Collectiveness within startup teams – Leading the way to initiating and managing collective pursuit of opportunities in organizational contexts

While traditional entrepreneurship literature addresses the pursuit of entrepreneurial opportunities to a solo entrepreneur, scholars increasingly agree that new ventures are often founded and operated by entrepreneurial teams as collective efforts especially in hightechnology industries. Researchers also suggest that team ventures are more likely to survive and succeed than ventures founded by the individual entrepreneur although specific challenges might relate to multiple individuals being involved in joint entrepreneurial action. In addition to new ventures, entrepreneurial teams are seen central for organizing work in established organizations since the teams are able to create major product and service innovations that drive organizational success. Acknowledgement of the entrepreneurial teams in various organizational contexts has challenged the notion on the individual entrepreneur. However, considering that entrepreneurial teams represent a collective-level phenomenon that bases on interactions between organizational members, entrepreneurial teams may not have been studied as indepth as could be expected from the point of view of the team-level, rather than the individual or the individuals in the team. Many entrepreneurial team studies adopt the individualized view of entrepreneurship and examine the team members’ aggregate characteristics or the role of a lead entrepreneur. The previous understandings might not offer a comprehensive and indepth enough understanding of collectiveness within entrepreneurial teams and team venture performance that often relates to the team-level issues in particular. In addition, as the collective-level of entrepreneurial teams has been approached in various ways in the existing literatures, the phenomenon has been difficult to understand in research and practice. Hence, there is a need to understand entrepreneurial teams at the collective-level through a systematic and comprehensive perspective. This study takes part in the discussions on entrepreneurial teams. The overall objective of this study is to offer a description and understanding of collectiveness within entrepreneurial teams beyond individual(s). The research questions of the study are: 1) what collectiveness within entrepreneurial teams stands for, what constitutes the basic elements of it, and who are included in it, 2) why, how, and when collectiveness emerges or reinforces within entrepreneurial teams, and 3) why collectiveness within entrepreneurial teams matters and how it could be developed or supported. In order to answer the above questions, this study bases on three approaches, two set of empirical data, two analysis techniques, and conceptual study. The first data set consists of 12 qualitative semi-structured interviews with business school students who are seen as prospective entrepreneurs. The data is approached through a social constructionist perspective and analyzed through discourse analysis. The second data set bases on a qualitative multiplecase study approach that aims at theory elaboration. The main data consists of 14 individual and four group semi-structured thematic interviews with members of core entrepreneurial teams of four team startups in high-technology industries. The secondary data includes publicly available documents. This data set is approached through a critical realist perspective and analyzed through systematic thematic analysis. The study is completed through a conceptual study that aims at building a theoretical model of collective-level entrepreneurship drawing from existing literatures on organizational theory and social-psychology. The theoretical work applies a positivist perspective. This study consists of two parts. The first part includes an overview that introduces the research background, knowledge gaps and objectives, research strategy, and key concepts. It also outlines the existing knowledge of entrepreneurial team literature, presents and justifies the choices of paradigms and methods, summarizes the publications, and synthesizes the findings through answering the above mentioned research questions. The second part consists of five publications that address independent research questions but all enable to answer the research questions set for this study as a whole. The findings of this study suggest a map of relevant concepts and their relationships that help grasp collectiveness within entrepreneurial teams. The analyses conducted in the publications suggest that collectiveness within entrepreneurial teams stands for cognitive and affective structures in-between team members including elements of collective entity, collective idea of business, collective effort, collective attitudes and motivations, and collective feelings. Collectiveness within entrepreneurial teams also stands for specific joint entrepreneurial action components in which the structures are constructed. The action components reflect equality and democracy, and open and direct communication in particular. Collectiveness emerges because it is a powerful tool for overcoming individualized barriers to entrepreneurship and due to collectively oriented desire for, collective value orientation to, demand for, and encouragement to team entrepreneurship. Collectiveness emerges and reinforces in processes of joint creation and realization of entrepreneurial opportunities including joint analysis and planning of the opportunities and strategies, decision-making and realization of the opportunities, and evaluation, feedback, and sanctions of entrepreneurial action. Collectiveness matters because it is relevant for potential future entrepreneurs and because it affects the ways collective ventures are initiated and managed. Collectiveness also matters because it is a versatile, dynamic, and malleable phenomenon and the ideas of it can be applied across organizational contexts that require team work in discovering or creating and realizing new opportunities. This study further discusses how the findings add to the existing knowledge of entrepreneurial team literature and how the ideas can be applied in educational, managerial, and policy contexts.

