Muddling through Akerlofian and Knightian uncertainty: The role of sociobehavioral integration, positive affective tone, and polychronicity

  • Daniel LeunbachEmail author
  • Truls Erikson
  • Max Rapp-Ricciardi


To address recent calls for a more nuanced understanding of the role of uncertainty in entrepreneurial processes, we distinguish between cross-sectional uncertainty, which arises from the uneven dispersion of knowledge across people and places, and longitudinal uncertainty, which arises from the dispersion of knowledge across time. We argue that new venture team (NVT) sociobehavioral integration (the extent to which NVT members function as a team), NVT polychronicity (the extent to which NVT members prefer to be engaged in multiple tasks simultaneously), and NVT positive affective tone (the extent to which NVT members consistently experience positive emotions) help NVTs cope with challenges arising from the dispersed nature of knowledge in different ways. Evidence from a sample of Scandinavian science-based new ventures supports this view.


Cross-sectional uncertainty Longitudinal uncertainty Sociobehavioral integration Positive affective tone Polychronicity 



  1. Akerlof GA (1970) The market for “lemons”: quality uncertainty and the market mechanism. Q J Econ 84(3):488–500CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alvarez SA, Barney JB (2007) The entrepreneurial theory of the firm. J Manag Stud 44(7):1057–1063CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Amason AC, Shrader RC, Tompson GH (2006) Newness and novelty: relating top management team composition to new venture performance. J Bus Ventur 21(1):125–148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Amit R, Brander J, Zott C (1998) Why do venture capital firms exist? Theory and Canadian evidence. J Bus Ventur 13(6):441–466CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Ancona DG, Caldwell DF (1992) Bridging the boundary: external activity and performance in organizational teams. Adm Sci Q 37(4):634–665CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Atuahene-Gima K, Murray JY (2004) Antecedents and outcomes of marketing strategy comprehensiveness. J Mark 68(4):33–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Baron RA (2015) Affect and entrepreneurship. Wiley Encyclopedia of Management 3:1–3Google Scholar
  8. Bernasconi M, Harris S, Moensted M (2006) High-tech entrepreneurship: managing innovation, variety and uncertainty. Routledge, AbingdonGoogle Scholar
  9. Bjornali ES, Knockaert M, Foss N, Leunbach D, Erikson T (2017) Unraveling the black box of new venture team processes. In: Ahmetoglu G, Chamorro-Premuzic T, Klinger B, Karcisky T (eds) The Wiley handbook of entrepreneurship. John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, pp 313–348CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Blatt R (2009a) Tough love: how communal schemas and contracting practices build relational capital in entrepreneurial teams. Acad Manag Rev 34(3):533–551CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Blatt R (2009b) Resilience in entrepreneurial teams: developing the capacity to pull through. Front Entrep Res 29(11):1Google Scholar
  12. Bluedorn AC (2002) The human organization of time. Stanford University Press, Stanford, CAGoogle Scholar
  13. Brodbeck FC, Kerschreiter R, Mojzisch A, Schulz-Hardt S (2007) Group decision making under conditions of distributed knowledge: the information asymmetries model. Acad Manag Rev 32(2):459–479CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Bronk R (2009) The romantic economist: imagination in economics. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Bronk R (2011) Uncertainty, modelling monocultures and the financial crisis. Bus Econ 42(2):5–18Google Scholar
  16. Bronk R, Jacoby W (2016) Uncertainty and the dangers of monocultures in regulation, analysis, and practice. In: MPIfG discussion paper 16/6. Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies, CologneGoogle Scholar
  17. Brown AL (2016) Asymmetric information. In: Augier M, Teece D (eds) The Palgrave encyclopedia of strategic management. Palgrave Macmillan, LondonGoogle Scholar
  18. Bylund PL, McCaffrey M (2017) A theory of entrepreneurship and institutional uncertainty. J Bus Ventur 32(5):461–475CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Carmeli A (2008) Top management team behavioral integration and the performance of service organizations. Group Org Manag 33(6):712–735CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Cattani G, Ferriani S, Lanza A (2017) Deconstructing the outsider puzzle: The legitimation journey of novelty. Organ Sci 28(6):965–992Google Scholar
