Topic Description Top terms 1 A gender-based perspective of entrepreneurship Gender, entrepreneurship, women, entrepreneurial, context, social, gendered, experiences, identity, institutional, cultural, practices, contexts, culture, values, norms, theory, explores, change, feminist 2 Women entrepreneurs and work-life balance Family, entrepreneurs, business, women, work, role, support, life, personal, experience, career, roles, influence, balance, entrepreneur, related, members, conflict, present, job 3 Theoretical approach to entrepreneurship Purpose, limited, entrepreneurship, literature, originality, design methodology approach, practical, studies, understanding, group, future, framework, limitations, implications, approach, qualitative, review, aims, context, insights 4 Entrepreneurship in a global context Entrepreneurship, countries, female, economic, activity, springer, nature, global, international, policy, chapter, part, developing, region, institutions, economies, country, emerging, cultural, level 5 Significance of socialization and networking for women entrepreneurs Social, case, networks, process, media, venture, network, learning, creation, networking, entrepreneur, opportunities, entrepreneurs, community, woman, opportunity, area, immigrant, digital, business 6 Management of business venture by a women entrepreneur Development, women, management, innovation, leadership, studies, developed, model, focus, enterprise, role, companies, organizations, order, aim, innovative, sustainable, dimensions, start-ups, tourism 7 Skill enhancement through training and development Business, entrepreneurs, women, support, training, government, skills, level, programs, questionnaire, identify, survey, start, lack, develop, education, group, groups, collected, respondents 8 Women entrepreneurial scenario at a global level Business, businesses, growth, performance, capital, small, financial, firms, entrepreneurs, enterprises, access, owners, firm, women owned, impact, human, SMEs, micro, significant, survey 9 Women entrepreneurs of developing markets Employment, sector, economy, informal, market, knowledge, activities, participation, marketing, number, industry, income, increase, working, employed, sources, general, due, formal, people 10 Motivational factors for entrepreneurship Entrepreneurial, factors, success, relationship, influence, education, significant, positive, model, motivation, factor, intention, perceived, orientation, variables, role, university, intentions, students, structural 11 Gender disparity in raising capital for a venture Female, entrepreneurs, gender, male, men, di.erences, ventures, gap, compared, risk, start, characteristics, venture, females, financing, interest, higher, examine, greater, funding 12 Challenges and prospects faced by women entrepreneurs Women, entrepreneurs, challenges, interviews, rural, barriers, economic, empowerment, enterprises, India, face, potential, society, faced, activities, conducted, motivations, developing, depth, country Cluster Cluster title Items Keywords 1 Entrepreneurial aspect 22 Entrepreneurship, entrepreneurial intentions, entrepreneurial orientation 2 Commercial aspect 19 Business development, business growth, business performance 3 Gender-based aspect 17 Covid-19, economic development, gender equality, gender issue, gender relations 4 Theoretical aspect 12 Feminist theory, gender theory, institutional theory 5 Gender-di.erences aspect 10 Gender di.erences, gender stereotype, UAE, Middle East 6 Challenges and barriers 08 Barriers, challenges, Malaysia, South Africa 7 Managing finances and work–life balance 08 Work–life balance, venture capital No. Journal Publications Citations 1 International Journal of Gender and Entrepreneurship 143 2,835 2 International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business 92 1,003 3 Small Business Economics 51 2,847 4 Gender in Management 51 727 5 Journal of Developmental Entrepreneurship 45 487 6 International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour and Research 43 1,279 7 Journal of Small Business and Entrepreneurship 41 453 8 International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal 33 1,046 9 Journal of Business Venturing 32 4,819 10 Journal of Small Business Management 31 744 No. First author Title Year Citations DOI 1 Ahl, H. Why Research on Women Entrepreneurs Needs New Directions 2006 966 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2006.00138.x 2 Fischer, E. M. A theoretical overview and extension of research on sex, gender, and entrepreneurship 1993 528 https://doi.org/10.1016/0883-9026(93)90017-Y 3 Cli., J. E. Does one size fit all? exploring the relationship between attitudes towards growth, gender, and business size 1998 486 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0883-9026(97)00071-2 4 Parasuraman, S. Work and Family Variables, Entrepreneurial Career Success, and Psychological Well-Being 1996 482 https://doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.1996.0025 5 Brush, C. G. A gender-aware framework for women’s entrepreneurship 2009 468 https://doi.org/10.1108/17566260910942318 6 Du Rietz, A. Testing the Female Underperformance Hypothesis 2000 362 https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008106215480 7 Verheul, I. Start-Up Capital: “Does Gender Matter?” 2001 361 https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011178629240 8 Baughn, C. C. The Normative Context for Women’s Participation in Entrepreneurship: A Multicounty Study 2006 333 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2006.00142.x 9 Fairlie, R. W. Gender di.erences in business performance: evidence from the Characteristics of Business Owners survey 2009 333 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-009-9207-5 10 Boden, Jr., R. J On the survival prospects of men’s and women’s new business ventures 2000 317 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0883-9026(98)00004-4 11 Mirchandani, K. Feminist insight on gendered work: New directions in research on women and entrepreneurship 1999 312 https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0432.00085 12 Verheul, I. Explaining female and male entrepreneurship at the country level 2006 305 https://doi.org/10.1080/08985620500532053 13 Gundry, L. K. The ambitious entrepreneur: High growth strategies of women-owned enterprises 2001 294 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0883-9026(99)00059-2 14 Sexton, D. L. Female and male entrepreneurs: Psychological characteristics and their role in gender-related discrimination 1990 293 https://doi.org/10.1016/0883-9026(90)90024-N 15 Minniti, M. Being in Someone Else’s Shoes: the Role of Gender in Nascent Entrepreneurship 2007 289 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-006-9017-y 16 Anna, A. L. Women business owners in traditional and non-traditional industries 2000 282 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0883-9026(98)00012-3 17 Orhan, M. Why women enter into entrepreneurship: an explanatory model 2001 278 https://doi.org/10.1108/09649420110395719 18 Demartino, R. Di.erences between women and men MBA entrepreneurs: exploring family flexibility and wealth creation as career motivators 2003 273 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0883-9026(03)00003-X 19 Lewis, P. The quest for invisibility: Female entrepreneurs and the masculine norm of entrepreneurship 2006 272 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0432.2006.00317.x 20 Hughes. K. D. Extending Women’s Entrepreneurship Research in New Directions 2012 266 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2012.00504.x Impacts over 10-year period per stakeholder (€) Total impact Child Parents Kindergartens Elementary schools Health system Social service Society * 36,329.31 279,687 786,757 33,229.36 * 35,852 1,171,854.72 Stakeholder Output Outcome/impact Monetized outcome and impact Children Improved results in school, lower incidence of conflicts with family, friends, and teachers Improved quality of life (less unemployment), health, a higher level of education, less neglect or abuse / Parents/family Lower incidence of conflicts with children, less parent absenteeism Improved quality of life, health Cost of absenteeismData: number of medical treatments, average salary Preschool education institutions (kindergartens) Lower incidence of conflicts, fewer hours of APA Improved quality of learning environment Cost of APAData: number of children eligible for APA, cost of issuing APA decisions, hours of assistance provided per week, salary cost of assistants to children Primary education institutions (elementary schools) Lower incidence of conflicts, fewer hours of APA Improved quality of learning environment Cost of APAData: number of children eligible for APA, cost of issuing APA decisions, hours of assistance provided per week, salary cost of assistants to children Healthcare institutions Fewer treatments required Improved availability of service Cost of medical treatmentsData: number of children in treatment for emotional and behavioral problems, estimated number of hours of treatment, cost of salaries of medical teams Social work centers Fewer services required Improved availability of service / Society Lower incidence of addiction and juvenile delinquency Improved safety level, lower crime rates Cost of treating addiction and juvenile delinquencyData: annual cost of Centers for the Prevention and Treatment of Illicit Drug Addiction, annual cost of social assistance programs in the field of illicit drugs, annual cost of residential juvenile delinquency treatment institutions t df Sig. (2-tailed) St. Error Di.erences Equal Variances assumed -1.731 60 0.089 0.19277 Equal Variances not assumed -1.519 16.298 0.148 0.21974 Satisfaction Engagement Total N 62 62 Mann-Whitney U 452.500 450.000 Wilcoxon W 1677.500 1675.000 Test Statistic 452.500 450.000 Standard Error 57.786 57.792 Standard Test Stat 2.319 2.275 Asymptotic Sig. (2-sided test) 0.020 0.023 Statistics df (Sig) Satisfaction 0.980 62 (0.398) Engagement 0.914 62 (0.000) Performance 0.915 62 (0.000) Statistics df (Sig) Satisfaction 0.135 62 (0.46) Engagement 0.150 62 (0.007) Performance 0.113 62 (0.001) Employment years Percentage 1 24.2% 1-5 53.2% 6-10 17.7% 11-15 4.8% Education levels Percentage Elementary school 1.6% High school graduate 11.3% Bachelor’s degree graduate 48.4% Master’s degree graduate 33.9% PhD graduate 4.8% Age Percentage 18-25 54.8% 26-35 37.1% 36-45 8.1% Individualistic (7) Responses are unique, but not all unique responses are rated that highly in terms of interpretation and perspective-taking. The exact wording is rarely replicated. Embrace simple ideas expressed at the lower levels as one complex idea). Like to reconcile ideas that are at previous stages expressed as polar. Distrust purely rational analysis in favor of a more holistic view. feelings and context are taken into an account. Realizes that most prior meaning-making and identities were socially constructed and culturally conditioned. Learn to consciously scrutinize their own beliefs and assumptions. do not impose their views on others. Non-material aspects of giving receive full acknowledgement. Giving is a language of social exchange. Expectations of the response of giving are loosened. Attention is paid to the intentions and assumptions behind the act of giving. Better sensing the intentions and assumptions behind the act of giving serves to structure more proper response. The proper response is defined by the capacity to create a positive impact on others. Critical to assess the impact on other is change well-being. An increase of the feeling of well-being in others increases the feeling of well-being in the self. Giving creates a space/mirror for learning about the self and others. Giving as a form of being. When attention is paid to society at large, recognition that there is a mismatch between how one act in terms of being and what is unfolding in the outer reality. “When I receive something, I understand it as a sign of appreciation and thank you, either for good deeds done or just as gratitude for being there for someone. I’m always interested in what the purpose of giving is so that I can thank them for their attention and see what made them feel so good that they decided to give me something. It is always good to know the reason so that you can make them feel good more often and teach you what one cherishes and appreciates. Besides, it gives me the reflection to see how much they know me and give me things that means a lot to me. Things in this context can be material or immaterial, such as “thank you,” hug, kiss, breakfast, help in preparing lunch, a voluntary initiative to do something instead of me . . . in a business setting, we do not take time for personal relationships, for building the trust and letting each other know that going the extra mile matters and it’s noticed. It also creates a team spirit, where mutual wins are greater than individual ones, and that we are not an egoistic society. Unfortunately, this doesn’t always work.” “I always want to give a gift-hit. Of course, it happens a gift-miss to me, too. But giving is a kind of language, so if I give a gift-miss, then we speak two di.erent languages. The unexpected consequence is that I start analysing where I missed and plan to improve that on the next occasion; I want to know you. This means a lot to me. The unexpected consequence is a reflection on how people care less and less: ‘Just bring a present like each year and we're done.’ This happens in a personal and business context. This reflection is for me unpleasant. I estimate it is also a reflection of the time we are living in. At the end of the day, I just wish the receiver recognizes my e.ort in preparing and giving the gift to him. I shake hands, I hug, I kiss.” Self-awareness (E5) Perceived multiple possibilities and alternatives in the situation. Actions in terms of appropriateness. More intimately tied to interpersonal relationships. More aware of individual di.erences in attitudes, interests, and abilities. Being responsible and fair is an important theme. The morality is one of helpfulness, altruism, and some concern for larger social issues. Material focus. Giving in the perspective from e.ects on both sides, thus focus on the relationship, social exchange. Recognition of multi-faceted nature of e.ects giving on the relationship. E.ects of giving on the social exchange are positive (social glue), negative (subversive expression of) and neutral (a method of influence). Emotional impact of the act of giving on the self is becoming more nuanced, emotional distinctions are becoming more fine-grained; attention remains on the positive e.ects of the self, yet the e.ects are induced by the quality of social exchange (and not narrowly by the behavioral response of the other side). “Now and again I am amazed at how grateful some people can be, sincerely grateful when you give them something, even if you give only a little.” “In the past, I was very disappointed to give more than I received, and over time, I learned how to evaluate people well and thereby reduce uncertainty in such situations.” “Giving promotes collaboration and social cohesion.” “Too many people give things just to display a higher social status than they hold. We should give to those to whom we are precious, and not only to those who are dear to us.” “Some special emotion like joy when you sense someone happy/joyful/satisfied with the gift and attention.” “That instead of having a positive e.ect on a person, your e.ect is negative, and that way you hurt a person, and cause damage to the relationship.” Conscientious (E6) Absolute statements and rules replaced by comparison, contingent statements. Capable of combining opposing alternatives holistically. Presenting choices and decisions. Have long-term goals and ideals. Concerned with life’s purpose. Recognize the inevitability of human imperfections. Report emotional nuances. Distinguishes appearances from the underling feelings. The physical aspect of a person is contrasted to mental and spiritual aspects. A broader temporal and social context. The non-material aspects of giving enter our attention (i.e., giving attention to someone is also an act of giving). Giving as a mechanism of high-quality bonding; a tool to induce trust in the relationship. The creation of trust in the relationship is a function of my response on the response of others; becoming aware that proper/improper act of giving is defined expectations one carries; starting to learn to loosen expectations; not to expect anything is the best approach. The properly performed act of giving increases proximity with other person in the relationship, high quality. A high-quality social exchange creates a positive impact on the self because it induces a feeling of connectedness (compassion). “It is more important to take time and e.ort to make someone happy and joyful; material things are not so important.” “When I give something, I can feel good, a little more fulfilled; sometimes I expect something in return but not always. Sometimes when I give, do that to express attention that is expected in our society. When I give, I am also aware of my will to serve. Sometimes I have assisted people with di.erent acts of kindness out of my sub-consciousness because this is part of us humans. When I help, I also give advice, because this helps build up communication and trustful relationships and friendships. I help because I feel I am connected and I am not uncaring. In school, I have received more help than I have given in return. . . . At work, I help most of the time and only sometimes and rarely say no.” “Tears of happiness and a hug. Pleasure and compassion.” “I expect not to be moved, but usually it pleases me. Usually, people are surprised. I prefer to give time, a.ection, gifts, and emotional support. You need me, I’ll be there. Why would I need to get anything from it? I like it, so I do it.” “Satisfaction, the feeling that I have done something right—when I see the positive reaction in the person I have influenced with a gift or attention.” “What I give to others it is unconditional and I expect nothing in return, so I have no unexpected consequences.” “Consequence is the connection through a sense of fulfilment, inner warmth, positive a.ect.” “When giving, releasing even greater happiness than when receiving a gift.” If the gift is perceived with sincere joy, I feel that I made that person happy and I get the feeling of satisfaction. I think that I like the person more. If the gift is not appreciated. I try not to show disappointment. I think that after such “acceptance” of the gift I move away from that particular person.” “When I’m a giver and I need to give a gift to my family or friends I initially feel stressed out! This is when I have to choose a gift. Usually, I choose something they would be able to use. When this phase is behind me, I am happy that I was able to choose “the proper” gift. When I give the gift to the person that is close to me, I usually feel happy and gentle. However, more important for me is how the gift is being perceived. If the gift is perceived with sincere joy, I feel that I made that person happy and I get the feeling of satisfaction. I think that I like the person more. If the gift is not appreciated (you can hear thank you, but your gut feeling tells you it is not sincere), I try not to show disappointment. I think that after such “acceptance” of the gift I move away from that particular person. General cognitive and behavioral tendencies of the stage (Loevinger, 2013) Perspective focus on the expected and unexpected outcome of giving Excerpts Self-protective (E3) Controlled by impulses. Poor language. Interpersonal relationships are viewed from the perspective of taking. A manipulative or deceptive attitude toward others. Fear of being manipulated and deceived. Material focus. Act of giving and its consequence not under reflective attention. Focus on negative e.ects (negative feelings and thoughts). Words and feelings simplistic. Material focus. E.ects on the self (how I feel). E.ects on another person not included in the interpretation “Dissatisfaction of a person.” “Spoiling.” “Not-good enough present.” “Good feeling when I give.” “Bad if getting an expensive gift.” “The embarrassment of choosing a gift.” “Gratitude not shown.” “Something in return.” “Feeling to give back.” Conformist (E4) Give many conventional responses. Interpretations conceptually simplistic. Frequent use of like, never, or everyone. Judgmental approach, right/wrong. Interpersonal relationships described as behaviors. Search for social acceptability and belonging. Giving gets more attention. Material focus. More complex interpretations. Focus on the emotional impact of the act of giving on the self. Emotional e.ects are framed simplistically (satisfaction, dissatisfaction). The other side enters into the perspective, but the attention is given primarily to how the response of the other side e.ects the self. Transactional-material approach to act of giving (exchange of equal values). The expectation of reciprocation of equal value. Disappointment if the reciprocated response is not aligned with the expectations. A lack of clarity around the expectations as a response. “Feeling of joy, love, importance.” “That the gift is not well received or does not end where it should.” “A problem can arise when the value of gifts is di.erent, and you may feel that you owe someone else who gave you a more expensive gift.” “I get a sense of possession or abundance.” “Gifting is something nice, and it is polite for the gifted person to accept and give thanks. It also happened to me that he did not want to accept the gift.” “If you receive a gift, you feel obliged to return it yourself.” “In the past, I learned that it is necessary to think carefully who you give to, and how much one deserves. In the past, I probably, like everyone, was very negatively surprised in this regard." “People taking it for granted, and forgetting what I have done for them." “You give too much to someone who doesn’t deserve it.” “Dissatisfaction with high expectations, desire for more and more.” “More willingness to engage.” “Gifting brings a smile to your face.” “Tears of happiness if the gift was a surprise.” “We always want more and more.” “Satisfaction.” “Satisfaction that you help.” Intraclass Correlation Coe.cient Intraclass Correlationa 95% Confidence Interval F Test with True Value 0 Lower Bound Upper Bound Value df1 df2 Sig. Single Measures 0.965b 0.953 0.973 55.462 184 184 0.000 Average Measures 0.982c 0.976 0.987 55.462 184 184 0.000 Two-way mixed-e.ects model in which people e.ects are random and measures e.ects are fixed. a Type A intraclass correlation coe.cients using an absolute agreement definition.. b The estimator is the same, whether or not the interaction e.ect is present. c This estimate is computed assuming the interaction e.ect is absent, because it is not estimable otherwise. Stage of development (Loevinger’s framework) Distribution of cases (N = 290) Average age Gender Educational background Male Female Natural sciences, engineering Social sciences, economics Other Group of ordinary people Impulsive (E2) 1.8% 20 70% 30% 30% 60% 10% Self-protective (E3) 8.6% 31 50% 50% 50% 50% 0% Conformist (E4) 59.7% 30 50% 50% 29.1% 55.6% 15.4% Self-aware (E5) 19.7% 41 50% 50% 41.9% 51.6% 6.5% Conscientious (E6) 5.4% 43 50% 50% 10% 60% 30% Individualistic (E7) 4.4% 45 50% 50% 10% 60% 30% Management task (associated tools that operate the underlying concepts) Contextual features considered Strategy development Internal (organizational) and external (operational environment) characteristics Strategic analysis Internal (organizational) and external (operational environment) characteristics Strategic choice Internal (organizational) and external (operational environment) characteristics Applying organizational structure Task (core activities) characteristics and diversification-related characteristics Managing project (e.g., the use of project organizations and project implementation strategy) Project characteristics and parent organization characteristics Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Note PDMP -0.09* 0.01 -0.04 GOs -0.23** -0.16** 0.26 DJ -0.28** -0.26** -0.25 PSS -0.25** 0.22 H5 PDMP×PSS 0.09 H6 GOs×PSS -0.82* H6 DJ×PSS -0.02 H6 .R2 0.237 0.035 0.014 R2 0.237 0.272 0.286 Adjusted R2 0.232 0.266 0.276 .F 52.070** 23.970** 3.250* Mediation Std. estimates Lower Upper Note PDMP . AC . ITQ -0.12** -0.16 -0.07 H4 GOs . AC . ITQ -0.25* -0.35 -0.16 H4 DJ . AC . ITQ -0.06** -0.11 -0.02 H4 Std. estimates SE t Note Model 1: Independent and dependent variables PDMP . ITQ -0.11* 0.04 -2.12 H1 GOs . ITQ -0.23** 0.07 -4.28 H1 DJ . ITQ -0.31** 0.05 -6.18 H1 Model 2: Independent and mediating variables PDMP . AC 0.32** 0.03 7.14 H2 GOs . AC 0.41** 0.05 8.92 H2 DJ . AC 0.11* 0.03 2.70 H2 Model 3: Mediating and dependent variables AC . ITQ -0.58** 0.06 -13.39 H3 Model 4: Full model PDMP . ITQ 0.03 0.04 0.64 — GOs . ITQ -0.03 0.07 -0.57 — DJ . ITQ -0.25** 0.05 -5.43 — PDMP . AC 0.32** 0.03 7.10 — GOs . AC 0.41** 0.05 8.93 — DJ . AC 0.11** 0.03 2.74 — AC . ITQ -0.48** 0.08 -8.04 — M SD a CR AVE 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 ITQ 2.43 1.22 0.88 0.89 0.80 (0.89) 2 PSS 3.75 0.86 0.85 0.89 0.67 -0.40 (0.82) 3 AC 3.65 0.87 0.91 0.92 0.65 -0.58 0.59 (0.81) 4 PDMP 4.74 1.45 0.95 0.95 0.79 -0.37 0.65 0.58 (0.89) 5 GOs 3.97 0.88 0.92 0.92 0.75 -0.41 0.56 0.62 0.52 (0.86) 6 DJ 3.11 1.09 0.95 0.95 0.81 -0.45 0.44 0.42 0.46 0.40 (0.90) Digital dynamic capabilities Ambidextrous managerial learning orientation Organizational e.ects of digital transformation Explorative learning orientation Exploitative learning orientation Digital sensing An imbalance towards generalist learning orientation Scanning new technological and market opportunities via a digital network (Helfat & Peteraf, 2015; Teece, 2007; Montealegre & Iyengar, 2021) by using discovering and sensemaking activities (Kirzner, 1997; Weick, 1995). Enhancing existing practices with digital tools (Laudien & Daxböck, 2016; Warner & Wäger, 2019) Knowledge specific to the industry to set the initial constraints and test the feasibility of technological opportunities (Cross & Sivaloganathan, 2007). First-order e.ects: Convergent change Digital seizing A balance between generalist and specialist learning orientation Decisions on a business model redesign by using digital technologies (Teece, 2007; Warner & Wäger, 2019) and which competencies to build within the firm and which to outsource (Ellström et al., 2021) Flexibility, adaption, and openness to new growth opportunities (Ellström et al., 2021). Skills of interpretations to discover, comprehend, and apply knowledge with future goals (Bunderson & Sutcli.e, 2002; Kelly et al., 2011; Shane, 2000). Expert reasoning about making investments in digital technologies (Helfat & Peteraf, 2015) Decomposing the projects and building the business processes for e.ective distribution of resources and team members (Ellström et al., 2021). Eliciting expert feedback or preferences regarding digital seizing choices from internal and external stakeholders; development of detailed design (Cross & Sivaloganathan, 2007). Second-order e.ects: Transforming work Digital transforming A balance between generalist and specialist learning orientation Managerial decision making and action regarding the coordinated adaptation of strategic assets that are critical for digital transformation (Helfat & Peteraf, 2015) Leadership, social skills, and e.ective communication across functions (Bunderson & Sutcli.e, 2002; Helfat & Peteraf, 2015). Development of digital skills (Warner & Wäger, 2019) Decomposing the projects and building the business processes for e.ective distribution of resources and team members (Ellström et al., 2021). Overcoming the potential obstacles in building the digital infrastructure by pinpointing best practices for how come some specific challenges (regarding technology and people) may be overcome (Cross & Sivaloganathan, 2007). Third-order e.ects: Transforming the organization Framework/key reference Type of dynamic capability Teece (2007) Sensing Scanning, creation, learning, and interpretation of local and global technologies and markets; investment in research and related activities. Seizing Improving current technological competencies; investing in new technologies and designs, developing services and products. Transforming Recombining and reconfiguring competencies, assets and organizational structures as technologies or market change. Warner & Wäger (2019) Digital sensing (1) digital scouting, (2) digital scenario planning, and (3) digital mindset crafting. Digital seizing (1) strategic agility, (2) rapid prototyping, and (3) balancing digital portfolios. Digital transforming (1) navigating innovation ecosystems, (2) redesigning internal structures, and (3) improving digital maturity. Ellström et al., (2021) Digital sensing (1) cross-industrial digital sensing, (2) inside-out digital infrastructure sensing. Digital seizing (1) digital strategy development, (2) determining enterprise boundaries. Digital transforming (1) decomposing digital transformation into specified projects, (2) creating unified digital infrastructure. Dynamic Relationships Management Journal CONTENTS Volume 11, Number 2, November 2022 Developing Digital Transformation Capability: The Role of Managerial Ambidextrous Learning Nikolina Dragicevic, Amadeja Lamovšek, Saša Batistic ........................................................................ 5 Supportive Human Resource Practices and Intention to Quit: The Role of A.ective Commitment and Perceived Supervisor Support Emil Knezovic, Hakan Atli, Kerim Lojo, Ognjen Ridic ............................................................................ 21 Reflections on Approaches to Research Strategies in Management Mihály Görög ....................................................................................................................................... 37 Evolutionary Tendencies of Simple Social Exchange Across the Stages of Ego Development: Implications for Leadership Melita Balas Rant ................................................................................................................................. 55 Empirical Analysis of the Influence of Gamification on Employees’ Behavior Ibrahim Hamza, Sarolta Tóvölgyi .......................................................................................................... 71 How to Measure Our Impact on Society: An Illustration of Social Impact Analysis Mojca Marc, Nina Ponikvar .................................................................................................................. 79 Going Back to the Roots: A Bibliometric and Thematic Analysis of Women Entrepreneurship Naira Fayaz, Sujata Khandai, Ivan Zupic, Avneet Kaur:......................................................................... 97 Author Guidelines................................................................................................................................ 117 Aims & Scope The Dynamic Relationships Management Journal is an international, double blind peer-reviewed bi-annual publication of academics’ and practitioners’ research analyses and perspectives on relationships management and organizational themes and topics. The focus of the journal is on management, organization, corporate governance and neighboring areas (including, but not limited to, organizational behavior, human resource management, sociology, organizational psychology, industrial economics etc.). Within these fields, the topical focus of the journal is above all on the establishment, development, main­tenance and improvement of dynamic relationships, connections, interactions, patterns of behavior, structures and networks in social entities like firms, non-profit institutions and public administration units within and beyond individual entity bound­aries. Thus, the main emphasis is on formal and informal relationships, structures and processes within and across individual, group and organizational levels. DRMJ articles test, extend, or build theory and contribute to management and organizational practice using a variety of empirical methods (e.g., quantitative, qualitative, field, laboratory, meta-analytic, and combination). Articles format should include, but are not restricted to, traditional academic research articles, case studies, literature reviews, method­ological advances, approaches to teaching, learning and management development, and interviews with prominent exec­utives and scholars. Material disclaimer Responsibility for (1) the accuracy of statements of fact, (2) the authenticity of scientific findings or observations, (3) expressions of scientific or other opinion and (4) any other material published in the journal rests solely with the author(s). The Journal, its owners, publishers, editors, reviewers and sta. take no responsibility for these matters. Information for Readers Dynamic Relationships Management Journal (ISSN 2232-5867 - printed version & ISSN 2350-367X - on-line version, available in (full text) at the DRMJ website) is published in 2 issues per year. For ordering the printed version, please contact the editor at matej.cerne@ef.uni-lj.si. Call for papers The Dynamic Relationships Management Journal (DRMJ) is inviting contributions for upcoming issues. The manuscript can be submitted per e-mail to the editor (matej.cerne@ef.uni-lj.si). Before the submission, authors should consult Author Guidelines. There is no submission or publication fee. Open Access statement This is an open access journal which means that all content is freely available without charge to the user or his/her institution. Users are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of the articles in this journal without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author. This is in accordance with the BOAI definition of open access. Please read »Copyright / licensing conditions« statement for addition info about legal use of published material. Copyright / licensing conditions Authors of the articles published in DRMJ hold copyright with no restrictions and grant the journal right of first publi­cation with the work. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.) Articles published in DRMJ are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International Public License (CC BY-NC 4.0; http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/). Under this license, authors retain ownership of the copyright for their content, but allow anyone to download, reuse, reprint, modify, distribute and/or copy the content for NonCommercial purposes as long as the original authors and source are cited. Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 1 Market-leading organizations know that good inputs are essential for producing high-quality out­puts. In academic work, the same logic applies. Data is our primary or key source of information that supplements sound theories, state-of-the-art re­views, or conceptual frameworks. It adds the origi­nality to our manuscripts, and enables authors to report about organizational realities. By assessing the quality of reported data, editors decide whether or not they will desk reject (or ultimately accept) your hard work. Therefore, it should not be taken for granted how we collect, process and visualize data. The purpose of this editorial is to draw your attention to the often overlooked yet extremely im­portant and decisive aspects of preparing and using empirical (both qualitative and quantitative) data. Di.erent data collection processes may be ap­plied depending upon your research question(s). However, scholars should be aware of some of the best and/or well-accepted (recommended) practices. For instance, although cross-sectional designs are most common, we should try to avoid to collect data at a single point in time. Such research design does not allow us to make causal inferences; we can only hypothesize about correlational relationships or make inferential comparisons. Longitudinal data is favor­able, yet often unreachable. However, the least what can authors do to try to increase the rigor in data col­lection is to have a time-lagged study (i.e., to measure dependent variable at Time 2, while independent vari­able is examined at Time 1) or to use retrospective measures (see Miller, Cardinal, & Glick, 1997). Another common methodological fallacy is to have single-source data. Yes, you can run di.erent post-hoc tests for common method bias, but it will never be as good as having multi-source data. If the latter is not possible, try to run a multi-study re­search, or at least make the same respondent to en­gage in your research twice. This would mean that the same person will assess both independent and dependent variables, yet at di.erent time points. Such a research design would probably put con­straints on the choice of potential outcome variables. However, if you, for instance, would still like to report about work performance as an outcome, a viable op­tion would be to use meta-perceptions of how sur­vey respondents are seen by others (Hernaus, Cerne, & Škerlavaj, 2021; Schooman & Mayer, 2008). Data processing means that you have a plethora of di.erent data analysis methods at your disposal. Which one(s) you will apply mostly de­pends upon your research question. Similar to the corporate world logic, where di.erent strategies re­quire di.erent organizational designs (Galbraith, 2001), you need to match your research question with the appropriate data analysis method(s) and techniques. To give an example, if you want to de­termine which job characteristics are critical for being more creative and innovative, a necessary condition analysis (Dul, 2016; Hau. et al., 2021) should be applied. However, if you are interested in determining which one(s) are dominant an­tecedents of innovative work behavior, a relative weight analysis would be more appropriate (Tonin­danel & LeBreton, 2011; Hakanen, Bakker, & Tu­runen, 2021). Furthermore, if you search for job characteristics’ profiles that might enable higher levels of employees’ creativity and innovation, qual­itative comparative analysis (Cangialosi, Battistelli, & Odoardi, 2021; Rihoux & Ragin, 2008) would be the method to consider. The icing on the cake would be to apply triangulation, that is, using multiple methods or techniques to conduct your research. You may want to consider combining qualitative (e.g., experiments or interviews) with quantitative (e.g., survey) within the mixed-methods study, or even apply merged methods (Gobo et al., 2021). Finally, not less important is how you visualize your data. Recently, data visualization has gained the momentum, thus highlighting the well-known adage “The form follows the function” (Jean-Bap­tiste Lamarck). Although the content is more impor­tant, you should be able to provide a high-quality follow-up, that is, to communicate appropriately the results, insights and conclusions made through di.erent visuals (i.e., tables, graphs, figures, etc.). Good visualization methods will make your life eas­ier, and enable you not only to explain, but also to explore and understand your data better (Healy, 2019). However, be aware that it requires attention and time to understand the context for the need to communicate (i.e., to whom you communicate, what you audience need to know, and how you will communicate; Nussbaumer Knaflic, 2015). Volume 11, Number 2 of the Dynamic Relation­ships Management Journal (DRMJ) consists of seven papers, representing a mixture of theoretical (con­ceptual or review), methodological and empirical studies. A wide array of relevant topics are covered, thus o.ering to our readership a diverse set of in­sights from the field of management. The first paper, written by Nikolina Dragicevic, Amadeja Lamovšek and Saša Batistic deals with a hot topic of managerial ambidexterity that serves as a microfoundation of dynamic organizational ca­pabilities within the world of digital transforma­tion. This conceptual paper derived from a thorough systematic review o.ers an integrated framework of thus far unrelated perspectives. In addition, it yields sound multilevel propositions for future research on digital sensing, digital seizing, and digital transfor­mation capability. The second paper, prepared by Emil Knezovic, Hakan Ath, Kerim Lojo and Ognjen Ridic, is an em­pirical piece that contributes with interesting insights about the role of human resource management and organizational behavior antecedents of the intention to quit. Specifically, they applied structural equation modelling to analyze and largely confirm direct (i.e., supportive HR practices), mediation (i.e., a.ective commitment) moderation (i.e., supervisor support) e.ects on employee retention within the under­studied research context of Bosnia and Herzegovina. The third one, authored by Mihály Görög, is a reflective paper that o.ers an overview and invites the reader to reconsider their strategy and ap­proaches to conducting the management research. With an intention to engage, and not to o.er recipes, the author o.ered a useful interpretation of deductive and inductive reasoning that is neces­sary to apply when crafting our research. What we particularly welcome is that the authors reminds us how important the role of logic in research is. Melita Balas Rant wrote about the implications of ego development on the quality of leader-mem­ber exchange relationships. By bringing the neo-Pi­agetian school of adult (ego) development into management discourse, the author o.ered both theoretical insights and empirical evidence about how the evolution of the interpretation schemes of the act of giving between the leader and fol­lower evolve across the levels of ego development. The fifth contribution to this Volume has been made by Ibrahim Hamza and Sarolta Tóvölgyi, who addressed the influential role of gamification as a behavioral modeling tool on organizational behav­ioral change. Their empirical results drawn from a cross-sectional sample of 62 employees provided a preliminary evidence that employees who practiced gamification reported to be more engaged and sat­isfied, although remained at the same performance level as their colleagues who did not practice gami­fication at the workplace. Expressed di.erently, em­bedding game element into work activities adds a fun layer to organizational reality. The sixth paper, written by Mojca Marc and Nina Ponikvar, is a qualitative study that illustrates how organizations can make their societal impact more visible. By using the social return on invest­ment (SROI) as an evaluation approach, they showed that financial impact of the Incredible Years parenting program has tremendous positive benefits, both for children and other stakeholders involved. Last but not the least, the seventh paper, pre­pared by Naira Fayaz, Sujata Khandai, Ivan Zupic and Avneet Kaur represents a thorough 30-year biblio­metric and thematic analysis of women en­trepreneurship. By applying a diverse set of bibliographic methods, supplemented with the­matic analysis, the authors not only enriched read­ers with a comprehensive quantitative review of this globally relevant issue, yet identified emerging top­ics that should bring this stream of research to the next level. Tomislav Hernaus and Matej Cerne REFERENCES Dul, J. (2016). Necessary condition analysis (NCA): Logic and methodology of “Necessary but not su.cient” causality. Organizational Research Methods, 19(1), 10-52. Galbraith, J. R. (2001). Designing Organizations: An Exec­utive Guide to Strategy, Structure, and Process Re­vised. San Francisco: Pfei.er. Gobo, G., Fielding, N. G., La Rocca, G., & van der Vaart, W. (2021). Merged Methods: A Rationale for Full Integration. Thousand Oaks: Sage Pub­lications. Hakanen, J. J., Bakker, A. B., & Turunen, J. (2021). The rel­ative importance of various job resources for work en­gagement: A concurrent and follow-up dominance analysis. Business Research Quarterly, https://doi.org/ ­ 10.1177/23409444211012419 Hau., S., Guerci, M., Dul, J., & van Rhee, H. (2021). Ex­ploring necessary conditions in HRM research: Fun­damental issues and methodological implications. Human Resource Management Journal, 31(1), 18-36. Healy, K. (2019). Data Visualization: A Practical Introduc­tion. New Jersey: Princeton University Press. Hernaus, T., Cerne, M., & Škerlavaj, M. (2021). The inter­play between relational job design and cross-training in predicting employee job/task citizenship perfor­mance. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 32(4), 625-646. Miller, C. C., Cardinal, L. B., & Glick, W. H. (1997). Retro­spective reports in organizational research: A reexam­ination of recent evidence. Academy of Management Journal, 40(1), 189-204. Nussbaumer Knaflic, C. (2015). Storytelling with data: A data visualization guide for business professionals. Hoboken: Wiley. Rihoux, B., & Ragin, C. C. , eds. (2008). Configurational Comparative Methods: Qualitative Comparative Anal­ysis (QCA) and Related Techniques. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. Schoorman, F. D., & Mayer, R. C. (2008). The value of common perspectives in self-reported appraisals: You get what you ask for. Organizational Research Meth­ods, 11(1), 148-159. Tonidandel, S., & LeBreton, J. M. (2011). Relative impor­tance analysis: A useful supplement to regression anal­ysis. Journal of Business and Psychology, 26(1), 1-9. FROM THE EDITORS: THE IMPORTANCE OF DATA IN RESEARCH – BEST PRACTICES REGARDING DATA COLLECTION, PROCESSING AND VISUALIZATION Tomislav Hernaus University of Zagreb Matej Cerne University of Ljubljana 2 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 3 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 4 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 5 DEVELOPING DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION CAPABILITY: THE ROLE OF MANAGERIAL AMBIDEXTROUS LEARNING Nikolina Dragicevic Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Zagreb, Croatia ndragicevic@efzg.hr Amadeja Lamovšek School of Economics and Business, University of Ljubljana, Slovenia amadeja.lamovsek@ef.uni-lj.si Saša Batistic School of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Tilburg University, The Netherlands s.batistic@tilburguniversity.edu This paper integrates the individual ambidexterity, digital transformation, and dynamic capabilities literatures to de­velop a framework that helps to understand the role of managerial ambidextrous learning in building the digital trans­formation capability of an organization. Based on a comprehensive literature review, the paper identifies competing demands in terms of managerial learning orientation serving as microfoundations of di.erent dynamic organizational capabilities underpinning digital transformation. We adopt an ambidextrous perspective of learning and propose that managers need to balance explorative and exploitative learning to aid building digital transformation capabilities. This paper contributes to ambidexterity and dynamic capabilities theoretical perspectives through its distinctive focus on the role of individual-level learning in the context of organizational-level digital transformation. The paper enhances understanding of how firms may support digital e.orts by becoming sensitive to and supporting managerial ambidex­terity as a critical factor in a successful digital transformation journey. We suggest that future research e.orts should investigate empirically the role of managerial ambidextrous behavior in digital e.orts. Keywords: individual ambidexterity, digital transformation, generalist learning, specialist learning, microfoundations of dynamic capabilities 1INTRODUCTION Technological advances trigger digital transfor­mation processes that alter value-creating paths in organisations (Vial, 2019) and lead to the emer­gence of the fourth industrial revolution (Beier et al., 2020; Dragicevic et al., 2020). The role of man­agers in making digital e.orts successful is critical; however, digital transformation initiatives often ex­perience di.culties because managers experience role ambiguity and do not know how to act (Ell­ström et al., 2021; Fitzgerald et al., 2014). For man­agers to successfully navigate through the digital journey, a vital challenge is building a digital trans­formation capability (Ellström et al., 2021; Warner & Wäger, 2019) while at the same time keeping the continuity of business performance, satisfying cus­tomer needs, and ensuring the wellbeing of employ­ees. Essentially, managers need to balance between the integration of new technologies (exploration) and taking care (exploitation) of the core, well-es­tablished business (Li et al., 2021; Warner & Wäger, 2019). This premise states that there is a great para­dox that surrounds digital transformation processes (Purvanova & Kenda, 2018), requiring managers to deal with tensions resulting from conflicting de­mands such as free exploration to complement ex­ploitative processes of business as usual (Ellström et al., 2021). Managing competing demands is be­coming necessary for e.ective digital transforma­tion to occur (Montealegre & Iyengar, 2021). Competing demands at the individual level often are studied using the construct of individual ambidexterity, defined as a capacity of a manager (or another employee) to exhibit seemingly incom­patible behaviors (Birkinshaw & Gibson, 2004) of performing both explorative and exploitative activ­ities, which lead to innovation and job performance (Mom et al., 2007; Rosing & Zacher, 2017). Individ­ual ambidexterity is suited to cope with dynamic contexts (Eisenhardt et al., 2010; Good & Michel, 2013) such as technology turbulent environments (Folger et al., 2021). Moreover, in uncertain and in­terdependent work contexts, managers’ ambidex­terity has proven to contribute to individual performance (Mom et al., 2015). Despite the promising value of investigating the role of individ­ual ambidexterity in the digital transformation ef­forts in companies, the literature still lacks relevant studies of the matter. Although some recent re­search discussed technological change and digital transformation concerning organisational ambidex­terity (Ouyang et al., 2020; Scuotto et al., 2019) and some studies connected individual ambidexterity to technology turbulent environments (Folger et al., 2021), less is known about how digital transforma­tion is connected to the individual, and in particular managerial ambidexterity. We contribute to bridging that gap by investi­gating the following research question: What type of learning is required from ambidextrous managers to develop digital transformation capability? We fo­cused on the dimension of learning because am­bidexterity is associated inherently with learning and two types of learning activities—explorative and exploitative (March, 1991) —which echo the specialist–generalist dilemma at the individual level (Bonesso et al., 2014; Kang & Snell, 2009a; Kelly et al., 2011a). For example, whereas specialist human capital favors exploitative learning (i.e., in-depth learning within a narrow field), generalist human capital fosters explorative learning (i.e., learning within di.erent fields) (Bonesso et al., 2014). Similar to Teece (2007) and Warner and Wäger (2019), we approached digital transformation as a dynamic ca­pability and assumed that managers can contribute to the development of such capability through their knowledge (Helfat & Peteraf, 2015; Pasamar et al., 2015). Dynamic capabilities enable continuous restoring of the firms’ resources and competencies in line with environmental changes and new sources of competitive advantage (Teece, 2007). Although researchers have dealt with our topic of interest im­plicitly to some extent (e.g. Ellström et al., 2021; Laudien & Daxböck, 2016; Warner & Wäger, 2019), we connected the dots from various contributions into an integrated framework to establish the rela­tionship between digital transformation as a dy­namic capability and ambidextrous’ managers di.erent learning orientations. We addressed the research aim with a literature review to integrate conceptually the theoretical streams we investigated—managerial ambidextrous learning and digital transformation as a dynamic ca­pability—to gain understanding of how managers can make their way through ongoing business challenges (i.e., competing demands) that they face in adapting to rapid technological and market change. Accord­ingly, this study builds a framework that explicates managerial learning orientations (i.e., generalist or specialist) serving as microfoundations of di.erent dynamic capabilities underpinning digital transforma­tion. Microfoundations are primary components (e.g. individual-level practices) underlying higher-level constructs such as organizational dynamic capabili­ties (Felin et al., 2012; Mousavi et al., 2019). The contributions of this study are as follows. First, the study extends the existing literature on managerial ambidexterity by explaining how the role of a manager’s ambidextrous learning is related to di.erent categories of dynamic capabilities un­derpinning digital transformation (i.e., sensing, seiz­ing, and transforming capabilities). Second, we enhance understanding of how firms may support digital e.orts by becoming sensitive to and support­ing managerial ambidexterity as a critical factor in a successful digital transformation journey. Accord­ingly, we believe that the framework may aid man­agers with developing and deploying digital strategies that consider important choices that managers need to make in digital e.orts, namely which mode of learning on which to focus as a part of capabilities development required for successful digital transformation. 2MANAGERIAL AMBIDEXTERITY: OVERVIEW OF THE CONCEPT 2.1Defining Managerial Ambidexterity Competing or conflicting demands are in man­agement literature studied under the umbrella con­struct of ambidexterity—the exploitation and exploration dilemma, seen as the core to learning, performance, agility, and innovation across the level of analysis (Birkinshaw & Gibson, 2004; Birkinshaw & Gupta, 2013; Raisch et al., 2009). Whereas explo­ration aids with sensing market opportunities and re­newing companies’ capabilities, exploitation builds on existing opportunities and creates a return on cur­rent capabilities (Levinthal & March, 1993). Ambidex­terity at the individual level is seen as having a critical role in organizational ambidexterity (Birkinshaw & Gupta, 2013; O’Reilly III & Tushman, 2013; Raisch et al., 2009). Whereas organizational ambidexterity has been a well-established construct for three decades, recently researchers have started to pay attention to individual ambidexterity, the capacity of an individual to conduct contradictory activities of exploration and exploitation toward job performance and innovation (Bledow et al., 2009; Mom et al., 2015b). We focused on managers as units of our analysis because they are expected to be more exposed to such paradoxical be­havior. Accordingly, we subscribed to the definition of individual ambidexterity as “a manager’s be­havioural orientation toward combining exploration- and exploitation-related activities within a certain pe­riod of time” (Mom et al., 2009, p. 812). The literature describes ambidextrous man­agers as multitaskers capable of engaging in com­plex cognitive processes such as integrative and paradoxical thinking, and capable of being involved in both routine and nonroutine activities and in dif­ferent types of learning activities which both refine existing and increase the variety of their knowledge and skills (Adler et al., 1999; Mom et al., 2007, 2015; Papachroni & Heracleous, 2020). The literature pro­vides examples of various di.erent tensions or con­flicting demands that are related to individual ambidexterity (Pertusa-Ortega et al., 2020). For ex­ample, studies have focused on the tensions be­tween the exploration of new capabilities and the exploitation of current capabilities (Rosing & Zacher, 2017), adaptability and alignment (Birkinshaw & Gibson, 2004), exploration of new ideas and their implementation (Bledow et al., 2009), flexibility and e.ciency (Yu et al., 2020), and the pursuit of new knowledge or use of the existing knowledge (Kelly et al., 2011). However, less is known about how di­mensions of learning orientation (i.e., explorative or generalist and exploitative or specialist learning) can influence individuals’ ambidexterity. 2.2Role of Learning in Managerial Ambidexterity Managerial learning is an integral part of man­agers’ work, and it is essential for organizational change (Sollander & Engström, 2021). From a knowl­edge-based view, ambidexterity at the individual level includes either the deepening of one’s existing knowledge or learning outside one’s current knowl­edge domains (Keller & Weibler, 2015). Therefore, some models of ambidexterity directly connect to the human resource base and perceive these di.er­ent types of learning activities as a core to building individual and organizational ambidexterity (Kang et al., 2009; Mom et al., 2007, 2015; Prieto & Santana, 2012). In particular, the explorative-exploitative learning orientation echoes the generalist–specialist learning dilemma (Kang & Snell, 2009). Whereas spe­cialists have in-depth knowledge associated with a particular knowledge domain or function and typi­cally occupy more narrowly defined jobs, generalists tend to have cross-disciplinary knowledge that can be enacted across di.erent domains and hence oc­cupy heterogeneous (boundary-spanning) jobs that require diverse skill-sets (Kang & Snell, 2009; Kelly et al., 2011). Generalists are valued for the breadth of their knowledge and entrepreneurial behavior which provides an organization with the ability to explore and cost savings), organizational performance (i.e., innovativeness, financial performance, firm growth, competitive advantage), and wellbeing of employ­ees. However, digital transformation also has some drawbacks, such as algorithmic control and data se­curity issues (Kellogg et al., 2020; Vial, 2019). Some other challenges require the management of em­ployees’ heterogeneous perceptions of digitalization e.orts (Schneider & Sting, 2020). Ambidextrous managers exhibit both generalist and specialist learning orientations. For example, Birkinshaw and Gibson (2004) suggested that am­bidextrous individuals enact both types of knowl­edge but are typically more generalists; this stance was adopted by other authors (e.g., Mom et al., 2009). Furthermore, Kelly et al. (2011, p. 620) found that specialist–generalist demarcation is “too rigid as it does not take into account the ways in which individuals themselves may choose to shape their working lives and careers.” 3DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION IN FIRMS 3.1Defining Digital Transformation Digital transformation refers to “a process wherein organizations respond to changes taking place in their environment by using digital technolo­gies to alter their value creation processes” (Vial, 2019, p. 3). Digital technologies are combinations of information, computing, communication, and con­nectivity technologies (Bharadwaj et al., 2013; Vial, 2019). Examples of such technologies driving digital transformation and bringing new market and oper­ational opportunities are mobile technologies, cloud computing, blockchain, artificial intelligence, and the internet of things (IoT) (Vial, 2019; Warner & Wäger, 2019).1 In a recent literature review, Vial (2019) identified several organizational-level out­comes that digital transformation promises to bring to organizations, such as operational e.ciency (i.e., improvement of business processes, automation, activities and switching between di.erent mindsets and action sets (Bledow et al., 2009), and resolving paradoxical requirements of exploitation and explo­ration (Raisch et al., 2009). Therefore, developing managerial ambidexterity seems to be critical. Organizations engaged in digital transformation processes need to reconfigure and innovate their practices to establish a balance between more or less radical improvements and maintaining a core busi­ness. Digitalization often serves as a prompt for orga­nizations to experiment and reinvent their business models, including reinventing industries, changing products and services, creating new digital businesses, reshaping value delivery models, and rethinking value propositions (Westerman et al., 2014; Warner & Wäger, 2019). Companies also can use digital tech­nologies to change their business models incremen­tally, i.e., “to extend, revise, or terminate existing activities in an evolutionary manner” (Cavalcante et al., 2011; Foss & Saebi, 2018; Kim & Min, 2015). Given the strategic nature of change, the e.orts that digital­ization e.orts require, and the challenges that these e.orts face, it becomes apparent that the managerial role is critical (Montealegre & Iyengar, 2021). 3.2Digital Transformation and Managerial Ambidexterity Underlying the digitalization attempts, tensions emerge which require managers’ both explorative and exploitative activities (Montealegre et al., 2019; Warner & Wäger, 2019). Often, the emphasis on ei­ther exploration or exploitation will a.ect a decision regarding the type of business model change (Lau­dien & Daxböck, 2016). For example, managers are prompted to explore because there are changes in technologies that they potentially need to adopt to keep long-term competitiveness. At the same time, they need to exploit to maintain companies’ short-term competitive pressures. Managers also need to either adjust their digital technology portfolio or ac­quire new technologies (Li et al., 2021). These ex­amples show that digital transformation and digital workplaces often require performing contradictory new capabilities and to adapt (Kang & Snell, 2009; Shane, 2000). On the other hand, specialists are ex­perts in a given field and are e.ective in gaining new in-depth knowledge within the narrow range defined by the domain. The role of managers’ knowledge is an important aspect of balancing competing demands. Managers need to capitalize on previous learning and focus on activities that maintain existing performance or learn new ways of dealing with customers and other stake­holders via digital technologies, opening themselves to new (or adjusted) ways of working (Baptista et al., 2020; Warner & Wäger, 2019). However, such man­agement of competing demands may not be easy. Managers, to deal with uncertainty and complexity arising from digital transformation pressures, some­times choose to rely on prior expert experience and familiar choices in their decision-making rather than to explore new possibilities that would lead to change (Gavetti & Levinthal, 2000; Laudien & Daxböck, 2016; Warner & Wäger, 2019). Managers tend to exploit al­ready-established technological assets rather than ex­pand their search activities (Teece, 2007). Hence, managing di.erent learning orientations (i.e., special­ist or generalist) often is a (necessary) challenge. Recognizing the value of ambidexterity re­search, Montealegre and Iyengar (2021) argued that central to successfully managing a digital business platform is the organizational ability to balance re­newal (i.e., exploration) and refinement (i.e., ex­ploitation).2 We build on the premises of their study and focus on the role of the individual level of am­bidexterity in digital transformation change process. 3.3Digital Dynamic Capabilities Due to its focus on developing mechanisms for organizations to cope with continuous (rapid tech­nological) change and remain competitive (Peteraf et al., 2013; Schilke et al., 2018), the dynamic ca­pabilities framework (Teece, 2007) is regarded as one of the promising underlying theoretical frame­works to study digital transformation (Vial, 2019). The dynamic capabilities framework emerged from and extended the resource-based view of firms to explicate how firms strategically renew resources and competencies to fit uncertain environments (Eisenhardt & Martin, 2000; Helfat et al., 2009; Teece et al., 1997). Continuous restoring of the firms’ resources and competencies in line with changes in the organization’s business environment enables new sources of competitive advantage (Teece, 2007). Teece (2007) recognized three cate­gories of dynamic capabilities that enable this: sensing, seizing, and transforming capabilities. Sensing involves activities of gaining knowledge about the business environment to make decisions about future development; seizing includes ex­ploitation of the sensed opportunities for the im­provement of current and development of new services and products; and transforming involves activities to reconfigure resources and competen­cies to create better fit with the environment (Teece, 2007, 2014). Because digital transformation requires orga­nizational adaptation to changing business envi­ronment, a dynamic capabilities framework was adopted in some recent digital transformation studies (e.g. Ellström et al., 2021; Matarazzo et al., 2021; Warner & Wäger, 2019). For example, Warner and Wäger (2019) suggested that digital transformation is a capability, and identified digi­tally based dynamic capabilities and their subca­pabilities required for digital transformation: digital sensing, digital seizing, and digital trans­forming capabilities. Ellström et al. (2021) built on Warner and Wäger’s findings to suggest comple­mentary routines for achieving digital transforma­tion in firms. Our work to some extent builds on these studies and is distinguished from them by fo­cusing on the role of managerial ambidextrous learning. Table 1 provides an overview of the original dy­namic capabilities framework (Teece, 2007) and the adoption of this framework to the digital transfor­mation context (Ellström et al., 2021; Warner & Wäger, 2019). 4AMBIDEXTROUS MANAGERIAL LEARNING ORIENTATIONS AND DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION CAPABILITY 4.1Integrated Framework Dynamic capabilities are organizational, higher-level capabilities; nevertheless, they are rooted in and emerge from individual, managerial practices (Helfat & Peteraf, 2015; Teece, 2012, 2014). We rec­ognize that developing digital transformation capa­bility requires managerial handling of competing demands and that the role of learning per se is criti­cal. Researchers have considered ambidexterity to act as a dynamic capability and have recognized the role that managers have in it (Birkinshaw et al., 2016; O’Reilly III & Tushman, 2008). Therefore, we recognize that there is value in developing a frame­work that connects these di.erent (yet related) the­oretical streams. Specifically, building on the dynamic capabili­ties, digital transformation, and individual ambidex­terity literatures, we suggest a framework that describes the role of a manager’s ambidexterity, by considering her or his learning orientation, in build­ing digital transformation capability. In particular, we identify learning (knowledge-based) activities that could be classified as having either a generalist or a specialist orientation, and describe their role in dif­covering and sensemaking activities (Kirzner, 1997; Weick, 1995). Managers also have access to part­ners’ resources and capabilities (Laudien & Daxböck, 2016), which they can use to probe technological possibilities (Teece, 2007). 1 Consider also McAfee & Brynjolfsson’s (2017) study which identifies three major trends related to technol­ogy that are reshaping how the businesses are run: the expanding capabilities of machines, rise of platforms or “digital environment[s] characterized by near-zero marginal cost of access, reproduction, and distribu­tion” (p. 216); and emergence of the crowd—“human knowledge, expertise, and enthusiasm distributed all over the world and now available, and able to be fo­cused, online” (p. 28). 2 They suggested that three interrelated activities—iden­tifying-nourishing, expanding-legitimizing, and aug­menting-embedding—enable the organisational ambidexterity, i.e., “renewal and refinement in the evolution of the digital platform” (Montealegre & Iyen­gar, 2021, p. 2). ferent aspects of building digital transformation as a In an introduction to special issues on digital work and transformation, Baptista et al. (2020) suggested three orders of e.ects of digital transformation on or­ganizations: convergent change, transforming work, and transforming the organization. Convergent change refers to the appropriation of workplace tech­nologies with immediate e.ects on the execution of tasks and established patterns of work; transforming work leads to a more fundamental change in the pat­terns and nature of work; and transforming the orga­nization creates new understandings of work and changes the deep structure of organizations. Building on their idea, we propose that digital capabilities of sensing, seizing, and transforming (together with learning activities associated with them) could be con­nected with the aforementioned three order e.ects of digital transformation on organizations. Digital sensing also may involve deepening ways of knowing and executing the existing tasks. For example, awareness of available workplace technologies (Li et al., 2021) may stimulate man­agers to apply some of these technologies to en­hance their daily practices, that is, to deepen their existing knowledge base. They may use digital technologies, such as IoT platforms, to perform their tasks more efficiently (Laudien & Daxböck, 2016; Warner & Wäger, 2019). Furthermore, man­agerial specialist knowledge and experience, due to its awareness of firm-specific requirements, may help with setting the initial constraints and feasibility testing of the current digital infrastruc­ture and identified technological opportunities (Cross & Sivaloganathan, 2007; Ellström et al., Table 2 summarizes the specifics of managerial ambidextrous learning orientations (i.e., generalists or specialists) in connection to each of the digital transformation capabilities (i.e., sensing, seizing, or transformation). 4.2The Role of Managerial Ambidexterity in Digital Sensing Digital sensing entails discovering new techno­logical and market opportunities (Helfat & Peteraf, 2015; Teece, 2007), including scanning of data and information available at digital networks [ecosys­tems “comprised of people, data, processes, and things connected by the shared used of technolo­gies that go beyond the scope of a single system (Henfridsson & Bygstad, 2013; Yoo; Henfridsson, & Lyytinen, 2010)”; Montealegre & Iyengar, 2021, p. 1]. Managers’ explorative learning about opportu­nities regarding digital technologies and ways in which they may reinvent business is guided by dis­2021). They also may assist in building and assess­ing the routines for capturing technological infor­mation captured by digital networks (Ellström et al., 2021). Digital sensing entails mostly a generalist learn­ing orientation (Pasamar et al., 2015), i.e., it includes more entrepreneurial behavior, is open to discover­ing new possibilities, and is less confined to a certain perspective. Therefore, we suggest: Proposition 1: Digital sensing predominantly re­quires a generalist learning orientation. 4.3The Role of Managerial Ambidexterity in Digital Seizing Digital seizing may involve business model re­design by using digital technologies (Teece, 2007; Warner & Wäger, 2019), that is, capturing the value of new growth opportunities through new products, processes, and services (Ellström et al., 2021). To pursue business model reinvention, managers need to decide which competencies to build within the firm and which to outsource (Ellström et al., 2021), as well as the form of the human resource base (Matarazzo et al., 2021). For this, they need to have skills of interpretation of varied problems and skills to discover, comprehend, and apply knowledge with future goals, which typically are generalists’ traits (Bunderson & Sutcli.e, 2002; Kelly et al., 2011; Shane, 2000). Managers also may act spontaneously, without seeking permission from their superiors (Birkinshaw & Gibson, 2004) in making decisions about which technologies to pursue in developing new services and products. Nevertheless, adjustments to business model design involve managers’ specialist knowledge as well. This can entail, for example, the capacity to make well-thought-out investments in new or im­proved digital technologies, which requires in-depth knowledge in the field and reasoning skills [i.e., “evaluating information, arguments, and beliefs to draw a conclusion” or “using information to deter­mine if a conclusion is valid or reasonable” (Gaz­zaniga et al., 2010, p. 342)] (Helfat & Peteraf, 2015). Specialist knowledge may be relevant in deciding on priorities and responsibilities for resources alloca­tion dedicated to strategy realization (Ellström et al., 2021) and human resources hiring (Matarazzo et al., 2021). Moreover, a specialist orientation may be re­quired in (building routines for) eliciting expert feed­back or preferences regarding digital seizing choices from internal and external stakeholders, as well as for the detailed design of new digital service or product solutions (Cross & Sivaloganathan, 2007). Because building digital seizing capability incor­porates tasks requiring both generalist and specialist learning, we suggest: Proposition 2: Digital seizing requires a balance be­tween generalist and specialist learning orientations. 4.4The Role of Managerial Ambidexterity in Digital Transforming Digital transforming, for example, requires managerial decision making and action regarding the coordinated adaptation of strategic assets, that is “the selection, configuration, alignment, and modification of tangible and intangible assets (Helfat et al., 2007)” (Helfat & Peteraf, 2015, p. 12) that are critical for digital transformation. Coordina­tion of these strategic changes requires generalist skills of e.ective communication across functions (Bunderson & Sutcli.e, 2002). Moreover, one of the critical aspects of developing digital transformation capability is the company’s culture (Fitzgerald et al., 2014; Hartl & Hess, 2017), and employees may have heterogeneous perceptions of digitalization that may serve as an obstacle to digital transformation processes. Therefore, to overcome resistance to change, managers need both communication and social skills to induce common understanding and cooperative behaviors in their subordinates (Helfat & Peteraf, 2015). Managers need not only to create but also to communicate e.ectively a digital vision to inspire and support their subordinates in their digital transformation journey (Dery et al., 2017). Exploitative learning orientation is involved in the application of specialist knowledge and using it for enhancing managers’ knowledge base. In partic­ular, managers need to develop new digital skills and/or become sensitive to support the development of such skills in their subordinates (e.g., big data anal­ysis) (Laudien & Daxböck, 2016). Workers need to re­alize more deeply the potential of digital technology in their daily work practices by learning to apply arti­ficial intelligence, IoT platforms, cloud computing, and others (Warner & Wäger, 2019). Furthermore, specialist expert knowledge may help with decom­posing the projects and building the business pro­cesses for e.ective distribution of resources and team members (Ellström et al., 2021). Specialist ex­perience also may aid with overcoming the potential obstacles in building the digital infrastructure by as­sessing the similarities from past projects and know­ing the best practices for how to overcome some specific challenges (regarding technology and people) (Cross & Sivaloganathan, 2007). Expertise also may be required in establishing new functions such as dig­ital marketing and digital reorganization (Matarazzo et al., 2021). Because building the digital transform­ing capability includes tasks requiring both generalist and specialist learning, we suggest: Proposition 3: Digital transforming capability re­quires a balance between generalist and specialist learning orientations. 5DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION 5.1Theoretical Contribution Our study contributes to the individual am­bidexterity literature by investigating the role of managerial ambidextrous learning (i.e., di.erent learning orientations) in building the digital transfor­mation capability. Its focus is in line with the propo­sition that dynamic capabilities are rooted in managerial capabilities and practices (Helfat & Pe­teraf, 2015; Teece, 2012, 2014) and that managers [and their ambidextrous learning (Pasamar et al., 2015)3] have a key role in developing such capabili­ties. The microfoundations of dynamic capabilities for digital transformation identified and described in this paper are present to some extent in previous re­search that focused on the same topic (Ellström et al., 2021; Warner & Wäger, 2019). However, our work complements the existing studies by distin­guishing between generalist and specialist learning orientations and recognizing their distinctive micro­foundational roles in digital transformation capability building. In contrast to the arguments of Birkinshaw et al. (2016), who equated a “sensing” capability with exploration, a “seizing” capability with exploita­tion, and “reconfiguring” to a higher-order capability that enables a balance between the first two, we view each digital capability as consisting of both ex­plorative and exploitative activities, and hence in­cluding both generalist and specialist learning. Nevertheless, we acknowledge that one learning ori­entation may prevail in the development of a specific capability. For example, as we argued in the previous sections, whereas digital sensing capability may re­quire a greater generalist learning orientation, both seizing and transforming capability require a balance between generalist and specialist learning orienta­tion. This balance may depend on the environmental circumstances, availability of resources, and strategic choices regarding the kind of digital transformation that will be pursued (Pasamar et al., 2015), as well as on the individual and leadership characteristics, culture, and other factors a.ecting individual am­bidexterity (Pertusa-Ortega et al., 2020). 3 Pasamer et al. suggested that ambidextrous learning and diverse architectures of intellectual capital are re­lated to the development of dynamic capabilities; however, they focused on a structural approach to am­bidextrous organizations, and not on an individual level as we do. 5.2Managerial Implications Because the role of managers is critical in digital e.orts, firms need to build guidelines for taking into account both managers’ generalist and specialist learning needs. However, managers may not be equally skilled at generalist and specialist learning. Hence, if a certain type of learning is more required for some aspect of dynamic capabilities building (i.e., sensing, seizing, or transforming), managers who have this learning orientation as dominant may provide su­perior aid in this aspect. Nevertheless, we believe that ambidextrous learning should be a common manage­rial trait, and that such duality is particularly required to foster change in organizations (Sollander & En­gström, 2021). Therefore, human resource manage­ment systems should actively aim to stimulate managerial ambidextrous learning, for example, by deploying practices that specifically target building “entrepreneurial ability to identify and exploit oppor­tunities both of experimentation and search for e.­ciency (Corbett, 2005; Shane, 2000; Short, Ketchen, Shook, & Ireland, 2010” (Bonesso et al., 2014, p. 402). For example, Bonesso et al. (2014) showed how broad knowledge and inter-functional and/or inter-firm work leads to a balance between exploration and ex­ploitation. In contrast, managers’ narrow prior knowl­edge and working experience may direct a search for opportunities for exploitation (e.g., improvement of current technologies). Following this and other studies (e.g. Mom et al., 2009; Un, 2007), we suggest that fa­cilitating participation in cross-functional work may stimulate more-entrepreneurial managerial behavior and balanced learning. Because managers with broader prior work experience may be more likely to exhibit ambidextrous behaviors, HR practitioners in­volved in the recruitment processes might take this insight as a guiding principle in their decision-making. Furthermore, Mom et al. (2019) drew on self-ef­ficacy (Bandura, 1982) and self-determination theory (Deci & Ryan, 2008) to put forward a set of human re­source management practices that stimulate manage­rial ambidexterity, namely motivating (i.e., job enrichment, behavioral appraisal, and commitment-oriented rewards and compensation), ability (i.e., comprehensive training and job enlargement), and opportunity-enhancing practices (i.e., decision mak­ing, information sharing, and support for ideas). We suggest that these are relevant in the context of digital transformation. Furthermore, recent studies identi­fied microfoundations (Warner & Wäger, 2019) and routines (Ellström et al., 2021) underpinning dynamic capabilities in support of firms’ digital e.orts and the realizing of the potential of digital transformation. Our study complements these works by focusing on am­bidextrous learning as the core to building such capa­bilities. In particular, we suggest a framework that di.erentiates a role of either generalist or specialist learning orientation in di.erent dynamic capabilities underpinning digital transformation (sensing, seizing, or transforming). We hold that such a framework may assist managers with creating digital strategies that take into account important learning processes un­derpinning managers’ work in digital transformation pursuits. 5.3Limitations This study provides a general framework de­scribing the role of managerial ambidextrous learn­ing in developing the digital transformation capability. However, this study does not assume that a specific hierarchical level is associated exclusively with microfoundations of dynamic capabilities and should predominantly practice only a particular learning orientation. Birkinshaw et al. (2016) took a di.erent approach and emphasized that sensing and seizing typically are front-line capabilities, whereas reconfiguring commonly is an executive capability. Montealegre and Iyengar (2021) proposed that the evolution of digital business platforms has three dif­ferent phases (i.e., initiating, developing, and grow­ing) and that in each phase top, middle, and operational management have di.erent roles in bal­ancing between renewal (i.e., exploration) and re­finement (i.e., exploitation). Nadkarni and Prügl (2020) emphasized the critical role of middle man­agers in implementing digital transformation. Con­versely, we believe that it would be beneficial to extend our study to investigate key management practices (including generalist or specialist learning orientations) related to these di.erent management levels. We also suggest that it would be useful to in­vestigate empirically the role of managerial ambidex­trous learning in digital e.orts in specific firms and across management levels because dynamic capa­bilities are context-specific (Birkinshaw et al., 2016). Finally, there is an increasing stream of research on the T-shaped individuals in di.erent contexts, includ­ing digital transformation (Demirkan & Spohrer, 2018); we believe that future research on individual ambidexterity could connect fruitfully with this stream. 5.4Conclusion This study conducted a comprehensive litera­ture review to connect di.erent theoretical streams—dynamic capabilities, digital transforma­tion, and individual ambidexterity literatures—to identify how di.erent managerial learning orienta­tions (i.e., generalist or specialist) underpin digital transformation capabilities (i.e., sensing, seizing, and transforming). Specifically, we build on these theoretical perspectives to o.er a more comprehen­sive conceptualization and framework that reveals the learning mechanisms (predominantly exploita­tive or explorative) for achieving digital transforma­tion. In doing this, we help to understand how each digital dynamic capability includes managerial learn­ing-based handling of competing demands, i.e., re­quires development of managerial ambidextrous learning. Future research should investigate empir­ically the role of managerial ambidextrous learning in digital attempts because our conceptual e.orts cannot capture the specific market dynamics. Acknowledgements This work has been supported in part by the Croatian Science Foundation under Project number UI-2020-02-8889. REFERENCES Adler, P. S., Goldoftas, B., & Levine, D. I. (1999). Flexibility versus e.ciency? A case study of model changeovers in the Toyota production system. Organization Sci­ence, 10(1), 43–68. Bandura, A. (1982). Self-e.cacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist, 37(2), 122. Baptista, J., Stein, M.-K., Klein, S., Watson-Manheim, M. B., & Lee, J. (2020). Digital work and organisational transformation: Emergent Digital/Human work con­figurations in modern organisations. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 29(2), 101618. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsis.2020.101618 Beier, G., Ullrich, A., Nieho., S., Reißig, M., & Habich, M. (2020). Industry 4.0: How it is defined from a so­ciotechnical perspective and how much sustainability it includes—A literature review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 259, 120856. https://doi.org/10.1016/ ­j.jclepro.2020.120856 Bharadwaj, A., El Sawy, O. A., Pavlou, P. A., & Venkatra­man, N. V. (2013). Digital Business Strategy: Toward a Next Generation of Insights (SSRN Scholarly Paper ID 2742300). Social Science Research Network. https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=2742300 Birkinshaw, J., & Gibson, C. (2004). Building ambidex­terity into an organization. MIT Sloan Management Review, 45(4). Birkinshaw, J., & Gupta, K. (2013). Clarifying the distinc­tive contribution of ambidexterity to the field of or­ganization studies. Academy of Management Perspectives, 27(4), 287–298. Birkinshaw, J., Zimmermann, A., & Raisch, S. (2016). How do firms adapt to discontinuous change? Bridging the dynamic capabilities and ambidexterity perspectives. California Management Review, 58(4), 36–58. Bledow, R., Frese, M., Anderson, N., Erez, M., & Farr, J. (2009). A dialectic perspective on innovation: Conflict­ing demands, multiple pathways, and ambidexterity. In­dustrial and Organizational Psychology, 2(3), 305–337. Bonesso, S., Gerli, F., & Scapolan, A. (2014). The individual side of ambidexterity: Do individuals’ perceptions match actual behaviors in reconciling the exploration and exploitation trade-o.? https://doi.org/10.1016/ ­J.EMJ.2013.07.003 Bunderson, J. S., & Sutcli.e, K. M. (2002). Comparing al­ternative conceptualizations of functional diversity in management teams: Process and performance e.ects. Academy of Management Journal, 45(5), 875–893. Cross, M. S., & Sivaloganathan, S. (2007). Specialist knowledge identification, classification, and usage in company-specific new product development pro­cesses. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part B: Journal of Engineering Manufac­ture, 221(8), 1285–1298. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2008). Self-determination the­ory: A macrotheory of human motivation, develop­ment, and health. Canadian Psychology/Psychologie Canadienne, 49(3), 182–185. Demirkan, H., & Spohrer, J. C. (2018). Commentary—Cul­tivating T-Shaped Professionals in the Era of Digital Transformation. Service Science, 10(1), 98–109. https://doi.org/10.1287/serv.2017.0204 Dery, K., Sebastian, I. M., & van der Meulen, N. (2017). The Digital Workplace is Key to Digital Innovation. MIS Quarterly Executive, 16(2). Dragicevic, N., Ullrich, A., Tsui, E., & Gronau, N. (2020). A conceptual model of knowledge dynamics in the in­dustry 4.0 smart grid scenario. Knowledge Manage­ment Research & Practice, 1–15. Eisenhardt, K. M., Furr, N. R., & Bingham, C. B. (2010). CROSSROADS—Microfoundations of performance: Balancing e.ciency and flexibility in dynamic environ­ments. Organization Science, 21(6), 1263–1273. Eisenhardt, K. M., & Martin, J. A. (2000). Dynamic capa­bilities: What are they? Strategic Management Jour­nal, 21(10–11), 1105–1121. Ellström, D., Holtström, J., Berg, E., & Josefsson, C. (2021). Dynamic capabilities for digital transformation. Journal of Strategy and Management, ahead-of-print(ahead-of-print). https://doi.org/10.1108/JSMA-04-2021-0089 Felin, T., Foss, N. J., Heimeriks, K. H., & Madsen, T. L. (2012). Microfoundations of routines and capabilities: Individuals, processes, and structure. Journal of Man­agement Studies, 49(8), 1351–1374. Fitzgerald, M., Kruschwitz, N., Bonnet, D., & Welch, M. (2014). Embracing digital technology: A new strategic imperative. MIT Sloan Management Review, 55(2), 1. Folger, N., Brosi, P., & Stumpf-Wollersheim, J. (2021). Per­ceived technological turbulence and individual am­bidexterity–The moderating role of formalization. European Management Journal. Gavetti, G., & Levinthal, D. (2000). Looking forward and looking backward: Cognitive and experiential search. Administrative Science Quarterly, 45(1), 113–137. Good, D., & Michel, E. J. (2013). Individual ambidexterity: Exploring and exploiting in dynamic contexts. The Journal of Psychology, 147(5), 435–453. Hartl, E., & Hess, T. (2017). The role of cultural values for digital transformation: Insights from a Delphi study. Helfat, C. E., Finkelstein, S., Mitchell, W., Peteraf, M., Singh, H., Teece, D., & Winter, S. G. (2009). Dynamic capabil­ities: Understanding strategic change in organizations. John Wiley & Sons. https://www.google.com/ ­books?hl=en&lr=&id=u0Tuh5vixLkC&oi=fnd&pg=PR6&ots=uIo_606tqA&sig=888t3aArC2V8EoyKT3WSJM_WWYE Helfat, C. E., & Peteraf, M. A. (2015). Managerial cogni­tive capabilities and the microfoundations of dy­namic capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 36(6), 831–850. Kang, S.-C., & Snell, S. A. (2009a). Intellectual capital ar­chitectures and ambidextrous learning: A framework for human resource management. Journal of Man­agement Studies, 46(1), 65–92. Kang, S.-C., & Snell, S. A. (2009b). Intellectual Capital Archi­tectures and Ambidextrous Learning: A Framework for Human Resource Management. Journal of Management Studies, 46(1), 65–92. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2008.00776.x Kang, Y., Gorg, C., & Stasko, J. (2009). Evaluating visual an­alytics systems for investigative analysis: Deriving de­sign principles from a case study. Visual Analytics Science and Technology, 2009. VAST 2009. IEEE Sym­posium On, 139–146. http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/ab­stract/document/5333878/ Keller, T., & Weibler, J. (2015). What it takes and costs to be an ambidextrous manager: Linking leadership and cognitive strain to balancing exploration and exploita­tion. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 22(1), 54–71. Kellogg, K. C., Valentine, M. A., & Christin, A. (2020). Al­gorithms at work: The new contested terrain of con­trol. Academy of Management Annals, 14(1), 366–410. Kelly, G., Mastroeni, M., Conway, E., Monks, K., Truss, K., Flood, P., & Hannon, E. (2011a). Combining diverse knowledge: Knowledge workers’ experience of special­ist and generalist roles. Personnel Review, 40(5), 607–624. https://doi.org/10.1108/00483481111154469 Kelly, G., Mastroeni, M., Conway, E., Monks, K., Truss, K., Flood, P., & Hannon, E. (2011b). Combining diverse knowledge: Knowledge workers’ experience of special­ist and generalist roles. Personnel Review, 40(5), 607–624. https://doi.org/10.1108/00483481111154469 Kirzner, I. M. (1997). Entrepreneurial discovery and the competitive market process: An Austrian approach. Journal of Economic Literature, 35(1), 60–85. Laudien, S. M., & Daxböck, B. (2016). The influence of the industrial internet of things on business model design: A qualitative-empirical analysis. Interna­tional Journal of Innovation Management, 20(08), 1640014. Li, H., Wu, Y., Cao, D., & Wang, Y. (2021). Organizational mindfulness towards digital transformation as a pre­requisite of information processing capability to achieve market agility. Journal of Business Research, 122, 700–712. March, J. G. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in orga­nizational learning. Organization Science, 2(1), 71–87. Matarazzo, M., Penco, L., Profumo, G., & Quaglia, R. (2021). Digital transformation and customer value creation in Made in Italy SMEs: A dynamic capabilities perspective. Journal of Business Research, 123, 642–656. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.10.033 McAfee, A., & Brynjolfsson, E. (2017). Machine, platform, crowd: Harnessing our digital future. WW Norton & Company. Mom, T. J. M., Bosch, F. A. J. V. D., & Volberda, H. W. (2007). Investigating Managers’ Exploration and Ex­ploitation Activities: The Influence of Top-Down, Bot­tom-Up, and Horizontal Knowledge Inflows*. Journal of Management Studies, 44(6), 910–931. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2007.00697.x Mom, T. J. M., Bosch, F. A. J. V. D., & Volberda, H. W. (2009). Understanding variation in managers’ am­bidexterity: Investigating direct and interaction e.ects of formal structural and personal coordination mech­anisms. Organization Science, 20(4), 812–828. Mom, T. J. M., Chang, Y.-Y., Cholakova, M., & Jansen, J. J. (2019). A multilevel integrated framework of firm HR practices, individual ambidexterity, and organiza­tional ambidexterity. Journal of Management, 45(7), 3009–3034. Mom, T. J. M., Fourné, S. P. L., & Jansen, J. J. P. (2015a). Managers’ Work Experience, Ambidexterity, and Per­formance: The Contingency Role of the Work Context. Human Resource Management, 54(S1), s133–s153. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.21663 Mom, T. J. M., Fourné, S. P. L., & Jansen, J. J. P. (2015b). Managers’ Work Experience, Ambidexterity, and Per­formance: The Contingency Role of the Work Context. Human Resource Management, 54(S1), s133–s153. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.21663 Mom, T. J., Van Den Bosch, F. A., & Volberda, H. W. (2007). Investigating managers’ exploration and exploitation activities: The influence of top-down, bottom-up, and horizontal knowledge inflows. Journal of Manage­ment Studies, 44(6), 910–931. Montealegre, R., & Iyengar, K. (2021). Managing digital business platforms: A continued exercise in balancing renewal and refinement. Business Horizons, 64(1), 51–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2020.09.003 Montealegre, R., Iyengar, K., & Sweeney, J. (2019). Un­derstanding ambidexterity: Managing contradictory tensions between exploration and exploitation in the evolution of digital infrastructure. Journal of the As­sociation for Information Systems, 20(5), 1. Mousavi, S., Bossink, B., & van Vliet, M. (2019). Micro­foundations of companies’ dynamic capabilities for environmentally sustainable innovation: Case study insights from high-tech innovation in science-based companies. Business Strategy and the Environment, 28(2), 366–387. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2255 Nadkarni, S., & Prügl, R. (2020). Digital transformation: A review, synthesis and opportunities for future re­search. Management Review Quarterly. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11301-020-00185-7 O’Reilly III, C. A., & Tushman, M. L. (2008). Ambidexterity as a dynamic capability: Resolving the innovator’s dilemma. Research in Organizational Behavior, 28, 185–206. O’Reilly III, C. A., & Tushman, M. L. (2013). Organizational ambidexterity: Past, present, and future. Academy of Management Perspectives, 27(4), 324–338. Ouyang, T., Cao, X., Wang, J., & Zhang, S. (2020). Manag­ing technology innovation paradoxes through multi-level ambidexterity capabilities. Internet Research. Papachroni, A., & Heracleous, L. (2020). Ambidexterity as Practice: Individual Ambidexterity Through Paradoxical Practices. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 56(2), 143–165. https://doi.org/10.1177/ ­0021886320913048 Pasamar, S., Lopez–Cabrales, A., & Valle–Cabrales, R. (2015). Ambidexterity and intellectual capital archi­tectures for developing dynamic capabilities: Towards a research agenda. European Journal of International Management, 9(1), 74–87. Pertusa-Ortega, E. M., Molina-Azorín, J. F., Tarí, J. J., Pereira-Moliner, J., & López-Gamero, M. D. (2020). The microfoundations of organizational ambidexter­ity: A systematic review of individual ambidexterity through a multilevel framework. BRQ Business Re­search Quarterly, 2340944420929711. Peteraf, M., Di Stefano, G., & Verona, G. (2013). The ele­phant in the room of dynamic capabilities: Bringing two diverging conversations together. Strategic Man­agement Journal, 34(12), 1389–1410. Prieto, I. M., & Santana, M. P. P. (2012). Building ambidex­terity: The role of human resource practices in the performance of firms from Spain. Human Resource Management, 51(2), 189–211. https://doi.org/ ­10.1002/hrm.21463 Purvanova, R. K., & Kenda, R. (2018). Paradoxical virtual leadership: Reconsidering virtuality through a para­dox lens. Group & Organization Management, 43(5), 752–786. Raisch, S., Birkinshaw, J., Probst, G., & Tushman, M. L. (2009). Organizational ambidexterity: Balancing ex­ploitation and exploration for sustained performance. Organization Science, 20(4), 685–695. Rosing, K., & Zacher, H. (2017). Individual ambidexterity: The duality of exploration and exploitation and its re­lationship with innovative performance. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 26(5), 694–709. Schilke, O., Hu, S., & Helfat, C. E. (2018). Quo vadis, dy­namic capabilities? A content-analytic review of the current state of knowledge and recommendations for future research. Academy of Management Annals, 12(1), 390–439. Schneider, P., & Sting, F. J. (2020). Employees’ perspec­tives on digitalization-induced change: Exploring frames of industry 4.0. Academy of Management Dis­coveries, 6(3), 406–435. Scuotto, V., Arrigo, E., Candelo, E., & Nicotra, M. (2019). Ambidextrous innovation orientation e.ected by the digital transformation: A quantitative research on fashion SMEs. Business Process Management Journal, 26(5), 1121–1140. https://doi.org/10.1108/BPMJ-03-2019-0135 Shane, S. (2000). Prior knowledge and the discovery of entrepreneurial opportunities. Organization Science, 11(4), 448–469. Sollander, K., & Engström, A. (2021). Unplanned man­agerial work: An ambidextrous learning potential. Studies in Continuing Education, 0(0), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/0158037X.2021.1874903 Teece, D. J. (2007). Explicating dynamic capabilities: The nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enter­prise performance. Strategic Management Journal, 28(13), 1319–1350. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.640 Teece, D. J. (2012). Dynamic capabilities: Routines versus entrepreneurial action. Journal of Management Stud­ies, 49(8), 1395–1401. Teece, D. J. (2014). The foundations of enterprise perfor­mance: Dynamic and ordinary capabilities in an (eco­nomic) theory of firms. Academy of Management Perspectives, 28(4), 328–352. Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic ca­pabilities and strategic management. Strategic Man­agement Journal, 18(7), 509–533. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199708)18:7<509::AID-SMJ882>3.0.CO;2-Z Un, C. A. (2007). Managing the innovators for exploration and exploitation. Journal of Technology Management & Innovation, 2(3), 4–20. Vial, G. (2019). Understanding digital transformation: A review and a research agenda. The Journal of Strate­gic Information Systems, 28(2), 118–144. Warner, K. S., & Wäger, M. (2019). Building dynamic ca­pabilities for digital transformation: An ongoing pro­cess of strategic renewal. Long Range Planning, 52(3), 326–349. Weick, K. E. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations. Sage. Yu, T., Gudergan, S., & Chen, C.-F. (2020). Achieving em­ployee e.ciency–flexibility ambidexterity. The Inter­national Journal of Human Resource Management, 31(19), 2459–2494. dynamic capability. We posit that these ambidex­trous learning activities serve as microfoundations—or micro-level origins or basic elements—underlying dynamic capability building (Felin et al., 2012; Mousavi et al., 2019). Figure 1 illustrates the frame­work that lays out the conceptual integration of the selected theories. We posit that building each of the digital transformation capabilities (digital sensing, digital seizing, and digital transforming) includes tasks requiring both managerial generalist and spe­cialist learning orientations. Abstract Vol. 11, No. 2, 5-19 doi:10.17708/DRMJ.2022.v11n02a01 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 6 Nikolina Dragicevic, Amadeja Lamovšek, Saša Batistic: Developing Digital Transformation Capability: The Role of Managerial Ambidextrous Learning Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 7 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 8 Nikolina Dragicevic, Amadeja Lamovšek, Saša Batistic: Developing Digital Transformation Capability: The Role of Managerial Ambidextrous Learning Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 9 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 10 Nikolina Dragicevic, Amadeja Lamovšek, Saša Batistic: Developing Digital Transformation Capability: The Role of Managerial Ambidextrous Learning Table 1: Dynamic capabilities and their role in digital transformation Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 11 Figure 1: Conceptual integration of the included theories Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 12 Alenka Slavec Gomezel: Firm Characteristics, Debt Maturity Structure, and Innovation Performance of Small Firms Nikolina Dragicevic, Amadeja Lamovšek, Saša Batistic: Developing Digital Transformation Capability: The Role of Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 13 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 14 Nikolina Dragicevic, Amadeja Lamovšek, Saša Batistic: Developing Digital Transformation Capability: The Role of Managerial Ambidextrous Learning Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 15 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 16 Nikolina Dragicevic, Amadeja Lamovšek, Saša Batistic: Developing Digital Transformation Capability: The Role of Managerial Ambidextrous Learning EXTENDED SUMMARY/IZVLECEK Ta clanek združuje literaturo individualne obojerocnosti, digitalne preobrazbe in dinamicnih sposobnosti z namenom razvoja ogrodja, ki pomaga razumeti vlogo managerske prilagodljivosti ucenja pri gradnji sposobnosti digitalne preobrazbe organizacije. Prispevek na podlagi obsežnega pregleda literature opredeljuje konkurencne zahteve v smislu usmeritve managerskega ucenja, ki služijo kot mikrotemelji razlicnih dinamicnih organizacijskih sposobnosti, ki podpirajo digitalno pre­obrazbo. Sprejemamo dvostransko perspektivo ucenja in predlagamo, da morajo managerji uravnotežiti raziskovalno in izkorišcevalno ucenje, da bi pomagali pri izgradnji sposobnosti digitalne preobrazbe. Ta clanek prispeva k teoreticnim perspektivam obojerocnosti in dinamicnih sposobnosti s svojim izrazitim poudarkom na vlogi ucenja na ravni posameznika v kontekstu digitalne preobrazbe na organizacijski ravni. Clanek izboljšuje razumevanje, kako lahko podjetja podpirajo digitalna prizade­vanja, tako da postanejo obcutljiva in podpirajo vodstveno obojerocnost kot kriticni dejavnik na us­pešni poti digitalne preobrazbe. Za nadaljnje raziskovanje predlagamo, da se empiricno razišce vlogo managerskega oborocnega vedenja v digitalnih prizadevanjih. Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 17 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 Nikolina Dragicevic, Amadeja Lamovšek, Saša Batistic: Developing Digital Transformation Capability: The Role of Managerial Ambidextrous Learning 18 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 19 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 20 SUPPORTIVE HUMAN RESOURCE PRACTICES AND INTENTION TO QUIT: THE ROLE OF AFFECTIVE COMMITMENT AND PERCEIVED SUPERVISOR SUPPORT Emil Knezovic International University of Sarajevo eknezovic@ius.edu.ba Hakan Atli International University of Sarajevo hakanatli16@gmail.com Kerim Lojo International University of Sarajevo lojokerim@gmail.com Ognjen Ridic International University of Sarajevo oridic@ius.edu.ba This study examines the relationship between supportive human resource practices (SHRPs) and intention to quit (ITQ) by taking into consideration the mediating role of a.ective commitment (AC) and the moderating role of perceived supervisor support (PSS). A cross-sectional survey design resulted in a final sample of 507 employees from di.erent industries in Bosnia and Herzegovina. To test the hypotheses, structural equation modeling and hierarchical regression were used. The results showed that SHRPs are related favorably to ITQ. Furthermore, AC was found to be an important mediator of the relationship, whereas the evidence for a moderating role of PSS was partial. Keywords: supportive HR practices, a.ective commitment, perceived supervisor support, intention to quit, Bosnia and Herzegovina 1INTRODUCTION Human resource (HR) practices have been an important topic in the last few decades (Boon, Den Hartog, & Lepak, 2019; Memon, 2014). According to Collins (2006), the e.ective implementation of human resource practices in companies is an impor­tant source of competitive advantage and positively a.ects organizational performance. An organiza­tional capacity to support employees through di.er­ent mechanisms is considered to be an integral part of employee retention (Pradhan, Srivastava, & Jena, 2019). This means that an organization has to go be­yond monetary incentives to a more socio-emo­tional exchange of resources. Keeping employees in a company has never been of higher importance. The context of Bosnia and Herzegovina (B&H) is very specific because it is char­acterized by high unemployment and a massive brain drain in recent years, which leads to a business strug­gle to keep employees not just within companies but within the country as well (Knezovic, Bušatlic, & Ridic, 2020). This problem in many developing countries is a consequence of both government and business negligence. Although government tends to keep a high number of people employed within the public sector and put additional burdens on the private sec­tor, employees tend to experience several issues in the workplace. For example, employees tend to be underpaid compared with the company’s actual earnings, work overtime without being paid, and face low development opportunities (Haskic, 2018). Fur­thermore, there is a serious divergence between written policies and job descriptions and what is ac­tually expected from the employees. This is harmful to employees and thus increases their chances of leaving the company. In a country in which many companies share the same approach to employees, the next logical step is to migrate. To investigate employee retention, researchers have focused on di.erent sets of HR practices (Combs, Liu, Hall, & Ketchen, 2006). Therefore, there are di.erent conceptualizations of these sets, rang­ing from very general, such as “HR system” or “HR bundle,” to more specific conceptualizations such as “high performance,” “high commitment,” or “high involvement” (Boon et al., 2019). In contrast to pre­vious sets with an exhaustive list of HR practices, in this study we used the operationalization of support­ive human resource practices (SHRPs) developed by Allen, Shore, and Gri.eth (2003). Their rationale was based on a social exchange theory in which support of employees results in employees’ support to the organization. What clearly distinguishes SHRPs from other HR practices is that they are perceived as an investment in employees that an organization is not required to o.er at all or to o.er to some employees (Eisenberger, Huntington, Hutchison, & Sowa, 1986). SHRP is more individually focused because it signals to employees that the organization cares about and values them. Several researchers have demonstrated that perceived investment by employees results in higher employee retention (Huselid, 1995). This is possible through participation in the decision-mak­ing process (PDMP), the fairness of rewards or dis­tributive justice (DJ), and growth opportunities (GOs) (Allen et al., 2003). In the B&H context, in which job security is one of the main goals for employees (Kne­zovic et al., 2020), a supportive environment is of im­mense importance. Regardless of the name, the dominant amount of research shows the favorable relationship be­tween HR sets of practices and di.erent levels of or­ganizational performance (Chadwick, 2010). One of the problems in the relationship lies in the inconsis­tency of practices within the same-labeled systems. This divergence results from three decades of re­search (Huselid, 1995; Boselie, Dietz, & Boon, 2005; Katou, 2011). The set of SHRPs proposed by Allen et al. (2003) is yet to be validated and tested across the di.erent populations. Allen et al. (2003) used two samples from the United States: salespeople work­ing in the beauty and cosmetics areas, and insurance agents of a large national insurance company. Biswas et al. (2020) replicated the study using HR managers in Bangladesh. Therefore, the first objective of this study was to validate supportive HR practices on the general population of employees in B&H. Furthermore, as Dyer and Reeves (1995) pro­posed, the relationship between HR practices and organizational performance exists at di.erent levels, but a more direct relationship is at the bottom of the performance pyramid. This is especially important in terms of turnover decisions because they can be in­fluenced at di.erent levels of the organization. Al­though abundant research exists on the relationship between human resource management (HRM) and employee retention (Ramlall, 2003; Aguenza & Som, 2018), little work has explained how they are related. This unexplored e.ect of HR practices on di.erent levels of performance is known as the “black box” (Boselie et al., 2005). Because there still is a need to investigate possible underlying mechanisms that as­sociate HR practices and employee retention, some researchers have argued that organizational commit­ment can be observed as a mediator, especially be­tween a supportive environment and turnover (Rhoades, Eisenberger, & Armeli, 2001; Allen et al., 2003). Because the concept of organizational com­mitment is very broad, Mercurio (2015) argued that a.ective commitment (AC) is more directly related to the organizational outcomes than behavioral and transactional constructs of commitment. Impor­tantly, using the conservation of resources theory, which is based on accumulation, protection, and re­plenishment of personal resources (Hobfoll, 1989), we can argue that by investing in SHRPs and making them well-functioned, the emotional bond that em­ployees exhibit toward the organization, or simply the AC, should be stronger. Therefore, the second objective of this study was to test whether SHRPs are related to employee retention in the context of B&H by considering the mediating role of AC. The support that employees receive can be ob­served through the lens of the organizational and su­pervisors’ support. Because organizational support usually is observed through formal policies and pro­cedures, the role of supervisor support was given more attention recently. As a person who highly influ­ences the atmosphere in which employees learn and develop, a supervisor becomes a focal point (Ellinger, Ellinger, & Keller, 2003; Škerlavaj, Cerne, & Dysvik, 2014). In particular, if employees perceive their orga­nization and supervisor to be supportive, they tend to engage more with their work and their organization. Therefore, support is a concept that has a multidimen­sional e.ect on the organization, and thus it can be considered to be a valuable moderator between the input activities and outcomes. To e.ectively perceive any kind of organizational support, employees have to understand that the organization is willing to invest in them. Nishii and Wright (2008) proposed the strate­gic human resource management (SHRM) framework, in which the employees’ perception was an important element when predicting employees’ reactions. As HR practices become more supportive, employees’ reac­tions tend to be more favorable toward the organiza­tion. The person that can transmit the most e.ective support to employees is their supervisor. Therefore, the third objective of this study was to investigate the moderating role of supervisors’ support on the rela­tionship between SHRPs and employee retention. 2THEORETICAL BACKGROUND AND HYPOTHESES 2.1Employee Retention As the work environment becomes more dy­namic, businesses invest more in attracting and keeping key employees (Aguenza & Som, 2018). A concept that has been of immense importance is employees’ intention to leave in the future. Ahmad (2018) described it as “an employee’s cognitive re­sponse to the working conditions of a particular or­ganization and to the economic condition of a nation as a whole, which stimulates an employee for the search of a better alternative job and manifest as the intent to leave an organization voluntarily” (p. 79). Simplistically, it is a situation in which an employee has planned to leave the organization (Saeed, 2014). Booth and Hamer (2007) considered this situation to have negative consequences for the organization be­cause it clearly presents weaknesses in terms of managing employees’ behavior. Because the concept of retention received tremendous attention in the recent period, Mathi­maran and Kumar (2017) conceptualized e.ective re­tention, describing it as “a systematic e.ort by employers to create and foster an environment that encourages current employees to remain employed by having policies and practices in place that address their diverse needs” (p. 17). In essence, companies are fighting to keep their best employees in the local and international market because retention is not only for keeping a company’s employees but also is a great ad­vertising tool for better recruitment. According to Luthans, Norman, Avolio, and Avey (2008), di.erent components of a supportive work environment can play a crucial role in overall employee attitudes and behaviors, which are keys to the employees staying in the organization. For example, Naz et al. (2020) found a significant relationship between a supportive work environment and employee retention. The relation­ship was not direct, because organizational commit­ment and person–organization fit mediated it. This shows that the relationship between organizational characteristics and employee retention is complex, and di.erent elements often have to match to pro­duce the desired result. Although the concept of human resource prac­tices has been present for decades (Beer, 1984), there is a great question of whether employees believe in those practices. The behaviors of employees and their perceptions of human resource practices di.er from employee to employee (Nishii & Wright, 2008). The nature of employees’ perceptions can di.er depend­ing on how their manager or supervisor tends to im­plement human resource practices (Wright, 2001). This is why it is important to understand employees’ perceptions toward SHRPs on the individual level. 