Examining the Canadian Sociocultural Model of Entrepreneurship and Acculturation of Immigrant Entrepreneurs in Saskatchewan
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Each year, thousands of immigrants come to Canada seeking a better life, with many pursuing entrepreneurship. These immigrant-owned businesses contribute significantly to the nation’s prosperity. Supporting them effectively requires understanding how they adapt to a new entrepreneurial culture. This project explored the acculturation of immigrant entrepreneurs in Canada using the Theory of Sociocultural Models (TSCM; Chirkov, 2020a, 2020b). TSCM views acculturation as the process of navigating differences between the sociocultural models (SCMs) of one’s home and host countries. In business, this involves adapting to culturally rooted values, beliefs, and practices. Immigrant entrepreneurs bring internalized SCMs from their countries of origin, which may clash with Canada’s entrepreneurial norms. The first phase of the project explored Canada’s sociocultural model of entrepreneurship (SCMofE) through a scoping review of existing research. This review aimed to identify the public aspects of communally shared models that shape the environment immigrant entrepreneurs must navigate. The Canadian SCMofE reflects individualist values and a commitment to diversity and inclusion, characterized by a dual discourse: it promotes innovation, initiative, and community contribution while also expressing cultural ambivalence toward entrepreneurial risk-taking and fear of failure. Communication norms vary between Francophone and Anglophone communities. In communication, entrepreneurs emphasize self-expression, diplomacy, and a non-confrontational style of interaction. Institutionally, entrepreneurship is shaped by a centralized, formal regulatory system that reinforces compliance and inclusivity. Key practices include reliance on mentors, investors, and both formal and informal networks, though informal regulation remains underexplored. This study provided foundational insights into the distinctive Canadian SCMofE that regulates entrepreneurial behaviour. The second study analyzed data from Statistics Canada’s 2017–2018 Canadian Community Health Survey to assess acculturation stress among immigrant entrepreneurs. Using ANOVAs, it compared psychological and social well-being between immigrant and Canadian-born self-employed individuals. Immigrants reported better perceived mental health but lower life satisfaction and social support. Gender and racial differences also emerged: men reported better mental health in relation to women, while women reported higher social support. Although the large sample revealed sociocultural challenges for immigrant entrepreneurs, the analysis was unable to uncover the underlying mechanisms behind these issues. To explore underlying mechanisms, in Study 3, I interviewed seven immigrant women entrepreneurs with diverse backgrounds (70% from Asia). All recognized tensions between their home countries and Canada’s SCMofE. They engaged in two acculturation processes: one involved practical business actions, such as attending local events, seeking mentorship, joining training programs, and launching businesses. The other was internal, involving self-reflection on differing norms and values. Through these processes, each woman gradually developed new mental frameworks, adapted to her business approach. Successful acculturation involved recognizing SCMofE differences, transforming the self, and building autonomous agency to adopt a new entrepreneurial model. The mechanisms of acculturation identified cognitive, emotional and behavioural processes: interacting with new communities while reflecting on observed differences. The emerged agency of entrepreneurs was at the center of this navigation. In conclusion, this project makes an important theoretical and practical contribution by offering a refined definition of entrepreneurial acculturation grounded in TSCM, along with a theory that highlights the mechanisms and dynamics of acculturation in immigrant entrepreneurship.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,005 | 0,007 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,005 | 0,010 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,009 | 0,004 |
| Communication savante | 0,005 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».