You are looking at 1 - 8 of 8 items

  • Author or Editor: Norris Krueger x
Clear All Modify Search
You do not have access to this content

Malin Brännback, Alan L. Carsrud and Norris Krueger

If we are to improve our understanding of the role of intentions in start-up teams of entrepreneurs and family firm succession, we need move to beyond the traditional view of individual intentions in entrepreneurial settings and toward understanding collective intentions. For example, in a start-up there is often a small group whose individual intentions for entering the firm and setting its strategic direction must blend to some form of consensus such as marketing and growth strategy. Very often the conflict of early intentions to enter and operate a firm by a team has been ignored in favor of just looking at the intentions of a single entrepreneur to start a firm, failing to recognize that this is often not just an individual decision, but one impacting the family of the entrepreneur as well. Thus, other people’s intentions can come into play with respect to the intention to start a new firm. In addition, in a family firm the intentions toward succession is as much collective as individual. If we seek we-intent to increase the possibility of successful succession, then a focus on “we” intentions allows for a better understand of the potentially conflicting intentions of key individuals. A CEO of a family firm may intend individually that a child will succeed them in the leadership of the firm. A potential conflicting intention would be the child having no intention to take over the firm. “We” intentions occur when a shared intention is reached. For example, the CEO and the child agree the child should go to work for another firm before a decision is made about the firm’s leadership succession. Although the topic of succession has been widely examined, it has always been from either the factors that influence a successor or the career choice intentions of the successor, or the individual intentions of the parent being succeeded. This chapter argues that the conceptualization of collective intent such as “we-intentions” from Bagozzi offers a better understanding of group processes from a social cognition perspective, especially those of succession. However, collective intentions (and their measurement) are still less understood. In turn, this suggests that family firms (and especially succession) might be ideal test beds for rigorous testing of models and measures of collective intent.

This content is available to you

Edited by Mellani Day, Mary C. Boardman and Norris F. Krueger

This content is available to you

Edited by Mellani Day, Mary C. Boardman and Norris F. Krueger

This content is available to you

Mellani Day, Mary C. Boardman and Norris F. Krueger

The introduction to this handbook presents an overview of issues that will be introduced in the rest of the chapters with respect to the nascent field of neuroentrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship researchers have begun to investigate brain-based research methods; however, hurdles such as a lack of familiarity with and training in neuroscience research design and implementation, along with interpretation of reactions in the brain to stimuli in laboratory experiments, has prevented any wide-scale adoption of these methods. Initial questions that neuroscientists wrestle with, and that those who would focus on brain-based research should consider, such as philosophical stance on brain versus mind and causation, are addressed.

You do not have access to this content

Edited by Mellani Day, Mary C. Boardman and Norris F. Krueger

This Handbook provides an overview of neuroscience-driven research methodologies and how those methodologies might be applied to theory-based research in the nascent field of neuroentrepreneurship. It presents the current thinking and examples of pioneering work, serves as a reference for those wishing to incorporate these methods into their own research, and provides several helpful discussions on the nature of an answerable question using neuroscience techniques. It includes concrete examples of new ways to conduct research that can shed light onto such areas as decision-making and opportunity recognition, allowing us to ask different, perhaps better, questions than ever before.
This content is available to you

Norris Krueger