of Entrepreneurship, 72–90. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: PrenticeHall.Search in Google Scholar

Shelton, J. N., T. E. Trail, T. V. West, and H. B. Bergsieker. 2010. “From Strangers to Friends: The Interpersonal Process Model of Intimacy in Developing Interracial Friendships.” Journal of Social and Personal Relationships 27 (1): 71–90, https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407509346422.Search in Google Scholar

Shepherd, D. A., and A. Zacharakis. 2001. “The Venture Capitalist-Entrepreneur Relationship: Control, Trust and Confidence in Co-operative Behaviour.” Venture Capital: An International Journal of Entrepreneurial Finance 3 (2): 129–49, https://doi.org/10.1080/13691060110042763.Search in Google Scholar

Sherman, R. A., C. S. Nave, and D. C. Funder. 2013. “Situational Construal Is Related to Personality and Gender.” Journal of Research in Personality 47 (1): 1–14, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2012.10.008.Search in Google Scholar

Sieger, P., M. Gruber, E. Fauchart, and T. Zellweger. 2016. “Measuring the Social Identity of Entrepreneurs: Scale Development and International Validation.” Journal of Business Venturing 31 (5): 542–72, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2016.07.001.Search in Google Scholar

Simon, M., S. M. Houghton, and K. Aquino. 2000. “Cognitive Biases, Risk Perception, and Venture Formation: How Individuals Decide to Start Companies.” Journal of Business Venturing 15 (2): 113–34, https://doi.org/10.1016/s0883-9026(98)00003-2.Search in Google Scholar

Sirén, C., V. Parida, P. C. Patel, and J. Wincent. 2019. “Rushed and Short on Time: The Negative Effects of Temporal Planning and Flexible Pacing Style on the Entrepreneurial Alertness–Effectuation Relationship.” Journal of Business Research 101: 555–60, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.11.025.Search in Google Scholar

Stam, W., and T. Elfring. 2008. “Entrepreneurial Orientation and New Venture Performance: The Moderating Role of Intra-and Extraindustry Social Capital.” Academy of Management Journal 51 (1): 97–111, https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2008.30744031.Search in Google Scholar

Tian, K. T., W. O. Bearden, and G. L. Hunter. 2001. “Consumers’ Need for Uniqueness: Scale Development and Validation.” Journal of Consumer Research 28 (1): 50–66, https://doi.org/10.1086/321947.Search in Google Scholar

Trope, Y., and N. Liberman. 2003. “Temporal Construal.” Psychological Review 110 (3): 403–21, https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295x.110.3.403.Search in Google Scholar

Trope, Y., and N. Liberman. 2010. “Construal-level Theory of Psychological Distance.” Psychological Review 117 (2): 440–63, https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018963.Search in Google Scholar

Trope, Y., N. Liberman, and C. Wakslak. 2007. “Construal Levels and Psychological Distance: Effects on Representation, Prediction, Evaluation, and Behavior.” Journal of Consumer Psychology 17 (2): 83–95, https://doi.org/10.1016/s1057-7408(07)70013-x.Search in Google Scholar

Tuli, K. R., A. K. Kohli, and S. G. Bharadwaj. 2007. “Rethinking Customer Solutions: From Product Bundles to Relational Processes.” Journal of Marketing 71 (3): 1–17, https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.71.3.1.Search in Google Scholar

Unger, J. M., A. Rauch, M. Frese, and N. Rosenbusch. 2011. “Human Capital and Entrepreneurial Success: A Meta-Analytical Review.” Journal of Business Venturing 26 (3): 341–58, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2009.09.004.Search in Google Scholar

Venus, M., R. E. Johnson, S. Zhang, X.-H. Wang, and K. Lanaj. 2018. “Seeing the Big Picture: A Within-Person Examination of Leader Construal Level and Vision Communication.” Journal of Management 45 (7): 2666–84, https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206318761576.Search in Google Scholar

Welter, C., and S. Kim. 2018. “Effectuation under Risk and Uncertainty: A Simulation Model.” Journal of Business Venturing 33 (1): 100–16, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2017.11.005.Search in Google Scholar

Williams, L. J., J. A. Cote, and M. R. Buckley. 1989. “Lack of Method Variance in Self-Reported Affect and Perceptions at Work: Reality or Artifact?” Journal of Applied Psychology 74 (3): 462–8, https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.74.3.462.Search in Google Scholar

Wilson, J., C. B. Crisp, and M. Mortensen. 2013. “Extending Construal-Level Theory to Distributed Groups: Understanding the Effects of Virtuality.” Organization Science 24 (2): 629–44, https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1120.0750.Search in Google Scholar

Yang, Z., Y. Jiang, and E. Xie. 2019. “Buyer-supplier Relational Strength and Buying Firm’s Marketing Capability: An Outside-In Perspective.” Industrial Marketing Management 82: 27–37, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2019.03.009.Search in Google Scholar

Yao, X., X. Wu, and D. Long. 2016. “University Students’ Entrepreneurial Tendency in China: Effect of Students’ Perceived Entrepreneurial Environment.” Journal of Entrepreneurship in Emerging Economies 8 (1): 60–81, https://doi.org/10.1108/jeee-03-2015-0021.Search in Google Scholar

York, J. G., I. O’Neil, and S. D. Sarasvathy. 2016. “Exploring Environmental Entrepreneurship: Identity Coupling, Venture Goals, and Stakeholder Incentives.” Journal of Management Studies 53 (5): 695–737, https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12198.Search in Google Scholar

Zhang, S. X., and J. Cueto. 2017. “The Study of Bias in Entrepreneurship.” Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice 41 (3): 419–54, https://doi.org/10.1111/etap.12212.Search in Google Scholar
Received: 2022-05-22
Accepted: 2022-11-06
Published Online: 2022-12-19

