نوع مقاله : مقالات پژوهشی- کیفی
نویسندگان
1 دانشکده کارآفرینی دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران
2 گروه توسعه کارآفرینی، دانشکده کارآفرینی دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران
3 گروه کسب و کار جدید ، دانشکده کارآفرینی دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران
چکیده
کلیدواژه‌ها
موضوعات
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسندگان [English]
Objective:
The primary objective of this research is to identify and analyze the factors affecting the success of startups, with a specific focus on the distinct personality traits of investors and their impact on investment decisions in initial coin offering. This study aims to investigate how the personality traits of neuroticism and openness to experience influence investment decisions and to explore the role of cognitive legitimacy in moderating these relationships. By integrating theories of personality and legitimacy, this research seeks to provide a deeper understanding of the psychological factors that drive investment behaviors in the context of initial coin offerings (ICOs).
Method:
This study employs a phenomenological research design, leveraging qualitative and quantitative methods to explore the subjective experiences of investors in initial coin offering. The research follows a structured approach encompassing the following steps:
A two-stage sampling process was adopted. In the first stage, tokens from ICOs conducted between 2020 and 2022 were selected using simple random sampling. Reliable sources such as Coinmarketcap.com, Crunchbase.com, and ICOcrunch.com provided the list of tokens. A random selection program written in Python was utilized to choose 40 sample tokens from this list, ensuring an unbiased representation.
Data on investment decisions were collected through a standard questionnaire distributed to a large and diverse sample of investors. The questionnaire was shared via prominent Telegram channels which collectively cover a broad international investor base.
Neuroticism and Openness to Experience traits were measured using a standardized Big Five personality factors questionnaire. Cognitive Legitimacy was assessed through the analysis of social media interactions, particularly on Twitter (X). A developer-created account was used to gather data on tweets containing specific keywords related to the ICOs. The data included tweet content, likes, retweets, user IDs, follower counts, and tweet sentiments categorized as positive, neutral, or negative. Sentiment analysis was performed using the RoBERTa pre-trained language model, known for its high accuracy in text classification tasks.
WarpPLS software was employed to conduct structural equation modeling (SEM), allowing for the examination of complex relationships between variables. The analysis focused on the direct effects of neuroticism and openness to experience on investment decisions, and the moderating effect of cognitive legitimacy. Reliability was tested using Average Variance Extracted (AVE), with thresholds set to ensure convergent validity.
Results:
The study yielded several key findings that highlight the interplay between personality traits, cognitive legitimacy, and investment decisions:
Impact of Neuroticism:
- High levels of neuroticism were found to have a significant negative impact on investment decisions in successful ICOs. Investors characterized by high neuroticism exhibited tendencies towards risk aversion, pessimism, and lower trust in new ventures, making them less likely to participate in these offerings.
Impact of Openness to Experience:
- Conversely, investors with high openness to experience were more inclined to invest in innovative and novel projects. This personality trait positively correlated with investment decisions, as these individuals are typically more open to risk-taking and exploring new opportunities.
Role of Cognitive Legitimacy:
- Cognitive legitimacy significantly enhanced investment decisions. Startups that demonstrated high cognitive legitimacy through transparent and credible actions on social media were more successful in attracting investors. However, cognitive legitimacy did not act as a moderating variable between personality traits and investment decisions but had a strong direct effect on increasing investment decisions.
Hypotheses Testing:
- H1: High neuroticism leads to a decrease in investment in successful initial offerings. (Confirmed)
- H2: Higher cognitive legitimacy of a business leads to more investment in successful products. (Confirmed)
- H3: Cognitive legitimacy moderates the relationship between neuroticism and investment in successful products. (Rejected)
- H4: Openness to experience leads to increased investment in successful initial offerings. (Confirmed)
- H5: Cognitive legitimacy moderates the relationship between openness to experience and investment in successful ventures. (Rejected)
Conclusion:
The research concludes that personality traits, particularly neuroticism and openness to experience, play a crucial role in shaping investment decisions in the context of crowdfunding. Neuroticism negatively influences investment decisions, making individuals with this trait less likely to invest in new ventures. In contrast, openness to experience has a positive impact, with such individuals being more inclined towards innovative investments.
Cognitive legitimacy emerged as a vital factor for attracting investments. Startups that can build strong cognitive legitimacy by maintaining transparency and credibility on social media are more likely to succeed in their fundraising efforts. Although cognitive legitimacy does not moderate the relationship between personality traits and investment decisions, its direct positive impact on investment decisions underscores its importance.