2.2Supportive HR Practices A vast amount of research has been devoted to examining systematically human resource practices (Boon et al., 2019). The main idea behind supportive HR practices lies in developing a supportive work environment. This approach is founded on the be­havioral perspective of HRM that considers attitudes and behaviors of employees as major antecedents of organizational performance (Schuler & Jackson, 1987). Recalling the “black box” phenomenon, Biswas et al. (2020) introduced the individual-level attributes that should explain more precisely the mechanism through which HR practices contribute to organizational performance. This was in line with the argument by Allen et al. (2003) that SHRPs are designed to influence, in the first place, individual attitudes and behaviors and, through them, organi­zational performance. This distinguishes SHRPs from the other sets of HR practices. Because there are rel­atively few studies of this particular set of HR prac­tices, to validate them we followed the proposals of Allen et al. (2003). Together, as a complementary set, SHRPs can contribute to overall organizational e.ectiveness. Huselid (1995) argued that human resource prac­tices that contribute to employees’ development or motivation should increase employee retention. Huselid also found significant evidence that human resource practices play a negative role in employee turnover. This is why the development and selection of specific SHRPs are crucial to the long-term sur­vival of a company. In particular, a supportive envi­ronment that is characterized by a larger extent of employee integration with the processes, trans­parency, and development opportunities enhances the bond with the organization. When employees feel support from the organization, they are more likely to feel obliged to repay the organization with higher productivity and involvement, and eventually to stay with the organization. This argument is founded on Gouldner’s (1960) reciprocity concept, that still is a widely used paradigm in organizational behavior studies (Gervasi, Faldetta, Pellegrini, & Maley, 2021). Although the relationship between HRM and employee turnover is very popular, there is a lack of research regarding SHRP, especially in a non-Western context (Biswas et al., 2020). There­fore, we propose the following hypothesis: H1: There is a negative relationship between sup­portive HR practices (decision-making process, fair­ness of rewards or distributive justice, and growth opportunities) and intention to quit (ITQ). 2.3The Mediating Role of A.ective Commitment The essence of supportive human resource prac­tices lies in social-exchange theory, which explains the cost–benefit relationship between two parties (Allen et al., 2003; Koster & Gutauskaite, 2019). If an organization can show that it cares about its employ­ees, the employees tend to be more attached to the organization. AC represents the emotional bond be­tween employees and an organization that is devel­oped over time by the interaction of di.erent elements, forces, and people and that, therefore, is not broken easily (Meyer, Stanley, Herscovitch, & Topolnytsky, 2002; Knezovic & Greda, 2021). Marescaux, de Winne, and Sels (2012) argued that the perception of favorability is the key factor related to AC. They explained the relationship between HR practices and AC through two aspects: social-ex­change relationship, and distributive preference. For example, an organization that provides more social-emotional resources and fair distribution is expected to have a more committed workforce. Furthermore, because employees consider supportive HR practices to be a “sign of appreciation, commitment and trust towards them” (Marescaux et al., 2012, p. 333), they are more willing to exhibit higher commitment to the organization. Because SHRPs are designed specifically to be perceived as an investment in or recognition of par­ticular employees (Allen et al., 2003), they can be ob­served as voluntary practices of the organization. Employees that are more involved in deciding the di­rection the organization will take (Appelbaum & Sluja, 2013), perceive higher growth opportunities within the current organization, and are treated fairly, which is an important determinant of trust and belief in the organization (McFarlin & Sweeney, 1992), tend to be more committed, especially on an emotional level (Knezovic & Greda, 2021). In developing countries, where the basic working conditions very often are not met, organizations that manage to go beyond the basics and provide certain investments in employees are considered to be desired employers. Those orga­nizations have a reputation for not just being able to attract employees but also to keep them. Therefore, we present the following hypothesis: H2: There is a positive relationship between sup­portive HR practices (decision-making process, fair­ness of rewards or distributive justice, and growth opportunities) and a.ective commitment. As a predominant construct of commitment, AC is found to be a significant predictor of ITQ (Carayon, Schoepke, Hoonakker, Haims, & Brunette, 2006; Ahmad, 2018). As a result of positive work experi­ence, AC is related favorably to di.erent outcomes such as organizational citizenship behavior, absen­teeism, and eventual intention to remain with the organization (Wasti, 2002). Rhoades et al. (2001) stated that there is a higher chance of employee in­volvement in organizational activities and intention to stay if they exhibit AC. Haqued, Fernando, and Caputi (2019) argued that “employees with AC demonstrate positive intentions to serve their orga­nizations and are likely to think less about quitting their jobs” (p. 51). In particular, employees that ex­hibit high AC are emotionally tied to the organiza­tion, and that relationship is hard to break. Therefore, AC can be considered to be a mitigator of possible employee withdrawal. Therefore, we propose the following hypothesis: H3: There is a negative relationship between a.ec­tive commitment and intention to quit. Although SHRPs have been presented as a sig­nificant predictor of employees’ turnover, it is obvi­ous that the direct e.ect is rather weak. The “black box” phenomenon indicates that the relationship between HR practices and di.erent work outcomes is distant and that there is a need to investigate other intervening variables. We argue that the sig­nificant mediator is presented in the AC. This is sup­ported by extensive literature that presented AC as a valid mediator in di.erent workplace relations, es­pecially those related to turnover intentions (Tetteh, Osafo, Ansah-Nyarko, & Amponsah-Tawiah, 2019). The main principle relies on social exchange theory, which emphasizes reciprocity (Fazio, 2017). In par­ticular, AC tends to be adjusted toward the per­ceived organizational support or, in this case, per­ceived supportive HR practices. If SHRPs are e.ective, we expect them to stimulate AC and, in re­turn, to create a more loyal workforce. Because AC is one of the proximal outcomes of strategic HR practices, and AC is an important antecedent of em­ployees’ turnover intentions, AC could play a medi­ating role in the relationship between SHRPs and ITQ. Therefore, SHRPs first would influence AC and subsequently would modify the ITQ. Therefore, we propose the following hypothesis: H4: There is a negative relationship between sup­portive HR practices (decision-making process, fair­ness of rewards or distributive justice, and growth opportunities) and intention to quit. 2.4The Moderating Role of Supervisor Support Some organizational characteristics tend to be more suitable for HR practices than others. One is perceived support from the organization and imme­diate supervisor. Perceived organizational support is considered to be the degree of valuing employ­ees’ contributions to their prosperity (Kumar & Gha­dially, 1989). In other words, when employees see the organization as being supportive, they feel more obligated to fulfill all expectations with greater ef­forts. It can be said that positive organizational sup­port makes employees care about the organization and want to help the organization achieve its goals, increases employee organizational commitment, and reduce the tendency for employees to miss work (McColl-Kennedy & Anderson, 2002). In recent times, the role of the supervisor devi­ated from the general organizational support con­cept. In particular, supervisors are the “bridge” between top management and employees, and the success of the company most of the time depends on their relationship with the employees. Perceived supervisors’ support is reflected in the degree to which supervisors esteem and take care of the pros­perity of employees (Kottke & Sharafinski, 1988). Employees are prone to consider the organizational emergency on their well-being based on collabora­tion with their supervisors, which leads to a point at which they can establish a relationship with their supervisor in the same way as with the organization for which they work. PSS can be considered to be an important factor that comes from the organiza­tion and its commitment (Cole et al., 2006). The su­pervisor’s support is concentrated on the employee’s dedication to the job. Every employee creates their own opinion or belief about the orga­nizational dedication and cares about them by eval­uating their commitment, which can be presented favorably or unfavorably (Eisenberger et al., 1986). The feeling of being supported implies that workers have common goals and values with the or­ganization and that they are identifying themselves with an organization, which results in loyalty to the organization (Meyer, Allen, & Smith, 1993). As pre­viously mentioned, perceived organizational support is trying to fulfill or meet the employees’ socio-emo­tional needs to make them identify with the organi­zation (Eisenberger et al., 2001), which will increase perceived organizational support and greater com­mitment. PSS is closely connected with perceived or­ganizational support. Supervisors are those who create an atmosphere among employees, and in most organizations they are the key factor in the maintenance and enhancement of employees’ com­mitment (Erdeji, Jovicic Vukovic, Gagic, & Terzic, 2016). When employees feel support from a super­visor, it increases their loyalty to the work environ­ment and decreases the intention to leave the organization (Islam et al., 2013). This is in line with leader–member exchange theory (Dienesch & Liden, 1986), which positions a leader, in this case a super­visor, as pivotal in enhancing di.erent employee-re­lated outcomes. Therefore, we argue the following: H5: There is a negative relationship between per­ceived supervisor support and intention to quit. However, perceived support also fuels other process–outcome relations. In particular, the posi­tive atmosphere that is created by organizational support and high supervisor involvement improves the impact of the process on organizational out­comes. Having an opportunity to participate in the decision-making process will influence employee-related outcomes, but in the presence of relevant supporting factors such as resources and the proper supervisor attitude, the impact should be higher. Employees that are not supported adequately are more reluctant to raise their voice or use opportu­nities for development, and perceive justice in the organization as non-transparent. Without the proper support, the employees tend to trust the or­ganizational goals and values less, which creates a situation of discomfort. It is crucially important that the right organiza­tional resources and relevant supervisors’ profiles are presented to capture the highest value from the employees (Allen & Meyer, 1990; Liu, Chow, & Huang, 2019). The key here is that support from the organization and supervisor can be di.erent be­cause both can pursue their interests. When they are aligned around the same goal, we can expect rather powerful outcomes. However, when they are not, the outcomes can be questionable. In particu­lar, employees do not leave the organization, but their leaders. Pramudita and Sukoco (2018) argued that the employee–supervisor relationship is built on reciprocity, and that when employees receive more support from their supervisor, their perfor­mance increases. Such employees are under a greater obligation to repay, and to do so, they have to stay in the organization. Therefore, we extend the model by hypothesizing the following: H6: Perceived supervisor support moderates the re­lationship between supportive HR practices (deci­sion-making process, fairness of rewards or distributive justice, and growth opportunities) and intention to quit. Figure 1 presents the conceptual model that in­corporates the hypotheses developed in this study. 3METHODOLOGY 3.1Participants and Procedure This research is based on primary data, for which cross-sectional data collection was used. Questionnaires were distributed in print and online forms to employees in di.erent industries. This helped us to obtain a large and diverse sample, which was important to mitigate the risk of sample bias because convenience sampling was used. This method has been used in previous research in which authors encountered problems relating to the lack of reliable data and databases which contained the elements of the entire target population (Vandek­erkhof, Steijvers, Hendriks, & Voordeckers, 2019). For content accuracy and validity, we used the back-translation method because the original con­structs were in the English language. Furthermore, to ensure voluntary participation and guarantee data privacy, the first page of the questionnaire pro­vided an option to the respondents to decide whether to participate. After the initial contact, a reminder letter was sent one month later. The final sample consisted of 507 employees. Among the respondents, 42% were female and 58% were male employees. On average, respondents were 34 years old, and the majority (73%) was highly educated. More than half of the respondents (56%) had more than five years of work experience. Most worked in small and medium-sized enterprises (88%) and were employed in the service sector (60%). 3.2Measurement The questionnaire contained seven main con­structs. Regarding SHRPs, PDMP was measured using five items. Each item was presented with a seven-point Likert scale developed by Steel and Mento (1987), ranging from 1 = “strongly disagree” to 7 = “strongly agree.” DJ was measured using Colquitt’s (2001) scale consisting of four items. GOs were measured using four items developed by Weng and Hu (2009). Both DJ and GOs were scored on a five-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 = “strongly disagree” to 5 = “strongly agree.” Regarding the moderating constructs, the PSS was measured using four distinctive items (a = 0.85) developed by Colquitt (2001). To measure AC, we used six items (a = 0.91) developed by Rhoades et al. (2001), and for ITQ we adopted Colarelli’s (1984) scale, which contained two items (a = 0.88). All three constructs were measured on a five-point Lik­ert scale, ranging from 1 = “strongly disagree” to 5 = “strongly agree.” 3.3Analyses 3.3.1Reliability, Validity, Descriptive Statistics, and Correlations The data used in the study were analyzed in two steps: (1) preliminary analysis, and (2) hypothe­ses testing. In the preliminary analysis, we checked for reliability and validity concerns using a series of tests (Table 1). To test the reliability of responses, Cronbach’s alpha was used. All the variables scored higher than 0.6, which is a common minimum threshold (Hair et al., 2006). The correlation between variables mostly was moderate. As expected, the correlation of vari­ables with the ITQ was negative, whereas other cor­relations were positive. Furthermore, we performed confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) on our theoretical model, because we used the already-established constructs. Both convergent and discriminant valid­ity were reached. The results showed that the model fit the data quite well (e.g., x2 = 928.19, df = 260, x2/df = 3.57, confirmatory fit index = 0.944, Tucker–Lewis index = 0.935, and root-mean-square error of approximation = 0.071). In addition, because we collected the data at a single point in time, there was a possibility of com­mon method bias. Following Podsako. et al.’s (2012) discussion, we performed Harman’s single-factor test, a common latent factor test, and a common marker variable test to check for common method bias. The results of all three tests showed that the variance produced by a single factor was below the common threshold of 50%, and thus we could conclude that there was no evidence of common method bias. 3.3.2Hypotheses Testing A structural model was used to test the first four hypotheses. The values of the model fit were fairly acceptable (i.e., x2 = 732.86, df = 179, x2/df = 4.09, confirmatory fit index = 0.945, Tucker–Lewis index = 0.935, and root-mean-square error of approximation = 0.078). The model is presented in Figure 2. To test for the mediation, we had to ensure that the basic conditions were met, i.e., a significant rela­tionship between (1) the independent and the depen­dent variables, (2) the independent and the mediating variables, and (3) the mediating and the dependent variables. The results are presented in Table 2. 4 RESULTS The results for Model 1 showed that SHRPs were negatively related to ITQ (PDMP – ß = -0.11, p < 0.05; GOs – ß = -0.23, p < 0.01; DJ – ß = -0.31, p < 0.01), which provides evidence to support H1. Fur­thermore, the relationships between SHRPs and AC were positive (Model 2: PDMP – ß = 0.32, p < 0.01; GOs – ß = 0.41, p < 0.01; DJ – ß = 0.11, p < 0.05). These results provide su.cient evidence to support H2. Model 3 showed a negative relationship be­tween AC and ITQ (ß = -0.58, p < 0.01). This indi­cates support for H3. Therefore, we can state that all conditions for mediating e.ects were met. Fi­nally, in Model 4, the relationships between certain SHRPs and ITQ became insignificant (PDMP – ß = 0.03, p > 0.05 and GOs – ß = -0.03, p > 0.05). This indicates full mediation through AC. Therefore, ad­ditional analysis was conducted to check for the in­direct e.ects of SHRPs on the ITQ through AC. The results are presented in Table 3. The indirect e.ect of SHRPs on the ITQ through AC was negative and significant (Table 3). Therefore, taking all the evidence, we can state that the AC par­tially mediates the relationship between DJ and ITQ (ß = -0.06, p < 0.01). In addition, AC fully mediates the relationship between PDMP and ITQ (ß = -0.12, p < 0.01) and the relationship between GOs and ITQ (ß = -0.25, p < 0.05). Therefore, we can conclude that there is su.cient evidence to support H4. For H5 and H6, we performed a hierarchical mul­tiple regression. The results are presented in Table 4. First, we added SHRPs in Model 1. The results showed a negative relationship between each prac­tice and ITQ. Additionally, SHRPs explained 23.7% of the variance in ITQ. Second, in Model 2, we added PSS as a moderating variable. The values showed that PSS was negatively related to the ITQ (ß = -0.25, p < 0.01) and that it explained 3.5% of the variance in ITQ. Therefore, there is su.cient evi­dence to support H5. Finally, in Model 3, we added interaction terms of each SHRPs and perceived su­pervisor support. The results provided evidence that PSS strengthens the negative relationship only in the case of GOs and ITQ (ß = -0.82, p < 0.05). Therefore, there is partial support for H6. The moderating ef­fect of POS is presented in Figure 3. 5DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION 5.1Theoretical contribution As B&H experiences a huge brain drain of the well-qualified workforce, employee retention is crit­ical. This study investigated the role of SHRPs in em­ployee retention. Furthermore, because the relationship between SHRPs and ITQ is not direct, and the mechanism of the e.ect is still to be inves­tigated, we explored possible underlying factors. In particular, we attempted to fill the gap by empiri­cally investigating the relationship between SHRPs and ITQ through the mediating role of AC and the moderating role of perceived supervisor support. Although the conceptualization of SHRP by Allen et al. (2003) is almost two decades old, valida­tion of the set is still to be supported (Biswas et al., 2020). In addition to the original validation of the set of SHRP using salespeople and insurance agents in the United States, there was a recent validation using HR managers in Bangladesh. This study con­tributes to the validation of employees across di.er­ent industries in B&H. Consistent with the study of Allen et al. (2003), we found that SHRPs are related favorably to ITQ. If employees perceive their working environment to be supportive, they are more likely to exhibit posi­tive attitudes and behaviors toward the organiza­tion. This is rooted in social exchange theory and reciprocity, in which SHRPs are considered to be a voluntary investment by the company and, there­fore to create a sense of obligation toward the com­pany. Reciprocity is even more pronounced in terms of the role of AC. Although this study was based on the work of Allen et al. (2003), we diverged from their work by focusing on AC rather than on the overall three-element organizational commitment. This was because AC is the most important of all commitment constructs for predicting di.erent work-related outcomes. Our results show that there is a negative relationship between AC and ITQ. This is in line with the findings of previous works (Rhoades et al., 2001; Haque et al., 2019). One of the major findings of this study is that AC is the me­diator of the relationship between SHRPs and ITQ. Although the role of AC as a mediator in di.erent workplace relations is rather well explored (Tetteh et al., 2019), there is a lack of research into the spe­cific SHRPs and ITQ. The results indicated a signifi­cant mediation, which means that when employees perceive their organization to be supportive, primar­ily through HR practices that are considered to be investments, they are more likely to experience emotional attachment to the organization and even­tually to remain with the organization. Regarding the moderating role of perceived su­pervisor support, we found mixed results. On the one hand, PSS is negatively related to the ITQ, which is in line with the findings of previous studies (Eisen­berger et al., 2001; Islam et al., 2013). On the other hand, we found partial support for the moderating e.ects of PSS on the relationship between SHRPs and ITQ. Specifically, PSS was a moderator signifi­cant only of the relationship between GOs and ITQ. This can be explained by the fact that GOs can be perceived di.erently under di.erent supervisors. Even when they are relatively scarce, supportive su­pervisors can create an atmosphere in which em­ployees feel that it is possible to progress and therefore that it is worth staying with the organiza­tion. Employees tend to believe more in supervisors who are supportive, and as long as they believe that they can progress at work, they are willing to stay with the organization. Therefore, perceived super­visor support strengthens the relationship between GOs and ITQ. These results provide an extension of the model proposed by Allen et al. (2003), which only dealt with mediators of the basic relationship. 5.2Practical Implications Pertaining to the theoretical part, the findings of this study provide some practical implications about employee retention. To generate and develop e.ec­tive retention strategies, businesses should create a supportive work environment. Firstly, organizations should create an environment in which the employ­ees have a voice in the decision-making process. This could be achieved by promoting the general involve­ment of employees in the decision-making process through formal and informal meetings or by granting more autonomy to lower-level positions. Secondly, every employee, at each level, has to be rewarded fairly. These rewards may be anything from compen­sation to vacation, depending on which organiza­tional level the employee occupies. This is especially important for companies that have more-informal policies toward DJ. Therefore, the communication of such decisions is key in promoting transparency across the company. Thirdly, the employees should have a chance to be promoted within the organiza­tion, and the best way to provide that is by giving challenging tasks to employees, which will boost their performance. GOs are crucial not just to keep em­ployees, but also to attract new employees. To pro­vide e.ective opportunities, managers first should understand the career aspirations of employees, whether and to what extent they align with the or­ganizational goals, and how to compromise between an individual and the company. Furthermore, companies need to understand that SHRPs will not directly influence employees’ decisions to quit. These practices will spur and create an emo­tional bond between employees and the company which eventually will make employees less likely to quit. Although SHRPs are a signal to employees about the company’s intentions (Allen et al., 2003), their ef­fect on employees’ retention is not immediate. There­fore companies must cultivate a sustainable supportive environment in which employees feel that organizational support is ongoing rather than episodic. Finally, the supervisors’ role cannot be ne­glected because it also explains the model and par­tially moderates the relationship between SHRPs and ITQ. Therefore, companies have to consider how to attract and promote employees with partic­ular characteristics into supervisory positions. As business becomes dynamic, the supervisors’ roles shift from universal to individual. In particular, com­panies should look for supervisors who can develop and sustain healthy personal relations, a one-on-one coaching style, and emotional support. 5.3Limitations and Future Research Like many studies, this study also has some lim­itations, even though it developed important find­ings regarding supportive human resource practices and their contribution to employees’ performance. These limitations can be divided into methodologi­cal and theoretical. Firstly, one of the greatest constraints in this study is that it su.ered from the lack of previous re­search conducted in this region about supportive human resource practices. This caused a lack of op­portunity to compare our results with those of pre­vious research. Secondly, this study used a cross-sec­tional data collection time-frame method, in which the variables were measured in one distinct and lim­ited specific period. Future research may focus on measuring these variables in di.erent periods. Thirdly, this study used a convenience sampling method, which caused limitations on the generaliza­tion of the findings to the entire population and pop­ulation validity. Additionally, this study focused mainly on the measurement of some specific sup­portive human resource practices. In future studies, the addition of other relevant supportive human re­source practices might increase the reliability and va­riety of findings. In addition, this study gathered data across di.erent industries in B&H. Focusing on one specific industry may provide more-accurate results. Finally, there should be a more thorough theoretical approach to the relationship between strategic HR practices and employee retention by taking into con­sideration possible new moderators and mediators. REFERENCES Aguenza, B.B., & Som, A.P.M. (2018). Motivational factors of employee retention and engagement in organiza­tions. International Journal of Advances in Manage­ment and Economics, 1(6), 88-95. Ahmad, A. (2018). The relationship among job character­istics organizational commitment and employee turnover intentions: A reciprocation perspective. Journal of Work-Applied Management, 10(1), 74-92. Allen, D.G., Shore, L.M., & Gri.eth, R.W. (2003). The role of perceived organizational support and supportive human resource practices in the turnover process. Journal of Management, 29(1), 99-118. Allen, N.J. & Meyer, J.P. (1990). The measurement and antecedents of a.ective, continuance and normative commitment to the organization. Journal of Occupa­tional Psychology, 63(1), 1-18. Appelbaum, S.H., & Sluja, J. (2013). Participation in decision making: A case study of job satisfaction and commitment. Industrial and Commercial Training, 41(5), 222-229. Beer, M.B. (1984). Managing Human Assets. New York: Free Press. Biswas, K., Boyle, B., & Bhardwaj, S. (2020). Impacts of support­ive HR practices and organisational climate on the attitudes of HR managers towards gender diversity – A mediated model approach. Evidence-based HRM, 9(1), 18-33. Boon, C., Den Hartog, D.N., & Lepak, D.P. (2019). A system­atic review of human resource management systems and their measurement. Journal of Management, 45(6), 2498-2537. Booth, S., & Hamer, K. (2007). Labour turnover in the re­tail industry: Predicting the role of individual, organi­zational, and environmental factors. International Journal of Retail and Distribution Management, 35(4), 289-307. Boselie, P., Dietz, G., & Boon, C. (2005). Commonalities and contradictions in research on human resource management and performance. Human Resource Management Journal, 15(3), 67-94. Carayon, P., Schoepke, J., Hoonakker, P.L.T., Haims, M.C., & Brunette, M. (2006). Evaluating causes and conse­quences of turnover intention among IT workers: The development of a questionnaire survey. Behaviour & Information Technology, 25(5), 381-397. Chadwick, C. (2010). Theoretic insights on the nature of performance synergies in human resource systems: Toward greater precision. Human Resource Manage­ment Review, 20(2), 85-101. Colarelli, S.M. (1984). Methods of communication and mediating processes in realistic job previews. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69(4), 633-642. Cole, M.S., Bruch, H., & Vogel, B. (2006). Emotion as me­diators of the relations between perceived supervisor support and psychological hardiness on employee cynicism. Journal of Organizational Behaviour, 27(4), 463-484. Collins, J.A. (2006). Leveraging tacit knowledge in al­liances: The importance of using relational capabilities to build and leverage relational capital. Journal of En­gineering Technology Management, 23(3), 147-167. Colquitt, J.A. (2001). On the dimensionality of organiza­tional justice: A construct validation of a measure. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(3), 386–400. Combs, J., Liu, Y., Hall, A. and Ketchen, D. (2006). How much do high-performance work practices matter? A meta-analysis of their e.ects on organizational per­formance. Personnel Psychology, 59(3), 501-528. Dienesch, R. M., & Liden, R. C. (1986). Leader–member exchange model of leadership: A critique and further development. The Academy of Management Review, 11(3), 618-634. Dyer, L., & Reeves, T. (1995). Human resource strategy and firm performance: What do we know and where do we need to go? International Journal of Human Resource Management, 6 (3), 656-670. Eisenberger, R., Armeli, S., Rexwinkel, B., Lynch, P.D., & Rhoades, L. (2001). Reciprocation of perceived orga­nizational support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(1), 42-51. Eisenberger, R., Huntington, R., Hutchison, S., & Sowa, D. (1986). Does pay for performance increase or de­crease perceived self-determination and intrinsic mo­tivation? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(5), 1026-1040. Ellinger, A.D., Ellinger, A.E., & Keller, S.B. (2003). Supervi­sory coaching behaviour, employee satisfaction, and warehouse employee performance: A dyadic perspec­tive in the distribution industry. Human Resource De­velopment Quarterly, 14(4), 435-458. Erdeji I., Jovicic Vukovic, A., Gagic, S., & Terzic, A. (2016). Cruisers on the Danube - The impact of LMX theory on job satisfaction and employees’ commitment to organization. Journal of Geographical Institute “Jovan Cvijic, 66(3), 401-415. Fazio, J., Gong, B., Sims, R. and Yurova, Y. (2017). The role of a.ective commitment in the relationship between social support and turnover intention. Management Decision, 55(3), 512-525 Gervasi, D., Faldetta, G., Pellegrini, M.M., & Maley, J. (in press). Reciprocity in organizational behavior studies: A systematic literature review of contents, types, and directions. European Management Journal. Gouldner, A.W. (1960). The norm of reciprocity: A preliminary statement. American Sociological Review, 25(2), 161-178. Hair, J., Black, W., Babin, B., Anderson, R., & Tatham, R. (2006). Multivariate data analysis. New Jersey: Pear­son Prentice Hall. Haque, A., Fernando, M. and Caputi, P. (2019). Responsi­ble leadership, a.ective commitment and intention to quit: An individual level analysis. Leadership & Or­ganization Development Journal, 40(1), 45-64. Hobfoll, S.E. (1989). Conservation of resources: A new at­tempt at conceptualizing stress. American Psycholo­gist, 44(3), 513-524. Haskic, M. (2018), “Može li se zaustaviti ezgodus radne snage iz BiH”, available at: http://business-magazine.ba/2018/12/29/moze-li-se-zaustaviti-egzo­dus-radne-snage-iz-bih/ (accessed 9 January 2022). Huselid, M. A. (1995). The impact of human resource management practices on turnover, productivity, and performance. Academy of Management Journal, 38(3), 635-672. Islam, T., Khan, S.U.R., Ahmad, U.N.U., Ali, G., Ahmed, I., & Bowra, Z.A. (2013). Turnover intentions: The role of perceived organizational support and organizational commitment. Procedia Social and Behaviour Sciences, 103, 1237-1241. Katou, A.A. (2011). Test of a causal human resource man­agement-performance linkage model: evidence from the Greek manufacturing sector. International Jour­nal of Business Science and Applied Management, 6(1), 16-29. Knezovic, E., & Greda, N. (2021). Career development and a.ective commitment: a comparative study of family and nonfamily businesses. Journal of Family Business Management, 11(4), 462-478. Knezovic, E., Bušatlic, S., & Ridic, O. (2020). Strategic human resource management in small and medium enterprises. International Journal of Human Resource Development and Management, 20(2), 114-139. Koster, F., & Gutauskaite, D. (2019). HRM-culture fit: why the link between human resource practices and com­mitment varies across countries. Dynamic Relation­ships Management Journal, 8(1), 13-27. Kottke, J.L., & Sharafinski, C.E. (1988). Measuring per­ceived supervisory and organizational support. Edu­cational and Psychological Measurement, 48(4), 1075-1079. Kumar, P., & Ghadially, R. (1989). Organizational politics and its e.ect on members of organizations. Human Relations, 42(4), 305-314. Liu, F., Chow, I.H.-S., & Huang, M. (2019). High-perfor­mance work systems and organizational identifica­tion: the mediating role of organizational justice and the moderating role of supervisor support. Personnel Review, 49(4), 939-955. Luthans, F., Norman, S. M., Avolio, B. J., Avey, J. B. (2008). The mediating role of psychological capital in the sup­portive organizational climate—employee perfor­mance relationship. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 29 (2), 219-238. Luz, C.M.D.R., de Paula, S.L., & de Oliveira, L.M.B. (2018). Organizational commitment, job satisfaction and their possible influences on intent to turnover” Revista de Gestăo, 25(1), 84-101. Marescaux, E., De Winne, S., & Sels, L. (2012). HR prac­tices and a.ective organisational commitment: (when) does HR di.erentiation pay o.? Human Re­source Management Journal, 23(4), 329-345. Mathimaran, K.B., & Kumar, A.A. (2017). Employee reten­tion strategies - An empirical research. Global Journal of Management and Business Research: E Marketing, 17(1), 16-22. McColl-Kennedy, J.R., & Anderson, R.D. (2002). Impact of leadership style and emotions on subordinate perfor­mance. The Leadership Quarterly, 13(5), 545-559. Memon, K.R. (2014). Strategic role of HRD in employee skill development: An employer perspective. Journal of Human Resource Management, 2(1), 27-32. Mercurio, Z.A. (2015). A.ective commitment as a core essence of organizational commitment: an integrative literature review. Human Resource Development Re­view, 14(4), 389-414. Meyer, J., Stanley, D. J., Herscovitch, L., & Topolnytsky, L. (2002). A.ective, continuance, and normative com­mitment to the organization: A meta-analysis of an­tecedents, correlates, and consequences. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 61(1), 20-52. Meyer, J.P., Allen N.J., & Smith, C. (1993). Commitment to organizations and occupations: extension and test of a three-component conceptualization. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(4), 538-551. Naz, S., Li, C., Nisar, Q.A., Khan, M.A.S., Ahmad, N., & Anwar, F. (2020). A study in the relationship between supportive work environment and employee reten­tion: role of organizational commitment and person–organization fit as mediators’. SAGE Open. Nishii, L.H. & Wright, P. (2008). The people make the place: Dynamic linkages between individuals. New Jersey: Erlbaum. Podsako., P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., & Podsako., N. P. (2012). Sources of method bias in social science re­search and recommendations on how to control it. Annual Review of Psychology, 63, 539-569. Pradhan, S., Srivastava, A., & Jena, L.K. (2019). Abusive supervision and intention to quit: exploring multi-me­diational approaches. Personnel Review, 49(6), 1269-1286. Pramudita, A., & Sukoco, B. M. (2018). The moderating roles of perceived supervisor support between psychological contract and job-related outcomes. In C. Shieh, & T.A. Auliandri (Eds.), The 2018 International Conference of Organizational Innovation (pp. 110–125). Fukuoka Uni­versity. https://doi.org/10.18502/kss.v3i10.3365 Ramlall, S. (2003). Managing employee retention as a strategy for increasing organizational competitive­ness. Applied HRM Research, 8(2), 63-72. Ramlall, S. (2004). A review of employee motivation the­ories and their implications for employee retention within organizations. Journal of American Academy of Business, 5(20), 52-63. Rhoades, L., Eisenberger, R., & Armeli, S. (2001). A.ective commitment to the organization: The contribution of perceived organizational support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(5), 825-836 Saeed, I. (2014). The relationship of turnover intention with job satisfaction, job performance, leader mem­ber exchange, emotional intelligence and organiza­tional commitment. International Journal of Learning & Development, 4(2), 242-256. Schuler, R.S., & Jackson, S.E. (1987). Linking competitive strategies with human resource management prac­tices. Academy of Management Perspectives, 1(3), 207-219. Škerlavaj, M., Cerne, M., & Dysvik, A. (2014). I get by with a little help from my supervisor: creative-idea gener­ation, idea implementation, and perceived supervisor support. The Leadership Quarterly, 25(5), 987-1000. Steel, R.P., & Mento, A.J. (1987). The participation-per­formance controversy reconsidered: Subordinate competence as a mitigating factor. Group & Organi­zation Management, 12(4), 411-423. Tetteh, S.D., Osafo, J., Ansah-Nyarko, M., & Amponsah-Tawiah, K. (2019). Interpersonal fairness, willingness-to-stay and organisation-based self-esteem: the mediating role of a.ective commitment. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 1315-1324. Vandekerkhof, P., Steijvers, T., Hendriks, W., & Voordeck­ers, W. (2019). The e.ect of nonfamily managers on decision-making quality in family firm TMTs: the role of intra-TMT power asymmetries. Journal of Family Business Strategy, 10(3), p. 100272. Wasti, S.A. (2002). A.ective and continuance commit­ment to the organization: Test of an integrated model in the Turkish context. International Journal of Inter­cultural Relations, 26(5), 525-550. Weng, Q., & Hu, B. (2009). The structure of career growth and its impact on employees’ turnover intention. In­dustrial Engineering and Management, 14(1), 14-21. Wright, P.M. (2001). Human resources and the resource-based view of the firm. Journal of Management, 27(6), 700-701. Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 21 Abstract Vol. 11, No. 2, 21-36 doi:10.17708/DRMJ.2022.v11n02a02 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 22 Emil Knezovic, Hakan Atli, Kerim Lojo, Ognjen Ridic: Supportive Human Resource Practices and Intention to Quit: The Role of A.ective Commitment and Perceived Supervisor Support Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 23 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 24 Emil Knezovic, Hakan Atli, Kerim Lojo, Ognjen Ridic: Supportive Human Resource Practices and Intention to Quit: The Role of A.ective Commitment and Perceived Supervisor Support Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 25 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 26 Emil Knezovic, Hakan Atli, Kerim Lojo, Ognjen Ridic: Supportive Human Resource Practices and Intention to Quit: The Role of A.ective Commitment and Perceived Supervisor Support Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 27 Figure 1: Conceptual model Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 28 Emil Knezovic, Hakan Atli, Kerim Lojo, Ognjen Ridic: Supportive Human Resource Practices and Intention to Quit: The Role of A.ective Commitment and Perceived Supervisor Support Table 1: Descriptive statistics, reliability, validity, and correlations Note: N =507. *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01. CR = composite reliability; AVE = average variance extracted; square roots of AVE values are in parentheses. Figure 2: Final model with standardized estimates Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 29 Table 2: Standardized weights for structural model Note: N =507. *p <0 .05; **p <0 .01. ITQ - R2 = 0.39; AC - R2 = 0.48. Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 30 Table 4: Moderating e.ect of perceived supervisor support Emil Knezovic, Hakan Atli, Kerim Lojo, Ognjen Ridic: Supportive Human Resource Practices and Intention to Quit: The Role of A.ective Commitment and Perceived Supervisor Support Table 3: Indirect e.ects through a.ective commitment with 95% confidence intervals Note: N =507. *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01. Note: N =507. *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01. Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 31 Figure 3: Moderating e.ect of perceived supervisor support on the relationship between growth opportunities and intention to quit Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 32 Emil Knezovic, Hakan Atli, Kerim Lojo, Ognjen Ridic: Supportive Human Resource Practices and Intention to Quit: The Role of A.ective Commitment and Perceived Supervisor Support Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 33 EXTENDED SUMMARY/IZVLECEK Ta študija preucuje razmerje med podpornimi praksami ravnanja z ljudmi in namero o prene­hanju z mediacijo custvene predanosti in moderacijo zaznane podpore nadrejenega. Presecna študija je temeljila na anketnem vprašalniku in zajela vzorec 507 zaposlenih iz razlicnih panog v Bosni in Hercegovini. Za preverjanje hipotez smo uporabili modeliranje strukturnih enacb in hierarhicno re­gresijo. Rezultati so pokazali, da so podporne prakse ravnanja z ljudmi pozitivno povezane z namero o prenehanju. Poleg tega je bilo ugotovljeno, da je custvena predanost pomemben mediator v tem temeljnem odnosu, medtem ko se je moderacijska vloga zaznane podpore nadrejenega izkazala le kot delno pomembna. Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 34 Emil Knezovic, Hakan Atli, Kerim Lojo, Ognjen Ridic: Supportive Human Resource Practices and Intention to Quit: The Role of A.ective Commitment and Perceived Supervisor Support Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 35 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 36 Emil Knezovic, Hakan Atli, Kerim Lojo, Ognjen Ridic: Supportive Human Resource Practices and Intention to Quit: The Role of A.ective Commitment and Perceived Supervisor Support REFLECTIONS ON APPROACHES TO RESEARCH STRATEGIES IN MANAGEMENT Mihály Görög University of Pannonia, Veszprém gorog.mihaly@gtk.uni-pannon.hu The literature on research methods, while introducing both inductive and deductive research strategies, as well as the associated qualitative and quantitative research methods, provides the epistemological underpinning of research. However, this literature generally neglects the role of logic in research, which sometimes could lead to inappropriate reasoning in both doctoral thesis work and research papers. Inappropriate reasoning is due primarily to misinterpreting inductive and deductive forms of reasoning in the literature on research methods as a result of neglecting logic. This paper sheds new light on interpreting inductive and deductive forms of knowledge creation including logic, which has played an important role as the science of reasoning in knowledge creation since the time of Aristotle. This paper is speculative in nature, and provides the reflections of an experienced researcher from the management domain. Keywords: deductive research, inductive research, role of logic in research, types of research 1INTRODUCTION The primary aim of research in any domain is the creation of new knowledge; thus the validity of research outcomes is of great importance. Janiszewski, Labroo, and Rucker (2016) stated that the validity of research outcomes is strongly re­lated to the appreciation of the contribution of re­search outcomes to extant knowledge. They proposed two factors that determine the contribu­tion of a research study, namely the quality and the benefit. Quality, they stated, is a twofold phe­nomenon that includes being grounded in and ex­panding extant knowledge on the one hand, and the appropriate implementation of the research on the other hand. They defined benefit as the extent to which the new knowledge challenges the exist­ing knowledge. Bryman and Bell (2015) also dis­cussed quality, and they emphasized three criteria against which the quality of business research needs to be evaluated: reliability, replicability, and validity. Bryman and Bell stated that reliability and replicability are strongly interrelated. Whereas re­liability relates to measures used to quantify phe­nomena, replicability implies the potential for achieving the same outcome when a research study is repeated based on the same conditions. Bryman and Bell defined validity as the truth of the conclusions, in terms of generalization, of the re­search. Mĺrtensson, Fors, Wallin, Zander, and Nils­son (2016) discussed quality of research in the context of its evaluation, and they asserted that quality research needs to be (1) credible (i.e., co­herent, consistent, rigorous, and transparent), (2) contributory (i.e., original, relevant, and generaliz­able), (3) communicable (i.e., consumable, acces­sible, and searchable), and (4) conforming (i.e., regulatory aligned, ethical, and sustainable). The importance of a valid generalization also was stressed by Troja (2019), especially in the case of qualitative research, because a superficial gener­alization could weaken credibility, i.e., validity. Gray (2004) suggested data triangulation and methodological triangulation in order to ensure validity via reliability. To enhance both validity and practicability Joslin and Müller (2016) em­phasized the importance of adopting a double re­search perspective in terms of observing phenomena based on a dual paradigm. Thus, to ensure the validity of the research outcomes, Joslin and Müller (2016) strongly suggested the use of triangulation in project studies, such as data triangulation (e.g., adopting multiple data sources), triangulation of researchers (e.g., two researchers are engaged), methodological trian­gulation (e.g., the use of mixed methods), theory triangulation (e.g., adopting multiple theoretical perspectives), and philosophical triangulation (e.g., adopting different epistemological posi­tions). Joslin and Müller stated that the use of the latter type of triangulation in the investigation of the very same phenomenon is advisable when there is a potential to achieve synthesis of those research outcomes that are derived from such re­search studies that are based on different episte­mological positions. From the point of view of both validity and quality of research it seems reasonable to con­sider criticism published in management journals regarding the use of research strategies and methods. Sometimes this criticism is coupled with the moral attitude of the researchers, and authors also tend to couple criticism with the overwhelming use of quantitative research meth­ods. Wolceshyn and Daellenbach (2018), while ar­guing for the legitimacy of inductive research in management, highlighted the underlying reason for the overwhelming use of quantitative re­search in the management domain. They stated that this reason is rooted in the emergence of management sciences, when management schol­ars, to achieve scientific legitimacy by means of emulating the natural sciences, propagated the use of hypothetico-deductive research coupled with quantitative methods. In line with Wol­ceshyn and Daellenbach (2018), Pernecky (2016) highlighted Émile Durkheim’s role in introducing a scientific approach to social science (specifically to sociology) based on his approach to social phe­nomena. Durkheim’s approach proposes that so­cial phenomena are independent of our knowledge of them, and thus they can be ob­served objectively. In this way, the use of (hypo­thetico-)deductive research and the underlying positivist epistemological position might result in achieving scientific recognition in the wider com­munity of scientists. Banks et al. (2016) identified several forms of questionable research practice based on a consid­erable sample that may occur when hypothetico-de­ductive quantitative research is applied. These findings, which were reinforced by Schwab and Star­buck (2017), include •reporting hypotheses selectively, i.e., excluding a hypothesis with statistically non-significant results from the paper; •excluding data from analysis, i.e., excluding outlier data to achieve statistical significance; •hypothesizing after results are known (HARKing), i.e., adjusting predefined hypotheses to the out­comes; •including control variables selectively, i.e., includ­ing only those control variables that support the statistically significant outcomes; •falsifying data, i.e., creating data instead of col­lecting real-life data; and •rounding o. a p-value, i.e., manipulating signifi­cance. Unlike in inductive-qualitative research, the aforementioned practices are experienced primarily when hypothetico-deductive quantitative research, i.e., the most frequently employed research strategy in the management domain, is applied. Several stud­ies have highlighted the specific underlying reasons for this phenomenon. Both Banks et al. (2016) and Recker and Mertens (2019) identified several rea­sons, such as the pressure on academics to publish, the time pressure of publishing new results as quickly as possible, and the ranking policy of journals. Oster­loh and Frey’s (2020) criticism of the review practice of many leading journals also might imply potential reasons for conducting questionable research. These circumstances have resulted in replication crises (e.g., Banks et al., 2016) or contradicting research out­comes (e.g., Görög, 2019). All in all, the use of these practices weakens the quality and reliability, and therefore the validity, of the research outcomes. Regarding inductive-qualitative research, a few critical remarks can be found in management jour­nals. These include the potentially limited knowl­edge of the researcher and the inherent limits of human observations (Zalaghi & Khazaei (2016). However, Mohajan (2018) while pointing out poten­tial advantageous features of inductive-qualitative research, identified a couple of disadvantages which might limit the validity of research results, including di.culties in demonstrating scientific rigor related to collecting data, and the fact that these research results could not be verified objectively. Thus, one might conclude that, apart from the researchers’ honesty, validity of a research outcome is determined primarily by the use of an appropriate research strategy and methods, or rather by the ap­propriate use of the strategies and methods. In this way, authors of books on research methods have primary responsibility, because both doctoral stu­dents and practicing researchers rely on these books to a great extent. Doctoral students are trained from these books, and practicing researchers refer to these books when justifying the appropriateness of the research strategies and methods deployed in their research. Although articles published in man­agement journals have discussed the use of re­search strategies (such as inductive, deductive, or abductive) or analytical methods (such as qualita­tive and quantitative), the authors of such papers basically agree with the book authors. What does characterize the books, or at least the books cited in this paper, on research methods? Most of these books, while focusing on the wider domain of social sciences, provide an epistemolog­ical background of applying di.erent research strategies and the associated analytical methods (in­cluding data collection methods as well), or even in­troducing the appropriate rhetorical aspects in terms of style of writing. However, it is hard to find a book on research methods that provides insight into logic, i.e., the science of reasoning. Tsang (2017) stated that courses lacking logic in doctoral schools result in inappropriate reasoning in thesis works and in the research-based manuscripts submitted to management journals. Logic seems to be a certain kind of interface between philosophy and research strategies. It implies that researchers can opera­tionalize their philosophical (both ontological and epistemological) stance and the associated research methodology by means of the tools of logic. Lacking familiarity with logic might lead to misinterpreting the use of research strategies, in terms of both the inductive and deductive forms of creating new knowledge. This paper sheds fresh light on interpreting in­ductive and deductive forms of knowledge creation in relation to the philosophy of science, and the sci­ence of logic (as the science of reasoning) which have played an important role since the time of Aris­totle in creating scientific knowledge. The basics of logic is introduced in a separate section. Interpreting this approach to knowledge creation provides the potential for, as collateral aims, understanding the unit of analysis, proposing basic research types, and a spiral-based evolution process of knowledge cre­ation in management. This paper is speculative in nature, especially the last section, which summa­rizes the concluding thoughts of the author. To make this apparent, the first-person pronoun is used in that section. However, before introducing the existing ap­proaches to the topic, a terminological issue is dis­cussed. A few authors use the term “approach” when discussing inductive and deductive methods of conducting research, whereas others use the term “strategy” when discussing these methods of research. In this paper when the existing literature is introduced, the term used by the authors of each paper is adopted. However, when my own views and proposals are introduced, I use the term “strat­egy” to classify inductive and deductive research. The paper is organized as follows. The following two sections introduce how research methods and the underlying strategies to conducting research are interpreted in management articles that discuss the perceived use of these tools, and in books on re­search methods. The interpretations given in the books are reflected in the articles. This implies that the articles show how the research methods o.ered in the books are understood and perceived by the researchers in the course of using them. This justi­fies introducing the approaches available in articles and books in separate sections. Those two sections are followed by the introduction of approaches to research in the literature on logic, beginning with philosophers who stress the role of logic in research. In this way, the paper moves from an application level toward a more theoretical level. The paper ends with concluding thoughts, bearing in mind the underlying epistemological stances when interpret­ing the use of deductive logic in management re­search. 