Hack your organizational innovation: literature review and integrative model for running hackathons.

This article aims to offer a comprehensive overview of the existing literature on the hackathon phenomenon to offer scholars a common ground for future research and managers and practitioners research-based guidelines on best planning and running a hackathon. A review of the most relevant literature on hackathons was conducted to serve as the research basis for our integrative model and guidelines. This article synthesizes the research on hackathons to offer comprehensible guidelines for practitioners while also providing questions for future hackathon researchers. We differentiate between the different design characteristics of hackathons while noting their advantages and disadvantages, discuss tools and methodologies for successful hackathon setup and execution step-by-step, and provide recommendations to encourage project continuity.

A Secure Base for Entrepreneurship: Attachment Orientations and Entrepreneurial Tendencies.

Entrepreneurship catalyzes economic growth; it generates jobs, advances the economy and solves global challenges. Hence, it is crucial to understand the factors contributing to entrepreneurship and entrepreneurs' development. While many studies have investigated intrapersonal factors for entrepreneurial tendencies, the present study focuses on a critical yet often overlooked interpersonal aspect: attachment orientations. Specifically, this article examines the relationship between adult attachment orientations and entrepreneurial tendencies. Three studies across three countries (Israel, the UK, and Singapore) indicated that an anxious attachment orientation in close relationships is negatively associated with enterprising tendencies. In Israel (Study 1) and Singapore (Study 2), avoidant attachment in close relationships was also negatively correlated to such tendencies. Overall, the more people feel secure in close relationships (lower scores on attachment anxiety or avoidance), the higher their enterprising tendencies. Limitations and future research suggestions are discussed.

On the Opportunities and Risks of Examining the Genetics of Entrepreneurship.

Recent accomplishments in genome sequencing techniques have resulted in vast and complex genomic data sets, which have been used to uncover the genetic correlates of not only strictly medical phenomena but also psychological characteristics such as personality traits. In this commentary, we call for the use of genomic data analysis to unlock the valuable field of the genetics of entrepreneurship. Understanding what makes an entrepreneur and what explains their success is paramount given the importance of entrepreneurship to individual, organizational, and societal growth and success. Most of the studies into the genetics of entrepreneurship have investigated familial entrepreneurial inclinations in the form of parent-offspring comparisons or twin studies. However, these do not offer a complete picture of the etiology of entrepreneurship. The use of big data analytics combined with the rapidly growing field of genetic mapping has the potential to offer a more complete picture of the etiology of entrepreneurship by allowing researchers to pinpoint precisely which genes and pathways underlie entrepreneurial behavior and success. We review the risks and opportunities which accompany this endeavor and make the case that, ultimately, prioritizing more research into the genetics of entrepreneurship has the potential to be of value to both science and society.

Perceptions of Victimhood and Entrepreneurial Tendencies.

There is a growing scientific interest around entrepreneurship. One central line of research examines how different personality traits and characteristics such as creativity or resilience relate to entrepreneurial intentions and behavior. In the current research, we add to this literature by focusing on trait victimhood, a trait that entrepreneurship research has overlooked and may be relevant to understanding entrepreneurial tendencies. In two studies in Israel among a sample of entrepreneurship students (Study 1) and a sample representing the general public (Study 2), we show that trait victimhood is negatively related to entrepreneurial personality (Study 1) and behavior (Study 2). Moreover, Study 2 suggests that a strong sense of self-efficacy may buffer against trait victimhood's adverse effects on behavioral entrepreneurship.

Buyers, Maybe Moving Second Is Not That Bad After All: Low-Power, Anxiety, and Making Inferior First Offers.

The behavioral decision-making and negotiations literature usually advocates a first-mover advantage, explained the anchoring and adjustment heuristic. Thus, buyers, who according to the social norm, tend to move second, strive to make the first offer to take advantage of this effect. On the other hand, negotiation practitioners and experts often advise the opposite, i.e., moving second. These opposite recommendations regarding first offers are termed the Practitioner-Researcher paradox. In the current article, we investigate the circumstances under which buyers would make less favorable first offers than they would receive were they to move second, focusing on low power and anxiety during negotiations. Across two studies, we manipulated negotiators' best alternative to the negotiated agreement (BATNA) and measured their anxiety. Our results show that, when facing neutral-power sellers, weak buyers who feel anxious would make inferior first offers (Studies 1 and 2). When facing low-power sellers, weak buyers would make inferior first offers across all anxiety levels (Study 2). Our findings shed light on two critical factors leading to the Practitioner-Researcher paradox: power and anxiety, and offer concrete guidelines to buyers who find themselves at low power and highly anxious during negotiations.