Implications for Practice:
- For Startups: Developing and maintaining cognitive legitimacy through transparent and credible communication on social media is essential for attracting a diverse investor base. Understanding the personality traits of potential investors can help tailor communication strategies to better engage with them.
- For Researchers: The study opens new avenues for exploring the impact of other personality traits and forms of legitimacy on investment decisions. Future research could expand the scope to include traits such as extraversion and conscientiousness, and investigate the effects of moral and pragmatic legitimacy.
The study focuses on two specific personality traits, suggesting a need for future research to consider a broader range of traits. Additionally, exploring other forms of legitimacy, such as moral or pragmatic legitimacy, could provide a more comprehensive understanding of their impact on investment decisions. Longitudinal studies are recommended to examine how these relationships evolve over time, especially in the dynamic and rapidly changing ICO market.
In summary, this research highlights the significant role of personality traits and cognitive legitimacy in influencing investment decisions in the context of crowdfunding. The findings provide valuable insights for startups and campaign developers seeking to enhance their legitimacy and attract diverse investor profiles. The study contributes to the growing field of financial psychology and offers practical recommendations for improving fundraising strategies in the digital age.
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
جلادتی, حسام الدین, و چیت‌ساز. (2023). رمزگشایی تأمین مالی جمعی کسب‌وکارهای نوپا: مشروعیت شناختی عرضه اولیه سکه. مجله پژوهش‌های کارآفرینی. doi:10.22034/JER.2023.2006614.1047
زینالی, محمد مهدی, چیت ساز, احسان, & محمدی الیاسی, قنبر. (1401). ارائه چارچوبی برای توسعه یادگیری کارآفرینانه: مطالعه‌ای در کسب‌وکارهای صنعت فناوری بلاک‌چین. مجله پژوهش‌های کارآفرینی, 1(1), 17-30.
doi: 10.22034/jer.2022.696665
Abedpour, A., Chitsaz, E., & Rostami Asrabadi, S. (2024). Designing a Business Model for Energy Management and Optimization in Iran Using Blockchain Technology. Education and Management of Entrepreneurship, 2(4), 74-59. doi: 10.22126/eme.2023.2505
Abrahamson, E., & Rosenkopf, L. (1993). Institutional and competitive bandwagons: Using mathematical modeling as a tool to explore innovation diffusion. The Academy of Management Review, 18(3), 487–517. https://doi.org/10.2307/258906
Aldrich, H. E., & Fiol, C. M. (1994). Fools Rush in? The Institutional Context of Industry Creation. The Academy of Management Review, 19(4), 645–670. https://doi.org/10.2307/258740
Andrew D. Brown, 1998. "Narrative, Politics and Legitimacy in an IT Implementation," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(1), pages 35-58, January.
https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6486.00083
Benedetti, H. and L. Kostovetsky (2021). Digital tulips? Returns to investors in initial coin offerings. Journal of Corporate Finance, 66: 101786.. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcorpfin.2020.101786
Block, J.H., Colombo, M.G., Cumming, D.J. et al. New players in entrepreneurial finance and why they are there. Small Bus Econ 50, 239–250 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-016-9826-6
Brønn, P.S., Vidaver-Cohen, D. Corporate Motives for Social Initiative: Legitimacy, Sustainability, or the Bottom Line?. J Bus Ethics 87 (Suppl 1), 91–109 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-008-9795-z
Castelló, I., Etter, M. and Årup Nielsen, F. (2016), Strategies of Legitimacy Through Social Media: The Networked Strategy. Jour. of Manage. Stud., 53: 402-432. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12145
Chitsaz, E., & Bigdeli, M. (2021). Identifying the Success Factors Affecting Entrepreneurial Finance using Initial Dex Offering. Journal of Entrepreneurship Development, 14(2), 221-240. doi: 10.22059/jed.2021.312183.653490.
Chitsaz, E., Qorbani, M., & Feili, H. (2020). Identifying the failure factors for crowdfunding using initial coin offering. Journal of Entrepreneurship Development, 13(1), 1-20. http://doi:
10.22059/jed.2020.297121.653257
Choi, Y. R., & Shepherd, D. A. (2005). Stakeholder Perceptions of Age and Other Dimensions of Newness. Journal of Management, 31(4), 573-596. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206304272294
CHRISTENSEN, C.M. and BOWER, J.L. (1996), CUSTOMER POWER, STRATEGIC INVESTMENT, AND THE FAILURE OF LEADING FIRMS. Strat. Mgmt. J., 17: 197-218. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199603)17:3<197::AID-SMJ804>3.0.CO;2-U
Cobb-Clark, D. A. and S. Schurer (2012). The stability of big-five personality traits, Economics Letters, 115(1): 11-15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econlet.2011.11.015.