2FINDINGS IN MANAGEMENT ARTICLES DEVOTED TO THE USE OF RESEARCH METHODS Although each research paper published in management journals introduces the research methods applied in the underlying research, several papers published in these journals have discussed research methods applied in management research. Aldag and Stearn (1988) reported the use of various research methods, and the increasing number of qualitative analytical procedures in addition to the quantitative analyses. Bansal, Smith, and Vaara (2018), while emphasizing the role of qualitative data-based inductive research in theory develop­ment, stated that this kind of paper submission has reached 20% of the total submissions to the Academy of Management Journal. Bansal, Smith, and Vaara also stressed the need to use di.erent types of qualitative research methods in addition to case-based positivist research. In the project man­agement domain, Müller and Söderlund (2015) highlighted that research studies are very traditional because researchers prefer using questionnaires and quantitative analyses, and emphasised the need to consider context specificity in such re­search. Barratt, Choi, and Li (2011) argued for con­ducting case-based qualitative research in operations management, which would contribute to developing the theoretical underpinning of this domain area. Gottfredson and Aguilis (2017) high­lighted the importance of adopting a dual deduc­tive–inductive research method to determine the relationships between leadership behaviour and fol­lower performance reliably. Whitfield and Strauss (2000) stated that there is a definite shift from inductive research adopting qualitative analyses toward deductive research adopting quantitative analysis in order to build (in­ductively) and test (deductively) theories. However, Whitfield and Strauss did not say that each deduc­tive research is ab ovo quantitative or that each in­ductive research is ab ovo qualitative in nature. Hyde (2000), like Whitfield and Strauss (2000), clearly di.erentiated quantitative and qualitative re­search, and stated that quantitative research gener­ally is based on a deductive process, whereas qualitative research is based on an inductive pro­cess. Hyde further argued for a balanced use of both induction and deduction in each research in order to avoid neglecting useful theoretical perspectives due to extreme induction, or developing (new) the­ory due to extreme deduction. Those papers con­sidered deductive research to be a theory-testing e.ort which aims to justify whether a given theory or concept is valid in a given context, whereas in­ductive research is considered as a theory-building process which aims to generalize specific occur­rences of the investigated phenomenon. In addition to using inductive and deductive re­search, Kovács and Spense (2005) argued for de­ploying abductive research in logistics to support theory development in this domain. Abductive re­search is understood here as a certain combination of inductive and deductive research. In an abductive research process, a theory is matched with challeng­ing real-life cases, and, as a result of resolving their contradictions, a new or a further developed theory is formulated and applied. Although abductive re­search is used in management research less often than deductive and inductive research, Behfar and Okhuysen (2018) emphasized its advantageous fea­tures. In their view, this research method is “an in­separable, indispensable, and valuable approach linking the development of explanation and the testing of resulting hypotheses to advance theory” (Behfar & Okhuysen, 2018, p. 323). Thus, they stated that an abductive research process has an outstanding role in theory development when re­solving and explaining contradictions or inconsisten­cies experienced in the phenomenon researched. Therefore, they suggested that an abductive re­search method should substitute the traditional de­ductive and inductive research methods. In terms of papers which report or propagate the use of di.erent research types, articles have been published in management journals which pro­vide a broader picture of undertaking management-related research. Janiszewski, Labroo, and Rucker (2016) di.eren­tiated deductive-conceptual research and non-de­ductive-conceptual research. Deductive-conceptual research focuses on a theory, concept-to-theory, or concept relationship to construct new theoretical knowledge; that is, the primary aim is to contribute to theory development by means of testing the pro­posed new construct. Non-deductive-conceptual re­search focuses on relationships between empirically observed phenomena to provide explanation. Za­laghi and Khazaei (2016) approached this issue by making reference to logic, and they di.erentiated deductive and inductive methods. A deductive method starts by considering general concepts from which a specific conclusion is drawn based on formal logical reasoning. An inductive method starts by ob­serving a specific phenomenon, and then the con­clusion drawn is generalized to a similar context. This generalization might lead to constructing a new or novel theory or concept. Recker and Mertens (2019), similarly to Bansal, Smith, and Vaara (2018), used the term “hypothetico-deductive research” when they discussed the importance of significance testing of null hypothesis. This term was used for deductive re­search in recent management literature, because, according to the broadly accepted notion, in deduc­tive-quantitative research a hypothesis is deduced from extant literature. Pathirage, Amaratunga, and Haigh (2008) and Wolceshyn and Daellenbach (2018) also adopted the terms “deductive” and “inductive” to di.eren­tiate between the two fundamental approaches to conducting research. They considered the terms in the context of epistemology, that is, from the point of view of how knowledge is created and acquired. Bearing in mind the two extremes, Pathirage, Ama­ratunga, and Haigh (2008) emphasized positivist and social constructivist epistemological positions, and in light of these two positions they highlighted the fundamental di.erences between deductive and in­ductive research. Thus, they stated that because positivists believe in an external world which is in­dependent of our knowledge of it (even the social world), the researcher is independent, and is able to reveal causal relationships by means of deductive thinking. Social constructivists believe in a socially constructed (non-objective and non-external) world; thus the researcher is part of the observed phenomenon. Therefore, a researcher collects data from which a general understanding of a phe­nomenon is achieved by means of inductive think­ing. Bredillet (2004) stated that relying on a “being ontology” which postulates a fixed reality and the associated positivist mirror is not appropriate in pro­ject-related research, and argued for adopting a “becoming ontology” postulating a changing reality and the associated subjectivism to achieve e.ective­ness of project management research outcomes. Despite the slightly di.erent phrasing used by the aforementioned authors, the basic concepts of conducting management research are understood similarly; however, the terms for research ap­proaches (deductive and inductive) and analytical approaches (quantitative and qualitative) some­times are used as synonyms. Studies di.erentiate (hypothetico-)deductive and inductive research, and consider these research strategies basically in the same way, although Zalaghi and Khazaei (2016) presented a di.erent notion about deductive and inductive research. However, there seems to be an agreement among studies regarding the strong con­nection between (hypothetico-)deductive research and the use of quantitative methods on the one hand, and the connection between inductive re­search and the use of qualitative methods on the other hand. The scope of the research methods propagated for use in management research has been broadened, and the importance of epistemo­logical underpinning of conducting management re­search has become common. In addition to the epistemological underpinning of research, a few studies have shed light on the role of axiology in research as well. Axiology is con­cerned with the involvement of the researchers’ value system in the research, i.e., it addresses the question of whether the relationship between the phenomenon being observed and the researcher has an impact on the research (e.g., Pathirage, Ama­ratunga, & Haigh, 2008). Reiter (2017) argued that researchers’ engagement in terms of their position­ality is needed in the pure social sciences (e.g., so­ciology). Bansal, Smith, and Vaara (2018) adopted the term “engaged scholarship,” which implies that a researcher is part of the context of the phe­nomenon being observed. In this way, they stated that the involvement of the researchers’ value can strengthen the insight into a researched phe­nomenon. Hudson and Okhuysen, (2014) and Beh­far and Okhuysen (2018) stated that it is naďve to assert that researchers might value neutral partici­pants in the research process. 3APPROACHES TO RESEARCH IN BOOKS DEVOTED TO RESEARCH METHODS Although several books have been published in the last decade introducing research methods ap­plicable in social sciences, the number of books de­voted to management research is limited. Thus, this section of the paper also considered a few books on the wider scope of social science-related research. Gray (2004) di.erentiated deductive and induc­tive research in the context of organizational re­search based on the relation between a theory or concept and the research aim. In deductive research the aim is to empirically justify or falsify relationships between theories or concepts asserted in the prede­fined hypotheses, whereas in inductive research the aim is to construct generalizations and relationships between concepts or theories, or even to construct new theories from the outcomes of empirical obser­vations. Gray (2004) emphasised the potential for a combined use of deductive and inductive processes. Bryman and Bell (2015) used the terms “deductive” and “inductive” theory or strategy alternately. They stated that in deductive research, hypotheses are de­duced from the extant literature, i.e., from what is already known, whereas in inductive research a the­ory development is inferred from the empirical find­ings. Akin to Gray’s (2004) view, Bryman and Bell did not emphasise a definite separation between deduc­tive and inductive research, and referred to their combined use as abduction. Jensen and Lauire (2016) di.erentiated between deductive and induc­tive research based on the nature of empirical infor­mation. In their view, quantitative methods rely on numerical data and generally adopt a deductive way of thinking, while qualitative methods rely on non-numerical data and generally follow an inductive method. They referred to the combination of quan­titative and qualitative methods as mixed methods. Tracy (2020) also di.erentiated deductive and inductive reasoning, using terms from logic. How­ever, bearing in mind a pure social science context, Tracy referred to these as etic and emic understand­ings. Emic refers to emerge, which implies inductive research aiming at the introduction of human be­haviour in a context-specific manner from the point of view of the actors to develop general trends, whereas etic (external) refers to deductive research, in which predefined external theories are used to de­scribe and explain a situation. Tracy stated that a qualitative analysis, compared with a quantitative method, implies more elements of subjectivity. Troja (2019) propagated a stepwise-deductive inductive mode which includes a phase from empirical data to concepts or theories as an inductive process. Then, as a deductive process, there is a phase from theo­retical toward empirical. However, this model resem­bles abduction (e.g., Bryman & Bell, 2015). Most research method books discuss the ques­tion of research approaches (deductive or inductive) and the associated data analysis methods (quantita­tive or qualitative) alongside the epistemological po­sitions. Gray (2004) stressed that selecting a data collection method (e.g., interviews or question­naires) is determined by the research methodology used (e.g., grounded research or survey research). This methodology is influenced by the theoretical perspectives adopted by the researcher (e.g., posi­tivism), and also is determined by the researcher’s epistemological position (e.g., objectivism). Episte­mology, as the philosophy of science, is concerned with creating knowledge adequately, whereas ontol­ogy is concerned with the external world in relation to which research as knowledge creation is under­stood. Gray discussed three epistemological posi­tions: objectivism, constructivism, and subjectivism. In Gray’s (2004) view, objectivism postulates as an ontological position an objective external world, and the related theoretical perspective is positivism, and thus research involves discovering the objective ex­ternal world primarily by means of deductive re­search. Constructivism, in his view, also postulates as an ontological position an objective external world, but its related theoretical perspective is inter­pretivism, and thus research is about creating knowl­edge by means of interaction with the external world within the frame of inductive research. Subjectivism, Gray states, does not postulate that an external world objectively exists; thus, knowledge is imposed on the world by the subject, i.e., this world could be interpreted in a qualitative-inductive way. Creswell (2012), in addition to the epistemolog­ical determination of methodological issues, empha­sised the role of rhetoric and axiology in research, which include the role of values adopted by the re­searcher, i.e., whether the researcher’s values could shape the interpretation of the research outcomes. However, in his approach, positivism and construc­tivism, to name just two concepts, are referred to as paradigms or worldviews, whereas Gray (2004) re­ferred to these concepts as theoretical perspectives. Tracy’s (2020) approach to paradigms is similar to that of Creswell (2012), although she emphasized the role of positivist, interpretative, critical, and post­modern paradigms. She also emphasized that choos­ing a certain paradigm precludes choosing another one simultaneously. Tracy (2020) referred to the term “theoretical framework” (e.g., interpretivism or ethnography) as a system of principles to explain dif­ferent phenomena. Kuhn’s (1970) broadly accepted interpretation of a paradigm includes a combination of ontological stance, epistemological position, and research methodology. For epistemological positions, Bryman and Bell (2015) di.erentiated two fundamental philosophi­cal stances, namely positivism and interpretivism, both of which include di.erent genres. They stated that positivism is associated with the natural sci­ences, and therefore it cannot be applied properly in social science research. According to Bryman and Bell, because the emphasis in social research is on understanding human behavior, interpretivism is considered to be an appropriate epistemological po­sition. Bryman and Bell (2015) also di.erentiated ontological positions, such as objectivism and con­structionism. Whereas objectivism postulates a re­ality which is external to the social actors, constructionism says that the external world is a so­cial construct. Bryman and Bell also emphasized the role of both ontological and epistemological posi­tions in formulating research questions and con­ducting research, which leads to adopting a certain paradigm (e.g., Kuhn, 1970). The latter postulates adopting a certain research design (e.g., longitudinal research) which provides guidance for implement­ing research methods (e.g., questionnaire-based data collection). Bryman and Bell (2015) used the term “strategy” (similar to di.erentiating the terms inductive and deductive) when di.erentiating quan­titative and qualitative research. In their view, a quantitative research strategy, which emphasizes collecting and analyzing data quantitatively, adopts an objective ontological position and a deductive approach to test theories. A qualitative research strategy, they stated, which emphasizes collecting and analyzing data non-numerically, adopts con­structivism as an ontological position and primarily uses an inductive approach to theory generation. Thus, Bryman and Bell considered the phenomenon of mixed methods as a combined use of quantitative and qualitative research strategies. Drouin, Müller, and Sankaran (2013) stated that very few project-related studies have adopted con­temporary epistemological approaches, and they ar­gued in favor of adopting theories from the broader social sciences (e.g., organizational and behavioral sciences) to innovate project management research based on new approaches (such as pragmatism and postmodernism) by using novel research methods (e.g., action research and ethnographic study). Books on research methods, especially those recently published, also shed light on the role of ax­iology in research. Tracy (2020) defined axiology as a discipline which deals with values that are associ­ated with a certain research area. This approach postulates value-laden research, e.g., the conscious adoption of the value of social justice in sociology. Bryman and Bell (2015) also approached this ques­tion in terms of values which reflect the beliefs and feelings of the researchers. According to Bryman and Bell, the influence of values manifests primarily in terms of sympathy or antipathy when qualitative research and interview-based data collection are ap­plied. They also stressed that research might be con­sciously value-laden. Although there are di.erences in approaches to research, especially in terms of understanding epis­temology, the underlying concepts of conducting re­search are understood basically in the same way despite the use of slightly di.erent phrasing when the basic concepts of research are explained. These primarily include how the terms “deductive” and “in­ductive” research and, respectively, “quantitative” and “qualitative” research are understood and ex­plained. Most authors agree to a certain extent that deductive research is used to provide empirical jus­tification or falsification of theories, whereas induc­tive research is used to generate theories from empirical data. However, di.erences in authors’ ap­proaches are important to understanding and ex­plaining epistemological positions and their genres. 4APPROACHES TO RESEARCH IN PHILOSOPHY AND LOGIC Both the papers published in management journals and the books on research methods cited in the previous sections emphasize the role of phi­losophy in research. Tsang (2017) stressed the im­portance of philosophical perspectives in research, stating that a philosophical perspective includes be­liefs and assumptions about the external world and also the way in which a person knows about this world. Thus, a philosophical perspective provides a worldview for a researcher. Marsh, Ercan, and Furlong (2018) considered this issue in a broader philosophical context, stating that a researcher’s attitude toward an observed phenomenon is shaped by their adopted ontological and epistemological position. Ontology and episte­mology are the two main branches of philosophy, and although they are related, they are di.erent. Central to ontology is the question of whether there is a real world which “is independent of our knowl­edge of it” (Marsh, Ercan, & Furlong, 2018, p. 18). Epistemology is the theory of knowledge, and its primary question is what and how one can know about the world. In terms of the ontological posi­tions, Marsh, Ercan, and Furlong di.erentiated be­tween foundationalism and anti-foundationalism. Whereas foundationalism postulates a real world which is independent of our knowledge of it, anti-foundationalism postulates a socially constructed world. As the most common categorization, Marsh, Ercan, and Furlong (2018) considered scientific (also referred to as positivist) and hermeneutic (also re­ferred to as interpretist) epistemological positions. Adopting a foundationalist ontological position leads to adopting a scientific, i.e., a positivist epis­temological position, stating that the real world can be known objectively. Thus, this approach relies on deduction and is concerned with causal relation­ships between phenomena (using theories to define hypotheses) to produce not only explanatory but predictive models as well by means of quantitative methods. However, an objective direct observation is needed of whether the prediction succeeds and the deduction is valid knowledge. Adopting an anti-foundationalist ontological position leads to a hermeneutic, i.e., an interpretist epistemological position, stating that the socially constructed world might be interpreted only by means of qualitative methods. Although the interpretist position includes di.erent subsections (genres), the underlying fea­tures of these genres are similar to the previously mentioned characteristics of interpretism. Because these two epistemological positions are fundamen­tally di.erent, Marsh, Ercan, and Furlong (2018) stressed that these positions cannot be adopted by a researcher interchangeably. When di.erentiating positivist and interpretist epistemological positions as fundamental positions, Marsh, Ercan, and Furlong (2018) stressed the im­portance of realism, which might be considered to be a certain kind of in-between category. They stated that realism adopts foundationalism as an ontological position, and thus it uses causal state­ments as hypotheses when observing certain phe­nomena and their relationships. However, realists state that there are objective social phenomena, and their relationships, that cannot be observed di­rectly, but only interpreted as they are perceived. Thus, realism accepts the use of both quantitative and qualitative research methods. Pernecky (2016) provided an overview of the his­tory of seeking true knowledge, and also considered the concepts of logic. He stated that the debate over deductive versus inductive thinking has its roots in ancient Greece, and has been continued over the fol­lowing centuries. Empiricists argued for the supremacy of experience, which postulates inductive thinking, whereas rationalists stated that true knowl­edge is an achievement of reasoning, i.e., logic which postulates deductive thinking. The underlying deduc­tive thinking of rationalism goes back to the ancient Greek mathematician Euclid, especially his axiomatic system (e.g., Szabó, 1967). However, the outcome of a deduction needs to be justified or falsified by means of experiments or empirical observations. The aim of inductive reasoning is to achieve generaliza­tions by means of observing particular phenomena and inferring general law in terms of theory. Because both deductive and inductive reason­ing are underlying tools for creating new knowl­edge, they are discussed further based on literature on science of reasoning, i.e., logic. Logic is a method by means of which correct reasoning can be di.er­entiated from incorrect reasoning (Copi, Cohen, & McMahon, 2014). An argument, i.e., reasoning, might be considered to be a sequence of sentences, i.e., a sequence of propositions, which starts with premises and ends with a conclusion (Gamut, 1991). Propositions are important parts of reasoning because whether something is true or false is stated by means of sentences which are referred to as propositions (e.g., Copi, Cohen, & McMahon, 2014). Although a proposition may include a simple state­ment (a categorical assertion), it also might be com­pound, including complex assertions. Copi, Cohen, and McMahon (2014) di.erentiated the following compound propositions: •Conjunctive, e.g., “in winter the temperature is below zero, and it is frequently snowing,” i.e., each part can be asserted separately. •Disjunctive (alternative), e.g., “at the end of the road you can turn left or right,” i.e., only one of the components is true. •Hypothetical (conditional), e.g., “if I am sleepy, then I go to bed,” i.e., only the if–then proposi­tion, but none of the components is asserted. Using propositions, one can construct argu­ments, which include inferences resulting in the conclusion drawn. Thus, the structure of arguments includes propositions (commonly referred to as premises) and a conclusion, in which the premises support the conclusion. The conclusion of an infer­ence may be used to form a new premise in a fol­lowing structure of argument. Depending on how the premises support the conclusion, an argument, and the implied inference, might be deductive or in­ductive. When the conclusion is supported conclu­sively by its premises, the argument is referred to as deductive; however, when this conclusiveness is not ascertained, the argument (and the implied infer­ence) is inductive. The di.erence between deductive and induc­tive reasoning is based on the nature of the claims which are made using arguments about the rela­tions between premises and a conclusion (e.g., Copi, Cohen, & McMahon, 2014). In a deductive argu­ment the conclusion, as a product of inference of the argument, comes from the premises as an ab­solute necessity. However, in an inductive argument the conclusion, as a product of inference of the rea­soning, comes from the premises with a certain de­gree of probability. The following two examples shed light on this di.erence: 1) Each six-year-old child has to go to school. Peter is a six-year-old child. Therefore, Peter has to go to school. 2) Most six-year-old children have to go to school. Peter is a six-year-old child. Therefore, Peter probably has to go to school. The di.erence between deductive and induc­tive reasoning places the question of validity at the forefront. Central to logic is highlighting what makes an argument valid, i.e., what makes a valid inference (e.g., Gamut, 1991). Gamut also highlighted that from the point of view of validity, the sequence of sentences, i.e., of the propositions (premises then conclusion), is of vital importance because this se­quence ensures the validity of argument schemata, i.e., of the structure of an argument. When true premises irrefutably underpin the conclusion, the argument is considered to be valid. Because this is not the case when an inductive argument is applied, the question of validity is considered in connection with deductive arguments. “A deductive argument is valid when, if its premises are true, its conclusion must be true” (Copi, Cohen, & McMahon, 2014, p. 24). The conclusion of an inductive argument can never be certain, although the level of its probability can vary. Thus, one example of inductive reasoning might be stronger or weaker than another. “Even when the premises are all true, however, and pro­vide strong support for the conclusion, that conclu­sion is not established with certainty” (Copi, Cohen, & McMahon, 2014, p. 25) in the case of induction. Bearing in mind this di.erence between deduction and induction, it is clear that considering further in­formation can change the probability of an inductive argument, whereas the validity of deductive reason­ing will not change due to additional information. Unlike the validity of an argument, the question of truth is understood related to the propositions, es­pecially to those which are considered to be the premises, stating something about a case. When the premises are true and the argument is valid, this ar­gument is referred to as sound (e.g., Copi, Cohen, & McMahon, 2014). Thus, a sound argument neces­sarily includes a true conclusion. Although a simple argument may consist of one premise, for the purpose of scientific reasoning, Aristotle developed his syllogistic logic (e.g., Gamut, 1991) in which two premises are used to draw a conclusion. Thus, syllogism is a deductive argument in which the conclusion is inferred from two premises. The validity of syllogism requires the use of its standard form, which implies, further to the internal structure of the propositions, a specified order of the propositions (argument schemata). In terms of the proper internal structure of the propo­sitions, of both premises and the conclusion, the concepts of major term, minor term, and middle term are di.erentiated (e.g., Copi, Cohen, & McMa­hon, 2014) in the following example: All elephants can fly. Jumbo is an elephant. Therefore, Jumbo can fly. In this example the predicate of the conclusion is fly, and this is referred to as the major term of this syllogism. The subject of the conclusion is Jumbo, and this is referred to as the minor term of this syllogism. Elephant, referred to as the middle term, is in both the premises, but never in the con­clusion. The premise in which the major term (fly) is included is referred to as a major premise, whereas the premise in which the minor term (Jumbo) is included is referred to as a minor premise. A categorical syllogism has a standard form when both the premises and the conclusion are a standard form of categorical propositions (e.g., Copi, Cohen, & McMahon, 2014), and these are arranged in a predefined order, i.e., the major premise is first, the minor premise is second, and the conclusion is last. The validity of this syllogism depends on this form. Further to categorical syllogism which is con­structed from categorical propositions, a disjunctive syllogism consists of one disjunctive (alternative) proposition as one of the premises. The other premise denies one of the alternatives stated in the first premise. Thus, a disjunctive syllogism requires the use of a logical constant such as or, and the valid conclusion of a disjunctive syllogism includes an al­ternative that is not denied. For example: At the end of the road you can turn left or right. At the end of the road you can’t turn left. At the end of the road you can turn right. A hypothetical (conditional) syllogism consists of conditional propositions which include an an­tecedent (e.g., if I am sleepy) and a consequent (e.g., then I go to bed). Whereas the pure hypotheti­cal syllogism relies on two conditional propositions, the mixed hypothetical syllogism is based on one conditional proposition and one categorical propo­sition as premises. For example: If I am sleepy, then I go to bed. I am sleepy. Then I go to bed. In this form of mixed hypothetical syllogism (modus ponens) the antecedent included in the conditional premise is confirmed by the categorical premise, whereas the conclusion states the conse­quent (e.g., Gamut, 1991). In other forms of mixed hypothetical syllogism (modus tollens), the categor­ical premise denies the consequent stated in the conditional premise, and the antecedent is denied in the conclusion (e.g., Gamut, 1991). The structural validity of the mixed hypothetical syllogisms re­quires the use of appropriate logical constants, such as if ... then, if and only if, and not. Again, due to the relations between the premises and the conclusion, in the case of deduc­tion the conclusion comes from their premises with certainty, i.e., if a deduction is valid and its premises include true assertions, the conclusion must be true. However, in the case of induction, also due to the re­lation between its premises and the conclusion, the resulting conclusion is true with a certain probability. To strengthen the probability of an inductively achieved analogical conclusion, Copi, Cohen, and McMahon (2014) drew attention to considering an appropriate number of similar and dissimilar as well as relevant cases, whereas the conclusion needs to be formulated modestly. Further to analogy, an in­ductive inference might relate to casual relationships as well, in which a cause-and-e.ect relationship is supposed between two phenomena. In this case, it is postulated that similar e.ects are produced by similar causes, i.e., generality is available due to the causal law. Inductive generalization, i.e., formulating a general proposition from particular experiences, might be achieved by simple enumeration. Thus, the higher the number of observed causalities, the greater is the potential for a more probably true in­ductive generalization. However, a negative case casts doubt on the truth of this generalization (e.g., Copi, Cohen, & McMahon, 2014). The conclusion of any inference might be used as a premise of further inferences to provide build­ing blocks for developing scientific explanations which could lead to constructing general truths or theories which are empirically verified (e.g., Copi, Ercan, & Furlong, 2014). Copi, Ercan, and Furlong stated that this process includes several steps, such as problem identification, formulating preliminary hypotheses, collecting additional evidence to adjust preliminary hypotheses and formulate explanatory hypotheses, drawing and testing consequences, and applying the new knowledge (theory). According to Copi, Ercan, and Furlong, central to this process is formulating hypotheses which are considered to be appropriate when they (1) are compatible with pre­viously established theories, (2) have predictive or explanatory power, and (3) imply relative simplicity. 5CONCLUDING THOUGHTS ON CONDUCTING RESEARCH IN MANAGEMENT The preceding brief overview of the research ap­proaches or strategies discussed in management jour­nals and introduced in books on research methods makes it possible to provide a concluding summary of logic and its relation to the philosophy of science. This summary focuses on interpreting deductive and in­ductive research in the management domain, and its relation to epistemology (philosophy of science). Addressing these issues provides potential for further discussion and interpretation of questions, such as the unit of analysis in management research and the basic types of management research. All this helps to interpret the evolution process of man­agement knowledge as a certain kind of knowledge creation spiral. Although terminology tends to di.er some­times, the authors of studies in management jour­nals and of books all consider and interpret both deductive and inductive research strategies. It is ac­cepted broadly that deductive research follows a theory–hypotheses–justification/falsification pro­cess, whereas inductive research is based on an ob­servation–pattern/hypotheses–theory process. Research tends to associate a deductive approach with quantitative analysis, and an inductive ap­proach with qualitative analysis. However, the broadly used term “hypothetico-deductive research” implies, and a few authors (e.g., Bryman & Bell, 2015) state expressis verbis, that in deductive re­search hypotheses are deduced from extant litera­ture, i.e., from what we already know. These authors also state that in the course of inductive research a theory is inferred from the empirical findings. In the science of logic, inference as the form of reasoning is considered to be a process in which the premises lead to a conclusion. An inference, de­pending on the relations between its premises and its conclusion, is either deductive or inductive. Al­though it seems acceptable that in inductive re­search, knowledge is inferred inductively as a result of inductive generalization, stating that hypotheses are deduced from extant knowledge in hypothetico-deductive research is questionable in terms of logic. To make this issue clear, we need to discuss further the approaches to knowledge creation. Gray (2004) introduced three types of studies: (1) exploratory, which aim to determine a situation; (2) descriptive, which aim to describe a phe­nomenon as it is; and (3) explanatory, which focus on highlighting relationships between phenomena. To produce these studies, di.erent types of research need to be completed. Both exploratory and de­scriptive studies require observation in order to in­troduce a new phenomenon or an undiscovered aspect of a known phenomenon. An example is in­troducing the concept of a project as a temporary organization (e.g., Lundin and Söderholm, 1995). However, an explanatory study might require either inductive or deductive research. When the relation­ships between phenomena are highlighted as a re­sult of inductive generalization the researcher, based on existing knowledge of these phenomena, assumes (but does not deduce) a certain relation­ship between them. This assumption is formulated as a hypothesis; then, by collecting and analysing empirical data, this hypothesis is justified (or falsi­fied) as a result of inductive generalization. An ex­ample is highlighting the relationship between project types and the project manager’s leadership style (e.g., Müller and Turner, 2007). When the re­lationships between phenomena are determined as a result of deductive reasoning, the researcher, based on existing knowledge (in terms of concepts or theories) related to these or other phenomena, deduces (as a result of logical succession, i.e., infer­ence) a certain relationship between them. This de­ductive conclusion is formulated as a hypothesis; then, by empirical observation, this hypothesis is re­inforced (or refuted). An example is determining the relationship between the market position perceived by project-based organizations and the type of con­tract used by the project clients. (e.g., Görög, 2016). Bearing in mind the di.erence between induc­tive and deductive inference (reasoning) as intro­duced in the literature on logic, I would say that use of the term hypothetico-deductive research is mis­leading because it relies on a certain kind of miscon­ception related to deductive research. Therefore, most of the research which is referred to as deduc­tive in management journals and books on research methods actually is inductive research (inductive generalizations) reflecting the science of logic. The preceding cases exemplify this statement and also provide justification for it. However, in the case of quantitative analysis–based research, the inductive generalization is underpinned quantitatively, and qualitative analysis–based research qualitatively supports the inductive generalization. In terms of epistemological stances, the litera­ture on philosophy di.erentiates two fundamental positions, namely positivist (also referred to as sci­entific) and interpretist (also referred to as hermeneutic). However, Marsh, Ercan, and Furlong (2018) di.erentiated an in-between position, real­ism, which adopts foundationalism as an ontological position, emphasizing the need to consider causal relationships between phenomena. Realists also state that there are objective relationships between social phenomena that cannot be observed directly, only interpreted as they are perceived. It is charac­teristic of the hermeneutic/interpretist epistemo­logical position that this stance includes several dif­ferent genres (branches); however, it seems that there is no commonly agreed name for these di.er­ent genres. Most of these genres sometimes named are di.erently when introduced in books on re­search methods and briefly interpreted in manage­ment journals, which can result in a certain amount of cognitive confusion for practicing researchers. Creswell (2012) provided an extensive list, including postpositivism, social constructivism, pragmatism, postmodern perspectives, feminist theory, critical race theory, etc., whereas Troja (2019) adopted the umbrella term “research perspective” and intro­duced symbolic interactionism, ethnomethodology, phenomenology, and social constructivism. How­ever, Marsh, Ercan, and Furlong (2018) drew atten­tion to the lack of discussion of the potential relevance of these genres. In my view, adopting one of these genres as an epistemological position is strongly related to the unit of analysis (and the underlying research aim) considered in a research study and also to the axi­ological approach of the researcher. Authors (e.g., Creswell, 2012; Troja, 2019) when exemplifying the use of di.erent research methods (based on a cer­tain epistemological genre) regularly consider, as the unit of analysis, a person or a small well-defined group of people. Revealing behavior of persons or a small and well-defined group of persons might ex­plain conducting value-laden research. For me, many of the genres that have emerged in the last decades seem to present certain axiological world­views rather than addressing the question of what and how one can know about the world. Adopting this kind of approach might be explained in sociol­ogy; however, management research does not need to emulate the current research practices of sociology. At this point, the following interrelated ques­tions need to be raised: •What is the unit of analysis in management re­search? •What are the appropriate epistemological posi­tions in management research? •What is the role of axiology in management re­search? Although management is strongly related to leadership, it is considered to be a di.erent domain (e.g., Gri.n, 2016) Thus, I might say, in line with Bryman and Bell (2015), that in management re­search the unit of analysis, in a broader sense of the term, is the organization. More precisely, man­agement research, in terms of the unit of analysis, focuses on di.erent aspects of the structure and process of the organization, and also at di.erent levels, such as core activities, projects, and the strategic apex. However, organizations are social constructs; they exist independently of our knowl­edge of them. Organizations existed before our knowledge of them, i.e., they existed before their recognition as phenomena. The case of the primi­tive tribes justifies this statement. Therefore, in line with Durkheim’s view, there is a potential to ob­serve objectively their structures and processes at di.erent levels, and to analyze relationships among di.erent operational aspects of organizations. Con­sequently, both positivism/scientific and realism (e.g., Marsh, Ercan, & Furlong, 2018) might be adopted as epistemological positions. This seems to be in line with Lewis and Thornhill’s (2016) re­search opinion in which the proposed underlying epistemological stance of deductive (logic-based) research is positivism or (critical) realism. As was mentioned previously, Bredillet (2004) stressed that a “being ontology” which postulates a fixed reality and the associated positivist mirror is not appropriate in research, and he argued for adopting a “becoming ontology” postulating a changing reality and the associated subjectivism (regardless the unit of analysis and the associated research aim) to achieve e.ectiveness of research outcomes. However, one might say that natural constructs also undergo changes, and adopting positivism in research into them broadly is ac­cepted. The evolution of our planet or the current climate change are examples. Of course, natural constructs change slowly. Business organizations can change rapidly, but they have permanent fea­tures, such as process or structure, and the old lin­ear-functional organizational structure is in use nowadays as well. Although organizations are objectively existing phenomena, the influence of values adopted by the researcher cannot be excluded fully. This influence might appear in terms of sympathy or antipathy (e.g., Bryman & Bell, 2015) related to informants, which can occur in the natural sciences as well (e.g., in research on climate change) related to the con­sequences of the observed phenomenon. However, the use of a consciously value-laden, i.e., worldview-driven research methodology does not support cre­ating additional knowledge in management sciences when structures and processes of organizations are studied. Thus, value-inspired, worldview-based management research could not provide new in­sight into the structure and process of organizations. On the contrary, consciously value-laden research in this respect could result in rather non-valid, and thus unreliable, research outcomes. However, when the unit of analysis (and the underlying research aim) is the behavior of people acting in an organi­zation, a researcher might adopt a di.erent episte­mological stance. One final question is whether there is the po­tential to apply such deductive research in man­agement science as it is understood in the science of logic. Further to the structural validity (argu­ment schemata), this kind of knowledge creation requires commonly agreed true concepts or theo­ries by means of which true propositions as premises are formulated. Concepts define phe­nomena and are considered to be the building blocks of theories. Theories conceptualize and ex­plain phenomena, and also are used to generate future expectations (in terms of explanations) about (social and natural) phenomena (e.g., Pathi­rage, Amaratunga, & Haigh, 2008). Joslin and Müller (2016) emphasized that theory needs to be used in research in order to explain a phenomenon being observed. In this way, a theory primarily is used to provide an answer to why something hap­pens; thus, a theory helps the researcher to reveal and understand the causes that create the phe­nomenon being observed. To exemplify applying deductive research strat­egy in the management domain, a more general in­terpretation of Fiedler’s (1967) contingency theory is considered. Using this theory, we can construct valid deductive arguments (as modus ponens) re­garding the appropriate use of di.erent organiza­tional structures as follows: If the core activity of an organization can be standardized, then su.cient coordination can be ensured in this organization by means of di­rect supervision. The core activity of this organization can be standardized. Therefore, su.cient coordination can be en­sured in this organization by means of direct su­pervision. If su.cient coordination can be ensured in this organization by means of direct supervision, then the use of the linear-functional organizational structure is appropriate in this organization. Su.cient coordination can be ensured in this organization by means of direct supervision. Therefore, the use of the linear-functional orga­nizational structure is appropriate in this orga­nization. The outcome of this deduction, i.e., the conclu­sion related to the appropriateness of a linear-func­tional organizational structure, can be reinforced or rejected by means of empirical observations. Trian­gulation, especially data triangulation, triangulation of researchers, and methodological triangulation, as suggested by Joslin and Müller (2016), could in­crease the objectivity and reliability of this observa­tion, and could reinforce the validity of the conclusion. However, knowledge creation based on a deductive approach requires familiarity with logic, the science of reasoning. Unlike the philosophy of science, which is a core course in many doctoral schools, logic generally is neglected in most man­agement doctoral schools. I strongly propose teach­ing logic in doctoral schools to enhance the use of both inductive and deductive reasoning in research. To achieve this end, authors of research method books need to introduce not only the epistemolog­ical underpinning but also the logical underpinning of the di.erent research strategies. Bearing in mind the example related to the use of linear-functional organizational structure, we need to address the question of how to formulate appro­priate premises in order to draw reliable and valid conclusions. Central to the premises of the first argu­ment (inference) is the concept of coordination (as the primary role of any organizational structure) and its relationship with standardization, whereas the premises in the second argument (inference) include propositions related to the concept of direct supervi­sion (as one of the coordination mechanisms) and its relationship with the linear-functional organizational structure. Thus, the conclusion of the first inference (argument) is used as a premise of the second infer­ence (argument) to provide scientific reasoning for the use of a linear-functional organizational structure (from among the potential choices) in a given context. Further to the case of organizational structures, it is characteristic of the broader management do­main that there is more than one tool to complete the very same management task. In strategic man­agement there are di.erent tools (PEST, SWOT, etc.) to analyze internal and external operational envi­ronments, di.erent strategic choices (e.g., cost lead­ership, di.erentiation, etc.), and di.erent ways in which strategy is defined (i.e., strategy development patterns). Project management is an example be­cause there are di.erent time-planning tools, di.er­ent risk assessment tools, di.erent project implementation strategies, and so forth. One can state that none of those tools which might be de­ployed to complete the very same management task is better than another. However, each of them has both advantageous and disadvantageous fea­tures from the point of view of their e.cient use. Organizations operate in di.erent internal and ex­ternal contexts, and in di.erent contexts the use of di.erent tools to address the very same manage­ment task seems to be appropriate. The proposed deductive reasoning provides the potential to elaborate such a method (as new knowl­edge) by means of which the contextual features and the features of the considered management tools can be matched. Achieving this postulates formulating premises which imply (1) relationships between the characteristics of the operational environment and the di.erent characteristics of those management tools which are available to complete the very same management task, and (2) relationships between or­ganizational characteristics and the di.erent charac­teristics of those management tools which are available to complete the very same management task. These premises might be used as statements (propositions) in syllogisms to implement deductive reasoning and achieve a context-related application of these management tools. Table 1 presents some potential methods for using deductive reasoning in management research. To formulate appropriate (i.e., true) premises, there is a need for a detailed ex­ploration of the characteristics of those tools by which the underlying concepts are operationalized in the course of their use, and of the characteristics of the context in which these tools are used. However, in the case of di.erent management tasks (i.e., the management tools), di.erent characteristics of the context (internal and external) should be considered. Applying this deductive argument (reasoning) in management research might enrich management science with research outcomes that have practical managerial implications as well. These likely results could eliminate, or at least moderate, the disadvan­tageous consequences of the frequently experi­enced trial-and-error–based application of the potential management solutions and the use of the associated management toolkit. The research out­comes achieved might be justified or falsified by means of empirical observations focusing on the success rate achieved in the case of using the man­agement toolkit in a context-related manner. Wolceshyn and Daellenbach (2018), with refer­ence to Aristotle, stated that induction and deduc­tion are more complementary than contradictory. Thus, bearing in mind the previously mentioned three basic research types, the evolution of knowl­edge of a management domain area (a branch of it, e.g., project management) might be described as a knowledge development spiral. Janiszewski, Labroo, and Rucker (2016), proposed factors that determine the contribution of a research study, and introduced the metaphor of a knowledge tree, which also has implications for the evolution of management knowledge or of the di.erent branches within the management domain. However, the proposed spi­ral-based approach focuses directly on the likely evolutionary process. This spiral-based evolution process commences with observations to describe and define the phe­nomena in order to formulate concepts. These con­cepts make it possible to generalize relationships among phenomena by means of inductive research in order to formulate and develop theories as a re­sult of inductive generalization. The theories, and the concepts, enable researchers to produce new knowledge by means of deduction (i.e., formulating premises by means of theories or concepts) to pro­vide explanatory models for understanding reality. This evolutionary process could be characteristic of each branch within the management domain, and new phenomena might emerge. Emergence of a new phenomenon could generate a new spiral, and, primarily in the deductive phase of the spiral, con­cepts and theories developed in other branches or other domains could be considered to formulate premises for deducing new knowledge. Further­more, by further observing a previously observed phenomenon, a new aspect of this phenomenon could be revealed which could result in further in­ductive and deductive phases of the spiral. This evo­lution process of knowledge creation is in line with Maylor and Söderlund’s (2015) notion of project management knowledge. They emphasized that studies and their outcomes are built on each other over time to increase the level of knowledge. Ac­cordingly, research in management might be (1) ob­servational, to highlight phenomena; (2) inductive, to deepen and widen existing knowledge; and (3) deductive, to create new knowledge based on ex­isting knowledge. These basic types of research might build on each other alongside the spiral-based evolution process of knowledge creation, or might be combined in a complex research study. Applying deductive research (as it is under­stood in logic) when it seems possible is justified by the inherent potential disadvantageous features of inductive generalization, such as (1) limited sample size in terms of limited number of informants, cases, numerical data, etc.; and (2) informants’ familiarity with the research topic, and their honesty. However, in the case of a deductive approach, the structural validity of the arguments and the true propositions as premises guarantee a true conclusion. In this way, the validity of research outcomes, as was discussed in the Introduction, and their objectivity, might be improved. However, as Marsh, Ercan, and Furlong (2018) noted, the objective observation needed in this case might be as objective as the observer who completes this observation. 6LIMITATIONS AND FURTHER THOUGHTS The limitations of this paper primarily derive from the limited knowledge of the author. The author is a practicing researcher in one of the branches of man­agement sciences. It seems impossible to highlight all the potential methods for adopting deductive reason­ing, as it is understood in logic, in the wider manage­ment domain; such an e.ort exceeds the limitations of a paper. However, the author hopes this paper gen­erates further, specific thoughts on the potential use of deductive reasoning as a research strategy in di.er­ent branches of the management domain, and that it proves to be a starting point for further discussion. REFERENCES Aldag, R.J., Stearn, T.M. (1988). Issues in Research Method­ology. Journal of Management, 14(2), 253-276. Bansal, P., Smith, W.K., Vaara, E. (2018). New Ways of See­ing through Qualitative Research. Academy of Man­agement Journal, 61(4), 1189-1195. Banks, G.C., O’Boyle Jr., E.H., Pollack, J.M., White, C.D., Batchelor, J.H., Whelpley, C.E., Abston, K.A., Bennett, A.A., Atkins, C.L. (2016). Questions About Questionable Research Practice in the Field of Management: A Guest Commentary. Journal of Management, 42(1), 5-20. Barratt, M., Choi, T.Y., Li, M. (2011). Qualitative Case Stud­ies in Operations Management: Trends, Research Out­comes, and Future Research Implications. Journal of Operations Management, 29(4), 329-342. Behfar, K., Okhuysen, G.A. (2018). Discovery Within Valida­tion Logic: Deliberately Surfacing, Complementing, and Substituting Abductive Reasoning in Hypothetico-De­ductive Inquiry. Organization Science, 29(2), 323-340. Bredillet, C.N. (2004). Beyond the positivist mirror: To­wards a project management ‘gnosis’. Proceedings of IRNOP VI. Turku, Finland Bryman, A., Bell, E. (2015, 4th edn.). Business Research Methods. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Copi, I.M., Cohen, C., McMahon, K. (2014, 14th edn.) In­troduction to Logic. Essex: Pearson. Creswell, J.W. (2012, 3rd edn.). Qualitative Enquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches. London: SAGE. Drouin, N., Müller, R., Sankaran, S. (2013). Novel Ap­proaches to Organizational Project Management Re­search: Translational and Transformational. Copenhagen: Copenhagen Business School Press. Fidler, F.E. (1967). A theory of leadership e.ectiveness. New York: McGraw-Hill. Gamut, L.T.F. (1991). Logic, Language, and Meaning. Vol. I. Introduction to Logic. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. Gottfredson, R.K., Aguinis, H. (2017). Leadership behav­iors and follower performance: Deductive and induc­tive examination of theoretical rationales and underlying mechanisms. Journal of Organizational Be­havior, 38, 558-591. Görög, M. (2016). Market positions as perceived by pro­ject-based organisations in the typical project busi­ness segment. International Journal of Project Management, 34(2), 187-201. Görög, M. (2019). Highlighting Determinants of the Mar­ket Positions of Project-Based Companies in the Typi­cal Project Business Segment: A Study of Using a Deductive Research Strategy. SAGE. Gray, D.E. (2004). Doing Research in the Real World. Lon­don: SAGE. Gri.n, R.W. (2016, 12th edn.). Management. Mason. OH: South-Western. Hudson, B.A., Okhuysen, G.A. (2014). Taboo topics: Struc­tural barriers to the study of organizational stigma. Journal of Management Inquiry, 23(3), 242–253. Hyde, K. (2000). Recognising deductive processes in qual­itative research. Qualitative Market Research, 3(2), 82-89. Janiszewski, C., Labroo, A.A., Rucker, D.D. (2016). A Tuto­rial in Consumer Research: Knowledge Creation and Knowledge Appreciation in Deductive-Conceptual Consumer Research. Journal of Consumer Research, 43(2), 200-209. Jensen, E.A., Laurie, C. (2016). Doing Real Research. Lon­don: SAGE. Joslin, R.., Müller, R. (2016). Identifying interesting project phenomena using philosophical and methodological triangulation. International Journal of Project Man­agement, 34(6), 1043-1056. Kovács, Gy., Spens, K.M. (2005). Abductive reasoning in logistics research. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 35(2), 132-144. Kuhn, T.S. (1970, 2nd edn.). The Structure of Scientific Rev­olutions. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Lundin, R. A., Söderholm, A. (1995). A theory of the tem­porary organization. Scandinavian Journal of Man­agement, 11, 437-455. Marsh, D., Ercan, S.A., Furlong, P. (2018). A Skin Not a Sweater: Ontology and Epistemology in Political Sci­ence. In Theory and Methods in Political Sciences (4th edn.) edited by Lowndes, V., Marsh, D., Stoker, G. (chapter 11, 177-198). London: Palgrave. Maylor, H., Söderlund, J. (2015). Project Management Re­search: Addressing Integrative Challenges. In Designs, Methods and Practices for Research of Project Man­agement. edited by Beverly, P. (chapter 1, 11-17). Farnham: Gower Mĺrtensson, P., Fors, U., Wallin, S., Zander, U., Nilsson, G. (2016). Evaluating research: A multidisciplinary ap­proach to assessing research practice and quality. Re­search Policy, 45(3), 593-603. Mohajan, H.K. (2018). Qualitative Research Methodology in Social Sciences and Related Subjects. Journal of Economic Development, Environment and People, 7(1), 23-48. Müller, R., Turner, J. R. (2007). Matching the project man­ager’s leadership style to project type. International Journal of Project Management, 25(1), 21-32. Müller, R., Söderlund, J. (2015). Innovative approaches in project management research. International Journal of Project Management, 33(2), 251-253. Osterloh, M., Frey, B.S. (2020). How to avoid borrowed plumes in academia. Research Policy, 49(1), 103831. Pathirage, C.P., Amaratunga, R.D.G., Haigh, R.P. (2008). The role of philosophical context in the development of research methodology and theory. The Built and Human Environment Review, 1(1), 1-10. Pernecky, T. (2016). Epistemology and Metaphysics for Qualitative Research. London: SAGE. Recker, J., Mertens, W. (2019). New Guideline for Null Hy­pothesis Significance Testing in Hypothetico-Deduc­tive IS Research. Journal of the Association for Information Systems. Reiter, B. (2017). Theory and Methodology of Exploratory Social Science Research. International Journal of Science and Research Methodology: Human, 5(4), 129-150. Saunders, M., Lewis, P. and Thornhill, A. (2019, 8th edn.) Research methods for business students. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited. Schwab, A., Starbuck. W.H. (2017). A call for openness in research reporting: How to turn covert practices into helpful tools. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 16(1), 125–141. Tracy, S.J. (2020, 2nd edn.). Qualitative Research Methods: Collecting Evidence, Crafting Analysis, Communicating Impact. Hoboken, N.J.: Wiley-Blackwell. Szabó, Á. (1967). Greek Dialectics and Euclid’s Axiomatics. Studies in Logic and the Foundations of Mathematics, 47, 1-27. Troja, A. (2019). Qualitative Research as Stepwise-Deduc­tive Induction. London: Routledge. Tsang, E.W.K. (2017). The Philosophy of Management Re­search. London: Routledge. Whitfield, K., Strauss, G. (2000). Methods Matter: Changes in Industrial Relations Research and their Im­plications. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 38(1), 141-151. Wolceshyn, J., Daellenbach, U.S. (2018). Evaluating Induc­tive versus Deductive Research in Management Stud­ies: Implications for Authors, Editors, and Reviewers. Qualitative Research in Organizations and Manage­ment: An International Journal, 13(2), 183-195. Zalaghi, H., Khazaei, M. (2016). The Role of Deductive and Inductive Reasoning in Accounting Research and Stan­dard Setting. Asian Journal of Finance & Accounting, 8(1), 23-37. Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 37 Abstract Vol. 11, No. 2, 37-54 doi:10.17708/DRMJ.2022.v11n02a03 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 38 Mihály Görög: Reflections on Approaches to Research Strategies in Management Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 39 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 40 Mihály Görög: Reflections on Approaches to Research Strategies in Management Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 41 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 42 Mihály Görög: Reflections on Approaches to Research Strategies in Management Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 43 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 44 Mihály Görög: Reflections on Approaches to Research Strategies in Management Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 45 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 46 Mihály Görög: Reflections on Approaches to Research Strategies in Management Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 47 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 48 Mihály Görög: Reflections on Approaches to Research Strategies in Management Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 49 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 Mihály Görög: Reflections on Approaches to Research Strategies in Management 50 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 51 Table 1: Potential methods for deductive management research Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 Mihály Görög: Reflections on Approaches to Research Strategies in Management 52 EXTENDED SUMMARY/IZVLECEK Literatura o raziskovalnih metodah ob uvajanju induktivnih in deduktivnih raziskovalnih pristopov ter s tem povezanih kvalitativnih in kvantitativnih raziskovalnih metod zagotavlja epistemološko pod­lago raziskovanja. Kljub temu pa ta literatura na splošno zanemarja vlogo logike v raziskovanju, kar bi vcasih lahko pripeljalo do neustreznega sklepanja tako v doktorskih disertacijah kot tudi pri razisko­valnih delih na splošno. Neustrezno sklepanje se najveckrat zgodi zaradi napacne interpretacije in­duktivnih in deduktivnih oblik sklepanja v literaturi o raziskovalnih metodah, kot posledica zanemarjanja logike. Ta clanek mece novo luc na interpretacijo induktivnih in deduktivnih oblik ust­varjanja znanja, vkljucno z logiko, ki ima pomembno vlogo kot znanost sklepanja pri ustvarjanju znanja že vse od Aristotelovega casa. Ta prispevek je špekulativne narave in ponuja refleksije izkušenega raziskovalca s podrocja managementa. Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 53 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 Mihály Görög: Reflections on Approaches to Research Strategies in Management 54 EVOLUTIONARY TENDENCIES OF SIMPLE SOCIAL EXCHANGE ACROSS THE STAGES OF EGO DEVELOPMENT: IMPLICATIONS FOR LEADERSHIP Melita Balas Rant University of Ljubljana School of Economics and Business, Slovenia melita.balas.rant@ef.uni-lj.si in leader–members social exchange, a followers’ per­ceptions and interpretations also are highly important1INTRODUCTION In leader–member exchange (LMX) theory, lead­ership is a function of the quality of the leader–member interaction; dynamics of this interaction construct the quality of the social exchange. Predic­tors of high-quality social exchange have been iden­tified on the side of the leader (charisma), on the side of the follower (follower innovative role expec­tations) (Meindl, Erlich, & Dukerich, 1985; Hollander, 1980), and in the dyadic leadership relationship (LMX) (Hollander, 1980; Graen & Scandura, 1987). One of the predictors of the quality of the social ex­change is demographic and relational similarity (Green, Anderson, & Shivers, 1996; Tsui, Xin, & Egan, 1995); both similarities increase the likelihood of trust in the relationship (Scandura & Pellegrini, 2008; Harris, Wheeler, & Kacmar, 2009). Trust is a higher-order attribute of high-quality social exchange. Trust also is a function of perceptions and inter­pretations of the both sides of the relationship; thus,This paper addresses the research question of how the stages of ego development impact the interpretation schemes of the simple social exchange (act of giving). Using a sample of N = 290 respondents, we present the research findings on the evolution of the interpretation schemes of the act of giving across the levels of ego development. Research findings reveal the tendency of the stage of ego development to impact the properties and e.ects of the simple social exchange (act of giving). We theorize implications for leadership. We propose that the higher order of ego development induces a higher quality leader–member exchange (LMX) and greater likelihood of resolution of adaptive leadership challenges. Furthermore, followers are more likely to entrust power to a leader in exchange for high-quality relation­ships. The paper is a tentative attempt of merger of the LMX theory with the constructive school of adult development. This merger illuminates an interesting relation, namely that the stage of ego development might be a likely determinant of the quality of the LMX and leadership e.ectiveness. Keywords: ego development, LMX theory, generativity, act of giving, social exchange The act of giving is worthy of study for several reasons: (1) it is the action/behavioral expression of the personal tendency for generativity (Erikson, 1950; Fein, 2018;); (2) generativity depends on the stage of adult development (Erikson, 1950, 1959, 1963); (3) generativity might be a possible explana­tory variable of a leader’s capacity for integrating across di.erence interests and expectations (Volck­mann, 2014) and to resolve the adaptive leadership challenges (Heifetz, Linsky, & Grashow, 2009). The paper contributes to the field of LMX the­ory. It gives a new perspective on LMX theory by merging the neo-Piagetian school of adult develop­ment with LMX theory. Furthermore, this paper brings the new concept to the field of trust forma­tion, namely generativity viewed from the perspec­tive of a simple act of social exchange—i.e., how the act of giving contributes to trust formation in the LMX relationship. Thirdly, the paper explains the trust formation in the LMX relationship from the perspective of the leader and the perspective of the follower. This paper is organized in eight sections. The second section reviews properties of ego develop­ment as identified by the constructive neo-Piagetian school of adult development. The third section fo­cuses on the Eriksonian view of adult development, the phenomenon of generativity, and research on the act of giving. The fourth section presents the re­search design, followed by how the perception and interpretations of the act of giving evolve across the ego development stages. We apply the Washington University Sentence Completion Test (WUSCT) ego development decoding scheme and the grounded theory approach to identify properties of the act of giving at the given ego development stage (sample size N = 290 respondents). In the sixth section we speculate on the possible influence of ego develop­ment stage on the trust aspect of a simple social ex­change (in our case, represented by the act of giving). We propose a tentative framework of co-flu­ence (Hollander’s abbreviated expression for the two-side influence or collective influence) from the two perspectives of the leader–follower relation­ship: (1) the follower perspective—how the willing­ness to entrust power to another person in exchange for services (the follower perspective) might evolve as one moves across the stages of ego development; and (2) the leader perspective—how the willingness of a leader to address the adaptive challenges might evolve as one moves across the stages of ego development. The seventh section dis­cusses theoretical contributions, practical implica­tions, research limitations, and possibilities for future research. The last section summarizes the main findings. 2THEORETICAL BACKGROUND 2.1Adult (Ego) Development The neo-Piagetian constructive school of human development studies di.erent evolutionary tendencies in humans such as self-referential and meaning-making systems (Kegan, 1982, 1994), so­cial cognition (Selman, 1971, 1980), reflective judg­ment (King & Kitchener, 2004), moral judgment (Kohlberg, 1984), the structure of the ego (Lo­evinger, 1976; Hy & Loevinger, 1996), cognitive com­plexity (Commons, Trudeau, Stein, Richards, & Krause, 1998), the complexity of perspective-taking and the a.ective sensitivity (Cook-Greuter, 1985/re­vised 2013; 2000), action logics (Tolbert & Associ­ates, 2004; Rooke & Tolbert, 2005), leadership styles (Harris & Kuhnert, 2008), needs and motivations (Maslow, 1967; Barret, 2016), and dominant sub­conscious values and beliefs (Graves, 1974; Beck & Cowan, 1996). Regardless of the foci of the studies, neo-Piage­tian scholars have identified the following evolution­ary regularities in human/leader development (McCauley, Drath, Palus, O’Connor, & Baker, 2006): 1) People try to make sense of themselves by form­ing meaningful and coherent narratives around the experience (Bauer & McAdams, 2004). 2) The story and experience interpretation is de­pendent of the subject–object relationship and meaning-making mechanisms (Kegan, 1982, 1994, 2009). Subject–object relationships and the meaning-making mechanisms evolve. 3) The meaning-making mechanisms evolve in stages, referred to as orders of consciousness, ways of knowing, or orders of development (McCauley et al., 2006). The stages of development unfold in a specific invariant sequence, with each successive order tran­scending and including the previous order (Wilber, 1995/2001). Erikson (1950, 1959, 1963) constructed eight core polarities operating in the human psyche that need to be resolved in the process of human (ego) development. These are trust vs. mistrust, au­tonomy vs. doubt/shame, initiative vs. guilt, indus­try vs. inferiority, identity vs. identity di.usion, intimacy vs. isolation, generativity vs. stagnation, and integrity vs. despair; these polarities construct an eight-stage model of adult development. In the case of ideal development, the person proceeds successively through these stages. From the perspective of the leadership and sus­tainability, the most interesting opposition is gener­ativity vs. stagnation (Ghislieri & Gatti, 2012). Generativity “is meant to include . . . productivity and creativity” (Erikson, 1950, p. 267). In the original Eriksonian notion of generativity, the emphasis is on the intergenerational inclusion; however, the per­sonal tendency for inclusion also could be applied across all other social and business divides, and thus is critical for integral leadership (Volckman, 2014). Slater (2003) added to Erikson’s stage of conflict between generativity vs. stagnation by including seven psychosocial conflicts, namely inclusivity vs. exclusivity, pride vs. embarrassment, responsibility vs. ambivalence, career productivity vs. inadequacy, parenthood vs. self-absorption, being needed vs. alienation, and honesty vs. denial. Some of Erikson’s most compelling examples of generativity appear in his psychobiographical explorations of the lives of Martin Luther and Mahatma Gandhi, two great leaders, both of whom appear to have been their most generative in the bright light of public action rather than in the private realms of friends and fam­ily. Generativity as a stage of adult development is a.ected by family background and cultural back­ground (Pratt, Matsuba, Lawford, & Villar, 2020). 2.2Generativity and the Act of Giving McAdams and de St Aubin (1992) studied the phenomena of generativity from a wider perspec­tive–how a shared psychosocial space impacts the expression of the generativity, inclusion, and ten­dency for giving. They identified a seven-feature conceptual model operating within a shared psy­chosocial space that induces the generative action: (1) cultural demands for generativity and acts of giv­ing; (2) wish, desire, and the force in the human psy­che for generativity; (3) the power of the concern for the next generation (the narrow Erikosonian view of generativity); (4) a personal belief in the goodness of oneself; (5) implemented generative action and its consequences; (6) a virtuous loop in which the generative action is strengthened further by cultural demand or inner desire; and (7) a per­son’s narration of generative action into the coher­ent subjective story about the self. Bradley (1997) and Bradley & Marcia (1998) studied the resolution of generativity vs. stagnation from the perspective of ego-identity structure. They found that the reso­lution of the conflict is dependent upon the capacity of the individual to synthesize the care with recep­tivity. Two criteria determine the extent of care or receptivity: (1) an individual’s level of involvement, defined as the active concern for the growth of the self and others; and (2) an individual’s inclusivity and scope of caregiving concern. Adults can rate high or low on these two criteria in relation to self and others. These ratings allow adults to be classi­fied into five identity statuses: generative, agentic, communal, conventional, and stagnant. Bradley and Marcia (1998) also showed that expression of gen­erativity and the five identity statuses tends to be a property of the higher-order stages of ego develop­ment, which they measured using the WUSCT (Hy & Loevinger, 1996). Generativity is a personality trait (placed in the upper left quadrant of the Wilberian all quad­rants, all levels [AQAL] model), whereas the act of giving is the behavior expressed in a specific mo­ment in time and context (placed in upper right quadrant of Wilberian AQAL integral theory; Wilber, 1995/2001). In the research literature, the act of giving is defined as “freely offering some­thing of oneself to another person, which needs to be of value to the recipient without the expecta­tion of receiving anything in return” (Knight, Sk­outeris, Townsend, & Hooley, 2014, p. 258). Such a definition conceals the unexpected nature of re­turns for the giver; for that matter, Knight et al. (2014) question whether the unexpected nature of returns is truly unexpected due to hidden benefits for the giver, and thus the act of giving is inherently a two-way social exchange in nature. A meta-research review of the act of giving within the context of non-familial reciprocal inter­generational interaction implied positive behavioral change on both sides of the social exchange (Knight et al., 2014). Furthermore, for both sides in the re­lationship, the act of giving causes positive emo­tional states (Morrow-Howell, Hong, & Tang, 2009), improved self-esteem, increased meaning, and pur­pose in one’s life (Folts, 2006; Hegeman, Roodin, Gilliland, & Ó’Flathabháin, 2010; Reisig & Fees, 2007; Rozario, 2006). Furthermore, the act of giving increases proximity within relational links (Lohman, Gri.ths, Coppard, & Cota, 2003); increases social cohesion across generations (De Souza, 2007); and increases a.ective and instrumental reciprocity (Breytspraak, Arnold, & Hogan, 2008). The e.ects of the act of giving are influenced by personal values (Cruz Passos, Silva Leite & Rezende Pinto, 2020), which evolve through stages of adult development (Hy & Loevinger, 1996). 3METHODOLOGY 3.1Research Question The research question is how trust is formed between two people in the social exchange while being impacted by stages of adult or ego develop­ment. The social exchange was studied in terms of the act of giving. What are the regularities of the act of giving across stages of adult development? After the identification of regularities, what are the impli­cations for the LMX relationship, from the perspec­tive of a leader and of a follower? 3.2Research Setting and Data Gathering We used convenience sampling strategy (Robinson, 2014). Data were gathered over the pe­riod December 2018–December 2020 from the Slovenian adult population (aged above 18 years). The request first was sent to post-graduate stu­dents at the University of Ljubljana, who were asked to disseminate it among their private net­work in which also more senior people are repre­sented. To increase motivation for taking the test, all respondents were o.ered the opportunity to re­ceive written coaching feedback on the dominant adult developmental stage. In that case, the person needed to reveal his/her email address. Otherwise, the person could stay anonymous. The WUSCT was conducted in Slovene. 3.3Method We used a questionnaire composed of three sections: (1) an ego development section; (2) inter­pretations of the act of giving; and (3) the socio-de­mographic of the respondent. For the ego development stage, we adopted Lo­evinger’s abbreviated sentence completion test (WUSCT), composed of 18 stem roots (Raising a family…; Being with other people…; My thoughts…; What gets me into trouble is…; Education…; When people are helpless…; A man’s job is…; I feel sorry…; Rules are…; I can’t stand people who…; I am…; My main problem is …; My emotions…; A good mother…; My conscience bothers me…; A man (women) should always…; The meaning of life is…; and Happiness is…). We identified the stages by de­coding using the guidelines in the WUSCT decoding manual (Hy & Loevinger, 1996). Decoding was done by two decoders, both of whom were experts in the field of a constructive approach to adult develop­ment with experience in the WUSCT decoding pro­cedure. Cohen’s kappa is above 98.2%, indicating good inter-rater reliability (Figure A-1). Answers on the reflective question “Reflecting on your personal experience, please share with us what are the expected and unexpected conse­quences of act of giving?” We deliberately left the act of giving undefined, thus inviting respondents to apply their own interpretations to “the act of giv­ing.” This aligned with the philosophy of the sen­tence completion test, in which the choice of approach and interpretation is an important vari­able of the research observation. These answers were decoded using the grounded theory approach (Glaser & Strauss, 1967; Corbin & Strauss, 1990). We grouped people in subgroups according to their stage of ego development identified though the WUSCT scheme. For more-e.ective pattern recognition, we also extracted the generic ego properties at each devel­opmental stage (Hy & Loevinger, 1996). Generic ego properties in each stage presented thematic lenses through which we observed answers. We paid at­tention to the material/non-material aspects, posi­tive/negative, a.ective/cognitive aspects, and self/other/relational aspects of answers at each adult stage. Figure A-2 summarizes how these prop­erties across the stages of adult development were identified. 3.4Sample Characteristics The sample totalled 290 individuals who com­pleted the SCT and shared their interpretations of the act of giving. The ego development stages ranged from E2 (impulsive) to E7 (individualistic). Figure 1 summarizes the socio-economic features of the sample. A majority of the sampled cases occu­pied the E4 stage of ego development (59.7%), fol­lowed by the E5 stage of ego development (19.7%). The post-conventional stage (E7) was weakly repre­sented in the sample. The sample shows that people who occupy higher stages of ego development are on average older, which confirmed that the stage of ego development is impacted by age and experi­ence (Kegan, 1994). 4FINDINGS How do the perceptions and interpretations of the act of giving change when one moves through the stages of ego development? We observed the answers from material/non-material aspects, posi­tive/negative, a.ective/cognitive aspects, and self/other (relational) aspects of answers at each ego stage; Figure A-2 presents an in-depth review of the decoding process. On the most generic level, the following movements of perception and inter­pretation of the act of giving were identified: •There was a tendency for perception and interpre­tation to move from the material to non-material as­pect of the act of giving when moving vertically from lower (E3) to higher stages of ego development (E7); •There was a tendency for perception and interpre­tation to move from the negative to the positive as­pect of the act of giving when moving vertically from lower (E3) to higher stages of ego development (E7); •There was a tendency for perception and interpre­tation to move from the simple a.ects to a more nuanced recognition of a.ects—cognitive inter­pretations of the act of giving gained higher-order phenomena recognition (response, interaction, and trust) and higher-order perspective-taking—when moving vertically from lower (E3) to higher stages of ego development (E7); •There was a tendency for perception and inter­pretation to move from a focus on the impact of the act of giving directly on the self, to a focus on the impact indirectly on the self (through the re­sponse of the other side), on the quality of social exchange, on trust in the relationship, and on the counter-response of the self to others, and on the e.ects of this on the quality of social exchange, proximity, and trust in the relationship and well-being of the other side. These tendencies of perceptions and interpre­tations of the act of giving across stages of adult de­velopment are presented graphically in Figure 2. The vertical axis depicts a negative vs. positive focus in the interpretations, the horizontal axis depicts outer-material to inner-sensational focus, and the third axis depicts the focus of the e.ects of the act of giving on the self, on others, or on the relation­ship. The pattern identified in the answers reveals a tendency for diagonal movement from inner lower left to the outer upper right corner. This indicates movement from a negative, material, self-focus to a positive, sensational and relational focus (i.e., quality social exchange). A positive, sensational, and relational focus of the act of giving on the quality social exchange (E7) vs. a negative, material, and self-focus (E3) indicates that E7 is more likely to in­duce trust and create a high-quality social exchange than is E3. Furthermore, a person becomes a more e.ective inducer of trust and a high quality of social exchange when he/she reconstructs the ego toward higher developmental levels. What implications can we generalize about the evolutionary tendencies around social exchange as people progress through the stages of adult devel­opment from this specific (narrow) case of social ex­change (act of giving)? How might our findings around the impact of the stages of ego opment on the perceptions and interpretations of the act of giv­ing inform the rehabilitation of trust in social ex­changes between leader and follower? Based on our findings, we speculate how the willingness of a follower to entrust power to an­other person in exchange for services (expected benefits) might evolve as one moves across the stages of ego development, and how the willingness of a leader to address the adaptive challenges might evolve across the stages of ego development. 5DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION 5.1Follower perspective: How can the willingness to entrust power to another person in exchange for services (expected benefits) evolve as one moves across the stages of ego development? Heifetz (2015) calls for research (failing, suc­cessful, micro, macro, case-studies, and qualitative) that studies authority and leadership separately be­cause of rising mistrust toward people in an author­ity position due to the tendency that “people in authority violate the trust of the power that they have been given and, having violated that trust, they generate significant scar tissue; some of that scar tissue gets carried from generation to generation” (Heifetz, 2011, p. 306). In addition to the research on the dark side of leadership and the corrupting tendencies of leaders in a position of authority (Conger, 1990; Kets de Vries, 2005), more research is needed on (1) how to establish and amplify trust, and (2) how to renew trust when mistrust has been established (Heifetz, 2015). Thus, we need to better understand the factors that impact the willingness to authorize the other side (the leader) and entrust him/her with power. The willingness to authorize the other side (i.e., the leader) depends on how followers perceive and interpret the actions, motives, and attributes of a person (Hollander, 1978, 1980, 2013). A leader’s le­gitimacy is a function of followers’ perceptions and interpretations. The level of legitimacy impacts the leader’s power and influence to facilitate change (Hollander, 1978, 2013). Follower acceptance is es­sential to the legitimacy and trust of leaders; thus, leadership is a process of co-fluence between the leader and followers (Hollander, 2008, 2013)1. In constructing these perceptions and interpre­tations, followers are the active component of lead­ership. Followers’ interpersonal evaluations of the leader are a function of the needs and expectations of the followers (Hollander, 1978, 1980, 2013). Ac­cordingly, “followers’ needs also determine which tangible and intangible rewards su.ce in motivating them to follow recognizing that individual di.er­ences do matter” (Hollander, 2013, p. 131). Investigating innovators, Scharmer (2009) found that two people in the same circumstances doing the same thing can bring about completely di.erent outcomes because the outcomes depend not only on what the person does, but also on their “interior condition,” or the inner place from which they operate (Scharmer, 2009, p. 7). The quality of inner place or the quality of awareness is a function of ego development (Loevinger, 1976; Cook-Greuter, 1985/revised 2013). We claim that followers’ per­ceptions and interpretations of any outer observa­tions (for example, words and acts of the leader) are thus a function of the quality of awareness captured by level of ego development. Under what conditions is the person at the lower stages of ego development (follower) willing to entrust power to another, and what do they ex­pect in return? Based on the findings about how expectations and interpretations around the act of giving evolve across stages of ego development, we assume that if a follower is at the lower stages of ego develop­ment (in our case, at E3 or E4), he/she would be will­ing to entrust power to another in exchange for the benefits valued for the self. The valued benefits are self and materially focused. It is preferable that the expected benefits should be perceived as a prospect for increased monetary reward, promotion, im­proved social status, and other forms of tangible re­wards. Furthermore, a person at the lower stage of ego development tends to pay more attention to the instances in which expectations of the rewards are not met. They prefer to interpret the e.ects of the social exchange negatively. In an open-system case (i.e., election and voting), the follower would prefer (attribute idiosyncratic credit) a person who is per­ceived to be more likely to deliver valued benefits (i.e., increase in wages, employment stability, etc.). In a closed-system case (i.e., a company), the selec­tion of a person in a position of authority unfolds in a top-down manner; in this case, we propose that a person at the lower stage of ego development would engage in more work e.ort in the case of perception and delivery of material and status benefits. Under what conditions is a person at the higher stages of ego development (follower) willing to entrust power to another, and what is expected in return? If the follower is at the higher stages of ego de­velopment (in our case, at E6 or E7), the criteria for entrusting a power shift from material to non-ma­terial (sensational; shifting attention from material and behavioral appearances to feelings, assump­tions, and beliefs behind specific appearances), from benefits for the self to the quality of the rela­tionship (the other side is taken in consideration in terms of its e.ects on the quality if the relationship). The core criteria for evaluating the quality of the re­lationship are proximity and trust. Here, the person recognizes the active role in defining the quality of the relationship in terms of how she/he frames their own expectations and controls responses. People at higher stages of ego development prefer to inter­pret the e.ects of the social exchange positively. In an open-system case (i.e., election and voting), the follower prefers to vote for the person who is per­ceived to be more likely to create trust and build proximity in the relationship (inclusiveness). In a closed-system case (i.e., a company), the person at the higher stage of ego development engages in a more dyadic relationship in a case in which proxim­ity and trust also are valued from the leader (i.e., the person in a position of authority). 5.2Leader perspective: How can the willingness of the leader to address the adaptive challenges evolve across the stages of ego development? From the perspective of how a leader should approach the leadership situation, Heifetz, Linsky, and Grashow (2009) differentiated between two types of leadership challenges: technical problems and adaptive challenges. Whereas technical prob­lems may be very complex and critically important (i.e., cardiac surgery), they have known solutions (the knowledge and capacity already exist); thus, such problems can be resolved by an authority, an expert, or by tested procedures, norms, and sys­tems. In contrast, adaptive challenges have no so­lution or the solution lies outside of people’s current repertoires; therefore, the solution can be addressed only through changes in people’s prior­ities, beliefs, habits, and loyalties. An adaptive challenge is defined as the gap between the values people stand for and the reality that they face (their current lack of capacity to realize those val­ues in their environment). In the next decade, the most predictable trend will be a rise of adaptive challenges (Sowcik, Andenoro, McNutt, & Murphy, 2015). The distinctive attribute of a leader is the capacity to address complex organizational chal­lenges through adaptive leadership (Nelson & Squires, 2017). A classic leadership error is treating an adaptive challenge as a technical problem (Heifetz, Linsky, and Grashow, 2009). When dealing with the adap­tive challenge, adaptive leaders are “certainly not as well received as when you are mobilizing people to address a technical issue that is within their compe­tence or requires expertise that can be readily ob­tained” (Heifetz, Linsky & Grashow, 2009, p.17). Not benefiting from adaptive challenges, losing credits and authority, etc., are the core obstacles for ad­dressing adaptive challenges. There is a need to ex­tend the strategic leadership research to better understand phenomena of addressing adaptive challenges from the perspective of (a) chief execu­tive o.cer (CEO) characteristics and (b) the dynam­ics of interactions among the CEO, the top management team, and the Board (Vera, Bonardi, Hitt, & Withers, 2022). The core task of an adaptive CEO is to enable the dynamic networks of all stakeholders (not only follow­ers) to achieve common goals in an environment of uncertainty. The stakeholders are all those individuals who place value on a role (Mitro., 1983) while also expecting to be impacted by the leader (Volckmann, 2014). When co-electively activating such networks of stakeholders, the system first tends to de-construct [i.e., it goes down the U curve in Schamer’s (2009) U-theory concept). This initially increases disequilibrium and causes an increase in the negative e.ects on the followers and other stakeholder groups. When operating in disequilibrium, the negative e.ects on di.erent stakeholder groups experienced in the state of disequilibrium will be attributed to the leader. Adaptive leaders thus need the capacity to sustain operations in disequilibrium (Heifetz, Linsky, & Grashow, 2009). A high level of conflict, frustration, panic, confusion, disorientation, and fear can be at­tributed to the leader (i.e., a person in the position of authority). Thus, the personal challenge of a leader is to sustain their own e.ective functioning when faced with negative returns. In other words, what are the conditions under which a person is more willing to address the adaptive challenge and function e.ec­tively in the face of negative returns? Under what conditions is the person at a lower stages of ego development (leader) willing to ad­dress the adaptive challenge, and what is the expec­tation in return? If the leader is at the lower stages of ego devel­opment (in our case, at E3 or E4), he/she gives more attention to the material benefits for the self; even when it comes to most elementary social exchanges, such as the act of giving, such people tend to inter­pret it in a sense of “what’s in it for me?” If addressing the adaptive challenge, a leader at the lower stage of ego development would need to foresee such bene­fits in order to embark on an adaptive leadership journey. However, when addressing the adaptive challenge, the collective (stakeholder) system tends to move into a larger state of disequilibrium. The ex­perience of conflict, frustration, panic, confusion, dis­orientation, and fear in a leader at the lower stage of ego development most likely would put more atten­tion on decisions and actions that increase the likeli­hood to gain the material benefits for the self. In this case, a negative, vicious circle is created, and the neg­ative perceptions and attributions may amplify. This creates the dynamic of “absencing” in Scharmer’s sense (2009). Absencing might become a leader–stakeholder dynamic despite the fact that the leader initiates the adaptive challenge. Under what conditions is a person at the higher stages of ego development (leader) willing to ad­dress the adaptive challenge, and what does he/she expect in return? When a leader is at the higher stages of ego de­velopment (in our case at E6 or E7), he/she substan­tially changes interpretations of the benefits caused by the act of giving; the core interpretational move­ment is from material to non-material (sensational; shifting attention from material and behavioral ap­pearances to feelings, assumptions, and beliefs behind the specific appearances), from benefits for the self to the quality of the relationship (the other side is taken into consideration as much as it e.ects the quality of the relationship), from a negative to a more positive-oriented focus. The core criteria for evaluating the quality of the relationship are proximity and trust. When a leader at the higher stage of ego development addresses an adaptive challenge, he/she is more ca­pable of operating and living in the face of conflict, frustration, panic, confusion, disorientation, and fear. This capacity to thrive in chaos is sustained by the lead­ers’ attention to decisions and actions that increase the likelihood of trust and proximity in the relation­ships with stakeholders, positive interpretations, and the constant scanning of the assumptions and beliefs behind the specific appearances. Such leaders thus are more likely to induce a cycle of presencing in the col­lective of stakeholders (Scharmer, 2009). 5.3Theoretical Contributions, Practical Implications and Research Limitations The core theoretical contribution of this study is the merging of LMX theory with neo-Piagetan adult development theory, also referred to as constructive developmental theory, which is understudied in the leadership literature (McCauley et al., 2006). This is addressed through the study of the evolution of the act of giving through ego development stages. The identified evolutionary properties of act of the giving are interpreted through the perspective of LMX the­ory. This merger brings a completely novel perspective to LMX theory. It sets the cognition, perception, and interpretation of a leader and a follower as an object of study. This also is an understudied phenomenon in leadership research (Toader & Martin, 2022). The next theoretical contribution is explaining the follower perspective through the willingness to entrust power to another person in exchange for ser­vices (expected benefits), whereas the leader per­spective is explained through the willingness of the leader to address the adaptive challenges. This is an­other novel perspective on LMX theory. Our findings advance the understanding of the development of leader–follower relationships and have implications for strengthening follower perceptions of high-qual­ity relationships with their leaders, and when a leader is addressing adaptive challenges. This also is an understudied phenomenon in leadership re­search (Wang, Jiang, Xu, Zhou, & Bauer, 2022). This study may have several practical implica­tions. When selecting people for leadership posi­tions, the selection criteria should include the stage of adult development. Leaders at a higher stage of adult development are more willing to address adaptive leadership challenges. Next, followers’ stages of adult development also matters. Whereas followers at a lower stage of adult development en­trust power to a leader in exchange for more mate­rial benefit, followers at a higher stage of adult development are more willing to entrust power to a person who is more likely to create trust and build proximity in the relationship (inclusiveness). This has profound implications for the practice of leading and leadership e.ectiveness. The stage of adult de­velopment and self-awareness are critical elements in the practice of leading and leadership e.ective­ness that are on the rise in leadership research (Car­den, Jones, & Passmore, 2022). The study has several research limitations. Al­though it appears that the use of adult development is gaining traction in the field of leadership develop­ment, instruments for assessing adult development such as the WUSCT can appear to be unreliable (Realms, 2017). The study was conducted in the Slovene language and then translated into English; in the process of translation, some of the meaning may change or even be lost. The proposed relation­ships for LMX theory also have weak generalizability. This study is hard to replicate. However, we propose some future research that may overcome some of the research limitations. We propose the study of leader–member social ex­change using quantitative questionnaires that in­clude the identified adult development constructs: positive/negative interpretations, material/behav­ioral/sensational focus, and focus on self/other/re­lationship. These constructs can be studied quantitatively using appropriate questionnaires. Some in-depth case studies of leaders’ intentions for addressing the adaptive challenges and followers’ in­tentions for entrusting power to a leader also would add novel evidence that would validate or invalidate our findings. Future research should include the stage of adult development as an important explana­tory variable in LMX relationship. 5.4Conclusion This paper addresses the research question of how the stages of ego development impact the in­terpretation schemes of the simple social exchange (act of giving)? The act of giving is worthy of study for several reasons: (1) the act of giving is the be­havioral expression of generativity, which is an im­portant aspect of ego development; and (2) generativity is an important phenomenon to be ob­served in a case scale system transformation. Using a sample of N = 290 respondents, we present the research findings of how the evolution of the inter­pretation schemes of the act of giving evolve across the levels of ego development. Based on research findings, we theorize how di.erent interpretation schemes of the act of giving might inform the phe­nomenon of social exchange between the leader and followers (and all relevant stakeholders). Specif­ically, we formed implications from two LMX per­spectives: (1) the follower perspective—how a willingness to entrust power to another person in exchange for services (expected benefits) might evolve as one moves across the stages of ego devel­opment; and (2) the leader perspective—how a will­ingness of the leader to address the adaptive chal­lenges might evolve across the stages of ego development. The attempt to generalize the impli­cations from a simple case of social exchange (the act of giving) to a more complex case of social ex­change (leader–member exchange) led to the con­clusions that (1) the stage of ego development on the side of the follower and on the side of a leader significantly impact the properties and e.ects of the social exchange; and (2) higher orders of ego devel­opment in the leader and follower induce higher-quality social exchange and a greater likelihood of resolution of adaptive challenges. Hence, mecha­nism, approaches, and methodologies that acceler­ate the progression to higher ego stages of both followers and leaders (preferably all stakeholders) should become the object of studies. REFERENCES Bauer, J. J., & McAdams, D. P. (2004). Personal Growth in Adults’ Stories of Life Transitions. Journal of Person­ality, 72(3), 573-602. Beck, D. E., & Cowan, C. (1996). Spiral Dynamics: Master­ing Values. Leadership and Change. Wiley-Blackwell. Bradley, C. L. (1997). Generativity-Stagnation: Develop­ment of a Status Model. Developmental Review, 17(3), 262-290. Bradley, C. L., & Marcia, J. E. (1998). Generativity-Stagna­tion: A Five-Category Model. Journal of Personality, 66(1), 39-64. Breytspraak, L. M., Arnold, L., & Hogan, K. (2008). Dimen­sions of an Intergenerational Relationship between Medical Students and Mentors-On-Aging. Journal of Intergenerational Relationships, 6, 131-153. Carden, J., Jones, R. J., & Passmore, J. (2022). Defining self-awareness in the context of adult development: a systematic literature review. Journal of Manage­ment Education, 46(1), 140-177. Commons, M. L., Trudeau, E. J., Stein, S. A., Richards, F. A., & Krause, S. R. (1998). Hierarchical Complexity of Tasks Shows the Existence of Developmental Stages. Developmental Review, 18, 237-278. Conger, J. A. (1990). The Dark Side of Leadership. Orga­nizational Dynamics, 19(2), 44-55. Cook-Greuter, S. R. (1985/revised 2013). Nine Levels of Increasing Embrace in Ego Development: A Full-Spec­trum Theory of Vertical Growth and Meaning-Making. Accessed on: https://www.semanticscholar.org/ ­ paper/Nine-Levels-Of-Increasing-Embrace-In-Ego-%3A-A-Theory-Cook-Greuter/cc0e81e8aaf82e6ec4faccbc3ed9889fe0cd2bb7 Cook-Greuter, S. R. (2000). Mature Ego Development: A Gateway to Ego Transcendence?. Journal of Adult De­velopment, 7(4), 227-240. Corbin, J. M., & Strauss, A. (1990). Grounded Theory Re­search: Procedures, Canons, and Evaluative Criteria. Qualitative Sociology, 13(1), 3-21. Cruz Passos, S., Silva Leite, R., & Rezende Pinto, M. D. (2020). Personal values and gift giving act: a proposed connection. Estudios Gerenciales, 36(155), 218-228. Erikson, E. H. (1950). Childhood and Society. New York: Norton. Erikson, E. H. (1958). Young Man Luther: A Study in Psy­choanalysis and History. New York: Norton. Erikson, E. H. (1959). Identity and the Life Cycle. Psycho­logical Issues, 1, 1-171. Erikson, E. H. (1963). Childhood and Society (2nd ed.). New York: Norton. Fein, E. (2018). Foundations and Resources of Integral Leadership. Strategic Partnership Leadership for Tran­sition.(LiFT 2.0), 2015-2018, Intellectual Output N° 1.Published online August 31, 2018. http://leadership-for-transition.eu/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/IO1-FR-Chapter-3-The-integral-model.pdf Folts, E. W. (2006). Introduction to the Special Issue on Elderly Volunteerism. Educational Gerontology, 32, 309-311. Ghislieri, C., & Gatti, P. (2012). Generativity and Balance in Leadership. Leadership, 8(3), 257-275. Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Routledge. Kets de Vries, M. F. R. (2005). The Dangers of Feeling like a Fake. Harvard Business Review, 83(9), 108-115 Knight, T., Skouteris, H., Townsend, M., & Hooley, M. (2014). The act of giving: A systematic review of non­familial intergenerational interaction. Journal of Inter­generational Relationships, 12(3), 257-278. McCauley, C. D., Drath, W. H., Palus, C. J., O’Connor, P. M., & Baker, B. A. (2006). The use of constructive-devel­opmental theory to advance the understanding of leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 17(6), 634-653. Graen, G. B., & Scandura, T. A. (1987). Toward a Psychol­ogy of Dyadic Organizing, in B. M. Staw & L. L. Cum­mings (eds.) Research in Organizational Behavior, pp. 175-208. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Green, S. G., Anderson, S. E., & Shivers, S. L. (1996). De­mographic and Organizational Influences on Leader-Member Exchange and Related Work Attitudes. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Pro­cesses, 66, 203-14. Harris, K. J., Wheeler, A. R., & Kacmar, K. M. (2009). Leader-member Exchange and Empowerment: Direct and Interactive E.ects on Job Satisfaction, Turnover Intentions, and Performance. The Leadership Quar­terly, 20(3), 371-382. Harris, L. S., & Kuhnert, K. W. (2008). Looking through the Lens of Leadership: A Constructive Developmental Approach. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 29(1), 47-67. Hegeman, C. R., Roodin, P., Gilliland, K. A., & Ó’Flathab­háin, K. B. (2010). Intergenerational Service Learning: Linking Three Generations: Concept, History, and Out­come Assessment. Gerontology & Geriatrics Educa­tion, 31, 37-54. Heifetz, R. (2011). Debate: Leadership and authority. Pub­lic Money & Management, 31(5), 305-308. Heifetz, R. A., Linsky, M. and Grashow, A. (2009). The Practice of Adaptive Leadership: Tools and Tactics for Changing Your Organization and the World. Harvard Business Press. Heifetz, R. A. (2015). Foreword. In Leadership 2050: Criti­cal challenges, key contexts, and emerging trends, Sowcik, M., Andenoro, A. C., McNutt, M., & Murphy, S. E. (eds). Bingley: Emerald Publishing Group. Hollander, E. P. (1978). Leadership Dynamics: A Practical Guide to E.ective Relationships. New York: Free Press. Hollander, E. P. (1980). Leadership and Social Exchange Processes, in K. J. Gergen, M. S. Greenberg, & R. H. Willis (eds) Social Exchange: Advances in Theory and Research, pp. 103-18. New York: Plenum Press. Hollander, E. P. (2009). Inclusive Leadership: The Essential Leader-Follower Relationship. New York: Routledge. Hollander, E. P. (2013). Inclusive Leadership and Idiosyn­crasy Credit in Leader-Follower Relations. In M. G. Rumsey (Ed.), Oxford Library of Psychology. The Ox­ford Handbook of Leadership (p. 122-143). Oxford University Press. Hy, L.X., & Loevinger, J. (1996). Measuring Ego Develop­ment. New York: Press Psychology. Kegan, R. (1982). The Evolving Self: Problem and Process in Human Development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Kegan, R. (1994). In Over Our Heads: The Mental De­mands of Modern Life. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Uni­versity Press. Kegan, R. (2009). What “Form” Transforms? A Construc­tive-Developmental Approach to Transformative Learning. In Contemporary Theories of Learning (pp. 43-60). Routledge. King. P.M., & Kitchener, K.S. (2004). Reflective Judgment: Theory and Research on the Development of Epis­temic Assumptions through Adulthood, Educational Psychologist, 39(1), 5-18. Kohlberg, L. (1984). The Psychology of Moral Develop­ment: The Nature and Validity of Moral Stages. San Francisco: Harper & Row. Loevinger, J. (1976). Ego Development: Concepts and Theories. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Lohman, H., Griffiths, Y., Coppard, B. M., & Cota, L. (2003). The Power of Book Discussion Groups in In­tergenerational Learning. Educational Gerontology, 29, 103-115. McAdams, D. P., & de St Aubin, E. D. (1992). A Theory of Generativity and its Assessment through Self-Report, Behavioral Acts, And Narrative Themes in Autobiog­raphy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62(6), 1003. Meindl, J. R., Ehrlich, S. B., & Dukerich, J. M. (1985). The romance of leadership. Administrative science quar­terly, 78-102. Mitro., I. 1983. Stakeholders of the Organizational Mind. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Morrow-Howell, N., Hong, S., & Tang, F. (2009). Who Benefits from Volunteering? Variations in Perceived Benefits. Gerontologist, 49, 91-102. Nelson, T., & Squires, V. (2017). Addressing Complex Chal­lenges through Adaptive Leadership: A Promising Ap­proach to Collaborative Problem Solving. Journal of Leadership Education, 16(4). 111-123. Pratt, M. W., Matsuba, M. K., Lawford, H. L., & Villar, F. (2020). The life span development of generativity. The Oxford handbook of moral development: An interdis­ciplinary perspective, Jensen, L. A. (Ed), 366-386. Reisig, C. N., & Fees, B. S. (2007). Older Adults’ Perceptions of Well-Being after Intergenerational Experiences with Youth. Journal of Intergenerational Relationships, 4(4), 6-22. Robinson, O. C. (2014). Sampling in interview-based qual­itative research: A theoretical and practical guide. Qualitative research in psychology, 11(1), 25-41. Rooke, D. & Torbert, W. R. (2005). Seven Transformations of Leadership. Harvard Business Review, April, 1-12. Rozario, P. A. (2006). Volunteering among Current Co­horts of Older Adults and Baby Boomers. Genera­tions, 30(4), 31-36. Scandura, T. A., & Pellegrini, E. K. (2008). Trust and Leader-Member Exchange: A Closer Look at Relational Vulnerability. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 15(2), 101-110. Scharmer, C. O. (2009). Theory U: Learning from the Fu­ture as It Emerges. Berrett-Koehler Publishers. Selman, R. L. (1980). The Growth of Interpersonal Under­standing. London: Academic Press. Selman, R.L. (1971). Taking another’s Perspective: Role-Taking Development in Early Childhood, Child Devel­opment. 42, 1721-1734. Slater, C. L. (2003). Generativity versus stagnation: An elaboration of Erikson’s adult stage of human devel­opment. Journal of Adult Development, 10(1), 53-65. Sowcik, M., Andenoro, A. C., McNutt, M., & Murphy, S. E. (2015). Leadership 2050: Critical challenges, Key Con­texts, and Emerging Trends. Emerald Group Publishing. Toader, A. F., & Martin, R. (2022). Bringing the cognitive revolution forward: What can team cognition con­tribute to our understanding of leadership?. The Leadership Quarterly, May, available online. Tsui, A. S., Xin, K. R., & Egan, T. D. (1995). Relational De­mography: The Missing Link in Vertical Dyad Linkage, in S. E. Jackson & M. N. Ruderman (eds) Diversity in Work Teams, pp. 97-130. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Heifetz, R. A., Linsky, M., & Grashow, A. (2009). The Prac­tice of Adaptive Leadership: Tools and Tactics for Changing Your Organization and the World. Boston: Harvard Business Press. Vera, D., Bonardi, J. P., Hitt, M. A., & Withers, M. C. (2022). Extending the boundaries of strategic leader­ship research. The Leadership Quarterly, 33 (3). Volckmann, R. (2014). Generativity, Transdisciplinarity, and Integral Leadership. World Futures, 70(3-4), 248-265. Wang, H. J., Jiang, L., Xu, X., Zhou, K., & Bauer, T. N. (2022). Dynamic relationships between leader–member ex­change and employee role-making behaviours: The moderating role of employee emotional ambivalence. Human Relations, available online. Wilber, K. (1995/2001). Sex, Ecology, Spirituality: The Spirit of Evolution. Shambhala Publications. APPENDIX: Figure A- 1: Inter-rater reliability measured by Cohen’s kappa Figure A-2: Perceptions and interpretations of the intentions for giving and the expected or unexpected consequences resulting from the act of giving across ego development stages for the trust and high-quality social exchange (Hollan­The purpose of this paper is to understand how trust is formed between two people in the social ex­change while being impacted by stages of ego de­velopment. Because both (1) the stage of ego development (Loevinger, 1976) and (2) the quality of social exchange are complex phenomena, the im­pact of stage of ego development of the quality of social exchange thus is a higher-order complex phe­nomenon. To uncover the basic regularities of this impact between two complex phenomena, we focus on the most elementary form of the social ex­change, “the act of giving.” der, 1978, 2009). “Changes can occur in perception, when enriched by experience. The prospect for trust or mistrust may thereby grow. If positive, there will likely be loyalty and solidarity of purpose, and the reverse is also likely. Trust and loyalty are among those qualities needed to bind relationships” (Hollander, 2009: 5). 1 Hollander’s (2013) attribution of the idiosyncratic credit to a leader is a function of perceived competence in the main group task and loyalty to group norms. The IC model thus explains the upward influence. When fol­lowers accord such credits to leaders, followers have “upward influence” (Hollander, 2004). IC is relevant for IC dynamics of “giving and taking credit,” which the essence of the process of leadership (Hollanders, 2004b). Spending of leadership credit is constrained by the expectations of the followers. The challenge of the IC model is that leaders may initiate change, but also show su.cient compliance to the group norms; the leadership challenge is to balance both forces. Hollander puts forth three limitations to a leader’s potential influ­ence that arise from the follower side: (1) “What have you done for us lately?”; (2) the lack of perceptiveness of a leader on an available credit; and (3) followers rep­resent a variety of interests (Hollander, 2013, p. 218). Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 55 Abstract Vol. 11, No. 2, 55-70 doi:10.17708/DRMJ.2022.v11n02a04 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 56 Melita Balas Rant: Evolutionary Tendencies of Simple Social Exchange Across the Stages of Ego Development: Implications for Leadership Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 57 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 58 Melita Balas Rant: Evolutionary Tendencies of Simple Social Exchange Across the Stages of Ego Development: Implications for Leadership Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 59 Figure 1: Socio-economic features of the sample Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 60 Melita Balas Rant: Evolutionary Tendencies of Simple Social Exchange Across the Stages of Ego Development: Implications for Leadership Figure 2: Impact of the ego development stage on the simple social exchange (act of giving) Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 61 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 62 Melita Balas Rant: Evolutionary Tendencies of Simple Social Exchange Across the Stages of Ego Development: Implications for Leadership Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 63 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 64 Melita Balas Rant: Evolutionary Tendencies of Simple Social Exchange Across the Stages of Ego Development: Implications for Leadership Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 65 EXTENDED SUMMARY/IZVLECEK Clanek obravnava raziskovalno vprašanje, kako stopnje osebnega razvoja posameznika vplivajo na osmišljanje preproste družbene izmenjave (preucujemo dejanje prostovoljnega dajanja daril, po­hval ipd.). Na vzorcu 290 anketirancev predstavljamo izsledke raziskave o evoluciji osmišljanja pros­tovoljnega dajanja po stopnjah osebnega razvoja. Izsledki raziskave razkrivajo, da višje stopnje osebnega razvoja osmišljajo dejanje prostovoljnega dejanja manj materialno, bolj pozitivno, pri tem doživljajo bolj kompleksna custva, izhajajo iz vec zornih kotov in so bolj osredotocene na kvaliteto odnosa z prejemnikom darila. Identificirane tendence posplošimo na ucinke za vodenje, pri cemer izhajamo iz teorije izmenjave vodja-clan (angl. leader–member exchange; LMX). Zakljucimo, da višja stopnja osebnega razvoja vodi do bolj kakovostne izmenjave vodja-clan in povecuje verjetnost rešitve prilagoditvenih problemov pri vodenju. Poleg tega je verjetneje, da bodo clani bolj zaupali vodji v zameno za visokokakovostne odnose med njimi. Clanek poskuša združiti teorijo LMX s konstruktivno šolo razvoja odraslih. Ta združitev osvetljuje zanimivo razmerje, in sicer, da je stopnja osebnega razvoja verjeten dejavnik kakovosti izmenjave vodja-clan in povecuje uspešnost vodenja. Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 66 Melita Balas Rant: Evolutionary Tendencies of Simple Social Exchange Across the Stages of Ego Development: Implications for Leadership Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 67 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 68 Melita Balas Rant: Evolutionary Tendencies of Simple Social Exchange Across the Stages of Ego Development: Implications for Leadership Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 69 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 70 Melita Balas Rant: Evolutionary Tendencies of Simple Social Exchange Across the Stages of Ego Development: Implications for Leadership EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS OF THE INFLUENCE OF GAMIFICATION ON EMPLOYEES’ BEHAVIOR Ibrahim Hamza Faculty of Economic and Social science, Budapest University of Technology and Economics, Hungary hamza.ibrahim@gtk.bme.hu Sarolta Tóvölgyi Faculty of Economic and Social science, Budapest University of Technology and Economics, Hungary tovolgyi.sarolta@gtk.bme.hu Gamification is a relatively new concept that refers to the use of game elements in non-game productive activity. It also can be implemented as a behavioral modeling tool influencing behavioral change in an organizational context. A remaining challenge in gamification is the absence of measurement focus to empirically quantify gamification at­tributes. This paper measures key behavioral changes that gamification influence among employees and assesses their theoretical foundation. We combined validated measurement tools to empirically measure behavior changes, especially engagement, performance, and satisfaction. The combined measurement tool includes the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES), the Individual Work Performance Questionnaire (IWPQ), and the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire (MSQ). Research results proved that there is a significant behavioral di.erence between employees that were influenced by gamification and employees that were not. Employees that were exposed to gamification demonstrated higher engagement and satisfaction levels and verified the potency of gamification. Research results evidenced no significant di.erences between the two groups in terms of performance levels. This research paper will guide practitioners to better evaluate gamification attributes and improve gamification organizational assimilation. Keywords: gamification, engagement, job performance, satisfaction, organizational behavior 1INTRODUCTION Gamification can be defined as embedding game elements into activities that are not themselves games (Werbach & Hunter, 2012). This engaging phe­nomenon helps in implementing motivational a.or­dances in services to evoke game-like experiences and Behavioral change is the abandonment of certain behaviors and the adoption of new ones (Prochaska & Velicer, 1997). Changing behavior is not about changing one act; it is about altering the behavioral routines in which the acts are embedded (Heimlich & Ardoin, 2008). Behavioral change is saturated with complexities, and for that reason there is no single theory that can fully account for it. However, such a change could be well described when it is caused by gamification. Self-determination theory and flow the­ory could be classified as principal theories that eluci­date how gamification influences behavioral change (Krath, Schürmann, & von Korflesch, 2021). According to self-determination theory (SDT), relatedness, autonomy, and competence are three primary psychological needs that all individuals as­pire to fulfil. SDT is applicable to the settings of learning and games because it explains the social contexts that can either boost or lessen intrinsic mo­tivation (Kam & Umar, 2018). On the other hand, flow theory delineates the state in which users be­come entangled in a certain activity and lose their sense of time (Csikszentmihalyi, 1991). When indi­viduals are fully engaged in an activity, they perceive the intrinsic nature of hoped-for rewards (Csikszent­mihalyi, 2014). Flow theory illustrates one of the principal goals of gamification, and the recent liter­ature has examined the e.cacy of using gamifica­tion elements to retain users in a flow experience (Huang et al., 2018). Empirically evaluating the behavioral changes imposed by gamification on employees has re­mained a hurdle. There are no studies that clearly show how such a measurement can be quantified exclusively. In our work, we applied a combined tool that is formed by three validated measurement tools to empirically measure employees’ engage­ment, performance, and satisfaction, because these are important factors of organizational behavior. 2METHODOLOGY 2.1Hypotheses Previous research addressed the importance of implementing gamification in business and its po­tential positive influence on employees’ engage­ment (Robson et al., 2016; Ponis et al., 2020), performance (Nacke & Deterding, 2017; Hosseini et al., 2021) and satisfaction (Nacke & Deterding, 2017; Schöbel et al., 2020). Gamification is a kind of tech­nology that influences change without enforcing it (Liu, Santhanam, & Webster, 2017). We developed a novel approach that validates gamification e.ects on employees’ behavior, and which can quantita­tively measure behavioral aspects. Gamification is a behavioral-change modeling tool when tailored ad­equately. In this research, the hypotheses are as fol­lows: H1. Gamification has a positive e.ect on employees’ behavior. H1-1. Gamification has a positive e.ect on employ­ees’ engagement. H1-2. Gamification has a positive e.ect on employ­ees’ performance. H1-3. Gamification has a positive e.ect on employ­ees’ satisfaction. 2.2Measurement To address these hypotheses, we constructed a measurement tool that can analyze employees’ key behavioral changes in an organizational context. Our measurement tool is a combination of three self-re­porting validated tools: the Utrecht work engagement scale (UWES), the Individual Work Performance Ques­tionnaire (IWPQ), and the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire (MSQ). We name this novel theoretical contribution EPS, which highlights the three variables measured: engagement, performance, and satisfac­tion. We applied the Utrecht scale to measure empir­ically how gamification implementations influences engagement. The method consists of 17 items and provides a more concrete overview of employees’ vigor, dedication, and absorption (Schaufeli & Bakker, 2003; Seppälä et al., 2009). Vigor refers to energy lev­els and mental resilience while working. Respondents answer the scale using a 7-point Likert in which 0 in­dicates Never and 7 indicates Always. The second ap­plied measurement tool is the IWPQ, which incorporates task performance, interpersonal perfor­mance, and counterproductive work behavior (Koop­mans et al., 2012; Koopmans, Bernaards, Hildebrandt, De Vet, & Van Der Beek, 2014). Originally the IWPQ consisted of 47 items, however, to address our re­search aim we selected a shorter 25-item version. The items were scored on a 5-point Likert scale in which 1 indicates Strongly disagree and 5 indicates Strongly agree. Finally, we applied the MSQ to measure the ef­fect of gamification on employees’ satisfaction. The measurement tool is used widely in the literature (Gillet & Schwab,1975; Weiss, Dawis, England, & Lofquist, 1967; Inayat & Khan, 2021) and provides ac­tual evidence of any changes in employees satisfac­tion levels. The MSQ is a 5-point Likert-type scale formed of 20 items and is a time-stable instrument. 2.3Participants and Procedures Our sample was formed of 62 European em­ployees who were pursuing their higher education in Hungary. Our data were obtained using question­naires. The surveys were distributed using Google forms, emails, and social media. Because gamifica­tion is not yet a widely recognized concept, we con­veniently conducted this research among employees who were continuing their higher edu­cation at Budapest University of Technology and Economics. Our sample comprised 56.5% males, 41.9% females, and 1.6% who identified themselves as other; 54.8% of our questionnaire respondents were between 18 and 25, 37.1% were between 26 and 35, and only 8.1% were between 36 and 45. Most of our respondents were university graduates; 48.4% had finished their bachelor’s degree, and 33.9% had completed their master’s degree. The level of work experience also indicated that 53.2% of our respondents had 1–5 years of experience, whereas 24.2% had less than 1 year. Our demographical data can help us unravel employees’ perception factors, which are examined in the Analysis and Results section. Table 1 presents our sample’s age distribution, Table 2 presents their educational distribution, and Table 3 presents our respondents’ years of experience. Table 1: Age distribution Table 2: Educational level distribution Table 3: Employment years distribution 3ANALYSIS AND RESULTS Our research data indicates that 21% of our respondents were never exposed to gamification at work, whereas 79% acknowledged being ex­posed to gamification and game design elements in an organizational context. Furthermore, 41.9% of the respondents acknowledged a high level of familiarity with the concept of gamification and procedures, and 27.5% of respondents indicated low familiarity levels. The collected data demon­strate that most of our sample had a good level of familiarity and understanding of gamification in an organizational context. Our population was divided into two groups: Group 1 (G1) is the em­ployees that were not exposed to gamification, and Group 2 (G2) is formed of employees that were exposed to gamification in an organizational context. Our research goal was to empirically measure the effects of gamification and compare Groups G1 and G2 in terms of engagement, per­formance, and satisfaction levels. Firstly, we con­ducted Kolmogorov–Smirnov and Shapiro–Wilk normality tests to address our sample distribution better. According to the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test, our data on satisfaction and engagement are not nor­mally distributed (0.0113 < 0.05, and 0.153 < 0.05). Our test results analysis indicates that performance levels are normally distributed (0.150 > 0.05). We also conducted a Shapiro–Wilk normality test to val­idate our results further (Table 5). The Shapiro–Wilk test indicates the same results as the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test. Our data on satisfaction and engagement are not normally distributed (0.0113 < 0.05, and 0.153 < 0.05), and, in contrast, our perfor­mance levels are normally distributed (0.150 > 0.05). Based on our results, we conducted Mann–Whitney U tests on our variables of satisfaction and engagement levels, and an independent T-test on our variables of performance levels. These tests allow us to determine if there were any di.erences between Groups G1 and G2. Table 6 presents the re­sults of the Mann–Whitney U test. Data analysis in Table 6 indicates moderate to strong di.erences between Groups G1 and G2 in terms of engagement levels (0.023 < 0.05), with a Mann–Whitney U value of 450.0 and a standard error of 57.792. Examining the data results carefully led us to conclude the validity of our first sub-hypothesis, H1-1. Moderate to strong di.erences exist between employees that were exposed to gamification and employees that were not in terms of organizational engagement. The same di.erentiated result was ev­ident when we replicated the data analysis on our satisfaction variable as indicated in Table 6. There were moderate to strong di.erences between Groups G1 and G2 in terms of job satisfaction (0.020 < 0.05), with a Mann–Whitney U value of 452.5 and a standard error of 57.78. Based on this analysis, we can conclude that Hypothesis H1-3 is accepted: mod­erate to strong di.erences exist between employees that were exposed to gamification and employees that were not exposed to gamification in terms of or­ganizational satisfaction. Owing the results of the normality tests in Tables 4 and 5 that proved the nor­mality of our performance variable distribution, we conducted an independent T-test to validate our sec­ond sub-hypothesis. Table 7 demonstrates the inde­pendence of performance from the influence of gamification. No significant di.erences existed be­tween Groups G1 and G2 in terms of organizational performance (significance value of 0.082 > 0.05, and a T-value of 1.731). Elaborating on our results, we conclude that our second sub-hypothesis is rejected. We repeated our tests on satisfaction and engage­ment levels using the independent T-test to validate the achieved results further. Table 7: Performance: independent T-test The T-test measurements demonstrate a signifi­cance value of engagement: (0.039 < 0.05, and a T-value of -2.236), which also validates Sub-hypothesis H1-1. Employees that were exposed to gamification demonstrated higher engagement levels than em­ployees that were not. Our results also were signifi­cant (0.037 < 0.05, and a T-value of -2.268), which validates our third research sub-hypothesis, H1-3. Employees demonstrates higher satisfaction levels in a gamified work environment. Furthermore, as ex­plained by Pallant (2016) we applied the eta-squared rule to measure how significantly game elements in­fluenced employees’ engagement and satisfaction. In the following equations, N1 is the number of re­spondents of Group 1, and N2 is the number of re­spondents of Group 2. Engagement analysis indicates that gamifica­tion exposure had moderate to strong e.ects on employees’ engagement levels. Results demon­strate the e.ciency of gamification in changing em­ployees’ behavior. We applied the same formula to measure employees’ satisfaction levels. The analysis of satisfaction levels also indicates that gamification had moderate to strong e.ects on employees’ organizational satisfaction levels. We can conclude that gamification changes employees’ behavior by improving their engagement levels and satisfaction levels. Because of the importance of initial or accumu­lated perceptions, we investigated employees’ per­ceptions of the gamification concept and if they realised its potential negative attributes. Results in­dicate that only 4.3% of the respondents stated that gamificationis a source of nuisance, and 8.5% indi­cated no negative or positive attributes. The solid majority of our respondents—precisely 87.2%—in­dicated positive e.ects after being exposed to gam­ification. Positive responses included better psycho­logical well-being, improved interdepartmental communication, knowledge sharing, and higher mo­tivation levels. 4DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION 4.1Theoretical Contributions Our research methodology was based on a hy­brid-type approach that utilized three scales to mea­sure and compare employee’s engagement, performance, and satisfaction. Combining the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale, Individual Work Performance Questionnaire and Minnesota Satisfac­tion Questionnaire enabled us to conduct a holistic analysis of gamification behavioral influence. Con­sistent with the previous literature (Huang et al., 2018; Krath, Schürmann, & von Korflesch, 2021) self-determination theory and flow theory are two of the most important theories in the field of gami­fication, and our proposed measurement tool, EPS, incorporates them both. Gamification influences be­havior change rather than mandating it, and every game element can be categorized according to its own influence and phycological e.ect. Therefore, game element selection is crucial in promoting the desired behavioral change. 4.2Practical Implications Our research elaborated a new approach in in­vestigating the influence of gamification on employ­ees, and is a cost-e.ective and fast empirical approach. Furthermore, the results of this study can help practitioners scientifically quantify behavioral changes in an organizational environment. Research results proved the usefulness of gamification in in­fluencing organizational behavior. Our results also indicate gamification assimilation among employees between 18 and 35. Gamification exposure moder­ately to strongly increased employees’ organiza­tional engagement and satisfaction. Moreover, the research findings indicate that in this sample, gam­ification had no significant influence on employees’ organizational performance, which is a notable ex­ception. 4.3Limitations Because gamification is a relatively new con­cept, measuring gamification influence among blue- collar employees proved di.cult, which is a notable limitation. Therefore, the implementation processes should include a comprehensive gamification de­scription. We planned to assess the impact of gam­ification on employees’ turnover rates, but acquiring such data contradicted corporate regula­tions. Our combined measurement tool is accurate; nevertheless, owing to its hybrid nature, it was paired with a lengthy questionnaire, making it more di.cult to obtain employees’ responses. 4.4Future Research Directions Our research was conducted among employees residing in Hungary, from di.erent cultural back­grounds. Selecting a more homogeneous sample would enable researchers to detect a mediating role of culture in gamification and should provide cultural perception of integrated game elements by applying the same hybrid measurement tool. Researchers’ in­terpretations of what constitutes “gamification” varies depending on the game elements they select to include. Therefore, we recommend utilizing a larger sample of employees to evaluate the e.ects of game elements individually and collectively. The aforementioned method would provide empirical evidence of the appropriate game element combi­nations based on organizational objectives. Employ­ees did not provide consent before participating in a gamified process, which is a noteworthy observa­tion. Gamification incorporation in on-site job tasks adds a fun layer to organizational activities. Never­theless, employees’ awareness of the process and its goals should be addressed. REFERENCES Bozkurt, A., & Durak, G. (2018). A systematic review of gamification research: In pursuit of homo ludens. International Journal of Game-Based Learning, 8(3), 15–33. Buckley, P., & Doyle, E. (2017). Individualising gamifica­tion: An investigation of the impact of learning styles and personality traits on the e.cacy of gamification using a prediction market. Computers and Education, 106, 43–55. Cardador, M. T., Northcraft, G. B., & Whicker, J. (2017). A theory of work gamification: Something old, something new, something borrowed, something cool? Human Resource Management Review, 27(2), 353–365. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1991). Flow, the psychology of op­timal experience - Steps towards enchancing the qual­ity of life. Harper & Row Publishers. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2014). Flow and the foundations of positive psychology. In Flow and the foundations of positive psychology. Ergle, D., & Ludviga, I. (2018). Use of Gamification in Human Resource Management: Impact on Engage­ment and Satisfaction. February. Gillet, B., Schwab, D.B. (1975). Convergent and discrimi­nant validities of corresponding Job Descriptive Index and Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire scales. Journal of Applied Psychology 60(3), 313–317. Heimlich, J. E., & Ardoin, N. M. (2008). Understanding be­havior to understand behavior change: a literature re­view. Environmental Education Research, 14(3), 215–237. Hosseini, C., Humlung, O., Fagerstrřm, A., & Haddara, M. (2021). An experimental study on the e.ects of gam­ification on task performance. Procedia Computer Sci­ence, 196, 999–1006. Huang, H. C., Pham, T. T. L., Wong, M. K., Chiu, H. Y., Yang, Y. H., & Teng, C. I. (2018). How to create flow experi­ence in exergames? Perspective of flow theory. Telem­atics and Informatics, 35(5), 1288–1296. Huotari, K., & Hamari, J. (2012). Defining gamification - A service marketing perspective. Proceedings of the 16th International Academic MindTrek Conference 2012: “Envisioning Future Media Environments”, MindTrek 2012, 17–22. Inayat, W., & Jahanzeb Khan, M. (2021). A Study of Job Satisfaction and Its E.ect on the Performance of Em­ployees Working in Private Sector Organizations, Pe­shawar. Education Research International, 2021. Kam, A. H. T., & Umar, I. N. (2018). Fostering authentic learning motivations through gamification: A self-determination theory (SDT) approach. Journal of Engineering Science and Technology, 13(Special Issue), 1–9. Koopmans, L., Bernaards, C., Hildebrandt, V., Van Buuren, S., Van Der Beek, A. J., & de Vet, H. C. w. (2012). De­velopment of an individual work performance ques­tionnaire. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 62(1), 6–28. Koopmans, L., Bernaards, C. M., Hildebrandt, V. H., De Vet, H. C. W., & Van Der Beek, A. J. (2014). Construct validity of the individual work performance question­naire. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 56(3), 331–337. Krath, J., Schürmann, L., & von Korflesch, H. F. O. (2021). Revealing the theoretical basis of gamification: A sys­tematic review and analysis of theory in research on gamification, serious games and game-based learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 125(January), 106963. Liu, D., Santhanam, R., & Webster, J. (2017). Toward mean­ingful engagement: A framework for design and re­search of gamified information systems. MIS Quarterly: Management Information Systems, 41(4), 1011–1034. Mekler, E. D., Brühlmann, F., Opwis, K., & Tuch, A. N. (2013). Do points, levels and leaderboards harm in­trinsic motivation? An empirical analysis of common gamification elements. ACM International Conference Proceeding Series, 66–73. Nacke, L. E., & Deterding, S. (2017). The maturing of gam­ification research. Computers in Human Behavior, 71, 450–454. Pallant, J. (2016). SPSS Survival Manual, 6th edition, 2016. Open University Press. Ponis, S. T., Plakas, G., Agalianos, K., Aretoulaki, E., Gayialis, S. P., & Andrianopoulos, A. (2020). Augmented reality and gamification to increase productivity and job satis­faction in the warehouse of the future. Procedia Man­ufacturing, 51(2020), 1621–1628. Prochaska, J. O., & Velicer, W. F. (1997). The transtheo­retical model of health behavior change. American Journal of Health Promotion, 12(1), 38–48. Robson, K., Plangger, K., Kietzmann, J. H., McCarthy, I., & Pitt, L. (2016). Game on: Engaging customers and em­ployees through gamification. Business Horizons, 59(1), 29–36. Schaufeli, W. B., & Bakker, A. B. (2003). UWES-Utrecht Work Engagement Scale: Test Manual. Unpublished Article, Department of Psychology, Utrecht University, Utrecht. Scheiner, C. W. (2015). The motivational fabric of gami­fied idea competitions: The evaluation of game me­chanics from a longitudinal perspective. Creativity and Innovation Management, 24(2), 341–352. Schöbel, S. M., Janson, A., & Söllner, M. (2020). Capturing the complexity of gamification elements: a holistic ap­proach for analysing existing and deriving novel gam­ification designs. European Journal of Information Systems, 29(6), 641–668. Seppälä, P., Mauno, S., Feldt, T., Hakanen, J., Kinnunen, U., Tolvanen, A., & Schaufeli, W. (2009). The construct validity of the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale: Mul­tisample and longitudinal evidence. Journal of Happi­ness Studies, 10(4), 459–481. Weiss, D.J., Dawis, R.V., England, G.W.,Lofquist, L.H. (1967) Manual for the Minnesota Satisfaction Ques­tionnaire. University of Minnesota, Minneapolis In­dustrial Relations Center. Werbach, K., & Hunter, D. (2012). For the Win: How Game Thinking can Revolutionize your Business. Zainuddin, Z., Chu, S. K. W., Shujahat, M., & Perera, C. J. (2020). The impact of gamification on learning and in­struction: A systematic review of empirical evidence. Educational Research Review, 30(February). improve behavioral results. Gamification processes are being applied today in numerous fields, including education, health, business, and management (Bozkurt & Durak, 2018). This e.ective problem-solv­ing and goal-achieving tool (Zainuddin, Chu, Shujahat, & Perera, 2020) also is implemented for behavioral change by influencing and promoting desired learning behavior (Ergle & Ludviga, 2018; Buckley & Doyle, 2017), and invoking in individuals the same psycho­ logical experiences as games generally do (Huotari & Hamari, 2012). Gamification is portrayed through and defined by game elements, the choice of which di.ers from one researcher to another. However, the most identified ones in the literature are points, badges, leader boards, avatars, quests, performance graphs, and certificates (Scheiner, 2015; Cardador, Northcraft, & Whicker, 2017; Mekler, Brühlmann, Opwis, & Tuch, 2013). With its potent game design aspects, gamifica­tion stimulates individual incentives and drives user behavior. Therefore, to better understand gamifica­tion, it is of supreme importance to acknowledge and fully comprehend user behavior, specifically user be­havioral changes in organizational contexts. These changes are induced by interpersonal and organiza­tional factors. Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 71 Abstract Vol. 11, No. 2, 71-78 doi:10.17708/DRMJ.2022.v11n02a05 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 72 Ibrahim Hamza, Sarolta Tóvölgyi: Empirical Analysis of the Influence of Gamification on Employees’ Behavior Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 73 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 74 Ibrahim Hamza, Sarolta Tóvölgyi: Empirical Analysis of the Influence of Gamification on Employees’ Behavior Table 4: Test of normalities: Kolmogorov–Smirnov Table 5: Test of normalities: Shapiro–Wilk Table 6: Mann–Whitney test statistics Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 75 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 76 Ibrahim Hamza, Sarolta Tóvölgyi: Empirical Analysis of the Influence of Gamification on Employees’ Behavior EXTENDED SUMMARY/IZVLECEK Igrifikacija je razmeroma nov koncept, ki se nanaša na uporabo elementov igre v neigrnih pro­duktivnih dejavnostih. Prav tako se lahko uporablja kot orodje za vedenjsko modeliranje, ki vpliva na vedenjske spremembe v organizacijskem kontekstu. Izziv, ki ostaja povezan s tem konceptom, je po­manjkanje empiricnih meritev lastnosti igrifikacije. Prispevek meri kljucne vedenjske spremembe, na katere vpliva igrifikacija med zaposlenimi, in ocenjuje njihovo teoreticno podlago. Združili smo že prej potrjena merska orodja za empiricno ugotavljanje sprememb vedenja, predvsem zavzetosti, us­pešnosti in zadovoljstva. Skupno merilno orodje vkljucuje Utrechtsko lestvico delovne zavzetosti (angl. Utrecht Work Engagement Scale; UWES), vprašalnik o individualni delovni uspešnosti (angl. Individual Work Performance Questionnaire; IWPQ) in Minnesota vprašalnik o zadovoljstvu (angl. Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire; MSQ). Rezultati raziskave so pokazali, da obstaja velika ve­denjska razlika med zaposlenimi, na katere je vplivala igrifikacija, in zaposlenimi, na katere ni. Za­posleni, ki so bili izpostavljeni igrifikaciji, so pokazali višjo stopnjo zavzetosti in zadovoljstva ter tako potrdili moc igrifikacije. Glede ravni uspešnosti pa rezultati niso pokazali statisticno znacilnih razlik med obema skupinama. Ta raziskovalni clanek bo v praksi vodil k boljšemu ocenjevanju lastnosti igri­fikacije in k izboljšanju uporabe koncepta v organizacijah. Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 77 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 78 Ibrahim Hamza, Sarolta Tóvölgyi: Empirical Analysis of the Influence of Gamification on Employees’ Behavior Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 79 2022d) indicates that reporting on social impacts will be even more demanding in terms of depth and scope, and will be integrated into the overarching non-financial reporting framework (European Com­1INTRODUCTION HOW TO MEASURE OUR IMPACT ON SOCIETY: AN ILLUSTRATION OF SOCIAL IMPACT ANALYSIS Mojca Marc School of Economics and Business, University of Ljubljana, Slovenia mojca.marc@ef.uni-lj.si Nina Ponikvar Associated professor School of Economics and Business, University of Ljubljana, Slovenia nina.ponikvar@ef.uni-lj.si In light of sustainable development, a modern organization is expected to operate and demon­strate its performance not only in terms of maximizThe purpose of this paper is to help organizations facing the challenge of measuring the social impact of their activities. Although examples of environmental e.ects’ analyses abound, this is not the case for the analysis of social impact. To illustrate how organizations can demonstrate their impact on society, we evaluated the activities of the Incredible Years (IY) parenting program using the social return on investment (SROI) approach, considering not only the direct impact of the program on children, but a broader range of outcomes for di.erent stakeholders. We show that the monetized impacts of the program are about 10 times higher than the costs of the program. The SROI as an evaluation approach is generally applicable to activities of for-profit and nonprofit organizations, and serves as a reference to demonstrate the value of expected social impact to investors and funders. Therefore, SROI is a valuable tool not only for managers but for policy makers as well. We discuss the steps, data requirement, interpretation of results, and lim­itations of the social impact analysis. Keywords: social impact, social impact analysis, SROI, ESG, parenting program ­ing value for the owner but also in terms of impact on society and the environment (e.g., United Na­tions, 2015; European Commission, 2022a). This holds for both companies and nonprofit organiza­tions (NPOs). The incentive for measuring and re­porting firms’ social impact comes from the market—from both buyers and peers. Additionally, the regulators in particular economic sectors might prescribe the scope and depth of reporting on social impacts by following the set goals of sustainable de­velopment (European Commission, 2014). The Pro­posal for a CSR Directive (European Commission, the funding (Arvidson, Lyon, McKay, & Moro, 2013). Accordingly, managers of nonprofit organizations also are expected to justify the spending of public funds for social impact by reporting on their pro­grams’ e.ciency and e.ectiveness. All this means that social impact analysis will gain importance as a tool to identify, measure, and evaluate the social de­sirability of activities. This paper addresses these important and timely issues. Although examples of environmental e.ects analyses abound, this is not the case for the analysis of social impact. This corresponds to the de­velopment of the regulatory framework, which cur­rently is more developed for environmental e.ects (European Commission, 2020c). Therefore the pur­pose of this paper is to help organizations facing the challenge of measuring the social impact of their ac­tivities by providing an example. We use the case of the Incredible Years (IY) parenting program to illus­trate the steps, data requirements, interpretation of results, and limitations of such analysis. The case was chosen because the program has a range of e.ects, occurring across a longer time frame and for multiple stakeholders. This allows us to demonstrate how to capture such features within the social impact analysis. We used the social return on investment (SROI) approach, taking into account not just the program’s direct e.ects on the children but a broader set of outcomes for di.erent stake­holders. Namely, studies show that parenting train­ing programs are an extremely e.ective way to reduce children’s behavioral problems and improve parent–child relationships (Hutchings et al., 2007), given that parents have a crucial influence on a child’s behavior (Gardner, 1987). Such programs provide better chances to finish schooling and to prosper in life, and better quality of life for parents and siblings as well. Furthermore, these e.ects ex­tend beyond their families to communities and so­ciety in the broadest sense. Still, the target groups of such programs often represent minor segments of the population, and the positive direct e.ects are challenging to evaluate, so the economic viability of these programs is often questioned despite the un­doubtedly positive quality e.ects. Moreover, there is growing pressure on the program initiators to demonstrate empirically the value of the expected social impact created by invested funds. Because the SROI is based on the monetary value of inputs and impacts, managers can use the results of such analyses for this purpose. We define social impact analysis as an umbrella term for the variety of methodological approaches developed in di.erent literature streams. The pro­fessional and academic community recognizes that mere economic indicators of performance, such as costs and profits, do not adequately reflect the broad scope of impacts expected from organizations and projects aiming to create social value. Many at­tempts have been proposed in economics, account­ing, and the social impact assessment literature (e.g., Burdge, 2003; Freudenburg, 1986; ICPGSIA, 2003; O’Faircheallaigh, 2009) to improve the perfor­mance measurement (and management) in this re­spect. The SROI approach is just one possible method to systematically identify, measure, and evaluate a broader set of individual and social ef­fects. SROI has been applied across di.erent public health areas, including health promotion, mental health, sexual and reproductive health, child health, nutrition, healthcare management, health educa­tion, and environmental health (see review by Banke-Thomas, Madaj, & Van den Broek, 2015). Re­cently, SROI studies also have emerged in the areas of physical activity and sport (see review by Gos­selin, Boccanfuso, & Laberge, 2020), as well as in so­cial enterprises to measure their social value (Nicholls, 2007). The SROI value is based on the monetary valu­ation of inputs and the monetary valuation of im­pacts of the analyzed program or activities. Although measuring such programs’ inputs usually is not problematic, measuring the benefits of these programs in a way that allows us to include them in the SROI calculation, namely in money terms, poses a considerable challenge to scholars and practition­ers (Millar & Hall, 2013; Maier, Schober, Simsa, and Millner, 2015; Arvidson et al., 2013). Our study con­tributes to the growing knowledge base in economic evaluations of social impact by addressing some of the challenges of measuring and monetizing the ef­fects in economic evaluations. The example we use can be generalized to many similar activities, partic­ularly those aimed at preventing negative impacts, implemented by di.erent organizations. This paper first presents a literature review of the e.ects of parenting programs and social impact measurement. Then we explain the SROI technique for economic evaluation. Next we explain how we identified and measured the social impact of the IY parenting program carried out in the period 2017–2019 in Slovenia. The results section contains the empirical results for the studied case, and the con­clusion wraps up the paper. 2THEORETICAL BACKGROUND In this section, we first review the literature on the e.ects of parenting programs to understand where to look for stakeholders and social impacts. Second, we briefly overview the analytical ap­proaches to measure social impact. 2.1E.ects of Parenting Programs The literature on the e.ects of intervention and preventive health programs, including parenting programs, confirms their short- and long-term pos­itive impact on the health and well-being of individ­uals and their immediate community (Copeland, Shanahan, Costello, and Angold, 2009; Scott, Knapp, Henderson, and Maughan, 2001). Intervening early in childhood is essential for preventing or mitigating later consequences of mental disorders (Pardini and Frick, 2013), such as failure in school, suicidal ten­dencies, crime, teen pregnancy, mental and physical health problems, social isolation, and even death. Parenting programs e.ectively reduce children’s be­havioral issues; improve parenting skills; and reduce anxiety, stress, and depression among parents (Hutchings et al., 2007). The IY parenting program for parents of chil­dren aged 3–8 includes preventive interventions in the field of mental health of children. Parents’ participation in such programs statistically signifi­cantly reduces behavioral disorders in children (Menting, de Castro, & Matthys, 2013; O’Neill, McGilloway, Donnelly, Bywater, & Kelly, 2010), thus reducing or preventing the adverse effects of behavioral disorders with early onset on educa­tion, health, addiction, delinquency and crime, teen pregnancy, child neglect, etc. IY improves parenting skills; relationships within the family; the self-image of family members; social, emo­tional, and communication skills of children; will­ingness to learn; prevention of serious behavioral disorders; the interaction between children and parents; relationships and connections; parents’ problem-solving skills; and children’s social skills and emotional control, school-readiness, and readiness for problem-solving; and reduces chil­dren’s behavioral and emotional problems (see Menting et al. 2013 for a review of studies). Long-term and, to a large extent, measurable program benefits include social savings in the field of various health services (from the treatment of psychiatric disorders to chronic non-infectious dis­eases), at all levels of education, in social services, in the prevention of consumption of legal and illegal drugs and non-chemical addiction, and in the field of juvenile delinquency and crime (Menting et al. 2013). The program also contributes to children’s better academic achievement and to a greater level of their economic activity in adulthood, thus reduc­ing the need for compensation for unemployment and social transfers (Cleary, Fitzgerald, and Nixon, 2004; Colman et al. 2009; Scott et al. 2001). 2.2Social Impact Measurement In this paper, we understand “social impact” as an impact on society. Typically, the intended direct e.ect of an activity is a positive impact, so we also call it a “benefit” for society. There are many calls for more examples, especially studies that enable comparison in monetary terms either within or across organizations. Because the analyses need to include e.ects occurring for a range of stakehold­ers, such calculations are complex and demand considerable resources. Various approaches to so­cial impact measurement share the aim of measur­ing and evaluating the impacts as consequences of activities on relevant target groups (stakeholders). We identified three areas in which methods were developed for capturing the impacts of activities creating social instead of purely monetary added value: economics, social accounting, and social im­pact assessment. In this section, we briefly summa­rize the main approaches. Traditionally, economic evaluation methods such as cost-e.ectiveness, cost-utility, and cost–benefit analyses (CBA) have been used to assess the value-for-money of public programs, especially in the health sector. For example, CBA is based on the demand function and evaluates benefits in money terms, either by the willingness-to-pay or willing­ness-to-accept approach (Then, Schober, Rauscher, & Kehl, 2017). In the accounting field, social ac­counting emerged as a contemporary approach to value and measure social impacts (Richmond, Mook, & Quarter, 2003). This approach focuses on including stakeholder input among data analyzed for the accounting statements (Richmond et al., 2003) and on providing a common language and metric for comparing heterogeneous social impacts (Mook, 2013). Examples include the Global Impact Investing Ratings System (GIIRS, 2008) and the Impact Report­ing and Investment Standards (IRIS, 2009). The social return on investment method devel­oped from traditional CBA and social accounting. The SROI approach originated from the social im­pact literature and was introduced in the 1990s by the Roberts Enterprise Development Foundation. In addition to some professional analyses, several aca­demic studies produced di.erent advanced analyti­cal techniques for calculating the SROI (Adler, 2006; Gair, 2002; Hammitt & Haninger, 2011). The SROI has been promoted as a more ”holistic” approach to demonstrating value for money (Banke-Thomas, Madaj, Charles, & van den Broek, 2015). Both the SROI and CBA try to evaluate the ef­fects of an activity or a program at the societal level. Accordingly, the purpose of undertaking a cost–ben­efit analysis is similar, if not identical, to that of un­dertaking an analysis of social return on investment (Cordes 2017). Some even define SROI as “a form of adjusted cost-benefit analysis that takes into ac­count, more holistically, the various types of im­pact” that programs have (Arvidson et al., 2010). SROI also has been described as an extension of the CBA to incorporate in addition the broader socio-economic and environmental outcomes (Banke-Thomas et al., 2015). At the same time, several di.erences have been pointed out by the academic literature (e.g., Arvid­son et al., 2010; Then et al., 2017). First, CBA di.ers from the SROI in the scope of the impacts consid­ered. CBA has a narrower focus on the economic im­pacts with direct and indirect costs, and barely considers social, political, and cultural impacts. Com­pared with CBA, SROI analysis uses di.erent termi­nology, focusing on the investment approach, including profit. In addition, there is a very strong ex­plicit emphasis on stakeholders within SROI and the types of involvement they can have. Consultation with stakeholders and their importance is one of the strongest features of conducting a SROI. It appears within CBA but is given much less emphasis. This characteristic of “bottom-up” SROI (vs. “top-down” CBA) has been recognized by health economists (Ed­wards & Lawrence, 2021). SROI can be deployed as a management tool and integrated into organiza­tional flows. Furthermore, SROI is presented as one way an organization may learn and use SROI to direct resources to areas with the most significant impact (Then et al., 2017). CBA is more likely to be con­ducted by external agents who report on the e.cacy of particular proposals or interventions. 3METHODOLOGY 3.1The Analyzed Program We analyzed the IY parenting program for par­ents of children aged 3–8, which was implemented in Slovenia in the 2017–2019 period. The e.ective­ness and transferability of the program have been studied for over 40 years in di.erent cultural envi­ronments. The goals, structure, and implementation of the certified IY program are standardized across countries. The program includes mainly parents of children with behavioral issues who have been re­ferred for or already are receiving treatment. In Slovenia, the IY pilot implementation started in the period 2015–2016 and, similar to other countries, yielded exceptional results. Consequently, in 2017, 10 IY centers were set up in five Slovenian regions. In the 2017–2019 period, funds were provided by the Ministry of Health and a consortium of partner institutions with the support of the local community and by the Ministry of Labor, Family, Social A.airs and Equal Opportunities. This study analyzed the costs of the program for the volume planned for 2018 and the benefits arising in a 10-year period after the implementation in 2018. 3.2The SROI Analysis The core of the SROI method is the “impact model,” composed of several “impact chains”—one for each of the key stakeholders affected. In every chain, hypothetical relations between in­puts, activities, and outputs are specified (Figure 1). Outputs are determined as directly measurable results of activities leading to the desired out­comes. Outcomes are understood as gross effects, of which only a part is a consequence of the pro­gram and represent the actual impacts (Then et al., 2017). Equivalently, the impact is defined as the difference between outcomes that would occur with and without the program (i.e., a net ef­fect). Impacts for each of the stakeholders typi­cally are determined first in natural units, but they also can be monetized. For economic evaluations, we strive to monetize as many impact chains as possible and sensible. After each impact chain is evaluated in mone­tary terms, the impacts can be summed and com­pared to the inputs’ cost. The comparison usually is expressed as the SROI value, which is a ratio of the total impact (sum of all impact chains) to the total input cost (Equation 1). For example, a SROI value of 5 means that each €1 spent in the program cre­ates a value of €5 in social e.ects. (1) These are the five elementary steps in the SROI analysis carried out for our case, the IY parenting program: Step 1. Identify a broad set of potential stakeholders a.ected positively or negatively by the program. Special care must be taken to ensure that as many direct and indirect e.ects on individuals, or­ganizations, and institutions are identified, regard­less of how directly they are involved in the program’s activity. The impacts sometimes can be unintended or harmful for some stakeholders; such stakeholders must not be neglected in the analysis. The reviewed literature on early childhood interven­tions exposes several potential stakeholders. The ex­pected positive impacts on the health and well-being of individuals and their immediate com­munity are most apparent and, consequently, the child, parents, and families represent key stakehold­ers in this analysis. Moreover, the institutions from health-related, educational, and social sectors also are sources of potential stakeholders. Finally, society also can be considered to be a stakeholder. Step 2. Identify key stakeholders, typically those for whom the most considerable e.ects are expected. Careful consideration must be taken to avoid in­cluding too broad a range of those a.ected by the program, but to include those stakeholders for whom principal e.ects can be expected. In addition to the child and parents, we identified institutions from pre-school and primary school education (kindergartens and elementary schools) as key stakeholders. The IY program’s e.ects on secondary and tertiary education are generated over a more extended period and are beyond the time horizon of our analysis. For the health sector, we treated in­stitutions o.ering primary and secondary treatment of behavioral and emotional problems as crucial stakeholders. We also included society as a key stakeholder because some e.ects on the perceived level of safety and crime rate were expected within the study’s time horizon. Step 3. Set up the impact model by specifying (hy­pothetical) impact chains for each stakeholder. The theoretical impact chains for children and parents are well substantiated by the literature (Menting et al., 2013). Hence, we expected that the inputs required by the IY program’s activities will result in measurable outputs leading to the program’s intended outcomes. For the immediate stakeholder group, parents, this means that by par­ticipating in the program’s activities (attended weekly classes and special events are the outputs), they will improve their parenting skills and benefit from having a better family and professional life (outcomes and impacts). The children do not par­ticipate in the weekly sessions; however, they have short-term benefits in terms of fewer require­ments for special assistance (hours of health ser­vices, educational services, and social workers’ services are the outputs) as well as a happier and more productive life over the long term (outcomes and impacts). Step 4. Collect empirical data to calculate the cost of inputs and the impact for each chain. Figure 1 shows how the impact was determined by first understanding the program’s outputs and outcomes. Usually, the outputs and outcomes are evaluated first in natural units, and then the impact is determined. Afterward, the non-monetary im­pacts of the program are given a monetary value. Outputs of the IY program are the services directly provided to participants (parents): class hours, ad­visory sessions, events, or similar directly countable results. The outcomes represent the intended and unintended consequences for the target group after the activities are carried out. Unintended conse­quences are the positive or negative e.ects that are not part of the program’s mission. The outcomes of parenting programs usually are measured with di­agnostic questionnaires filled in by participants be­fore and after implementation. Within the studied IY program, data were recorded only for the immediate stakeholders (chil­dren and parents) based on an initial interview with parents and with diagnostic questionnaires such as the Parenting Scale, Eyberg Child Behaviour Inventory (ECBI), the Warwick–Edinburgh Mental Wellbeing Scale (WEMBS), and the Development and Well-Being Assessment (DAWBA) diagnostic interview. Un­like certain IY programs (O’Neill et al., 2010), the children’s need for health, social, and educational services before and after parents’ involvement in the program was not measured [for example, using the Client Socio-Demographic and Service Receipt Inven­tory (Chisholm et al., 2000)]. For SROI analysis, data collected with such a questionnaire would be useful. Instead, as a proxy measure of outcomes (and hence, impacts), we used secondary data and interviews with the manager of the largest IY program provider in Slovenia, the head of the Department for Child Psy­chiatry of the Pediatric Clinic in Ljubljana, and the di­rector of the IY programs in Slovenia. Step 5. Calculate the SROI value for the program. After evaluating the costs of inputs and mone­tizing impacts on the stakeholders, we calculated the SROI index as the ratio of the total value of the im­pacts to the value of inputs. In principle, a SROI index higher than 1 indicates a program producing social e.ects greater than its costs. Hence, such a program is not only socially desirable but also economically ra­tional for society. However, we must emphasize that the SROI value does not encompass the whole “value” of the program impacts, because many of the impacts are not monetized, yet it is clear that they exist. Hence, the SROI index should serve mainly as a benchmark and starting point for discussion regard­ing how social value services are provided in society. 4RESULTS 4.1Steps 1 and 2 The initial steps of SROI require that we first iden­tify potential stakeholders a.ected by the program, followed by pinpointing the key stakeholders. This pro­gram’s target beneficiaries and stakeholders are (1) children and (2) their parents and extended families. We primarily assessed direct benefits for the parents, and, similar to other studies in this field (O’Neill, McGil­loway, Donnelly, Bywater, & Kelly, 2013), focused only on the key stakeholders for whom the e.ects of the program are the strongest and evident in the analyzed period, for which data are available. These stakehold­ers are (3) primary and pre-school education organi­zations, (4) healthcare organizations, and (5) society. Due to non-available data, we only qualitatively describe the programs’ impacts in the fields of delin­quency, crime, and unemployment for the children of the participants, as well as the indirect benefits and other external e.ects of the program on third parties. Thus, the calculation of impacts included only a part of the program’s actual positive e.ects, whereas costs of implementing the program were included in full. Such analysis is prudent and leads to underestimated impacts of the program per unit of cost. 4.2Step 3 Table 1 presents the impact model, composed of seven impact chains. It shows the assumed (hypotheti­cal) impact chains for seven identified key stakeholders: children, parents, pre-school (kindergartens), elemen­tary schools, healthcare institutions, social service insti­tutions, and, finally, society in its broadest sense. The program’s expected outputs for the children are fore­most better results in school, and lower incidence of conflicts with parents and other family members, friends, and teachers (educators). The expected out­comes are better quality of life, less likelihood for unem­ployment in adulthood, better health, higher education level, and less neglect and abuse. However, most of these e.ects can be quantified and monetized only after the children become part of the active population, which occurred beyond the time horizon of this analysis. The program’s expected outputs for the parents (participants in the program) mainly are a lower in­cidence of conflicts with children, and less absen­teeism due to lower needs of the child for the services of the health system and the social service system. There are two primary outcomes for this stakeholder: a better quality of life, and better health. Due to data limitations, we focused only on the savings in the cost of absenteeism to monetize the expected impact. The expected outputs for pre-school and primary education institutions are a lower incidence of conflicts and a lower need for ad­ditional professional assistance (APA). We did not have data on the incidence of conflicts in schools; hence, we monetized only the latter impact by esti­mating the savings in the cost of providing APA. The expected output for the healthcare institu­tions and the social service institutions is a lower number of treatments in the former and less need for services provided by social work centers in the latter. The expected outcome in both cases is better availability of service for others. In the analysis, we quantified and monetized only the impact on the health sector institutions by evaluating the savings in the cost of treatments for children with emo­tional and behavioral problems. The expected im­pact on the social service system certainly is not negligible, but due to data unavailability, it was not quantified and monetized. Finally, from society’s perspective, the expected outputs from this parenting program are a lower in­cidence of addiction and juvenile delinquency. The expected outcomes are a greater level of safety and lower crime rates. We quantified and monetized these e.ects by evaluating the savings in the cost of treating addiction as well as savings in the cost of juvenile delinquency residential treatment. 4.3Step 4 This section explains the monetization of im­pacts from Table 1 in more detail. We primarily as­sessed direct benefits and focused only on the stakeholders for whom the program’s impacts were the strongest and most evident in the analyzed pe­riod, for which data were available. Other impacts of the program were defined in qualitative terms. 4.3.1Measuring the Cost of Inputs The cost of inputs included in the SROI analysis was estimated based on the 2018 IY implementa­tion costs (€173,551). The funding was provided by the Ministry of Health of the Republic of Slovenia (95%) and by a group of consortium partners (5%) (Mala ulica, 2017). The cost calculations are based on the pro­jected average of 180 participants annually (Ander­luh, 2017). The estimated program cost per participant (parent) and per child was calculated by assuming that one participant (parent) had one child, following Kuzma, Mirkovic, Svetina, and An­derluh (2017). Because most participants have more than one child, the program’s benefits actually are available to more children. However, because both parents may participate, fewer children than partic­ipants possibly will benefit from the program. In the program’s pilot, the total number of children im­pacted by the program was higher than the number of participants (343 parents and 438 children) (Kuzma et al., 2017). This indicates that our assump­tion (one participant equals one child) likely under­estimates the number of children benefiting from the program. Considering the projected participants’ volume for 2018 leads to a cost per participant to €964.17 (€173,551/180). This is the first indicator for the as­sessment of the SROI value of the IY parenting pro­gram. The program will have a SROI value higher than 1 if the estimated program’s social impacts ex­ceed €964 per participant. If we apply the ratio of parents/children from the pilot implementation of the program, in which the number of children ben­efiting from the program exceeded the number of participants by 28%, the program’s estimated an­nual cost per child would be €753. 