Cooperation, social capital and economic performance

The objective of this paper is to define social capital as social infrastructure and to try to include this variable in an economic growth model. Considering social capital in such a way could have an impact on the productivity of production factors. Firstly, I will discuss how institutional variables can affect growth. Secondly, after analyzing several definitions of social capital, I will point out the benefits and problems of each one and will define social capital as social infrastructure, aiming to introduce this variable into an economic growth model. Finally, I will try to open the way for subsequent empirical studies, both in the area of measuring the stock of social infrastructure as well as those comparing economies, with the idea of showing the impact of social infrastructure on economic growth.

Organizational creativity – Hegemonic and alternative discourses

SUMMARY Organizational creativity – hegemonic and alternative discourses Over the course of recent developments in the societal and business environment, the concept of creativity has been brought into new arenas. The rise of ‘creative industries’ and the idea of creativity as a form of capital have attracted the interests of business and management professionals – as well as academics. As the notion of creativity has been adopted in the organization studies literature, the concept of organizational creativity has been introduced to refer to creativity that takes place in an organizational context. This doctoral thesis focuses on organizational creativity, and its purpose is to explore and problematize the hegemonic organizational creativity discourse and to provide alternative viewpoints for theorizing about creativity in organizations. Taking a discourse theory approach, this thesis, first, provides an outline of the currently predominant, i.e. hegemonic, discourse on organizational creativity, which is explored regarding themes, perspectives, methods and paradigms. Second, this thesis consists of five studies that act as illustrations of certain alternative viewpoints. Through these exemplary studies, this thesis sheds light on the limitations and taken-for-granted aspects of the hegemonic discourse and discusses what these alternative viewpoints could offer for the understanding of and theorizing for organizational creativity. This study leans on an assumption that the development of organizational creativity knowledge and the related discourse is not inevitable or progressive but rather contingent. The organizational creativity discourse has developed in a certain direction, meaning that some themes, perspectives, and methods, as well as assumptions, values, and objectives, have gained a hegemonic position over others, and are therefore often taken for granted and considered valid and relevant. The hegemonization of certain aspects, however, contributes to the marginalization of others. The thesis concludes that the hegemonic discourse on organizational creativity is based on an extensive coverage of certain themes and perspectives, such as those focusing on individual cognitive processes, motivation, or organizational climate and their relation to creativity, to name a few. The limited focus on some themes and the confinement to certain prevalent perspectives, however, results in the marginalization of other themes and perspectives. The negative, often unintended, consequences, implications, and side effects of creativity, the factors that might hinder or prevent creativity, and a deeper inquiry into the ontology and epistemology of creativity have attracted relatively marginal interest. The material embeddedness of organizational creativity, in other words, the physical organizational environment as well as the human body and its non-cognitive resources, has largely been overlooked in the hegemonic discourse, although thereare studies in this area that give reason to believe that they might prove relevant for the understanding of creativity. The hegemonic discourse is based on an individual-centered understanding of creativity which overattributes creativity to an individual and his/her cognitive capabilities, while simultaneously neglecting how, for instance, the physical environment, artifacts, social dynamics and interactions condition organizational creativity. Due to historical reasons, quantitative as well as qualitative yet functionally- oriented studies have predominated the organizational creativity discourse, although studies falling into the interpretationist paradigm have gradually become more popular. The two radical paradigms, as well as methodological and analytical approaches typical of radical research, can be considered to hold a marginal position in the field of organizational creativity. The hegemonic organizational creativity discourse has provided extensive findings related to many aspects of organizational creativity, although the con- ceptualizations and understandings of organizational creativity in the hegemonic discourse are also in many respects limited and one-sided. The hegemonic discourse is based on an assumption that creativity is desirable, good, necessary, or even obligatory, and should be encouraged and nourished. The conceptualiza- tions of creativity favor the kind of creativity which is useful, valuable and can be harnessed for productivity. The current conceptualization is limited to the type of creativity that is acceptable and fits the managerial ideology, and washes out any risky, seemingly useless, or negative aspects of creativity. It also limits the possible meanings and representations that ‘creativity’ has in the respective discourse, excluding many meanings of creativity encountered in other discourses. The excessive focus on creativity that is good, positive, productive and fits the managerial agenda while ignoring other forms and aspects of creativity, however, contributes to the dilution of the notion. Practices aimed at encouraging the kind of creativity may actually entail a risk of fostering moderate alterations rather than more radical novelty, as well as management and organizational practices which limit creative endeavors, rather than increase their likelihood. The thesis concludes that although not often given the space and attention they deserve, there are alternative conceptualizations and understandings of organizational creativity which embrace a broader notion of creativity. The inability to accommodate the ‘other’ understandings and viewpoints within the organizational creativity discourse runs a risk of misrepresenting the complex and many-sided phenomenon of creativity in organizational context. Keywords: Organizational creativity, creativity, organization studies, discourse theory, hegemony

Civilian-military cooperation in crisis management operations

Finnish Defence Studies is published under the auspices of the National Defence College, and the contributions reflect the fields of research and teaching of the College. Finnish Defence Studies will occasionally feature documentation on Finnish Security Policy. Views expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily imply endorsement by the National Defence College.

