The Influence of Entrepreneurs’ Culture and Ethnicity on Firms’ Degree of Hybridity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hybrid businesses that combine profit and social objectives at their core play an important role in their communities. In this article, we use insights from paradox theory to examine the influence of entrepreneurs’ cultural value orientations and ethnicity on distinct forms of hybrid businesses. We use a unique random sample of international small- and medium-sized privately owned businesses in Canada. After controlling for alternative explanations and using propensity scores to match the samples of Indigenous and non-Indigenous entrepreneurs, we consistently find that entrepreneurs’ self-expression values and Indigenous ethnicity are positively associated with a higher degree of hybridity in the businesses they start. Our findings contribute to the conversations on the micro-foundations of organizational paradox and to the literature on the factors that influence different hybrid organizational forms. Besides, our findings also add to the literature that examines hybridity in the context of internationalized businesses. The rationality and culture of the entrepreneur affect organizational paradox. Entrepreneurs with self-expressive values and identified with an Indigenous ethnicity have higher proclivities to form ideal hybrids and embrace paradoxical organizational forms.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".