Coff, R. W. (2002). Human capital, shared expertise, and the likelihood of impasse in corporate acquisitions. Journal of Management, 28(1), 107–128.
https://doi.org/10.1177/014920630202800107
Connelly, B. L., Certo, S. T., Ireland, R. D., & Reutzel, C. R. (2011). Signaling Theory: A Review and Assessment. Journal of Management, 37(1), 39-67. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206310388419
Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Four ways five factors are basic. Personality and Individual Differences, 13(6), 653-665. https://doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869(92)90236-I
Czaja, D. and Röder, F. (2022), Signalling in Initial Coin Offerings: The Key Role of Entrepreneurs’ Self-efficacy and Media Presence. Abacus, 58: 24-61. https://doi.org/10.1111/abac.12223
Deeds, D. L., Mang, P. Y., & Frandsen, M. L. (2004). The influence of firms’ and industries’ legitimacy on the flow of capital into high-technology ventures. Strategic Organization, 2(1), 9-34 https://doi.org/10.1177/1476127004040913
DiMaggio, P.J. and Powell, W.W. (2000), "The iron cage revisited institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields", Baum, J.A.C. and Dobbin, F. (Ed.) Economics Meets Sociology in Strategic Management (Advances in Strategic Management, Vol. 17), Emerald Group Publishing Limited, Leeds, pp. 143-166. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0742-3322(00)17011-1
Drobetz, W., Momtaz, P. P., & Schröder, H. (2019). Investor sentiment and initial coin offerings. Journal of Alternative Investments, 21(4), 41-55. https://doi.org/10.3905/jai.2019.1.069
Elitzur, R. and A. Gavious (2003). Contracting, signaling, and moral hazard: a model of entrepreneurs, ‘angels,’ and venture capitalists, Journal of Business Venturing, 18(6), 709-725,
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0883-9026(03)00027-2.
Elnaj, S. (2018). "The Problems with Bitcoin and the Future of Blockchain." Forbes.
Engle, D. E., Mah, J. J., & Sadri, G. (1997). An empirical comparison of entrepreneurs and employees: Implications for innovation. Creativity Research Journal, 10(1), 45–49.
https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326934crj1001_5
Evans, L. (2010). Social media marketing: strategies for engaging in Facebook, Twitter & other social media, Pearson Education.
Filatotchev, I. and Bishop, K. (2002), Board composition, share ownership, and ‘underpricing’ of U.K. IPO firms. Strat. Mgmt. J., 23: 941-955. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.269
Fisch, C. (2019). Initial coin offerings (ICOs) to finance new ventures, Journal of Business Venturing, 34(1), 1-22, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2018.09.007.
Fisch, C., Masiak, C., Vismara, S., & Block, J. (2021). Motives and profiles of ICO investors. Journal of Business Research, 125, 564-576. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.07.036.
Fornell, C., & Bookstein, F. L. (1982). Two Structural Equation Models: LISREL and PLS Applied to Consumer Exit-Voice Theory. Journal of Marketing Research, 19(4), 440-452.
https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378201900406.
Gompers, P., Kovner, A., Lerner, J., & Scharfstein, D. (2008). Venture capital investment cycles: The impact of public markets. Journal of financial economics, 87(1), 1-23.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2006.12.002
Haunschild, P.R., & Miner, A.S. (1997). Modes of Interorganizational Imitation: The Effects of Outcome Salience and Uncertainty. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42, 472-500.
https://doi.org/10.2307/2393735
Haveman, H. A. and R. J. David (2008). "Ecologistsand institutionalists: Friends or foes." The sage handbook of organizational institutionalism, 595-573.
Hayes, A. F., & Preacher, K. J. (2010). Quantifying and testing indirect effects in simple mediation models when the constituent paths are nonlinear. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 45(4), 627–660. https://doi.org/10.1080/00273171.2010.498290
He, H. and Baruch, Y. 2010. Organizational identity and legitimacy under major environmental changes: tales of two UK building societies. British Journal of Management. 21 (1), pp. 44-62.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8551.2009.00666.x
Hendijani Fard M, Arasti Z, Imanipour N, Chitsaz E. (2024). Developing a model for the post-failure social and psychological processes among Iranian entrepreneurs: A narrative research. Journal of Psychological Science. 22(132), 2393-2415. https://doi:10.52547/JPS.22.132.2393
Hill, J. andJ. Hill (2018). "Fintech and government regulation." Fintech and the remaking of financial institutions: 285-314.