  21. Chen MR, Lin HC, Michel JG (2010) Navigating hypercompetitive environment: the role of action aggressiveness and TMT integration. Strateg Manag J 31:1410–1430CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Coff RW (1999) How buyers cope with uncertainty when acquiring firms in knowledge-intensive industries: caveat emptor. Organ Sci 10(2):144–161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Cole MS, Bruch H, Walter F (2008) Affective mechanisms linking dysfunctional behavior to performance in work teams: a moderated mediation study. J Appl Psychol 93(5):945–958CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. De Jong BA, Elfring T (2010) How does trust affect the performance of ongoing teams? The mediating role of reflexivity, monitoring, and effort. Acad Manag J 53(3):535–549CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Dew N, Velamuri SR, Venkataraman S (2004) Dispersed knowledge and an entrepreneurial theory of the firm. J Bus Ventur 19(5):659–679CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Dimitratis P, Lioukas S, Carter S (2004) The relationship between entrepreneurship and international performance: the importance of domestic environment. Int Bus Rev 13:19–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Dimov D (2018) Uncertainty under entrepreneurship. In: Fayolle A, Ramoglou S, Karatas-Özkan M, Nicolopoulou S (eds) Philosophical reflexivity in entrepreneurship: understanding, challenging, advancing and synthesizing worldviews in entrepreneurship research. Routledge, AbingdonGoogle Scholar
  28. Dow SC (2012) Uncertainty about uncertainty. In: Foundations for new economic thinking. Palgrave Macmillan, London, pp 72–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Dow SC (2013) Keynes on knowledge, expectations and rationality. In: Phelps ES, Frydman R (eds) Rethinking expectations: the way forward for macroeconomics. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJGoogle Scholar
  30. Eisenhardt KM, Martin JA (2000) Dynamic capabilities: what are they? Strateg Manag J 21(10–11):1105–1121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Ensley MD, Hmieleski KM (2005) A comparative study of new venture top management team composition, dynamics and performance between university-based and independent start-ups. Res Policy 34(7):1091–1105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Erikson T, Korsgaard S (2016) Knowledge as the source of opportunity. J Bus Ventur Insights 6:47–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Evans M (1985) A Monte Carlo study of the effects of correlated method variance in moderated multiple regression analysis. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 36:305–323CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Foo MD (2011) Teams developing business ideas: how member characteristics and conflict affect member-rated team effectiveness. Small Bus Econ 36:33–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Forbes DP, Borchert PS, Zellmer–Bruhn ME, Sapienza HJ (2006) Entrepreneurial team formation: An exploration of new member addition. Entrep Theory Prac 30(2):225–248Google Scholar
  36. Foss NJ, Klein PG (2012) Organizing entrepreneurial judgment: a new approach to the firm. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Foss NJ, Lyngsie J (2014) The strategic organization of the entrepreneurial established firm. Strateg Organ 12(3):208–215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Foss NJ, Klein PG, Kor YY, Mahoney JT (2008) Entrepreneurship, subjectivism, and the resource–based view: towards a new synthesis. Strateg Entrep J 2(1):73–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Froyd J and Layne J (2008) Faculty development strategies for overcoming the “curse of knowledge”. In Frontiers in Education Conference, 2008. FIE 2008. 38th Annual. IEEE, pp S4D-13Google Scholar
  40. Gartner WB, Liao J (2012) Risk-takers and taking risks. In: Chance and intent. Routledge, Abingdon, pp 33–48Google Scholar