"The Tragedy of the Commons": How Individualism and Collectivism Affected the Spread of the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Why did COVID-19 hit some countries harder than others? While this question is usually answered based on demographics (e. g., population age), health policy (e.g., quarantine), or economic factors, we argue that cultural variance across countries is just as crucial in understanding how susceptible a society is to the COVID-19 outbreak. To test this hypothesis, we first analyzed data collected across 69 countries and examined the relationship between culture and the impact of COVID. Next, we conducted two studies to validate our findings further and explore the mechanism at hand. As expected, we found that the more individualistic (vs. collectivistic) a country was, the more COVID-19 cases and mortalities it had. We also found that the more individualistic participants were, the higher the chances they would not adhere to epidemic prevention measures. These findings are important in understanding the spread of the pandemic, devising optimal exit strategies from lockdowns, and persuading the population to get the new vaccine against the virus.

Policymakers as safe havens: The relationship between adult attachment style, COVID-19 fear, and regulation compliance.

The COVID-19 crisis has caused severe psychological distress. Governments have been trying to fight the outbreak, inter alia, by enacting various restrictions to maintain social distancing. However, compliance with restrictions depends upon different interpersonal variables. The present study focused on the relationship between attachment patterns, fear of COVID-19, and adherence to COVID-19 guidelines. Participants completed the ECR measure to assess their adult attachment style, in addition to a COVID-19 fear and guidelines compliance questionnaire. We suggest that anxious attachment patterns may be related to heightened fear of COVID-19. Although fear and guideline adherence were positively correlated, secure attachment patterns were correlated to higher adherence than insecure attachment patterns.

Fighting Coronavirus One Personality at a Time: Need for Structure, Trait Victimhood, and Adherence to COVID-19 Health Guidelines.

Following the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, authorities have issued several guidelines to curb the pandemic's disastrous effects. However, measures' effectiveness is dependent upon people's adherence to them. Therefore, it is crucial to understand the potential factors that explain guideline adherence. In the present brief research report, we investigated need for structure and trait victimhood, i.e., the tendency to feel like a victim, and their effect on fear of the pandemic, which in turn, predicted guideline adherence. Furthermore, the association between fear and guideline adherence was shaped by participants' global self-efficacy: higher levels of self-efficacy predicted more guideline adherence regardless of fear levels. The present findings may be relevant to health messaging endeavors aiming to improve compliance with guidelines.

Studying the prominence effect amid the COVID-19 crisis: implications for public health policy decision-making.

The novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has brought with it crucial policy- and decision-making situations, especially when making judgments between economic and health concerns. One particularly relevant decision-making phenomenon is the prominence effect, where decision-makers base their decisions on the most prominent attribute of the object at hand (e.g., health concerns) rather than weigh all the attributes together. This bias diminishes when the decision-making mode inhibits heuristic processes. In this study, we tested the prominence of health vs. economic concerns across two decision-making modes - choice (prone to heuristics) and matching (mitigates heuristics) - during the peak of the COVID-19 in the UK using Tversky et al.'s classic experimental paradigm. We added to the classic experimental design a priming condition. Participants were presented with two casualty-minimization programs, differing in lives saved and costs: program X would save 100 lives at the cost of 55-million-pound sterling, whereas program Y would save 30 lives at the cost of 12-million-pound sterling. Half of the participants were required to choose between the programs (choice condition). The other half were not given the cost of program X and were asked to determine what the cost should be to make it as equally attractive as the program Y. Participants in both groups were primed for either: a) economic concerns; b) health concerns; or c) control (no priming). Results showed that in the choice condition, unless primed for economic concerns, health concerns are more prominent. In the matching condition, on the other hand, the prominence of health concerns did not affect decision-makers, as they all "preferred" the cheaper option. These results add further support to the practical relevance of using the proper decision-making modes in times of consequential crises where multiple concerns, interests, and parties are involved.

And sympathy is what we need my friend-Polite requests improve negotiation results.

The wording negotiators use shapes the emotions of their counterparts. These emotions, in turn, influence their counterparts' economic decisions. Building on this rationale, we examined how the language used during negotiation affects discount rate and willingness to engage in future deals. In three studies, participants assumed the role of retailers. Alleged counterparts (actually a computerized program) asked for a discount under three conditions: request, want, and demand. Results show that less extreme language (request/want) resulted in better outcomes than demanding a discount. Moreover, while the language used by the customer had an effect on experienced emotions, the positive emotions (sympathy and empathy) participants felt toward the customer mediated the relationship between the linguistic cue and the negotiation outcome. Our results inform both psycholinguistic research and negotiation research by demonstrating the causal role of linguistic cues in activating concept-knowledge relevant to different emotional experiences, and point to the down-the-line impact on shaping negotiation preferences.

Negotiation as a form of persuasion: arguments in first offers.

In this article we examined aspects of negotiation within a persuasion framework. Specifically, we investigated how the provision of arguments that justified the first offer in a negotiation affected the behavior of the parties, namely, how it influenced counteroffers and settlement prices. In a series of 4 experiments and 2 pilot studies, we demonstrated that when the generation of counterarguments was easy, negotiators who did not add arguments to their first offers achieved superior results compared with negotiators who used arguments to justify their first offer. We hypothesized and provided evidence that adding arguments to a first offer was likely to cause the responding party to search for counterarguments, and this, in turn, led him or her to present counteroffers that were further away from the first offer.