4.7 Article

Are government employees more or less likely to venture? Evidence from China

期刊

JOURNAL OF BUSINESS RESEARCH
卷 157, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.113629

关键词

Government employees; Entrepreneurial intentions; Entrepreneurial alertness; Life satisfaction; Institutional environment; Mixed-methods design

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study explores the relationship between government employment and entrepreneurial intentions through the mechanisms of entrepreneurial alertness and life satisfaction. It also examines the moderating effects of tax burden and corruption. The findings show that government employment positively influences entrepreneurial intentions through entrepreneurial alertness, but negatively influences them through life satisfaction. Tax burden and corruption play different roles in moderating these effects, revealing a complex system of relationships.
Although many new ventures are created by government employees, these potential founders' entrepreneurial intentions are rarely studied. Building on the pull-push theory of entrepreneurship, this study elucidates the relationship between government employment and entrepreneurial intentions through two opposing mediation routes: entrepreneurial alertness and life satisfaction. We also analyze a potential moderating role of two institutional factors, tax burden and corruption. We employ a mixed-methods design. Empirical findings from four archival data sources reveal that government employment positively associates with entrepreneurial in-tentions through entrepreneurial alertness but negatively relates to entrepreneurial intentions through life satisfaction. These two competing mechanisms are also differentially moderated by tax burden and corruption, revealing a nuanced system of effects. We use qualitative interviews to validate the quantitative findings and investigate different facets of this phenomenon to enrich our understandings.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据