  41. Gevers JM, van Eerde W, Rutte CG (2001) Time pressure, potency, and progress in project groups. Eur J Work Org Psychol 10(2):205–221CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Gilbert-Saad A, Siedlok F, McNaughton RB (2018) Decision and design heuristics in the context of entrepreneurial uncertainties. J Bus Ventur Insights 9:75–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Gubitta P, Tognazzo A, Destro F (2016) Signaling in academic ventures: the role of technology transfer offices and university funds. J Technol Transf 41(2):368–393Google Scholar
  44. Hambrick DC (1994) Top management groups. A conceptual integration and reconsideration of the “team” label. Res Org Behav 16:171–213Google Scholar
  45. Hambrick DC (2005) Upper echelons theory: origins, twists and turns, and lessons learned. In: Smith KG, Hitt MA (eds) Great minds in management: the process of theory development. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 109–127Google Scholar
  46. Hambrick DC (2007) Upper echelons theory: an update. Acad Manag Rev 32(2):334–343CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Hambrick DC, Mason PA (1984) Upper echelons: the organization as a reflection of its top managers. Acad Manag Rev 9(2):193–206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Hayek FA (1945) The use of knowledge in society. Am Econ Rev 35:519–530Google Scholar
  49. Hayes AF (2009) Beyond Baron and Kenny: statistical mediation analysis in the millennium. Commun Monogr 76(4):408–420CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Hayes AF (2013) Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: a regression-based approach. The Guilford Press, NYGoogle Scholar
  51. Hiller NJ, Beauchesne MM (2014) Executive leadership: CEOs, top management teams, and organizational-level outcome. In: Day DV (ed) The Oxford handbook of leadership and organizations. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 556–588Google Scholar
  52. Hirsh JB, Mar RA, Peterson JB (2012) Psychological entropy: a framework for understanding uncertainty-related anxiety. Psychol Rev 119(2):304–320CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Hmieleski KM, Cole MS, Baron RA (2012) Shared authentic leadership and new venture performance. J Manag 38(5):1476–1499Google Scholar
  54. Hodgson GM (2004) Opportunism is not the only reason why firms exist: why an explanatory emphasis on opportunism may mislead management strategy. Ind Corp Change, 13(2):401–418Google Scholar
  55. Huang L, Pearce JL (2015) Managing the unknowable: the effectiveness of early-stage investor gut feel in entrepreneurial investment decisions. Adm Sci Q 60(4):634–670CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Huff AS, Milliken FJ, Hodgkinson GP, Galavan RJ, Sund KJ (2016) A conversation on uncertainty in managerial and organizational cognition. In: Uncertainty and strategic decision making. Emerald Group Publishing Limited, Bingley, pp 1–31Google Scholar
  57. Isenberg DJ (2008) The global entrepreneur. Harv Bus Rev 86(12):107–111Google Scholar
  58. Jantunen A, Puumalainen K, Saarenketo S, Kyläheiko K (2005) Entrepreneurial orientation, dynamic capabilities and international performance. J Int Entrep 3(3):223–243CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Jehn KA, Northcraft GB, Neale MA (1999) Why differences make a difference: a field study of diversity, conflict and performance in workgroups. Adm Sci Q 44(4):741–763CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Jones MV, Coviello N, Tang YK (2011) International entrepreneurship research (1989–2009): a domain ontology and thematic analysis. J Bus Ventur 26(6):632–659CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Kaplan S (2008) Polychronicity in work teams: a theoretical examination of antecedents and consequences. In: Roe RA, Waller MJ, Clegg SR (eds) Time in organizational research. Routledge, Abingdon, pp 101–126Google Scholar
  62. Kaplan S and Waller M (2007) On the perils of polychronicity: multitasking effects in nuclear crews. In: 22nd annual meeting of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  63. Keynes JM (1937) Some economic consequences of a declining population. Eugen Rev 29(1):13–17Google Scholar
  64. Kisfalvi V, Sergi V, Langley A (2016) Managing and mobilizing microdynamics to achieve behavioral integration in top management teams. Long Range Plan 49(4):427–446CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Klotz AC, Hmieleski KM, Bradley BH, Busenitz LW (2014) New venture teams: a review of the literature and roadmap for future research. J Manag 40(1):226–255Google Scholar
