The nexus between intrapreneurship and person-job fit: a qualitative comparative analysis of work motivation in SMEs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose Based on self-determination theory and the perspective of person-job fit, this study aims to determine the configurations of situations in which the person-intrapreneurship fit and psychosocial factors that lead to different types of motivation. Design/methodology/approach The data were collected from 199 employees of four Quebec small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and analyzed by a configurational approach using the Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) method. Findings The results indicate that for intrapreneurs to operate autonomously, it is crucial that they do not experience job anxiety. Intrapreneurial self-efficacy is required when intrapreneurship is voluntary (strong fit) but not when forced (poor fit). In forced intrapreneurship, organizational support is central to self-determination. Thus, regardless of self-efficacy, the model suggests autonomous motivation is possible in forced intrapreneurship if the employee has organizational support and lacks anxiety. Practical implications These findings underscore the imperative for organizations to prioritize the psychological well-being of their employees, particularly when engaging them in intrapreneurial projects. Additionally, managers can foster autonomous motivation by encouraging favorable behaviors such as intrapreneurial behavior (IB) and providing essential support, particularly when these projects may not align with employees' ambitions and intentions. Originality/value This study offers a novel perspective on the role of person-job fit in the specific context of intrapreneurship, based on a new categorization of fit based on the disparity between employees' intrapreneurial intention and actual intrapreneurial behavior. It provides unique theoretical and practical insights into fostering autonomous motivation through the lens of person-intrapreneurship fit.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".