4.3.2.Measuring the Value of Impacts Regarding the IY parenting program’s impacts, we first established that the program is a novelty in Slovenia, and there are no alternative programs with comparable e.ects. This means that the entire flow of the program’s outcomes is incremental and arises due to the program’s implementation. Hence, the outcomes of the program can be considered equal to its impacts (net e.ects). Second, because this is a public preventive health program financed from public sources and is free of charge for partic­ipants, it does not have any direct monetary out­come in the market. Thus, the program’s positive e.ects arise exclusively in non-monetary form as in­direct e.ects due to the prevention of adverse ef­fects on society. The program’s impacts were assessed within the 10 years for the projected volume of 180 partic­ipants in 2018, as specified in the program’s appli­cation documents (Mala ulica, 2017). As mentioned previously, in terms of program impacts, we primar­ily assessed direct e.ects and focused on the fields in which the program’s impacts were the strongest and were evident in the analyzed period, for which data were available. These fields are primary and pre-school education, healthcare, addiction, and ju­venile delinquency. Other impacts of the program, such as e.ects on parents and families; to a limited extent delinquency and crime, higher education at­tainment, and the likelihood of employment; and external positive e.ects of the program were de­fined in qualitative terms. The program indirectly leads to children being more successful in the educational field and attain­ing higher academic levels (Colman et al., 2009; Fer­gusson, Horwood and Ridder, 2005; O’Neill et al., 2010), and to reducing the probability and duration of unemployment. Because these e.ects rarely would occur within the analyzed 10-year period, we did not calculate their monetary value. The impacts for the parents participating in the program were evaluated based on the savings in par­ent absenteeism costs (lower loss of income due to accompanying the child to medical treatments). It was assumed that these savings are generated throughout the analyzed 10-year period. These costs are incurred due to the time spent on transporta­tion, waiting, and accompanying the child, and were estimated as 2 times specified number of hours of medical treatment per child (2 × 12.75 hours = 25.5 hours; see also the subsequent analysis for stake­holders in healthcare) times the average gross salary per hour in 2018, €11.31 (SURS, 2019). The annual cost of absenteeism per child thus amounted to €288.33, not including transportation costs. The evaluation of the IY parenting program (Kuzma et al., 2017) shows that 14% of children from the program were included in medical treatment. Assuming the same share (14%), 25.2 of the 180 children from the program are included in medical treatment and must be accompanied by parents. The total costs of parent absenteeism are €7,266 (€288.33 × 25 children). We considered that the IY parenting program’s e.ect will stand at 50%, which means that children from the program will need 50% fewer hours of medical treat­ment, and hence the savings in this field amount to €3,633 annually (€7,266/2). Therefore the mone­tized impact of the IY program for parents is at least €3,633 annually. The program further generates ben­efits for parents by reducing absenteeism and allow­ing them to spend leisure time attending to children or helping them with their school work. It also re­duces the possibility of inappropriate actions, wrong parenting methods (Evans, Davies, Williams, & Hutchings, 2015), child neglect, or even abuse (Sethi et al., 2018). Consequently, it reduces the need for social services and social policy measures. The sav­ings in this area were not quantified and monetized due to lack of available data. For the stakeholders in pre-school education, it was assumed that children whose parents were in­cluded in the IY program in 2018 would require less APA. By Slovenian regulation, children have the right to 3 weekly hours of APA (individual supplementary tutoring by trained pedagogical specialists) if they have confirmed emotional and behavioral prob­lems. APA’s cost covers issuing decisions on APA (€210 per child) and implementing APA (specialists’ work, €1,837 annually per child). APA savings due to lower needs emerge immediately after the im­plementation of the program. According to the head of the Center for Early Intervention in Child Mental Health and experience from the program provider Center for Child and Adolescent Mental Health, we assumed that the e.ect of parenting program stands at 40%, which means that 40% of partici­pants’ children (72 of the 180 children) would not require APA in kindergartens. Annual savings amount to €147,404, which is the program’s impact on pre-school education stakeholders. In addition to APA, in Slovenian primary edu­cation, children with severe emotional and behav­ioral disorders (for example, autism) have the right to personal assistants during school hours. Similar to the case for pre-school, children of parents in­cluded in the IY parenting program in 2018 poten­tially need fewer hours of APA and fewer personal assistants. We assumed that these savings, on av­erage, start in the third year after the implementa­tion of the program, when children enter primary school. Three elements of savings were considered: the costs of issuing the decision on APA (€210 per child), the costs of implementing APA (€2,944 an­nually per child), and the costs of personal assis­tants to children with severe emotional and behavioral disorders (€9,905 annually per child). In line with observed program e.ects in the Celje Pri­mary Healthcare Centre, the IY e.ect on APA needs was evaluated at 20%. This means that 20% of par­ticipants’ children (36 of the 180 children) will not require APA, which leads to savings of €113,525. The need for personal assistants was estimated based on the share of children with an autism spec­trum disorder in the population of children with special needs. Following the conservatism princi­ple, our calculation considered that 1% (Kuzma et al., 2017) of parents in the program have children with an autism spectrum disorder (1.8 of the 180 children in the program). In reality, this percentage is higher, because the structure of the program does not reflect the population. We assumed that the need for personal assistants would decrease by 30% (0.54 children) due to the IY program. This means an annual saving of €5,349. The total savings for stakeholders in primary education attributable to the IY parenting program thus amounts to €118,874. Because we monetized only a part of the e.ects, the program’s full impact is likely to be higher. Impacts for the healthcare stakeholders were assessed based on the avoided costs of health ser­vices (fewer treatments needed at primary and sec­ondary levels). We assumed that these savings are generated throughout the analyzed 10-year period due to fewer healthcare teams’ services required at the primary and secondary level. We considered that the healthcare team at the primary level com­prises one specialist (pediatrician) and one nurse, earning gross monthly salaries of €3,808 and €2,114, respectively (MJU, 2019). Furthermore, con­sidering a 174-hour monthly workload and an equal division of work in the team, the primary healthcare team’s labor cost per hour is €17.02. The secondary-level healthcare team comprises one specialist (pe­dopsychiatrist or psychiatrist) and one nurse. The same salaries were assumed as in the case of the primary healthcare team, but with di.erent work di­vision—90% specialist and 10% nurse—for a team labor cost per hour of €20.91. We assumed that a child with behavioral and emotional disorders needs, on average, three primary-level 15-minute appointments, a total of 0.75 hours of treatment at a primary level every year and a cost of €12.76 an­nually. At the secondary level, such children need, on average, 12 1-hour appointments per year, with a cost of €250.96 annually per child. Together with primary healthcare, this amounts to €263.73 annu­ally per child. The secondary level costs also may in­clude the costs for other specialists, such as a clinical psychologist, special education teacher, and speech and language therapist. However, these costs were not included in the calculation. The evaluation study of the IY parenting pro­gram (Kuzma et al., 2017) showed that 14% of chil­dren of the program’s participants are included in medical treatment. We assumed the same share for the program in 2018 (25.2 of the 180 children). As­suming the aforementioned costs, medical treat­ment for these 25 children amounts to €6,646 annually. We considered that the IY parenting pro­gram’s e.ect will be 50%, which means that the chil­dren from the program will need one-half fewer hours of treatment by healthcare teams at the pri­mary and secondary levels. Hence, the monetized impact of the program for stakeholders in health­care is at least €3,323 annually. Compared with ed­ucation, the estimated savings in healthcare are low, because the Slovenian pediatric mental health sys­tem capacities currently are very limited. At least one-third of the children of parents included in the IY parenting program meet the criteria for a clinical behavioral disorder (Kuzma et al., 2017), but only 14% of these children are included in medical treat­ment. If all children who meet the criteria for a clin­ical behavioral disorder were included in medical treatment (60 of the 180 children), the IY parenting program’s positive e.ect in this field would be sub­stantially higher, amounting to approximately €7,900 annually. For society as the stakeholder, the program’s outcome is a greater safety level and a lower crime rate. We estimated these impacts by monetizing the anticipated savings due to fewer cases of ad­diction and juvenile delinquency requiring institu­tional treatment, due to implementing the IY parenting program. The savings due to reducing addiction include only addiction to illicit drugs and are based on publicly available data on expendi­tures in 2015 (NIJZ, 2016), which amounted to €7,762,541 for 3,719 users, resulting in a cost of treatment of €2,087 per person. We assumed that due to the IY program, 1% of children of the 180 participants in 2018 (1.8 children) will not require treatment due to illicit drug addiction and that these savings occur only in the last year of the an­alyzed 10-year period, leading to a monetized im­pact of €4,052. These savings relate to illicit drugs addiction only, but no other effects, such as reduc­ing alcohol addiction and non-chemical addiction, which can be substantial. The literature review showed that parenting programs reduce juvenile delinquency. In this area, we assessed only the savings from the re­duced costs of care in residential treatment insti­tutions, which amount to €31,800 annually (MIZŠ, 2018). Assuming that one child (of the 180 partic­ipants) will not have to be placed in a residential treatment institution due to the parents’ partici­pation in the IY parenting program, annual savings amount to €31,800. The effect of reducing juve­nile delinquency was considered only in the last year of the analyzed period; however, actual sav­ings can occur for several years beyond the ana­lyzed time horizon. Our analysis did not consider the program’s effects on postponing referral to residential treatment institutions to a later year or the effects of shortening the average time spent in a residential treatment institution. The program’s long-term impacts lead to lower crime and delinquency rates in adulthood. Impacts of the program thus include savings in court fees and costs of prison sentences. These costs are esti­mated to be exceptionally high (O’Neill et al., 2010). In Slovenia, the daily cost per prisoner in 2017 was €79.51 (Kosmac 2018), which is slightly more than €29,000 per prisoner per year. There­fore, we justifiably can assume that the savings calculated (€31,800) are underestimated and rep­resent the lower limit for the actual monetary value of the program’s impact in this area. Further IY effects arise not only for the ana­lyzed stakeholders but for the society as well. These effects were not included in the calculation of SROI. First, parenting programs also lead to in­direct impacts on the society, such as a greater probability of an individual’s economic indepen­dence, less need for social policy measures, and larger net contribution to the financing of public services (O’Neill et al., 2010). Second, the pro­gram’s long-term effects include a higher level of attained education, better physical and mental health of children when they reach adulthood, a greater probability of employment, or shorter un­employment duration. Third, the improved welfare of children and families leads to healthier and more-responsible members of society, and, conse­quently, to improved welfare in society. Finally, less juvenile delinquency, addiction, and crime lead to greater safety levels in society. Table 2 presents the monetized impacts for the identified stakeholders’ groups, as well as the total value of impacts in the analyzed 10-year period. The actual value of impacts is likely to be even higher because we monetized only a part of the identified e.ects. 4.4Step 5 Figure 2 shows the impact chain and the results of the SROI calculation. The SROI value for the 2018 IY program is 10.13. This means that every €1 in­vested in the parenting program in 2018 generates positive e.ects for various stakeholders in the total amount of €10.13 within the following 10 years. The program creates immediate e.ects by re­ducing the need for medical treatment or health services for these children, generated throughout the observed period. Immediately after implement­ing the program, the program’s impact in pre-school education also is evident. When the children of these parents start primary school, the impact is transferred to that level. In the last year, the pro­gram creates savings in the fields of addiction and juvenile delinquency. Because only parts of the im­pacts were monetized, and they were analyzed for 10 years only, the actual SROI likely is higher. The summation of impacts across the identified impact chains for each of the stakeholders amounts to €1,171,855. The program’s average annual impact is €117,185 and the average impact per participant in the 10-year period amounts to €6,510. As ex­plained previously, our calculations did not include e.ects of the IY that occur after the observed 10-year period (for example, impacts in the field of un­employment), or benefits that have been analyzed only qualitatively (for example, program benefits for participants’ children). The estimated impact in the 10-year period (€1,171,855) is generated as the con­sequence of a single (1-year) implementation of the program in 2018 and thus needs to be compared to the costs of IY implementation in 2018, that is, €173,551. Each repetition of the program at the same scale generates impacts as calculated. 4.5 Robustness Check Our calculation of SROI is based on several as­sumptions about the outcome parameters. To verify the results’ robustness to the chosen assumptions, we used the sensitivity analysis presented in Figure 3. The baseline assumption on the value of costs was varied by as much as 50% up and down, and the corresponding SROI was calculated. Similarly, the program’s impacts on stakeholders were examined to determine how SROI changes if the program’s ef­fect on each stakeholder group is increased or de­creased by as much as 50%. Regardless of the direction of the change and the type of impact, all recalculated SROIs were greater than 1, which con­firms the robustness of the conclusion that the IY program is socially valuable and economically sound. As shown in Figure 3, the SROI index is most sensitive to the assumption regarding inputs’ value. Compared with the monetization of impacts, this value is relatively more accurate and reliable. Among impacts, the assumptions regarding the ef­fects on elementary schools and kindergartens are more critical than others for the value of SROI. Nev­ertheless, even if individual e.ects are only half as large as assumed in our analysis (with other e.ects unchanged), the SROI value still is above 5. Finally, we calculated the critical value of an in­dividual e.ect (with the others remaining un­changed) for which SROI would equal 1. The annual program costs would have to increase by more than 900% (for the volume of 180 participants) to bring the SROI index value to 1. The calculated critical values of assumptions re­garding the impact on each stakeholder are nega­tive. This means that the program has a SROI greater than 1 even if one of the stakeholder impacts does not arise, because the e.ects on other stakeholders are higher than the program costs. The negative crit­ical values of assumptions also mean that the IY par­enting program would have a SROI less than 1 only if it generated damage, i.e., had adverse e.ects on the analyzed stakeholders, which, as we established, certainly is not the case. We further compared each particular stake­holder’s impact and the entire costs of the IY pro­gram, and calculated the critical standalone impact size for each stakeholder. In pre-school education, a 40% e.ect was assumed, whereas to achieve a SROI index higher than 1, at least a 31% e.ect is su.cient (with the e.ect on other stakeholders equal to zero). In the field of primary education, a 19% e.ect would be su.cient. In other fields, the critical level of the e.ect, in the absence of all other e.ects, is higher than the value assumed in the analysis, be­cause their impact is relatively small. 5DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION Increasing requirements for disclosure of envi­ronmental, social, and governance information and policies are prompting companies and nonprofit or­ganizations to consider the extent to which they are prepared to meet these expectations. Over the last decade, the identification, measuring, and reporting of environmental impacts has become relatively fa­miliar, and is outlined by several frameworks. In con­trast, guidelines for social and governance pillars, including a methodological framework for measure­ment, largely are yet to be developed. This paper il­lustrates how social impacts can be identified, measured, and even monetized using the SROI ap­proach. Unlike other economic evaluation methods, such as the CBA, the SROI approach focuses on a wider set of a.ected stakeholders. Another distin­guishing characteristic is that only the di.erence be­tween the e.ects that would have occurred without and with a preventive program is considered to be an impact. We consider both characteristics to be a distinctive advantage of the SROI method as a methodological ground for identifying and measur­ing social impacts. In the previous literature, the dif­ficulty of assigning a financial value to “soft outcomes” has been identified as a major problem (e.g., Banke-Thomas et al., 2015). In our paper, we highlighted the importance of identifying the relevant stakeholders [and not nec­essarily all of them (e.g., Antonaras et al., 2011; Banke-Thomas et al., 2015)] and demonstrated how to address the critical decisions regarding the selec­tion and collection of data. Trade-o.s between hav­ing more or having the relevant data are to be expected, and a sensible compromise must be reached to finalize the analysis. Similar to previous SROI studies, we focused only on the impacts on those stakeholders for whom the program’s e.ects are most substantial (Antonaras et al., 2011) and for which data were available: children, parents, pre-school and primary education institutions, health­care institutions, and society. The program also has impacts in other areas, which we assessed only qualitatively and not monetarily; for example, ef­fects on parents and families, delinquency and crime, unemployment, and chronic physical and mental illness in adulthood. Recent SROI guidance does not recommend comparing SROI metrics across di.erent activities, whereas the CBA is designed to be comparable in such a way. The emphasis on stakeholder involve­ment leads to diverse sets of indicators, and there­fore to di.culties in comparing like with like. This is the limitation of the SROI method, which Maier et al. (2015) referred to as commensuration, in which di.erent entities are compared according to a com­mon metric. Comparability between social invest­ments is limited. However, in Maier et al.’s opinion, comparability could be increased if calculation pro­cedures such as discount rates, deadweights, and proxies were standardized further, and the same scale or environment could be ensured. Another critical part of the analysis is the choice of the period analyzed, as noted by Banke-Thomas et al. (2015). In this study, we used a 10-year period after the implementation because the most relevant e.ects were expected to occur within this time frame. However, a longer or shorter analytic horizon might lead to di.erent conclusions. Therefore, as a contribution of our study, we highlight two princi­ples that should be followed when selecting the time frame for the analysis: (1) choose the period conservatively, i.e., estimate the minimum time frame in which most, but not all, e.ects can be ex­pected to occur; and (2) conduct a sensitivity anal­ysis, i.e., use calculations to determine the critical assumptions that considerably a.ect the conclu­sions if the time frame is changed to be shorter or longer than the baseline. Related to the preceding points is the decision about how thoroughly the negative vs. positive ef­fects (or costs and benefits) should be included. Namely, implementing measures such as SROI is relatively feasible when information about pro­gram outcomes, cost, and revenue already is being collected by an organization (Cordes, 2017). In many situations, the information about the costs of activities is more familiar, available, and pre­dictable than information about expected bene­fits. Thus, it is advisable that costs (or negative effects) are included fully in the analysis and cau­tion is exerted in terms of expected positive ef­fects. Such a conservative approach leads to an underestimated SROI value and safeguards against enthusiastic or overrated expectations of positive social returns. Of course, such a conservative stance may prevent some socially desirable activ­ities from being implemented; therefore, a bal­ance between both views is needed. The decision about how thoroughly the effects should be in­cluded is illustrated in our example, in which the calculated total impact value comprised only a part of the program’s actual positive effects, whereas program implementation costs were in­cluded in full. Finally, the process and results of the SROI analysis can be exploited beyond the mere (one-time) demonstration or reporting of the organiza­tional aggregate social impact to (potential) investors, funders, or other stakeholders (Flock­hart, 2005). When the impact model is well under­stood, good groundwork has been set up for socially responsible management (Then et al., 2017). Through this analysis, organizations can identify, for example, which activities and issues could be problematic from the ESG perspective, or, conversely, where new opportunities might open up. The information gathered and processed in the SROI analysis also can feed into the organi­zational strategy development process and even­tually also be incorporated into strategy implementation or performance management tools. SROI reduces complexity by condensing the difficult task of communicating value to one fig­ure. This figure can be used as a tool to shape pub­lic opinion about distributive justice or to legitimize NPOs by communicating their impact to audiences who are less receptive to qualitative ev­idence (Maier et al., 2015). Our experience shows that the scope of avail­able data limits the quality of social impact anal­yses. This implies that organizations may need to increase the availability and range of available data to measure the outputs, outcomes, and im­pacts of programs (Meng & Shi, 2017). Therefore, future research in this area could focus on im­proving the availability of external data, such as shared databases of proxy data. However, be­cause there is a significant deficit of existing ex­amples of social impact analysis (benchmarks), many organizations often will discover the type and scope of data they need only ex post—after their first attempt to conduct such an analysis. Therefore, further research in this area could pro­vide valuable examples of the type and range of data needed for SROI analysis in specific contexts. Furthermore, as is evident from our case, a lon­gitudinal approach to data collection may be re­quired to measure accurately the long-term effects and monitor the evolution of social im­pacts over time for different stakeholders. Despite the aforementioned limitations, we believe that our study makes an important con­tribution to the literature in this area and pro­vides a practical reference example for practitioners and researchers. The activities of many different organizations can be analyzed in a similar way whenever they are characterized by a broad range of indirect individual and social ef­fects in addition to the intended direct effects for the target population. In particular, our account of measuring effects by estimating avoided costs can be generalized to other organizations and sectors whose activities aim to prevent adverse outcomes in society, such as education, sport and recreation, and social work. REFERENCES Adler, M. D. (2006). QALY’s and Policy Evaluation: A New Perspective. Yale Journal of Health Policy, Law and Ethics, 6(1), 1–92. Anderluh, M. (2017). Nacrt delovanja Centra za dokazano ucinkovite programe zgodnjih intervenc na podrocju duševnega zdravja otrok. Univerzitetni klinicni center, Pediatricna klinika. (in English: Action plan of the Cen­ter for Proven E.ective Early Childhood Mental Health Intervention Programs. University Medical Center, Pe­diatric Clinic) Antonaras, A., Iacovidou, M., & Memtsa, C. (2011). Mea­suring social return on investment using the EBEN GR business ethics excellence model. Verslo ir teises aktu­alijos/Current Issues of Business and Law, 6(1), 69–89. Arvidson, M., Lyon, F., McKay, S., & Moro, D. (2013). Valu­ing the social? The nature and controversies of mea­suring social return on investment (SROI). Voluntary Sector Review, 4(1), 3-18. Banke-Thomas, A. O., Madaj, B., Charles, A., & van den Broek, N. (2015). Social Return on Investment (SROI) methodology to account for value for money of public health interventions: a systematic review. BMC public health, 15(1), 1-14. Burdge, R. J. (2003). The Practice of Social Impact Assess­ment-Background. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 21(2), 84–88. Chisholm, D., Knapp, M. R. J., Knudsen, H. C., Amaddeo, F., Gaite, L., Van Wijngaarden, B., & EPSILON Study Group. (2000). Client socio-demographic and service receipt inventory–European version: development of an in­strument for international research: EPSILON Study 5. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 177(S39), s28-s33. Cleary, A., Fitzgerald, M., & Nixon, E. (2004). From child to adult: a longitudinal study of Irish children and their families. University College Dublin (UCD). Colman, I., Murray, J., Abbott, R. A., Maughan, B., Kuh, D., Croudace, T. J., & Jones, P. B. (2009). Outcomes of con­duct problems in adolescence: 40 year follow-up of national cohort. British medical journal, 338, a2981. Copeland, W. E., Shanahan, L., Costello, E. J., & Angold, A. (2009). Childhood and adolescent psychiatric dis­orders as predictors of young adult disorders. Archives of general psychiatry, 66(7), 764-772. Cordes, J. J. (2017). Using cost-benefit analysis and social return on investment to evaluate the impact of social enterprise: Promises, implementation, and limita­tions. Evaluation and program planning, 64, 98-104. Edwards, R. T., & Lawrence, C. L. (2021). ‘What You See is All There is’: the importance of heuristics in cost-ben­efit analysis (CBA) and social return on investment (SROI) in the evaluation of public health interven­tions. Applied Health Economics and Health Pol­icy, 19(5), 653-664. European Commission (2022a). International Platform on Sustainable Finance. Retrieved 2022 May 18 from https://ec.europa.eu/info/business-economy-euro/banking-and-finance/sustainable-finance/inter­national-platform-sustainable-finance_en European Commission. (2014). Non-Financial Reporting Directive 2014/95/EU. Retrieved 2022, May 5 from https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/ ­ PDF/?uri=CELEX:32014L0095&from=EN European Commission (2020b). Sustainable finance – envi­ronmental, social and governance criteria (benchmarks). Retrieved 2022, May 5 from https://ec.europa.eu/ ­info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/ ­12019-Sustainable-finance-environmental-social-and-governance-criteria-benchmarks-_en European Commission (2020c). Final report on EU taxon­omy. Retrieved 2022 May 5 from https:// ­ ec.europa.eu/ info/sites/default/files/business_economy_euro/banking_and_finance/documents/200309-sustainable-finance-teg-final-report-taxonomy_en.pdf European Commission. (2022d). Proposal for a Directive on corporate sustainability due diligence and annex. Re­trieved 2022, May 5 from https://ec.europa.eu/info/pub­ lications/210421-sustainable-finance-communication_en#csrd. Evans, S., Davies, S., Williams, M., & Hutchings, J. (2015). Short-term benefits from the incredible years parents and babies programme in Powys. Community Practi­tioner, 88(9), 46-49. Fergusson, D. M., John Horwood, L., & Ridder, E. M. (2005). Show me the child at seven: the conse­quences of conduct problems in childhood for psy­chosocial functioning in adulthood. Journal of child psychology and psychiatry, 46(8), 837-849. Flockhart, A. (2005). Raising the profile of social enter­prises: the use of social return on investment (SROI) and investment ready tools (IRT) to bridge the financial credibility gap. Social Enterprise Journal, 1(1), 29 - 42. Freudenburg, W. R. (1986). Social Impact Assessment. An­nual Review of Sociology, 12, 451–78; Gair, C. (2002). A Report from the Good Ship SROI. http://www.redf.org/pub_nse.htm. Gardner, F. E. (1987). Positive interaction between moth­ers and conduct-problem children: Is there training for harmony as well as fighting?. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 15(2), 283-293. Global Impact Investing Ratings System (GIIRS). (2018). The Rockefeller Foundation. http://giirs.org/. Gosselin, V., Boccanfuso, D., & Laberge, S. (2020). Social return on investment (SROI) method to evaluate phys­ical activity and sport interventions: a systematic re­view. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 17(1), 1-11. Hammitt, J. K., & Haninger, K. (2011). Valuing Morbidity Risk: Willingness to Pay per Quality-Adjusted Life Year. Working paper for the 38th Seminar of the European Group of Risk and Insurance Economists, September 19–21, Vienna, Austria. Hutchings, J., Bywater, T., Daley, D., Gardner, F., Whitaker, C., Jones, K., … Edwards, R.T. (2007). Parenting inter­vention in Sure Start services for children at risk of de­veloping conduct disorder: pragmatic randomised controlled trial. BMJ, 334(7595), 678-82. Impact Reporting and Investment Standards (IRIS). (2009). IRIS Project Overview. http://iris.thegiin.org/. International Committee on Principles and Guidelines for Social Impact Assessment (ICPGSIA). (2003). The In­terorganizational Committee on Principles and Guidelines for Social Impact Assessment: Principles and Guidelines for Social Impact Assessment in the USA. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 21(3), 231–50. Kosmac, G. (2018). Zapornik je leta 2017 davkoplacevalce stal slabih 80 evrov dnevno (In English: In 2017, a pris­oner costed taxpayers just under € 80 a day). April 17th, 2018. Retrieved 2019, August 1 from https://www.rtvslo.si/slovenija/zapornik-je-leta-2017-davkoplacevalce-stal-slabih-80-evrov-dnevno/452225. Kuzma, M., Mirkovic, A., Svetina M., & Anderluh, M. (2017). Evalvacija ucinkovitosti programa NL. Norwvay Grants, Služba vlade RS za razvoj in evropsko kohezi­jsko politiko, Univerzitetni klinicni center (in English: Evaluation of the IY program’s e.ectiveness. Norwvay Grants, Government O.ce for Development and Eu­ropean Cohesion Policy, University Medical Center). Layard, R. and Glaister, S. (1994) Cost–benefit analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Maier, F., Schober, C., Simsa, R., & Millner, R. (2015). SROI as a method for evaluation research: Understanding merits and limitations. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 26(5), 1805-1830. Mala ulica (2017). Prijava na javni razpis za sofinan­ciranje programov varovanja in krepitve zdravja za leta 2017, 2018 in 2019 (in English: Application for the public tender for co-financing of health pro­tection and promotion programs for 2017, 2018 and 2019). Meng, X.-L., & Shi, F.-G. (2017). A generalized fuzzy data envelopment analysis with restricted fuzzy sets and determined constraint condition 1. Journal of Intelli­gent & Fuzzy Systems, 33(3), 1895–1905. Menting, A. T., de Castro, B. O., & Matthys, W. (2013). E.ec­tiveness of the Incredible Years parent training to modify disruptive and prosocial child behavior: A meta-analytic review. Clinical Psychology Review, 33(8), 901-913. Millar, R., & Hall, K. (2013). Social return on investment (SROI) and performance measurement: The opportuni­ties and barriers for social enterprises in health and so­cial care. Public Management Review, 15(6), 923-941. MIZŠ – Ministrstvo za izobraževanje in šport (in English: Ministry of Education and Sports). (2018). Okrožnica MIZŠ 6034-113/2017/1. MJU – Ministrstvo za javno upravo (in English: Ministry of Public Administration). (2019). Placna lestvica in vrednost nominalnih osnov (in English: Salary scale and value of nominal bases). Retrieved 2019, 15 May from http://www.mju.gov.si/si/delovna_podrocja/ ­ place_v_javnem_sektorju/veljavna_placna_lestvica/ Mook, L., ed. (2013). Accounting for Social Value. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Nicholls, J. 2007. Why Measuring and Communicating So­cial Value can help Social Enterprise become More Competitive. London: Cabinet O.ce. NIJZ – Nacionalni inštitut za javno zdravje (in English: Na­tional Institute of Public Health). (2016). Stanje na po­drocju prepovedanih drog v Sloveniji 2016 (In English: Situation in the field of illicit drugs in Slovenia 2016). Retrieved 2019, 20 May from https://www.nijz.si/ ­sl/publikacije/stanje-na-podrocju-prepovedanih-drog-v-sloveniji-2016 O’Faircheallaigh, C. (2009). E.ectiveness in Social Impact Assessment: Aboriginal Peoples and Resource Devel­opment in Australia. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 27(2), 95–110. O’Neill, D., McGilloway, S., Donnelly, M., Bywater, T., & Kelly, P. (2010). A Cost-Benefit Analysis of Early Childhood In­tervention: Evidence from an Experimental Evaluation of the Incredible Years Parenting Program. Economics, Finance and Accounting Department Working Paper Se­ries. Department of Economics, Finance and Account­ing, National University of Ireland - Maynooth O’Neill, D., McGilloway, S., Donnelly, M., Bywater, T., & Kelly, P. (2013). A cost-e.ectiveness analysis of the In­credible Years parenting programme in reducing childhood health inequalities. The European Journal of Health Economics, 14(1), 85-94. Pardini, D., & Frick, P. J. (2013). Multiple developmental pathways to conduct disorder: Current conceptualiza­tions and clinical implications. Journal of the Canadian Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 22(1), 20. Richmond, B. J., L. Mook, and J. Quarter. (2003). Social Accounting for Nonprofits: Two Models. Nonprofit Management & Leadership, 13(4), 308–24. Scott, S., Knapp, M., Henderson, J., & Maughan, B. (2001). Financial cost of social exclusion: follow up study of an­tisocial children into adulthood. Bmj, 323(7306), 191. Sethi, D., Yon, Y., Parekh, N., Anderson, T., Huber, J., Rako­vac, I., & Meinck, F. (2018). European status report on preventing child maltreatment. Copenhagen, DK: WHO Regional O.ce for Europe. SURS - Statisticni urad RS (in English: Republic of Slovenia Statistical O.ce). (2019). Povprecna bruto placa za december 2018 za 1,7 % nižja od place za november 2018 (in English: The average gross salary for Decem­ber 2018 is 1.7% lower than the salary for November 2018). Retrieved 2019, 20 June from https:// ­ www.stat.si/StatWebPDF/PrikaziPDF.aspx?id=7932&lang=sl Thapar, A., Pine, D. S., Scott, S., Snowling, M. J., & Taylor, E. A. (Eds.). (2017). Rutter’s child and adolescent psy­chiatry. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons. Then, V, Schober, C., Rauscher, O, & Kehl, K. (2017). Social Return on Investment Analysis. Palgrave Studies in Im­pact Finance. Cham, UK: Palgrave Macmillan. United Nations (2015). Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Retrieved 2019, 10 May from https://sdgs.un.org/2030agenda mission, 2014). This also is proposed by the environ­mental, social, and governance criteria of the so-called ESG initiative (European Commission, 2020b). In particular, when organizations are co-funded by public sources to create social value, in addition to their financial performance, they also need to focus on the measurement of impacts on society (Millar & Hall, 2013). Nonprofit organiza­tions, which largely are co-financed by public funds, represent a growing sector in developed countries, bringing calls for more legitimization and evidence of e.ectiveness to provide accountability and justify Abstract Vol. 11, No. 2, 79-96 doi:10.17708/DRMJ.2022.v11n02a06 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 80 Mojca Marc, Nina Ponikvar: How to Measure Our Impact on Society: An Illustration of Social Impact Analysis Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 81 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 82 Mojca Marc, Nina Ponikvar: How to Measure Our Impact on Society: An Illustration of Social Impact Analysis Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 83 Figure 1: Impact model in SROI analysis (one impact chain) Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 Mojca Marc, Nina Ponikvar: How to Measure Our Impact on Society: An Illustration of Social Impact Analysis 84 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 85 Table 1: Hypothetical impact model comprising seven individual impact chains Note: APA = additional professional assistance Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 Mojca Marc, Nina Ponikvar: How to Measure Our Impact on Society: An Illustration of Social Impact Analysis 86 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 87 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 Mojca Marc, Nina Ponikvar: How to Measure Our Impact on Society: An Illustration of Social Impact Analysis 88 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 89 Table 2: Monetized impacts per stakeholder * 10-year impacts for these stakeholders are described qualitatively and were not monetized. Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 Mojca Marc, Nina Ponikvar: How to Measure Our Impact on Society: An Illustration of Social Impact Analysis 90 Figure 2: Impact chain and results of the SROI analysis Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 91 Figure 3: Robustness of the SROI index to changes in the basic scenario assumptions about program costs and e.ects on stakeholders Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 Mojca Marc, Nina Ponikvar: How to Measure Our Impact on Society: An Illustration of Social Impact Analysis 92 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 93 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 94 Mojca Marc, Nina Ponikvar: How to Measure Our Impact on Society: An Illustration of Social Impact Analysis EXTENDED SUMMARY/IZVLECEK Vse vecje zahteve glede obvladovanja okoljskih in družbenih dejavnikov ter dejavnikov korporaci­jskega upravljanja (ang. Environmental, Social and Governance; ESG) spodbujajo podjetja in neprofitne organizacije k razmisleku glede njihove pripravljenosti na izpolnjevanje takšnih pricakovanj. Spodbude za merjenje in porocanje o družbenem vplivu podjetij prihajajo tako s trga, od kupcev kot konkurentov, kot tudi s strani regulatorjev. Namen tega prispevka je pomagati organizacijam, ki se soocajo z izzivom merjenja družbenega ucinka svojih dejavnosti. V clanku na primeru ponazorimo, kako je mogoce s pristopom SROI identificirati, izmeriti in denarju izraziti družbene ucinke. Metoda SROI se osredotoca na obsežen nabor deležnikov, kot ucinek pa šteje samo razlika med ucinki, ki bi se pojavili brez anal­izirane aktivnosti in z njo. Za študijo primera uporabljamo program starševstva, katerega cilj je izboljšati starševske spretnosti in s tem zmanjšati custvene in vedenjske težave otrok. Program vodi neprofitna organizacija, vendar je mogoce na podoben nacin analizirati tudi dejavnosti znotraj profitnega sektorja, kadar je zanje poleg predvidenih neposrednih ucinkov znacilen širok spekter posrednih individualnih in družbenih ucinkov. V študiji smo ovrednotili družbene ucinke v desetletnem obdobju po izvedbi programa, saj so bili v tem casovnem okviru pricakovani najpomembnejši ucinki. V clanku poudarjamo vlogo izbire dolžine obdobja merjenja ucinkov ter natancnosti vkljucevanja stroškov izvedbe analizirane aktivnosti in njenih ucinkov. Pri tem izpostavljamo pomen razpoložljivosti in obsega ucinkov, ki jih za­jamemo s podatki. Poudarjamo tudi, da so rezultati analize SROI uporabni ne le za porocanje o družbenem ucinku organizacije vlagateljem in drugim deležnikom, temvec tudi kot dobro podlaga za družbeno odgovorno upravljanje preko vkljucevanja ugotovitev analize SROI v proces razvoja organi­zacijske strategije ter scasoma tudi v orodja za obvladovanje uspešnosti. Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 95 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 Mojca Marc, Nina Ponikvar: How to Measure Our Impact on Society: An Illustration of Social Impact Analysis 96 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 97 Abstract GOING BACK TO THE ROOTS: A BIBLIOMETRIC AND THEMATIC ANALYSIS OF WOMEN ENTREPRENEURSHIP Naira Fayaz Amity Business School, Amity University Uttar Pradesh, India Mirnaira13@gmail.com Sujata Khandai Amity College of Commerce and Finance, Amity University Uttar Pradesh, India Skhandai@amity.edu Ivan Zupic Institute of Management Studies, Goldsmiths, University of London, England i.zupic@gold.ac.uk Avneet Kaur Amity College of Commerce and Finance, Amity University Uttar Pradesh, India Kauravneet483@gmail.com We used bibliometric methods to examine studies related to women entrepreneurship. Specifically, we focused on understanding the recent trends, the most influential publications and journals, topics on which women entrepreneur­ship studies are conducted, and deciphering the future direction of women entrepreneurship studies. We used the Scopus database to extract 1,554 documents published from 1982 to 2022 and analyzed the scientific publications per year, the most cited articles, sources of publications, keyword co-occurrence, thematic structure (topic modeling), and bibliographic coupling. We found that the scientific publications related to women entrepreneurship are increas­ing significantly each year, and the most consistent keyword is “gender.” Citation analysis identified Ahl (2006) as the most cited article, which demonstrates Ahl’s notable influence, as well as the success of the gender turn influenced by feminist theory. Co-word analysis found seven clusters showing the thematic structure of women entrepreneurship research. Bibliographic coupling analysis found four clusters, encompassing various aspects associated with women entrepreneurship. The clusters are “Role of gender in an entrepreneur’s performance,” “Challenges and upcoming issues faced by women entrepreneurs,” “Impact of geographic location on women entrepreneurship,” and “Financial struggles of women entrepreneurs.” Topic modeling using the latent Dirchlet allocation algorithm (LDA) identified seven areas of interest in the women entrepreneurship literature. We conclude with implications and suggestions for future research. Keywords: women entrepreneurship, female entrepreneurship, bibliometric analysis, bibliographic coupling, co-word analysis, topic modeling 1INTRODUCTION Increased scholarly and political attention has been invested in women entrepreneurship in recent years (Henry, Foss, & Ahl, 2016; Jennings & Brush, 2013). Globally, there are an estimated 274 million women involved in business startups. This does not include 139 million women owners/managers of es­tablished businesses and 144 million women who are informal investors (GEM, 2020–21, p.14). It is now well accepted that women contribute significantly to en­trepreneurial activity (Noguera, Álvarez, & Urbano, 2013) and economic development (Kelley et al., 2017, Hechevarría, Bullough, Brush, & Edleman, 2019) by creating new jobs and thus leading to an increase in the gross domestic product (GDP) (Bahmani-Oskooee, Kutan, & Xi, 2013; Ayogu & Agu, 2015). This has had a cascading e.ect on reducing poverty and social exclu­sion (Langowitz & Minniti, 2007; Rae, 2015). The number of studies and the attention being paid to the realm of women entrepreneurship has in­creased strongly in recent years. This includes several reviews of women’s entrepreneurship which furnish an understanding of the field. Brush (1992) reviewed 57 studies of women entrepreneurship published during the period 1975–1991 and proposed a new “integrated perspective for future research.” After re­viewing 81 research articles published during 1982–2000 in leading entrepreneurship and management journals, Ahl (2006) criticized a few shortcomings of women entrepreneurship research, revealed a trend of recreating the idea of women as being subordinate to men, and suggested new research directions. In addition to these studies, the contributions of studies of women entrepreneurship to general en­trepreneurship theories over the last 30 years was evaluated by Jennings & Brush (2013). More recently, the developmental trajectory of women en­trepreneurship research, detecting new research horizons, and developing trends in the literature was studied by Deng, Liang, Li, and Wang (2020). A com­prehensive literature review and bibliometric analysis by Aggarwal and Johal (2021) attempted to identify a link between rural women and entrepreneurship. However, the significant growth of women en­trepreneurship globally calls for a more thorough and comprehensive review and analysis of studies on the topic. Existing reviews, with the exception of that by Deng et al. (2020), focused on a small num­ber of studies published in management and busi­ness journals. Hence, a major shortcoming that exists today is the lack of a more comprehensive un­derstanding of the development trajectory and re­cent and future trends in the domain of women entrepreneurship. Taking these shortcomings into consideration, this study answers the following questions: 1. What are the most influential studies and out­lets for women entrepreneurship? 2. What is the thematic structure of women en­trepreneurship literature? 3. What is the intellectual structure of studies on women entrepreneurship? 4. What are the recent trends in the field of women entrepreneurship research? 5. How will the existing research shape the future direction of women entrepreneurship studies? We bring clarity to the cumulative knowledge of women entrepreneurship through a bibliometric analysis using bibliographic coupling, citation anal­ysis, co-word analysis, and topic modeling. By an­swering the research questions, this bibliometric review makes the following contributions. First, this paper provides a comprehensive, systematic, and objective review of women entrepreneurship. Our study further complements existing reviews by con­ducting a co-word analysis, topic modeling, and bib­liographic coupling, and visualizing them comprehensively. Second, we identify the areas of women entrepreneurship which demand increasing attention, including an increasing focus on work–life balance and the significance and imperative of net­working to business. Thirdly, our study highlights a burgeoning interest in women entrepreneurs from developing countries Future research needs to focus on the women entrepreneurship ecosystem to study the institu­tional environment embedded within it and work on improving it, because it is important to increase the percentage of women in entrepreneurship be­cause of the possible economic benefits that could be derived from this. 2LITERATURE REVIEW Entrepreneurship as a topic of research gained significance in the 1930s (Yadav & Unni, 2016). It took almost 50 years for the sub-domain of “women en­trepreneurship” to emerge as a topic of research (Jennings & Brush, 2013). According to Schwartz (1976), Yadav and Unni’s (2016) review study of “fe­male entrepreneurship” was the first ”academic re­search paper,” Hisrich and O’Brien (1981) was the first “academic conference presentation,” and Go.ee and Scase (1985) was the first book on the topic. Accord­ing to Jennings and Brush (2013), the late 1990s and early 2000s were pivotal years in the study of women entrepreneurs, during which two conferences paved the way for women entrepreneurship as a research area. The first was a “policy-oriented Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) Conference on women entrepreneurs in small and medium-sized enterprises” in 1998, and the second occurred in 2003 when Diana International hosted an academic conference. A few studies have explored women en­trepreneurship through qualitative and/or biblio­metric analysis. Cardella, Hernández-Sánchez, & Sánchez-García (2020) examined 2,848 articles re­lating to women entrepreneurship and discovered that it was a relatively new area of investigation that has gained continual attention from scholars, with increasingly more articles published in the last 20 years. According to Cardella et al.’s (2020) study, women entrepreneurship as a research subject is shifting focus from the investigation of political and economic problems to the examination of beneficial factors that allow for the bridging of the gender gap. Deng et al. (2020) reported consistent observations, stating that the literature on women entrepreneur­ship has increased exponentially since 2014, with as many as of 150 articles annually, and certain clusters have received enhanced attention. These clusters include “entrepreneurial intention,” “initiating force,” and “social network.” Bastian, Sidani, & El Amine, (2018) highlighted the significance of devel­oping a theoretical framework that can aid in gain­ing a comprehensive understanding of women entrepreneurship. The framework can aid in assess­ing the uniqueness of the geographical area as well as some of the motivators or hurdles in women en­trepreneurship. A comprehensive view of women entrepreneurs is necessary to identify new research directions (Paoloni, Secundo, Ndou, & Moda.ari, 2018). Paoloni et al. (2018) highlights digital women entrepreneurship. They emphasize that a pertinent socioeconomic and technological phenomenon can reshape existing businesses and create opportuni­ties for developing innovative solutions for society. Adom & Anambane (2019) examined the involve­ment of culture and gender stereotypes in the en­trepreneurial journey of women. They further highlight that culture, which encapsulates gender stereotypes, helps drive women’s entrepreneurial behavior. This is because of a desire to escape these stereotypes, as well as gender inequality, which has hampered women’s living standards. An increasing number of studies pertaining to women entrepreneurship are being published. However, a qualitative review can include only a lim­ited number of studies. This paper fills this gap by presenting a large-scale systemic analysis of trends in women entrepreneurship studies, co-authorship networks, recent topics of women entrepreneurship studies, and what the future holds for studies in women entrepreneurship. 3METHODOLOGY We performed a bibliometric analysis to gain a better understanding of the most important influences on women’s entrepreneurship and how the available literature on women’s entrepreneurship is structured. We employed the Scopus database, which is well-known in the research community and contains over 27 million abstracts, making it the largest database (Burnham, 2006). The search criteria for arti­cles included keywords such as “women entrepreneur­ship,” “female entrepreneurship,” “women entrepreneurs” or “female entrepreneurs.” The biblio­graphic search returned 3,228 results for the period 1982–2022. The article selection thereafter was refined using four criteria. First, the article had to be written in English (Cardella et al., 2020); second, it had to be a sci­entific paper published in a peer-reviewed journal, be­cause these are considered to be reliable sources of information (Podsako., MacKenzie, Bachrach, and Pod­sako., 2005), Third, the article had to be related to “business, management, and accounting.” Finally, the research article must not have been published in a book as a chapter or in a conference proceeding. The criteria further narrowed the selection to 1,584 articles. This approach is based on the PRISMA method guidelines (Liberati et al., 2009) used by Cardella et al. (2020). The present study analyses the temporal evolution of research publications, the most prominent authors on the topic, the most productive journals in terms of total quantity of published articles, and the nations with the maximum number of research contributions using a series of bibliometric indicators. At the final stage of filtration, all 1,584 articles were read by the researchers to shortlist the articles that were not related directly to women en­trepreneurship. Such articles (n = 29) were removed from the data set. For example, if an article had a keyword “women entrepreneurship” but did not discuss entrepreneurship per se, the article was eliminated. A consensus among the researchers was reached after this step, and the final number of ar­ticles used in the analysis was 1,554. VOS viewer software version 1.6.10 was used for the analysis. Because it uses a bibliometric technique, it enables graphic illustration, identification, and clas­sification of groups in a strategic matrix predicated on commonalities and contrasts. The graphic creation of maps leads to deeper examination of the relation­ships between variables, which aids in a better un­derstanding of the nature of a research area and makes it an indisputable analysis instrument (Val­laster, Kraus, Merigo Lindahl, and Nielsen, 2019). 4RESULTS 4.1Scientific Publications per Year1 Women are among the fastest-growing groups of entrepreneurs, contributing significantly to global advancement, employment generation, and eco­nomic systems (Brush, 2006). As shown in Figure 2, the number of scientific publications on the subject is increasing each year. Scientific publications on top­ics related to women entrepreneurship have been available for quite some time; the first published ar­ticle dates back to 1950 (Cardella et al., 2020). Figure 2 highlights the increasing trend in publications on the topic during the period 1982–2022. The earliest publication on women entrepreneurship in our data set extracted from Scopus was from 1982. The progress in the chosen field of study remained low until 1997, when 10 publications were reported. However, the number of publications decreased again until 2005, after which scientific publications increased and remained in double digits (e.g., 11 in 2005, 24 in 2006, 25 in 2007, and 30 in 2008). Apart from 2010 and 2015, all other years exhibited a sig­nificantly positive increase in the number of publi­cations related to women entrepreneurship. The maximum number of publications was reported in 2021, 242 publications. 4.2Article Citations Table 1 lists the 20 most cited articles. The articles were sorted on the basis of citations received and link strength, extracted through VOS viewer. Ahl’s (2006) research paper “Why Research on Women En­trepreneurs Needs New Directions” is the most cited (n = 966). The link strength of Ahl’s article is 307, which indicates its significance. Fischer, Reuber, and Dyke’s (1993) research article is the second most cited article in the study’s database, with 528 citations. De­spite being significantly new compared with other publications, Ahl (2006) is still the most cited paper. The list of other publications is presented in Table 1. 