© 2022 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Articles in the same Issue

  1. Frontmatter
  2. Competitive Research Articles
  3. Entrepreneurship in Times of Crisis: A Comprehensive Review with Future Directions
  4. Entrepreneurial Failure: Structuring a Widely Overlooked Field of Research
  5. Why Peer Support Matters: Entrepreneurial Stressors, Emotional Exhaustion, and Growth Intentions of Women Entrepreneurs
  6. “And Yet It Moves”: National Entrepreneurial Culture and Entrepreneurship-Friendly Policies: Evidence From OECD Countries
  7. Research on the Influence Mechanism of Dual Social Network Embeddedness Combined Ambidexterity on Entrepreneurial Performance of Returning Migrant Workers
  8. Holding Friends Closer or Keeping Them at a Distance: The Intimacy with Founding Members and Its Effect on Entrepreneurs’ Effectual Problem Setting
  9. Entrepreneurs’ Personality Traits and Social Enterprise: A Legitimation Perspective
  10. The Antecedents to Habitual Entrepreneurship: Exploring the Role of Entrepreneurs’ Narcissism and Educational Level
  11. Network Insight and Entrepreneurial Performance of New Ventures: Understanding the Roles of Resource Integration and Dynamic Management Capability
  12. Extending the Theory of Planned Behavior – A Longitudinal Study of Entrepreneurial Intentions
  13. Patterns of Technological Entrepreneurship and Their Determinants: Evidence from Technology-Based Manufacturing Firms in China
  14. The Relationship between Cognitive and Contextual Factors: A Self-Regulatory Mechanism Underlying Persistence in Nascent Entrepreneurs
  15. Is e-Government a Driver to Enhance Entrepreneurship? An Empirical Investigation of European Countries
  16. Investigating the Relationship between Technological Entrepreneurship and National Innovativeness: Moderating Effects of Intellectual Property Protection and R&D Transfer Environment
  17. How Does Subsidiary Autonomy Influence Performance in the Emerging Economy: Different Moderating Effects of Subsidiary Entrepreneurship
  18. Resource Orchestration in Hub-Based Entrepreneurial Ecosystems: A Case Study on the Seaweed Industry
  19. How Does the Combination of Factors Influence Entrepreneurs’ Decision-Making Logic? A Qualitative Comparative analysis
  20. Competitive Strategy in Everyday Entrepreneurial Ventures: A Self-determination Theory Perspective
  21. Should Start-Ups Be Green? Corporate Environmental Responsibility, Institutional Contexts, and Financial Performance of New Ventures
  22. Success Factors in Equity Crowdfunding – Evidence from Crowdcube
https://doi.org/10.1515/erj-2022-0215
Keywords for this article
entrepreneur; intimacy; construal level; psychological distance; effectual problem setting

Articles in the same Issue

  1. Frontmatter
  2. Competitive Research Articles
  3. Entrepreneurship in Times of Crisis: A Comprehensive Review with Future Directions
  4. Entrepreneurial Failure: Structuring a Widely Overlooked Field of Research
  5. Why Peer Support Matters: Entrepreneurial Stressors, Emotional Exhaustion, and Growth Intentions of Women Entrepreneurs
  6. “And Yet It Moves”: National Entrepreneurial Culture and Entrepreneurship-Friendly Policies: Evidence From OECD Countries
  7. Research on the Influence Mechanism of Dual Social Network Embeddedness Combined Ambidexterity on Entrepreneurial Performance of Returning Migrant Workers
  8. Holding Friends Closer or Keeping Them at a Distance: The Intimacy with Founding Members and Its Effect on Entrepreneurs’ Effectual Problem Setting
  9. Entrepreneurs’ Personality Traits and Social Enterprise: A Legitimation Perspective
  10. The Antecedents to Habitual Entrepreneurship: Exploring the Role of Entrepreneurs’ Narcissism and Educational Level
  11. Network Insight and Entrepreneurial Performance of New Ventures: Understanding the Roles of Resource Integration and Dynamic Management Capability
  12. Extending the Theory of Planned Behavior – A Longitudinal Study of Entrepreneurial Intentions
  13. Patterns of Technological Entrepreneurship and Their Determinants: Evidence from Technology-Based Manufacturing Firms in China
  14. The Relationship between Cognitive and Contextual Factors: A Self-Regulatory Mechanism Underlying Persistence in Nascent Entrepreneurs
  15. Is e-Government a Driver to Enhance Entrepreneurship? An Empirical Investigation of European Countries
  16. Investigating the Relationship between Technological Entrepreneurship and National Innovativeness: Moderating Effects of Intellectual Property Protection and R&D Transfer Environment
  17. How Does Subsidiary Autonomy Influence Performance in the Emerging Economy: Different Moderating Effects of Subsidiary Entrepreneurship
  18. Resource Orchestration in Hub-Based Entrepreneurial Ecosystems: A Case Study on the Seaweed Industry
  19. How Does the Combination of Factors Influence Entrepreneurs’ Decision-Making Logic? A Qualitative Comparative analysis
  20. Competitive Strategy in Everyday Entrepreneurial Ventures: A Self-determination Theory Perspective
  21. Should Start-Ups Be Green? Corporate Environmental Responsibility, Institutional Contexts, and Financial Performance of New Ventures
  22. Success Factors in Equity Crowdfunding – Evidence from Crowdcube
Sign up now to receive a 20% welcome discount
Institutional Access
How does access work?
Have an idea on how to improve our website?
Please write us.
© 2025 De Gruyter Brill
Downloaded on 29.9.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/erj-2022-0215/html?lang=en
Scroll to top button