Talking Your Way into Entrepreneurial Support: An Analysis of Satisfaction Drivers in Entrepreneur Mutual Aid Groups

Abstract

The role of organized peer networks in entrepreneurial support systems has been surprisingly neglected in the literature, despite their undisputed effectiveness in numerous areas outside the entrepreneurship realm. This study explores the efficacy of mutual aid groups for entrepreneurial support, as theoretically distinct from other group‐based mechanisms (such as peer group mentoring and many to one group mentoring). Drawing from respondent data of small, local mutual aid groups within the global entrepreneurship support organization (2,869 responses from members of 540 groups worldwide), we investigate the factors determining the entrepreneurs' satisfaction with the entrepreneur mutual aid groups. Understanding the antecedents of members' subjective satisfaction with the group serves an essential first step toward developing the models explaining the objective effectiveness of these organizations (e.g., performance, survival, and growth), in that the former is an essential, necessary condition for continuing participation in the voluntary mutual aid groups. Our analysis reveals that group climate and leadership are important drivers of group satisfaction.

Helping Entrepreneurs Help Themselves: A Review and Relational Research Agenda on Entrepreneurial Support Organizations

“…Finally, the most prevalent studies at this level are those that report individuals’ access to ESO resources and services during participation. This set primarily consists of self-reported survey responses to issues such as ESO resource availability/usage, perceptions of “value” or “quality” concerning various offerings, or overall satisfaction with participation (e.g., Arlotto et al, 2011; Marimuthu & Lakha, 2015; Sarkar et al, 2019; Tötterman & Sten, 2005; Voisey et al, 2006). To explore the heterogeneity in these preferences and ratings between individuals (i.e., entrepreneurs) and between individuals and ESO managers (as observed by van Weele et al, 2017), a separate group of studies within this subset explore these preferences and ratings alongside different individual characteristics, such as human capital, entrepreneurial experience, and cultural differences (e.g., Albort-Morant & Oghazi, 2016; Dahms & Kingkaew, 2016; Pandey et al, 2017).…”

Effect of Mentorship on the Early Entrepreneurial Journey of University Students

“…While mentoring relationships can be offered in several forms, the most popular at universities is in a dyad form, i.e., one-to-one. Even though engaging with professional mentors on a one-to-one basis can help increase a CEEA-ACEG21; Paper 226 University of Prince Edward Island; June 21 -23, 2021-5 of 7 -student's confidence with interacting with professionals [35], this form of interaction can also introduce a hierarchy [15], [45] in which mentors take a leading role and mentees follow. While this type of one-way exchange of knowledge is helpful in many cases, it very much depends on the mentor's credibility and ability to lead the mentee in the right direction.…”

“…Unlike a dyad mentoring approach, a lateral relationship often found in peer-group mentoring is a twoway exchange of knowledge. While both mentoring relationships form strong ties, peer mentoring groups experience higher motivation for mentoring as they are united by a common purpose, to learn and support each other [45]. Hierarchy dissolves as each group member shares a valuable and unique experience [15].…”

Advice to Entrepreneurs and Small Business

“…Therefore, entrepreneurs access to mentors is distributed unequally; moreover a "Matthew effect" exists where contacts accumulate in a process called preferential attachment (Perry-Smith and Mannucci 2017). Peer networks online have been shown to provide practical advice (Kuhn and Galloway 2015, Sarkar, Osiyevskyy and Hayes 2019, Brown and Butler 1995 but in contrast to preferential attachment, existing peer networks legacy-ties can constrain businesses from reaching new contacts (Hasan and Koning 2019). The sociological literature demonstrates the power of reciprocity in advice networks (Mirc and Parker 2020) and transitivity, where networks increase their density over time leading to 'small world networks'.…”