4.3Source of Publications A list of journals which publish articles pertain­ing to women entrepreneurship was prepared using VOS viewer. The threshold used for shortlisting the sources was five published articles. Of a total of 336 sources, 60 met the designated criteria. Table 2 in­dicates the top 10 sources or journals publishing ar­ticles related to the topic of research. Women entrepreneurship articles are published most fre­quently in the International Journal of Gender and Entrepreneurship. The total number of articles pub­lished in this journal was 143. The second journal is the International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business. The di.erence in the number of ar­ticles published in the first and second journals is in itself significant, and shows the dominance of the former journal in this field of study. However, during the analysis, we found that the International Journal of Gender and Entrepreneurship is not the most cited. The most cited is the Journal of Business Ven­turing, which is ninth on the list of sources, with a total of citations of 4,819. Thus the Journal of Busi­ness Venturing is the most influential source in women entrepreneurship literature. 4.4Co-Occurrence (Keywords) Based on 1,555 studies of women entrepreneurs, we applied VOS viewer to create a network of keyword co-occurrence. This network was e.ective in gaining insight into the articles’ linked content. “Author key­words show the core of the study and the focal point of an investigation that are carefully selected by the authors,” according to Oraee, Hosseini, Papadoniko­laki, Palliyaguru, and Arashpour (2017). The type and strength of the relationship between various fields of knowledge is highlighted by keyword co-occurrence analysis. Only 220 keywords of a total of 3,337 passed the threshold. With a total link strength of 796, the keyword “gender” occurred most often (290 times), followed by “entrepreneurship,” which occurred 297 times and had a link strength of 757. “Women” (oc­currence = 213, link strength = 631), “women en­trepreneurs” (occurrence = 244, link strength = 469), “entrepreneur” (occurrence = 89, link strength = 374), and “female entrepreneurship” (occurrence = 140, link strength = 278) also were among the top keywords. Figure 3 presents the keywords graphically. A further analysis of keyword co-occurrence in VOS viewer indicated seven clusters comprising 96 items, after filtering for a minimum of 10 occur­rences of a keyword. Cluster 1 and Cluster 2 are the largest, with 22 and 19 items, respectively, in each cluster. The most common keyword (n = 297) in Cluster 1 is “entrepreneurship,” and “female en­trepreneurs” (n = 117) is the most common in Clus­ter 2. Prima facie, Cluster 1 highlights aspects pertaining to the entrepreneurial side of women’s enterprises, focusing on entrepreneurial intentions, entrepreneurial orientation, entrepreneurship, and entrepreneurship education. In addition, the cluster contains keywords focusing on women empower­ment, gender gap, and opportunity recognition. Cluster 2 contains keywords focusing on busi­ness development, growth, and performance. This cluster essentially focuses on developing or emerg­ing nations such as India and Nigeria, among others. Cluster 3 contains 17 items and highlights gender is­sues, equality, and relations, particularly in the face of the global pandemic. A significant keyword in Cluster 3 is “covid-19.” Cluster 4 contains 12 items, and this cluster essentially highlights theories such as the gender theory, feminist theory, and institu­tional theory. Gender di.erences and gender stereo­types appear in Cluster 5. Cluster 6, with eight items, highlights the challenges and barriers encountered by women entrepreneurs. Cluster 7 deals with as­pects pertaining to work–life balance and venture capital, in addition to gender and leadership. 4.5Topic Modeling We further analyzed the abstracts of our docu­ments using the latent Dirichlet allocation (Blei, Ng, & Jordan, 2003) algorithm (LDA). Our analysis found twelve topics summarized in Table 4. The identified topics helped in narrowing the trends and/or patterns being followed in the area of interest. Upon analyzing the topics, it was found that few of these topics are similar; e.g., Topics 1 and 11. Whereas the former concerns the general perspec­tive of women entrepreneurship, the latter concerns the gender disparity in raising funds and capital for business. Topics 5 and 6 also are similar. Whereas Topic 6 contains articles pertaining to how to man­age the business owned by women or how female entrepreneurs are managing them, Topic 5 contains articles highlighting the significance of networking and socializing. Topics 7 and 10 include articles in which significance is accorded to soft-skill enhance­ment and management. Training, development, and motivation are crucial for the success of any busi­ness, irrespective of the gender of the owner. From a theoretical perspective, Topic 3 includes terms and articles considered important for theoretical advancement and understanding of various tech­niques and methodologies for conducting research on women entrepreneurship. There is increasing focus on women entrepreneurs and work–life balance, in addi­tion to substantial interest in women entrepreneurs from developing countries. An area attracting signifi­cant attention is the significance of socialization and networking for women entrepreneurs. 4.6Bibliographic Coupling Bibliographic coupling employs citation analysis to ascertain a similarity relationship between pub­lications. This happens when two works refer to the same third work in their respective bibliographies. The “coupling strength” of two documents increases as the number of shared citations of other publica­tions increases (Martyn, 1964). Collating the con­nections between all the publications in a field of research aids in the creation of a map of the re­search field and the identification of sub-groups (clusters) of research using quantitative network analysis methods (Zupic & Cater, 2015). The bibliographic coupling technique was ap­plied to the entire data set of 1,554 documents, using a minimum of 100 citations per document, a resolution size of 1.25, and a minimum cluster size of 5. This gave us a visual representation of 70 doc­uments fulfilling the aforementioned filters from five clusters. A graphic representation is provided in Figure 4. Cluster 1 (Red): Role of Gender in an Entrepreneur’s Performance The first cluster is the largest, containing 27 doc­uments. It contains some of the most cited articles, e.g., Ahl (2006), which is cited 966 times, and Cli. (1998), which is cited 486 times. This cluster’s most dominant sub-theme is “gender-based studies.” This topic is covered in 11 articles. For example, Roper and Scott (2009) discussed the di.culties that women entrepreneurs face in obtaining funds for their start-ups. Following Roper and Scott (2009), Fairlie and Robb (2009) investigated the role of prior work experience to explain why women’s enterprises have relatively low survival rates, revenues, employ­ment, and profits. However, in contrast, Orser, Rid­ing, and Manley (2006) reported that women and men entrepreneurs are equally likely to seek external financing. However, women entrepreneurs refrain from seeking equity funding, because they primarily own small and medium enterprises. Similar work by authors such as Cromie (1987), Cowling and Taylor (2001), Demartino and Barbato (2003), and Ahl (2006) appears in the cluster. The other sub-theme on which authors are fo­cusing is how performance of a venture run by women entrepreneurs is measured or impacted. Mitchelmore and Rowley (2013) developed a “Fe­male Entrepreneur Competence” framework which provides a basis for an agenda focusing on educa­tion and overall development of women en­trepreneurs. For years, authors have focused on how the performance of women’s entrepreneurial ventures can be enhanced (Parasuraman, 1996; Orhan & Scott, 2001; Brindley, 2005; Mitchelmore, 2013). Cluster 1 highlights the importance of collat­ing gender-based studies with performance-based studies (in relation to women entrepreneurs). Cluster 2 (Green): Challenges and Upcoming Issues Faced by Women Entrepreneurs This is the second largest cluster, with 18 items. This cluster contains publications which focus on is­sues that women entrepreneurs might encounter, not just in developing countries but also in devel­oped nations such as the USA and Sweden. From a practical point of view, this cluster is significant. Pub­lications in this cluster bring attention to certain is­sues that are universal, e.g., work–life balance and managing the domestic role. The most cited (n = 100) article in this cluster, Ahl and Nelson (2015), explains that even in countries with “family-friendly” welfare policies such as Sweden, women entrepreneurs face challenges in taking their ven­ture to the next level. Interestingly, this cluster also contains certain articles which focus on gender awareness (Brush, 2009), gender identities (Garcia & Welter, 2013), and gender and technology-depen­dent ventures (Marlow & McAdam, 2012). In addition, this cluster includes publications which associate religious identities with women en­trepreneurs. Essers and Benschop (2009) explained how Moroccan and Turkish women entrepreneurs in the Netherlands craft their ethno-cultural identi­ties in relation to their Muslim identity. A similar re­ligious group was studied by Rehman and Roomi (2012), but in a di.erent geographical location (Pak­istan). According to the research, major hurdles women face in achieving balance in a patriarchal Is­lamic society are socio-cultural norms, meeting fam­ily commitments, and ensuring a healthy work-life balance (Kirkwood & Tootell, 2008; Eddleston & Powell, 2012), as well as masculinity (Lewis, 2006), which leads to hiding their gendered identity asso­ciated with the business. Interestingly, a few studies have discussed the future of women entrepreneurship. Hughes, Jen­nings, Brush, Carter, and Welter (2012) argued that several studies focusing on women entrepreneurs highlight the problems faced by such entrepreneurs but do not indicate what the future holds for them. According to Hughes et al. (2012), describing pre­cisely the new spheres for authors to investigate will not only address the arguments raised thus far, but will also result in a broader and deeper comprehen­sion of women’s entrepreneurship. Cluster 3 (Blue): Impact of Geographic Location on Women Entrepreneurship This cluster has 15 documents, in which the sci­entific publications shed light on how di.erent geo­graphical locations impact the performance of ventures owned by women. The study by Baughn, Chua, and Neupert (2006) encompasses a number of countries (n = 38) to investigate the impact of specific norms facilitating women’s entrepreneur­ship and the relative rates of women to men in­volved in entrepreneurship in various countries. Another example is Jamali’s (2009) study, which brought attention to the constraints faced and op­portunities available to women entrepreneurs in de­veloping nations. The cluster also contains publications pertain­ing to specific nations. Cetindamar, Gupta, Karad­eniz, and Egrican (2012) explored the impact of “human, family and financial capital” on women en­trepreneurs in Turkey. Coad and Tamvada (2012) ac­centuated the barriers faced by women entrepreneurs in India, and Manolova, Carter, Manev, and Gyoshev (2007) called to attention the impact of the “human capital” of Bulgaria’s women entrepreneurs. Ramadani (2013, 2015) indicated the work done by women entrepreneurs in devel­oping nations such as Macedonia, Albania, and Kosovo. This cluster includes authors that have fo­cused on developing nations only. This gives a posi­tive outlook for nations such as India. Because ac­tual women entrepreneurship is growing in India (IBEF, 2022), so should the academic research, and this cluster is proof that this is the case. Cluster 4 (Yellow): Financial Struggles of Women Entrepreneurs The final cluster is the smallest, including just 10 scientific publications. The major theme in this cluster is related to financing a business owned by women. Becker-Blease and Sohl (2007) discovered that although women entrepreneurs in the United States are more likely to receive angel investment for their ventures, they seek it at significantly lower rates than do men. In contrast, Eddleston, Ladge, Mitteness, and Balachandra (2016) found no di.er­ence in access to finance between women and men entrepreneurs. Eddleston et al. did not take into ac­count any other source of finance other than bank loans, which could be the reason for this result. Woman-led ventures are less impactful than male-owned enterprises in terms of start-up financing, because women have less start-up capital, human resources, and prior work experience (Fairlie & Robb, 2009). Other studies in this cluster discussed the strategies to be applied in a woman-led business to make it successful (Gundry & Welsch, 2001), and women embarking upon an entrepreneurial journey after breaking the glass ceiling (Mattis, 2004). 5DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION This research used bibliometric analysis to un­derstand the trend in academic research related to women entrepreneurship. According to this study, the scientific publications related to women en­trepreneurship are increasing significantly each year. Our study takes into account research papers published through 2021. This is significant because a large number of articles on women entrepreneur­ship were published after 2020. There were 242 publications in 2021. Our study extracted four clus­ters giving a broad picture of di.erent areas of con­cern pertaining to women entrepreneurship. Among the four major clusters, the most signifi­cant theme preferred by researchers across the globe is the role of gender in a venture’s perfor­mance. The study used co-citation analysis to exam­ine the philosophical underpinnings of the most cited publications, and used bibliographic coupling to explore the similarity relationship of research ar­ticles. We distilled the insight of the academic schol­ars who articulated their viewpoints with citations using bibliometric methods. The most consistent keyword among the data set is “gender,” which is in agreement with the largest cluster extracted from bibliographic coupling. This finding is consistent with that of the study by Deng et al. (2020). The study also gives an overview of the trajec­tory of research articles written over the years. The number of publications grew significantly after 2005, and the maximum number of publications was reported in 2021. Publications prior to 2000 fo­cused primarily on gender (Fischer, 1993; Cli., 1998) and work and family balance (Parasuraman, 1996). The base set in the earlier years of research could be the reason for the similar themes in the later years as well. In the recent past there have been publications on similar themes or topics (Sarfaraz, Faghih, & Majd, 2014; Adom & Anambane, 2019). A major shift in studies related to women en­trepreneurship occurred after 2010, with authors focusing more on challenges faced by (Deborah, Wilhelmina, Oyelana, & Ibrahim, 2015; Panda, 2018) and prospects available to (Garg & Agarwal, 2017) women entrepreneurs. This shift is visible be­cause of women breaking the glass ceiling and the stereotype that women do not belong in the corpo­rate world (Lathabhavan & Balasubramanian, 2017). The articles related to women entrepreneurship published in recent times (2021 onward) take a di­vergent route by focusing on specific industries (Ribeiro et al., 2021), developing nations (Ogun­dana, Simba, Dana, & Liguora, 2021), and sustain­able development (Mahajan & Bandyopadhyay, 2021), to name a few. The trends observed in the area of women’s en­trepreneurship were made more specific through the use of topic modeling. This analysis summarizes the topics under 12 headings, which contain content related to “a gender-based perspective of en­trepreneurship,” “skill enhancement through train­ing and development,” and “challenges and prospects faced by women entrepreneurs”, to name a few. This research resonates with the findings of Moreira, Marques, Braga, and Ratten (2019) to a certain extent; one cluster (role of gender) overlaps that of Moreira et al.’s “Epistemological position and gender.” However, the present research also di.ers from Moreira et al. regarding the most cited article. The results of this study found Ahl (2006) to be the most cited article, whereas in Moreira et al. (2019), Ahl (2006) was not even among the six most cited articles. This demonstrates Ahl’s (2006) notable in­fluence, as well as the success of the gender turn in­fluenced by feminist theory in recent times. Furthermore, because co-citation analyses evolve over time as additional studies are published with new citation patterns, it is logical to generate a co-citation analysis of the field on a regular basis. In ad­dition to knowing which article is cited the most, it is equally important to know which source or jour­nal is publishing the most articles on women en­trepreneurship. The International Journal of Gender and Entrepreneurship is the most prominent journal among the list available in terms of publishing arti­cles on women entrepreneurship. The publication count was 143, with 2,835 citations. Because the analysis found that “gender” is the most common keyword, the result for the source of publication is justifiable. The bibliographic coupling analysis revealed four clusters encompassing various aspects of women entrepreneurship. Cluster 1 is the largest cluster, and clearly indicates that for a long period the role of gender in entrepreneurship has re­mained a topic of interest for various authors. The trend of gender-based studies is being associated with performance measurement (of ventures owned by women) studies, which is opening up new avenues for gender studies in general and women entrepreneurship in specific. Cluster 2 is the most promising cluster. Articles in this cluster are not only discussing challenges in financial terms (Panda, 2018), but also highlighting more-contemporary is­sues such as gender awareness and identities, gen­der and technology, and religious identities (Brush et al., 2009; Garcia & Welter, 2013; Marlow & McAdam, 2012; Essers and Benschop, 2009). The trend in this cluster is that authors are aligning “gen­der” with other variables to give a more holistic out­look of women entrepreneurship. Bibliometric coupling also shows that much re­search on women entrepreneurship is being con­centrated in developing nations (Baughn et al., 2006; Cetindamar et al., 2012) because it often is reported that women in these areas are forced into running a venture either because of financial prob­lems (Baughn et al., 2006) or simply because they need to survive (Jamali, 2009). The pre-existing con­ditions of such entrepreneurs are poor, and the pressure of earning a living to support their family puts them in a worse situation. The final cluster of this research, although the smallest, still holds sig­nificance. This cluster predominantly concerns the problems faced by women entrepreneurs in raising financing for their ventures. Women entrepreneurs are not easily trusted by funding agencies, because they are perceived as lacking in experience (Fairlie & Robb, 2009; Wellalage & Locke, 2017) in manag­ing a business. However, the cluster also incorpo­rates articles which show that women are climbing the corporate ladder (Salahuddin et al., 2021), thus showcasing the latent potential of women. 5.1Implications and Future Research Female entrepreneurs highlight their contribu­tions as a key tool for future economic, social, and sustainable growth (Sajjad, Kaleem, Chani, & Ahmed, 2020). In the future, businesswomen around the world will look up to successful female entrepreneurs as role models (Al Mamun, Fazal, & Muniady, 2019). The present research establishes a base for aca­demicians planning to conduct studies in a similar domain. Using bibliometric analysis, the research brings to attention certain visible areas which have potential for more research, including gender-based studies (Panda, 2018). The findings of this study sug­gest that authors should include performance mea­surement tools in gender-based studies. Mitchelmore and Rowley’s (2013) “Female En­trepreneur Competence” framework provides a base for an action plan concentrating on education and overall development of women entrepreneurs. Although this framework has been used in recent studies (e.g., Iskamto, Ghazali, & Afthanorhan, 2020), there exists scope for more application. This research summarizes approximately 1,500 articles in four clusters. This could help au­thors in conducting qualitative studies focusing on a specific cluster. Publications in Cluster 2 high­light the challenges faced by women en­trepreneurs. The significance of this cluster is justified by number of recent publications (Isaga, 2018; Al-Kwifi, Tien Khoa, Ongsakul, & Ahmed, 2020). However, authors can narrow their focus to the challenges and issues faced by women in con­flicted zones (political or economic) such as Kash­mir in India, Iran, or Ukraine. A qualitative study conducted using in-depth interviews can bring to attention the harsh realities faced by women en­trepreneurs in such politically unstable and war-torn areas. The study concludes with articles focusing par­ticularly on the troubles faced by women in secur­ing additional funds or even seeking seed funding for their ventures. This is a point of concern at pre­sent, because businesses in general are facing fi­nancial difficulty (McLaughlin, 2022). The condition of women entrepreneurs is bound to worsen. The findings of this study can serve as a foundation for quantitative or qualitative studies focusing on what can be done to improve the fi­nancial condition of women entrepreneurs not just in developing nations, but also in developed na­tions. Studies focusing on the role of microfinance in entrepreneurship can benefit from the findings of Cluster 4. The results of this study also provide some insights for policy makers and bureaucrats. Coun­tries may establish policies that support women entrepreneurs in terms of financial assistance (subsidies and rebates). This research can help governments to understand the problems that are faced by women entrepreneurs, and the so­lutions they can provide to such entrepreneurs. Policy makers need to educate not only the women entrepreneurs, but their family members as well, in order to break the shackles. Using dig­ital media or social media platforms, brands and governments can create a single platform for women entrepreneurs which can help them get in touch with other prospective entrepreneurs and impart to them necessary skills and knowl­edge. 5.2Limitations and Conclusions The sample for the study was restricted to peer-reviewed publications in English-language journals. As a result, a specific knowledge base was not taken into account. During the filtration process, 96 arti­cles could not be taken into consideration because of this criterion. Future studies can be conducted in collaboration with authors comfortable in languages other than English. This can add depth future stud­ies. By broadening the language horizon not only can more studies be included in future research, but authors also can explore the cross-cultural aspect of entrepreneurship. The study is dependent on the data extracted from the Scopus database only. This is a limitation. Future studies can make use of other available databases such as the Web of Science for a more comprehensive study. In addition, citation analysis assigns a weight to a paper’s citations, and these weights are biased toward older articles, because those articles have a significantly greater number of citations than do recent publications. As a result, the bibliographic analyses may be biased in favor of older articles. In future research, authors can limit the search result to the number of citations (prefer­ably less than 10). This automatically will highlight the more recent articles. Our results also demonstrate that there has been limited scrutiny of the role of social network or networking theories (Adler & Kwon, 2002; Na­hapiet & Ghoshal, 1998) to investigate the success of entrepreneurial firms. Future research could focus on how di.erent types of networks play sig­nificant roles in di.erent entrepreneurial behaviors. REFERENCES Adler, P. S., & Kwon, S. -W. (2002). Social capital: Prospects for a new concept. Academy of Manage­ment Review, 27(1), 17–40. Adom, K., & Anambane, G. (2019). Understanding the role of culture and gender stereotypes in women en­trepreneurship through the lens of the stereotype threat theory. Journal of Entrepreneurship in Emerg­ing Economies. Aggarwal, M., & Johal, R. K. (2021). Rural women en­trepreneurship: a systematic literature review and be­yond. World Journal of Science, Technology and Sustainable Development. Ahl, H. (2006). Why research on women entrepreneurs needs new directions. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 30(5), 595-621 Ahl, H., & Nelson, T. (2015). How policy positions women entrepreneurs: A comparative analysis of state dis­course in Sweden and the United States. Journal of Business Venturing, 30(2), 273-291. Ahmad, S., & Bajwa, I. A. (2021). The role of social en­trepreneurship in socio-economic development: a meta-analysis of the nascent field. Journal of En­trepreneurship in Emerging Economies. Al-Kwifi, O. S., Tien Khoa, T., Ongsakul, V., & Ahmed, Z. U. (2020). Determinants of female entrepreneurship success across Saudi Arabia. Journal of Transnational management, 25(1), 3-29. Al Mamun, A., Fazal, S. A., & Muniady, R. (2019). En­trepreneurial knowledge, skills, competencies and performance: A study of micro-enterprises in Kelan­tan, Malaysia. Asia Pacific Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 13(1), 29-48. Anna, A. L., Chandler, G. N., Jansen, E., & Mero, N. P. (2000). Women business owners in traditional and non-traditional industries. Journal of Business ventur­ing, 15(3), 279-303. Audretsch, D. B., & Keilbach, M. (2004). Entrepreneur­ship and regional growth: an evolutionary interpre­tation. Journal of evolutionary economics, 14(5), 605-616. Ayogu, D. U., and Agu, E. O. (2015). Assessment of the contribution of women entrepreneur towards en­trepreneurship development in Nigeria. Intern. J. Curr. Res. Acad. Rev. 3, 190–207. Bahmani-Oskooee, M., Kutan, M. A., and Xi, D. (2013). The impact of economic and monetary uncertainty on the demand for money in emerging economies. Appl. Econ. 45, 3278–3287. doi: 10.1080/00036846.2012.705430 Bastian, B. L., Sidani, Y. M., & El Amine, Y. (2018). Women entrepreneurship in the Middle East and North Africa: A review of knowledge areas and research gaps. Gen­der in Management: An International Journal. Baughn, C. C., Chua, B. L., & Neupert, K. E. (2006). The normative context for women’s participation in en­trepreneruship: A multicountry study. Entrepreneur­ship theory and practice, 30(5), 687-708. Becker-Blease, J. R., &Sohl, J. E. (2007). Do women-owned businesses have equal access to angel capi­tal?. Journal of business Venturing, 22(4), 503-521. Blei, D. M., Ng, A. Y., & Jordan, M. I. (2003). Latent Dirich­let Allocation. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 3, 993–1022. Boden Jr, R. J., & Nucci, A. R. (2000). On the survival prospects of men’s and women’s new business ven­tures. Journal of business venturing, 15(4), 347-362. Brindley, C. (2005). Barriers to women achieving their en­trepreneurial potential: Women and risk. Interna­tional Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior& Research. Brush, C. G. (1992). Research on women business owners: Past trends, a new perspective and future directions. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 16(4), 5-30. Brush, C. G. (2006). Women entrepreneurs: A research overview. The Oxford handbook of entrepreneurship. Brush, C. G., De Bruin, A., & Welter, F. (2009). A gender-aware framework for women’s entrepreneurship. International Journal of Gender and entrepreneurship. Brush, C.G. (1992), Research on women business owners: past trends, a new perspective and future directions, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Vol. 16 No. 4, pp. 5-30. Burnham, J. F. (2006). Scopus database: a review. Biomedical digital libraries, 3(1), 1-8. Cardella, G. M., Hernández-Sánchez, B. R., & Sánchez-García, J. C. (2020). Women entrepreneurship: A sys­tematic review to outline the boundaries of scientific literature. Frontiers in psychology, 11, 1557. Cetindamar, D., Gupta, V. K., Karadeniz, E. E., & Egrican, N. (2012). What the numbers tell: The impact of human, family and financial capital on women and men’s entry into entrepreneurship in Turkey. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 24(1-2), 29-51. Cli., J. E. (1998). Does one size fit all? Exploring the rela­tionship between attitudes towards growth, gender, and business size. Journal of business ventur­ing, 13(6), 523-542. Coad, A., &Tamvada, J. P. (2012). Firm growth and barri­ers to growth among small firms in India. Small Busi­ness Economics, 39(2), 383-400. Cowling, M., & Taylor, M. (2001). Entrepreneurial women and men: two di.erent species?. Small Business Eco­nomics, 16(3), 167-175. Cromie, S. (1987). Similarities and di.erences between women and men business proprietorship. Interna­tional Small Business Journal, 5(3), 43-60. Deborah, A. E., Wilhelmina, S., Oyelana, A. A., & Ibrahim, S. I. (2015). Challenges faced by women en­trepreneurs and strategies adopted by women en­trepreneurs to ensure small business success in Nkonkobe Municipality, South Africa. Journal of Eco­nomics, 6(1), 37-49. DeMartino, R., &Barbato, R. (2003). Di.erences between women and men MBA entrepreneurs: exploring fam­ily flexibility and wealth creation as career motiva­tors. Journal of business venturing, 18(6), 815-832. Deng, W., Liang, Q., Li, J. & Wang, W. (2020). Science mapping: a bibliometric analysis of female en­trepreneurship studies. Gender in Management: An International Journal. Dima, A. (2021). The Importance of Innovation in En­trepreneurship for Economic Growth and Develop­ment. A Bibliometric Analysis. Revista de Management ComparatInternational, 22(1), 120-131. Du Rietz, A., &Henrekson, M. (2000). Testing the female underperformance hypothesis. Small Business Eco­nomics, 14(1), 1-10. Eddleston, K. A., & Powell, G. N. (2012). Nurturing en­trepreneurs’ work–family balance: A gendered per­spective. Entrepreneurship theory and practice, 36(3), 513-541. Eddleston, K. A., Ladge, J. J., Mitteness, C., &Balachandra, L. (2016). Do you see what I see? Signaling e.ects of gender and firm characteristics on financing en­trepreneurial ventures. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 40(3), 489-514. Elam, A., Brush, C., Greene, P., Baumer, B., Dean, M., &Heavlow, R. (2019). Global entrepreneurship moni­tor 2018/2019 women’s entrepreneurship report. 1-108. London: Global Entrepreneurship Research Association, London Business School. Essers, C., &Benschop, Y. (2009). Muslim businesswomen doing boundary work: The negotiation of Islam, gen­der and ethnicity within entrepreneurial contexts. Human relations, 62(3), 403-423. Fairlie, R. W., & Robb, A. M. (2009). Gender di.erences in business performance: evidence from the Charac­teristics of Business Owners survey. Small Business Economics, 33(4), 375-395. Fischer, E. M., Reuber, A. R., & Dyke, L. S. (1993). A theo­retical overview and extension of research on sex, gender, and entrepreneurship. Journal of business venturing, 8(2), 151-168. García, M. C. D., & Welter, F. (2013). Gender identities and practices: Interpreting women entrepreneurs’ narratives. International Small Business Journal, 31(4), 384-404. Garg, S., & Agarwal, P. (2017). Problems and prospects of woman entrepreneurship–a review of literature. IOSR Journal of Business and Management, 19(1), 55-60. GEM—Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (2020-21) Women’s entrepreneurship – Thriving through Crisis. p.14 Go.ee, R., &Scase, R. (1985). Proprietorial control in fam­ily firms: some functions of ‘quasi-organic’manage­ment systems. Journal of management studies, 22(1), 53-68. Guleria, D., & Kaur, G. (2021). Bibliometric analysis of eco­preneurship using VOSviewer and RStudio Bib­liometrix, 1989–2019. Library Hi Tech. Gundry, L. K., & Welsch, H. P. (2001). The ambitious en­trepreneur: High growth strategies of women-owned enterprises. Journal of business venturing, 16(5), 453-470. Hannigan, T. R., Haans, R. F., Vakili, K., Tchalian, H., Glaser, V. L., Wang, M. S., ... & Jennings, P. D. (2019). Topic modeling in management research: Rendering new theory from textual data. Academy of Management Annals, 13(2), 586-632. Hechavarria, D., Bullough, A., Brush, C., & Edelman, L. (2019). High-growth women’s entrepreneurship: Fu­eling social and economic development. Journal of Small Business Management, 57(1), 5-13. Hechevarri´a, D., Bullough, A., Brush, C., and Edelman, L. (2019). High-growth women’s entrepreneurship: fu­eling social and economic development. J. Small Busi­ness Managem. 57, 5–13. Henry, C., Foss, L., & Ahl, H. (2016). Gender and en­trepreneurship: a review of methodological ap­proaches. International Small Business Journal, 34(3), 217–241. Hisrich, R. D., & O’Brien, M. (1981). The woman en­trepreneur from a business and sociological perspec­tive. Frontiers of entrepreneurship research, 21(11), 19-23. Hughes, K. D., Jennings, J. E., Brush, C., Carter, S., & Wel­ter, F. (2012). Extending women’s entrepreneurship research in new directions. Entrepreneurship theory and practice, 36(3), 429-442. IBEF. (2022). Women Entrepreneurs Shaping the Future of India. IBEF. Retrieved from https://www.ibef.org/ blogs/ ­ women-entrepreneurs-shaping-the-future-of-india. Isaga, N. (2018). Start-up motives and challenges facing female entrepreneurs in Tanzania. International Jour­nal of Gender and Entrepreneurship. Iskamto, D., Ghazali, P. L., & Afthanorhan, A. (2020). A Conceptual Framework for Entrepreneur Compe­tence and Entrepreneur Performance: The Role of Gender. The Journal of Management Theory and Practice (JMTP), 1-4. Jamali, D. (2009). Constraints and opportunities facing women entrepreneurs in developing countries: A re­lational perspective. Gender in management: an in­ternational journal. Jennings, J. E., & Brush, C. G. (2013). Research on Women Entrepreneurs: Challenges to (and from) the Broader Entrepreneurship Literature? The Academy of Man­agement Annals, 7(1), 663-715. Jennings, J. E., & Brush, C. G. (2013). Research on women entrepreneurs: challenges to (and from) the broader entrepreneurship literature? The Academy of Man­agement Annals, 7, 661–713. Jha, S. K. (2018). Entrepreneurial ecosystem in India: Tak­ing stock and looking ahead. IIMB management re­view, 30(2), 179-188. Julien, P. A. (2018). The state of the art in small business and entrepreneurship. Routledge. Kelley, D. J., Baumer, B. S., Brush, C., Green, P. G., Mahdavi, M., Majbouri, M., et al. (2017). Global Entrepreneur­ship Monitor 2018/2017 Report on Women’s En­trepreneurship. Babson College: Smith College and the Global Entrepreneurship Research Association. Kirkwood, J., &Tootell, B. (2008). Is entrepreneurship the answer to achieving work–family balance?. Journal of management & organization, 14(3), 285-302. Lathabhavan, R., & Balasubramanian, S. A. (2017). Glass Ceiling and women employees in Asian organizations: a tri-decadal review. Asia-Pacific Journal of Business Administration. Lewis, P. (2006). The quest for invisibility: Female en­trepreneurs and the masculine norm of entrepreneur­ship. Gender, Work & Organization, 13(5), 453-469. Lewis, R. D. (2006). When cultures collide: leading across cultures. Boston. MA: Nicholas Brealey. Liberati, A., Altman, D. G., Tetzla., J., Mulrow, C., Gřtzsche, P. C., Ioannidis, J. P., et al. (2009). The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: expla­nation and elaboration. Ital. J. Public Health 7, 354–391. Mahajan, R., & Bandyopadhyay, K. R. (2021). Women en­trepreneurship and sustainable development: select case studies from the sustainable energy sector. Jour­nal of Enterprising Communities: People and Places in the Global Economy. Manolova, T. S., Carter, N. M., Manev, I. M., &Gyoshev, B. S. (2007). The di.erential e.ect of men and women entrepreneurs’ human capital and networking on growth expectancies in Bulgaria. Entrepreneurship theory and practice, 31(3), 407-426. Marlow, S., & McAdam, M. (2012). Analyzing the influence of gender upon high–technology venturing within the context of business incubation. Entrepreneurship The­ory and Practice, 36(4), 655-676. Martyn, J. (1964). Bibliographic coupling. Journal of Doc­umentation. Mattis, M. C. (2004). Women entrepreneurs: out from under the glass ceiling. Women in management review. McLaughlin, K. (2022, April 13). COVID-19: Implications for business. McKinsey & Company. Retrieved from https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/risk-and-resilience/our-insights/covid-19-implications-for-business. Minniti, M., & Nardone, C. (2007). Being in someone else’s shoes: the role of gender in nascent en­trepreneurship. Small business economics, 28(2), 223-238. Mirchandani, K. (1999). Feminist insight on gendered work: New directions in research on women and en­trepreneurship. Gender, work & organization, 6(4), 224-235. Mitchelmore, S., & Rowley, J. (2013). Entrepreneurial competencies of women entrepreneurs pursuing business growth. Journal of small business and enter­prise development. Moreira, J., Marques, C. S., Braga, A., & Ratten, V. (2019). A systematic review of women’s entrepreneurship and internationalization literature. Thunderbird Inter­national Business Review, 61(4), 635-648. Nahapiet, J., & Ghoshal, S. (1998). Social capital, intellec­tual capital, and the organizational advantage. Academy of Management Review, 23(2), 242–266. Noguera, M., A´lvarez, C., and Urbano, D. (2013). Socio-cultural factors and female entrepreneurship. Intern. Entrepreneurship Managem. J. 9, 183–198. Ogundana, O. M., Simba, A., Dana, L. P., & Liguori, E. (2021). Women entrepreneurship in developing economies: A gender-based growth model. Journal of Small Business Management, 59(sup1), S42-S72. Oraee, M., Hosseini, M. R., Papadonikolaki, E., Pal­liyaguru, R., &Arashpour, M. (2017). Collaboration in BIM-based construction networks: A bibliometric-qualitative literature review. International Journal of Project Management, 35(7), 1288-1301. Orhan, M., & Scott, D. (2001). Why women enter into en­trepreneurship: an explanatory model. Women in management review. Orser, B. J., Riding, A. L., & Manley, K. (2006). Women en­trepreneurs and financial capital. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 30(5), 643-665. Panda, S. (2018). Constraints faced by women en­trepreneurs in developing countries: review and rank­ing. Gender in Management: An International Journal. Paoloni, P., Secundo, G., Ndou, V., & Moda.ari, G. (2018, March). Women entrepreneurship and digital tech­nologies: Towards a research agenda. In IPAZIA Work­shop on Gender Issues (pp. 181-194). Springer, Cham. Parasuraman, S., Purohit, Y. S., Godshalk, V. M., &Beutell, N. J. (1996). Work and family variables, entrepreneurial career success, and psychological well-being. Journal of vocational behavior, 48(3), 275-300. Phan Tan, L. (2021). Mapping the social entrepreneurship research: Bibliographic coupling, co-citation and co-word analyses. Cogent Business & Management, 8(1), 1896885. Podsako., P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Bachrach, D. G., and Podsako., N. P. (2005). The influence of management journals in the 1980s and 1990s. Strategic Manage­ment Journal, 26, 473–488. Ramadani, V., Gërguri, S., Dana, L. P., &Tašaminova, T. (2013). Women entrepreneurs in the Republic of Mace­donia: waiting for directions. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business, 19(1), 95-121. Ramadani, V., Hisrich, R. D., &Gërguri-Rashiti, S. (2015). Female entrepreneurs in transition economies: in­sights from Albania, Macedonia and Kosovo. World Review of Entrepreneurship, Management and Sus­tainable Development, 11(4), 391-413. Ranjan, A. (2019). The role of entrepreneurship in eco­nomic development. American Journal of Manage­ment Science and Engineering, 4(6), 87-90. Ratten, V., & Jones, P. (2021). Entrepreneurship and man­agement education: Exploring trends and gaps. The International Journal of Management Educa­tion, 19(1), 100431. Rehman, S., &Roomi, M. A. (2012). Gender and work-life balance: a phenomenological study of women en­trepreneurs in Pakistan. Journal of small business and enterprise development. Renton, M., & Richard, J. E. (2020). Entrepreneurship in marketing: socializing partners for brand governance in EM firms. Journal of Business Research, 113, 180-188. Ribeiro, M. A., Adam, I., Kimbu, A. N., Afenyo-Agbe, E., Adeola, O., Figueroa-Domecq, C., & de Jong, A. (2021). Women entrepreneurship orientation, net­works and firm performance in the tourism industry in resource-scarce contexts. Tourism Manage­ment, 86, 104343. Roma, P. (December 2021). Top 7 upcoming trends for fe­male entrepreneurs in 2022. Your Story. Retrieved from https://yourstory.com/herstory/2021/12/up­ coming-trends-female-entrepreneurs-2022. Roper, S., & Scott, J. M. (2009). Perceived financial barri­ers and the start-up decision: An econometric analysis of gender di.erences using GEM data. International Small Business Journal, 27(2), 149-171. Sajjad, M., Kaleem, N., Chani, M. I., & Ahmed, M. (2020). Worldwide role of women entrepreneurs in economic development. Asia Pacific Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 14(2), 151-160. Salahuddin, A., Mahmood, Q. K., & Ahmad, A. (2021). Breaking second glass ceiling: lived experiences of women entrepreneurs in Pakistan. Quality & Quan­tity, 1-12. Santos, G., Marques, C. S., & Ferreira, J. J. (2018). A look back over the past 40 years of female entrepreneur­ship: Mapping knowledge networks. Scientomet­rics, 115(2), 953-987. Sarfaraz, L., Faghih, N., & Majd, A. A. (2014). The relation­ship between women entrepreneurship and gender equality. Journal of Global Entrepreneurship Re­search, 4(1), 1-11. Schwartz, E. (1976). Entrepreneurship: A new female fron­tier. Journal of Contemporary Business, 5(1), 47-76. Sexton, D. L., & Bowman-Upton, N. (1990). Female and male entrepreneurs: Psychological characteristics and their role in gender-related discrimination. Journal of business venturing, 5(1), 29-36. Shoimardonkulovich, Y. D. (2021). The role of en­trepreneurship in achieving economic stability. Aca­demicia Globe: Inderscience Research, 2(07), 50-54. Smith, D. (2010). The role of entrepreneurship in economic growth. Undergraduate economic review, 6(1), 7. Todaro, M. P., & Smith, S. C. (2012). Economic develop­ment 11th edition. Vallaster, C., Kraus, S., Merigo Lindahl, J. M., and Nielsen, A. (2019). Ethics and entrepreneurship: a bibliometric study and literature review. J. Bus. Res. 99, 226–237. Verheul, I., &Thurik, R. (2001). Start-up capital:” does gender matter?”. Small business economics, 16(4), 329-346. Verheul, I., Stel, A. V., & Thurik, R. (2006). Explaining fe­male and male entrepreneurship at the country level. Entrepreneurship and regional development, 18(2), 151-183. Wellalage, N., & Locke, S. (2017). Access to credit by SMEs in South Asia: do women entrepreneurs face discrimination. Research in International Business and Finance, 41, 336-346. Yadav, V., &Unni, J. (2016). Women entrepreneurship: re­search review and future directions. Journal of Global Entrepreneurship Research, 6(1), 1-18. Zucchi, K. (2021). 10 Most Successful Women Entrepreneurs. Investopedia. Retrieved from https://www.investope­ dia.com/articles/personal-finance/040515/10-most-suc­ cessful-women-entrepreneurs-decade.asp Zupic, I., & Cater, T. (2015). Bibliometric methods in man­agement and organization. Organizational research methods, 18(3), 429-472. 1Publications in 2022 were not taken into account for this analysis because the data were available for only 4 months. Vol. 11, No. 2, 97-115 doi:10.17708/DRMJ.2022.v11n02a07 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 Naira Fayaz, Sujata Khandai, Ivan Zupic, Avneet Kaur: Going Back to the Roots: A Bibliometric and Thematic Analysis of Women Entrepreneurship 98 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 99 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 Naira Fayaz, Sujata Khandai, Ivan Zupic, Avneet Kaur: Going Back to the Roots: A Bibliometric and Thematic Analysis of Women Entrepreneurship 100 Figure 1: PRISMA method—process of sample selection Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 101 Figure 2: Publications from 1982 to 2022 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 Naira Fayaz, Sujata Khandai, Ivan Zupic, Avneet Kaur: Going Back to the Roots: A Bibliometric and Thematic Analysis of Women Entrepreneurship 102 Table 1: Most cited articles Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 103 Table 2: Journals publishing articles related to women entrepreneurship Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 Naira Fayaz, Sujata Khandai, Ivan Zupic, Avneet Kaur: Going Back to the Roots: A Bibliometric and Thematic Analysis of Women Entrepreneurship 104 Figure 3: Keyword co-occurrence Table 3: Co-word clusters Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 105 Table 4: Topic modeling analysis Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 Naira Fayaz, Sujata Khandai, Ivan Zupic, Avneet Kaur: Going Back to the Roots: A Bibliometric and Thematic Analysis of Women Entrepreneurship 106 Figure 4: Bibliographic coupling map with four clusters of the top 100 articles Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 107 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 Naira Fayaz, Sujata Khandai, Ivan Zupic, Avneet Kaur: Going Back to the Roots: A Bibliometric and Thematic Analysis of Women Entrepreneurship 108 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 109 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 Naira Fayaz, Sujata Khandai, Ivan Zupic, Avneet Kaur: Going Back to the Roots: A Bibliometric and Thematic Analysis of Women Entrepreneurship 110 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 111 EXTENDED SUMMARY/IZVLECEK Z bibliometricnimi metodami smo preucevali študije, povezane z ženskim podjetništvom. Posebej smo se osredotocili na razumevanje nedavnih trendov, najvplivnejših objav in revij, tematik, povezanih z raziskovanjem podjetništva žensk, ter dešifriranja prihodnjih usmeritev raziskovanja pod­jetništva žensk. S pomocjo baze podatkov Scopus smo pridobili 1554 dokumentov, objavljenih od leta 1982 do 2022, in analizirali znanstvene objave na leto, najveckrat citirane clanke, vire objav, sopojavljanje kljucnih besed, tematsko strukturo (modeliranje teme) in bibliografsko sklopljenost (parcenje). Ugotovili smo, da se število znanstvenih publikacij, povezanih z ženskim podjetništvom, vsako leto znatno povecuje, najbolj dosledna kljucna beseda pa je »spol«. Analiza citatov je Ahl (2006) prepoznala kot najbolj citiran clanek, kar dokazuje opazen vpliv te objave, pa tudi uspešnost spolnega obrata pod vplivom feministicne teorije. Analiza sosklicevanja je odkrila sedem skupin, ki prikazujejo tematsko strukturo raziskav ženskega podjetništva. Bibliografska analiza sklopljenosti je odkrila štiri skupine, ki zajemajo razlicne vidike, povezane z ženskim podjetništvom. Identificirani grozdi so »Vloga spola pri podjetniški uspešnosti«, »Izzivi in prihajajoce težave, s katerimi se srecujejo podjetnice«, »Vpliv geografske lokacije na podjetništvo žensk« in »Financne težave podjetnic«. Modeliranje tem z uporabo latentnega Dirchletovega algoritma za dodeljevanje (angl. Dirchlet allocation algorithm; LDA) je prepoznalo sedem podrocij zanimanja v literaturi o ženskem podjetništvu. Na koncu clanek poda tudi implikacije in predloge za nadaljnje raziskave. Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 Naira Fayaz, Sujata Khandai, Ivan Zupic, Avneet Kaur: Going Back to the Roots: A Bibliometric and Thematic Analysis of Women Entrepreneurship 112 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 113 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 Naira Fayaz, Sujata Khandai, Ivan Zupic, Avneet Kaur: Going Back to the Roots: A Bibliometric and Thematic Analysis of Women Entrepreneurship 114 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 115 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 116 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 117 AUTHOR GUIDELINES 1.GENERAL INFORMATION All articles submitted to the Dynamic Relationships Management Journal are double-blind reviewed. The manuscript should submitted via e-mail to the editor (matej.cerne@ef.uni-lj.si). Send two files: one that contains author contact information along with the text, references, tables, figures, and exhibits; and one where author contact information will be deleted. Authors should keep an exact, extra copy of the manuscript for future reference. Manuscripts are reviewed with the understanding that they are original, not under consideration by any other publisher, have not been previously published in whole or in part, have not been previously ac­cepted for publication, and will not be submitted elsewhere until a decision is reached regarding their pub­lication in the Dynamic Relationships Management Journal. Manuscripts must be written in English. Authors are responsible for the quality of written English and proof reading of the text is required. Manuscripts should be double-spaced (including references) in 12 point font, with pages numbered consecutively throughout the entire paper. (The title page is page one.) Text alignment should be justified. Margins should be one inch (2.5 cm) at the top, bottom and sides of the page. Manuscripts inclusive of all text, references, tables, figures, appendices etc. should be no longer than 30 pages and should not exceed 60.000 characters including spaces. Authors should provide a summary, which will be published in Slovene (for foreign authors, translation will be provided by editors). Manuscripts that report quantitative analyses of data should typically include descriptive statistics, correlation matrices, the results of statistical tests and so forth. If these items are not included in the manuscript, they should be reported in a separate technical appendix. Authors of manuscripts that report data dependent results also must make available, upon request, exact information regarding their proce­dures and stimuli (excluding data). If we receive files that do not conform to the above requirements, we will inform the author(s) and we will not begin the review process until we receive the corrected files. The author(s) submitting the manuscript for review should clearly indicate to the editor the relation of the manuscript under review to any other manuscripts currently under review, in press or recently pub­lished by the authors. The editor may ask the authors to submit copies of such related papers to the Editorial Board. 2.GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS 1.First page: Name of author(s) and title; author(s) footnote, including present positions, complete ad-dress, telephone number, fax number, email address, and any acknowledgment of financial or technical assistance. 2.Second page: Title of paper (without author's name) and an abstract of no more than 250 words sub­stantively summarizing the article. Also include up to six keywords that describe your paper for indexing and for web searches in your manuscript. 3.Next: Text alignment justified with major headings and subheadings flush with the left margin. The in­troduction should state clearly the objective of the paper as well as the motivation and the context of the research. The literature review should be limited to the articles, books and other items that have a direct bearing on the topic being addressed. In empirical papers, details of the empirical section tests should not be included in the paper itself. The conclusion should summarize key findings and state their importance to the field. Footnotes should be kept to an absolute minimum and must be placed at the foot of the page to which they refer. They should not be used for citing references. 4.Then: Tables, numbered consecutively, each on a separate page. If tables appear in an appendix, they should be numbered separately and consecutively, as in Table A-1, A-2, and so on. 5.Next: Figures, numbered consecutively, each placed on a separate page. If tables appear in an appendix, they should be numbered separately, as in Figure A-1, A-2, etc. 6.After conclusion: Longer summary (1-2 pp, depending on length of article) in Slovenian language (for foreign authors, translation will be provided by editors). 7.Last: References, typed in alphabetical order by author's last name and in APA style. 3. TABLES 1.The table number and title should be centered and placed above the table. 2.Source(s) should also be provided and centered below the table: i.e. Mabey & Gooderham, The impact of management development on perceptions of organizational performance in European firms, 2005: 136. 3.Designate units (e.g., %, $) in column headings. 4.Align all decimals. 5.Refer to tables in the text by number only. Do not refer to tables by "above," "below," and "preceding." 6.If possible, combine closely related tables. 7.Clearly indicate positions of tables within the text on the page where they are introduced: e.g. Table 1 about here. 8.Measures of statistical significance should be reported within the table. 4.FIGURES, PHOTOGRAPHS AND CAMERA-READY ARTWORK 1.For graphs, label both vertical and horizontal axes. The ordinate label should be centered above the ordinate axis; the abscissa label should be placed beneath the abscissa. 2.Place all calibration tics inside the axis lines, with the values outside the axis lines. 3.The figure number and title should be typed on separate lines, centered and placed above the figure. 4.When appropriate, source(s) should also be provided and centered below the figure (see example under the Tables section). 5.Clearly indicate positions of figures within the text on the page where they are introduced. 6.Once a manuscript has been accepted for publication, complex tables and all figures must be submitted both electronically and as camera-ready (hard) copy. Do not embed figures in the Word file; instead, submit them separately in the program in which they were created (i.e., PDF, PowerPoint, Excel). 7.Lettering should be large enough to be read easily with 50% reduction. 8.Any art not done on a computer graphics program should be professionally drafted in India ink. 9.Do not submit photographs or camera-ready art until your manuscript has been accepted. If the pho­tograph or artwork is completed, submit copies. 5.MATHEMATICAL NOTATION 1.Mathematical notation must be clear and understandable. Since not all journal readers are mathe­matically proficient, the authors should ensure that the text (i.e., words) also conveys the meaning ex­pressed by the mathematical notation. We recommend that extensive mathematical notation (e.g., proofs) should be provided in a separate technical appendix. 2.Equations should be centered on the page. Equations should be numbered; type the number in paren­theses flush with the left margin. If equations are too wide to fit in a single column, indicate appropriate breaks. Unusual symbols and Greek letters should be identified by a note. 6.REFERENCE CITATIONS WITHIN THE TEXT Cite all references at the appropriate point in the text by the surname of the author(s), year of publi­cation, and pagination where necessary. Pagination (without 'p.' or 'pp.') to give the source of a quotation or to indicate a passage of special relevance, follows the year of publication and is preceded by a colon, i.e. Parsons (1974: 238). Page numbers should be given full out, i.e. 212-230 not 212-30. When providing quotes, these should be in italics. In general, references to published works must be cited in text according to the guidelines for APA style (for more information see the DRMJ website). 7.REFERENCE LIST STYLE 1.Single Author: Last name first, followed by author initials. Berndt, T. J. (2002). Friendship quality and social development. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 11, 7-10. 2.Two Authors: List by their last names and initials. Use the ampersand instead of “and.” Wegener, D. T., & Petty, R. E. (1994). Mood management across a.ective states: The hedonic contin­gency hypothesis. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 66, 1034-1048. 3.Three to Six Authors: List by last names and initials; commas separate author names, while the last author name is preceded again by ampersand. Kernis, M. H., Cornell, D. P., Sun, C. R., Berry, A., & Harlow, T. (1993). There’s more to self-esteem than whether it is high or low: The importance of stability of self-esteem. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 1190-1204. 4.Organization as Author American Psychological Association. (2003). 5.Unknown Author Merriam-Webster’s collegiate dictionary (10th ed.).(1993). Springfield, MA: Merriam-Webster. 6.Two or More Works by the Same Author: Use the author’s name for all entries and list the entries by the year (earliest comes first). Berndt, T. J. (1981). Berndt, T. J. (1999). References that have the same first author and di.erent second and/or third authors are arranged alphabetically by the last name of the second author, or the last name of the third if the first and second authors are the same. For other examples, see the DRMJ website. Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 118 Author Guidelines Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 119 Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, Vol. 11, No. 2, November 2022 120 Author Guidelines