The impact of entrepreneurship research on other academic fields.

The remarkable ascent of entrepreneurship witnessed as a scientific field over the last 4 decades has been made possible by entrepreneurship's ability to absorb theories, paradigms, and methods from other fields such as economics, psychology, sociology, geography, and even biology. The respectability of entrepreneurship as an academic discipline is now evidenced by many other fields starting to borrow from the entrepreneurship view. In the present paper, seven examples are given from this "pay back" development. These examples were first presented during a seminar at the Erasmus Entrepreneurship Event called what has the entrepreneurship view to offer to other academic fields? This article elaborates on the core ideas of these presentations and focuses on the overarching question of how entrepreneurship research impacts the development of other academic fields. We found that entrepreneurship research questions the core assumptions of other academic fields and provides new insights into the antecedents, mechanisms, and consequences of their respective core phenomena. Moreover, entrepreneurship research helps to legitimize other academic fields both practically and academically.

Entrepreneurship research questions the core assumptions of other academic fields and legitimizes them both practically and academically. Since the 1980s, entrepreneurship research has seen tremendous growth and development, establishing itself as an academic field. Entrepreneurship is also taught extensively in leading business schools around the world. Indeed, few business schools do not address entrepreneurship in their curriculum. This represents a sea change: although entrepreneurs and new ventures had a remarkable impact on society, academia barely noticed it in the 1980s. Simply put: economics and business students rarely, if ever, encountered any mention of entrepreneurship during their studies. While entrepreneurship research has now developed its own methodological toolbox, it has extensively borrowed perspectives, theories, and methods from other fields. In the 2020s, we now find that entrepreneurship scholars are sharing its toolbox with other academic fields, questioning the core assumptions of other academic fields and providing new insights into the antecedents, mechanisms, and consequences of their respective core phenomena. Moreover, entrepreneurship research helps to legitimize other academic fields both practically and academically. Hence, entrepreneurship research now plays not just an important role in entrepreneurship education, practice, and policy but also throughout many other research fields.

Predicting Entrepreneurial Career Intentions: Values and the Theory of Planned Behavior.

Integrating predictions from the theory of human values with the theory of planned behavior (TPB), our primary goal is to investigate mechanisms through which individual values are related to entrepreneurial career intentions using a sample of 823 students from four European countries. We find that openness and self-enhancement values relate positively to entrepreneurial career intentions and that these relationships are partly mediated by attitudes toward entrepreneurship, self-efficacy, and, to a lesser extent, by social norms. Values and TPB constructs partially mediated cross-country differences in entrepreneurial intentions. Spanish students showed lower entrepreneurial intentions as compared to Dutch, German, and Polish students, which could be traced back to lower self-enhancement values (power and achievement), less positive attitudes toward entrepreneurship, and differences in social norms.

From microscopic to macroscopic perspectives and back: The study of leadership and health/well-being.

This special issue introduces a set of papers that contribute to research on leadership and health/well-being from multiple perspectives. To situate these papers in current research debates, this introduction to the special issue provides an overview of research on leadership and health/well-being by using a microscope-macroscope perspective as an organizing framework. The microscope-macroscope organizing framework highlights that a comprehensive understanding of leadership and well-being requires researchers to consider multiple perspectives, including those of leaders and followers, embedded in their context and time. It encourages researchers to transcend more narrow input-process-output perspectives that are typically adopted when studying leadership and health/well-being. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Self-employment and eudaimonic well-being: Energized by meaning, enabled by societal legitimacy.

This study investigates why and where self-employment is related to higher levels of eudaimonic well-being. We focus on meaningfulness as an important eudaimonic process and subjective vitality as a eudaimonic well-being outcome that is central to entrepreneurs' proactivity. Building on self-determination theory, we posit that self-employment, relative to wage-employment, is a more self-determined and volitional career choice, which enhances the experience of meaningfulness at work and perceptions of work autonomy. In a multi-level study of 22,002 individuals and 16 European countries, meaningfulness at work mediates the relationship between self-employment and subjective vitality and explains this relationship better than work autonomy. We identify moderating effects of context: the societal legitimacy of entrepreneurship in a country affects the choice set of alternative career options that individuals can consider and thus shapes the experience of meaningfulness at work and work autonomy, and thereby indirectly subjective vitality. These findings expand our understanding of eudaimonic well-being, entrepreneurs' work, and the role of context in entrepreneurship and well-being research. They complement existing research on hedonic well-being of entrepreneurs and extend the scarce literature on their eudaimonic well-being.