Sosiaalisen pääoman verkostotutkimus kohdeyrityksessä

Tässä sosiaalisen pääoman verkostotutkimuksessa tarkastellaan valitun rahoitusalalla toimivan kohdeyhtiön sosiaalisen verkoston rakennetta. Työn tavoitteena on määritellä kohdeorganisaation sosiaalinen verkosto ja löytää avainhenkilöt, jotka ovat keskeisiä organisaation toiminnalle ja tiedonjakamiselle. Näiden tunnistettujen roolien kautta pyritään selvittämään miten yritykset laajemmin voivat hyödyntää yritysten epämuodollista sosiaalista verkostoa yleensä tiedon jakamisessa. Tuloksilla pyritään myös hakemaan tukea sille miten sosiaalista epämuodollista verkostoa voidaan hyödyntää silloin kun organisaatio on muutostilassa. Työ on laadullinen tutkimus jota tuetaan numeerisella aineistolla joka on kerätty verkostokyselyllä. Pääasiallinen aineisto tutkimukselle kerättiin teemahaastatteluilla. Empiirinen aineisto kerättiin verkostoanalyysillä koko kohdeyhtiön henkilökunnalle lähetetyllä kyselyllä. Tästä johdettuna luotiin sosiaalisen verkosto kartta ja analysoitiin tulokset. Tuloksien avulla löydettyjä havaintoja käytettiin teemahaastatteluiden pohjana varsinaiselle tutkimukselle. Haastateltavat henkilöt edustivat organisaation eri yksiköitä ja ammattiryhmiä. Tutkimuksen tulokset osoittavat sen, että kohdeyrityksen sosiaalisen verkoston rakenne poikkeaa tyypillisestä muodollisesta organisaatiorakenteesta huomattavasti. Tutkimuksessa havaittiin selkeitä avainhenkilöitä joiden roolit korostuvat organisaation toiminnalle oleellisina tietoväylinä. Näiden avainhenkilöiden kautta haetaan tietoa ja apua päätöstentekoon organisaation kaikilla tasoilla. Tutkimus osoittaa myös sen, että sosiaalisen pääoman kasvaessa oikeaa tietoa osataan hakea oikeasta paikasta nopeammin ja tehokkaammin epämuodollisia reittejä pitkin. Tunnistamalla avainhenkilöt organisaatiossa, yritykset pystyvät vaikuttamaan tiedonkulkuun myös silloin kun yritys on muutostilassa. Vaikuttamalla ja kommunikoimalla myös epäformaalien verkostojen kautta yrityksien on helpompi muokata toimintatapojaan muutoksien yhteydessä.

Integrated reporting – a new form of a firm’s interaction with stakeholders

This study examines a new kind of public reporting, called integrated reporting as a form of a firm’s interaction with stakeholders. The study concerned issues such as how the studied organization defined its stakeholders and how this definition evolved during the transition period from 2009 to 2013, how has the integrated reporting of the organization evolved as an instrument of interaction with stakeholders over the transition period, and how the organization reported its value creation according to the international integrated reporting framework in the final, full-featured report. In examining the theory, the study used a qualitative analysis method that allowed deriving conceptual tools necessary to carry out the study. This study is based on the material of the five integrated reports written in Russian from a subsidiary of a Russian public company. The subsidiary carried out the transition to an integrated reporting for the five years from 2009 to 2013. A comparative qualitative method was used in reviewing the empirical material. During the research, an active cooperation of the organization with key stakeholders was revealed, which occurred during the whole period of development of integrated reporting. As a result, integrated reports were produced in cooperation with various key stakeholders, allowing balancing the financial and non-financial information in the reports. The study found that during the transition period, integrated reports gradually changed in the direction of greater clarity and ease of access to perception, consistency of presentation and materiality. The integrated reporting of the organization began reflect the basic requirements of the international integrated reporting framework regarding the content elements and guiding principles. Thus, the organization’s reports began including features of financial and non-financial reporting and connecting the three aspects of the organization's activities: economic, environmental and social. This study reveals the importance of identifying key stakeholders and their influence on the creation of organizational value. The new form of reporting suits better the requirements of modern organizations to interact with their stakeholder groups. The integrated reporting, which reflects the principles of the international integrated reporting framework, is an active resource for companies to communicate with stakeholders and a platform of transmission the necessary information on the creation of value in the long term.