  66. Knight FH (1921) Risk, uncertainty and profit. A.M. Kelley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  67. Lawrence BS (1997) The black box of organizational demography. Organ Sci 8(1):1–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Lechler T (2001) Social interaction: a determinant of entrepreneurial team venture success. Small Bus Econ 16(4):263–278CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Liesch PW, Welch LS, Buckley PJ (2014) Risk and uncertainty in internationalisation and international entrepreneurship studies. In: The multinational enterprise and the emergence of the global factory. Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke, pp 52–77Google Scholar
  70. Ling Y, Simsek Z, Lubatkin MH, Veiga JF (2008) Transformational leadership’s role in promoting corporate entrepreneurship: examining the CEO-TMT interface. Acad Manag J 51(3):557–576CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Lubatkin MH, Simsek Z, Ling Y, Veiga JF (2006) Ambidexterity and performance in small-to medium-sized firms: the pivotal role of top management team behavioral integration. J Manag 32(5):646–672Google Scholar
  72. Lyubomirsky S, King L, Diener E (2005) The benefits of frequent positive affect: does happiness lead to success? Psychol Bull 131:803–855CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. McKelvie A, Haynie JM, Gustavsson V (2011) Unpacking the uncertainty construct: implications for entrepreneurial action. J Bus Ventur 26(3):273–292CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. McMullen JS, Shepherd DA (2006) Entrepreneurial action and the role of uncertainty in the theory of the entrepreneur. Acad Manag Rev 31(1):132–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Mendenhall ME, Butler FC, Ehat AF (2014) Toward a refinement of the meta-construct of behavioral integration in upper echelons theory. Acad Manag Proc 2014(1):11626CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Mohammed S, Nadkarni S (2014) Are we all on the same temporal page? The moderating effects of temporal team cognition on the polychronicity diversity–team performance relationship. J Appl Psychol 99(3):404–422CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Mueller JS, Melwani S, Goncalo JA (2012) The bias against creativity: why people desire but reject creative ideas. Psychol Sci 23(1):13–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Nickerson RS (1999) How we know—and sometimes misjudge—what others know: imputing one's own knowledge to others. Psychol Bull 125(6):737–759CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Okhuysen GA, Waller MJ (2002) Focusing on midpoint transitions: an analysis of boundary conditions. Acad Manag J 45(5):1056–1065Google Scholar
  80. Ott TE, Eisenhardt KM, Bingham CB (2017) Strategy formation in entrepreneurial settings: past insights and future directions. Strateg Entrep J 11(3):306–325CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Packard MD (2017) Where did interpretivism go in the theory of entrepreneurship? J Bus Ventur 32(5):536–549CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Packard MD, Clark BB, Klein PG (2017) Uncertainty types and transitions in the entrepreneurial process. Organ Sci 28(5):840–856CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Pirola-Merlo A, Härtel C, Mann L, Hirst G (2002) How leaders influence the impact of affective events on team climate and performance in R&D teams. Leadersh Q 13(5):561–581CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Podsakoff PM, Organ DW (1986) Self-reports in organization research. Problems and prospects. J Manag 12(4):531–544Google Scholar
  85. Podsakoff PM, MacKenzie SB, Lee JY, Podsakoff NP (2003) Common method biases in behavioural research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. J Appl Psychol 88:879–903CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Ramoglou S, Tsang EW (2016) A realist perspective of entrepreneurship: opportunities as propensities. Acad Manag Rev 41(3):410–434CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Ruef M, Aldrich HE, Carter N (2003) The structure of founding teams: homophily, strong ties, and isolation among U.S. entrepreneurs. Am Sociol Rev 68:195–225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Sarasvathy SD (2001) Causation and effectuation: toward a theoretical shift from economic inevitability to entrepreneurial contingency. Acad Manag Rev 26(2):243–263CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Schippers MC, Edmondson AC, West MA (2014) Team reflexivity as an antidote to team information-processing failures. Small Group Res 45(6):731–769CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Siemsen E, Roth A, Olivera P (2010) Common methods bias in regression models with linear, quadratic, and interaction effects. Organ Res Methods 13(3):456–476CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Simsek Z, Veiga JF, Lubatkin MH, Dino RN (2005) Modeling the multilevel determinants of top management team behavioural integration. Acad Manag J 48(1):69–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Skidelsky R (2009) Keynes. In: The return of the master. Allen Lane, LondonGoogle Scholar
  93. Smith KG, Smith KA, Olian JD, Sims HP, O’Bannon DP, Scully JA (1994) Top management team demography and process: the role of social integration and communication. Adm Sci Q 93(3):412–438CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Smithson M (2008) Psychology’s ambivalent view of uncertainty. In: Bammer G, Smithson M (eds) Uncertainty and risk: multidisciplinary perspectives. Earthscan, London, pp 205–218Google Scholar
  95. Souitaris V, Maestro BM (2010) Polychronicity in top management teams: the impact on strategic decision processes and performance of new technology ventures. Strateg Manag J 31(6):652–678Google Scholar
  96. Stark D (2011) The sense of dissonance: accounts of worth in economic life. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  97. Townsend DM, Hunt RA, McMullen JS, Sarasvathy SD (2018) Uncertainty, knowledge problems, and entrepreneurial action. Acad Manag Ann 12(2):659–687CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Tsui AS, Farh JL (1997) Where guanxi matters. Work Occup 24(1):56–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. Tuckett D, Nikolici M (2017) The role of conviction and narrative in decision-making under radical uncertainty. Theory Psychol 27(4):501–523CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. Tuckett D, Mandel A, Mangalagiu D, Abramson A, Hinkel J, Katsikopoulos K, Kirman A, Malleret T, Mozetic I, Ormerod P, Smith RE, Venturini T, Wilkinson A (2015) Uncertainty, decision science, and policy making: a manifesto for a research agenda. Crit Rev 27(2):213–242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. Van Katwyk PT, Fox S, Spector PE, Kelloway EK (2000) Using the Job-Related Affective Well-Being Scale (JAWS) to investigate affective responses to work stressors. J Occup Health Psychol 5(2):219–230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. Van Knippenberg D, Schippers MC (2007) Work group diversity. Annu Rev Psychol 58:515–541CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. Velamuri SR, Venkataraman S (2005) Why stakeholder and stockholder theories are not necessarily contradictory: a Knightian insight. J Bus Ethics 61(3):249–262CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. Von Hippel W, Trivers R (2011) The evolution and psychology of self-deception. Behav Brain Sci 34(1):1–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. Waller MJ, Giambatista RC, Zellmer-Bruhn ME (1999) The effects of individual time urgency on group polychronicity. J Manag Psychol 14(3/4):244–257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. Wiltbank R, Dew N, Read S, Sarasvathy SD (2006) What to do next? The case for non-predictive strategy. Strateg Manag J 27(10):981–998CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. Zahra SA, Garvis DM, (2000) International corporate entrepreneurship and firm performance: The moderating effect of international environmental hostility. J Bus Venturing 15(5–6):469–492Google Scholar
  108. Zander I (2007) ‘Do you see what I mean?’ An entrepreneurship perspective on the nature and boundaries of the firm. J Manag Stud 44(7):1141–1164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. Zellmer-Bruhn ME (2003) Interruptive events and team knowledge acquisition. Manag Sci 49(4):514–528CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  110. Zuzul T, Edmondson AC (2017) The advocacy trap: when legitimacy building inhibits organizational learning. Acad Manag Discov 3(3):302–321CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Daniel Leunbach
    • 1
    Email author
  • Truls Erikson
    • 1
    • 2
  • Max Rapp-Ricciardi
    • 3
  1. 1.Section for Digitalisation and EntrepreneurshipUniversity of OsloOsloNorway
  2. 2.University of CambridgeCambridgeUK
  3. 3.Department of PsychologyUniversity of GothenburgGöteborgSweden

Personalised recommendations