Janney, J. J. and T. B. Folta(2023), Signaling through private equity placements and its impact on the valuation of biotechnology firms, Journal of Business Venturing, 18(3), 361-380, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0883-9026(02)00100-3.
Judge, T. A., Higgins, C. A., Thoresen, C. J., & Barrick, M. R. (1999). The Big Five personality traits, general mental ability, and career success across the life span. Personnel Psychology, 52(3), 621–652. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1999.tb00174.x
Khatami, S. M., Chitsaz, E., Ahmadpour Daryani, M., & Jaladati, H. M. (2024). Revenue Model and Value Proposition in On-demand Insurtech. Journal of Business Administration Researches, 15(34), 141-173. https://Doi: 10.22034/jbar.2024.19865.4293
Kirmani, A., & Rao, A. R. (2000). No Pain, No Gain: A Critical Review of the Literature on Signaling Unobservable Product Quality. Journal of Marketing, 64(2), 66-79.
https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.64.2.66.18000.
Liu, Y., Ott, M., Goyal, N., Du, J., Joshi, M., Chen, D., Levy, O., Lewis, M., Zettlemoyer, L., & Stoyanov, V. (2019). RoBERTa: A Robustly Optimized BERT Pretraining Approach. ArXiv, abs/1907.11692.
McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T., Jr. (2008). The five-factor theory of personality. In O. P. John, R. W. Robins, & L. A. Pervin (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (3rd ed., pp. 159–181). The Guilford Press.
McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (1987). Validation of the five-factor model of personality across instruments and observers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52(1), 81–90. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.52.1.81
Melnikovas, A. (2018). "Towards an Explicit Research Methodology: Adapting Research Onion Model for Futures Studies." Journal of futures Studies, December 2018, 23(2): 29–44,
https://doi.org/10.6531/JFS.201812_23(2).0003
Moezzi, A., Chitsaz, E., Ahmadi, M. (2024). Navigating the Future: Understanding Key Success Factors and Challenges in Web 3 Entrepreneurship. Management Research in Iran,
Moisseyev, A. (2013). "Effect of social media on crowdfunding project results."
10.1109/MTS.2015.2494358.
Ozlati, F., noori fard, Y., Emam verdi, G., Darabi, R., & Hajiha, Z. (2021). Voluntary Disclosure of Non-financial Information, Audit Quality and Their Effects; With Emphasis on Matching Signaling Theory and Legitimacy Theory. Journal of Management Accounting and Auditing Knowledge, 10(38), 67-86.
Pollack, J. M., Rutherford, M. W., & Nagy, B. G. (2012). Preparedness and cognitive legitimacy as antecedents of new venture funding in televised business pitches. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 36(5), 915-939. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2012.00531.x
Rao, R. S., Chandy, R. K., & Prabhu, J. C. (2008). The fruits of legitimacy: Why some new ventures gain more from innovation than others. Journal of Marketing, 72(4), 58-75.
Riley, John, G. 2001. "Silver Signals: Twenty-Five Years of Screening and Signaling." Journal of Economic Literature, 39 (2): https://doi.org/432–478.DOI: 10.1257/jel.39.2.432
Scott, W. R. (2013). Institutions and organizations: Ideas, interests, and identities, Sage publications.
Song, L. Z., Song, M., & Di Benedetto, C. A. (2011). Resources, supplier investment, product launch advantages, and first product performance. Journal of Operations Management, 29(1-2), 86-104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2010.07.003
Spence, M. (1978), JOB MARKET SIGNALING, Academic Press, 281-306,
https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-214850-7.50025-5.
Stanko, M. A. and D. H. Henard (2017). Toward a better understanding of crowdfunding, openness and the consequences for innovation. Research Policy46(4): 784-798, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2017.02.003
Suchman, Mark C. Managing Legitimacy: Strategic and Institutional Approaches. The Academy of Management Review, vol. 20, no. 3, 1995, pp. 571–610. JSTOR, https://doi.org/10.2307/258788. Accessed 7 Sept. 2024.
Suls, J., Green, P., & Hillis, S. (1998). Emotional reactivity to everyday problems, affective inertia, and neuroticism. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24(2), 127–136.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167298242002.
Treviño, L. K., den Nieuwenboer, N. A., Kreiner, G. E., & Bishop, D. G. (2014). Legitimating the legitimate: A grounded theory study of legitimacy work among Ethics and Compliance Officers. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 123(2), 186–205.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2013.10.009
Wang, T., Song, M., & Zhao, Y. L. (2014). Legitimacy and the Value of Early Customers. Journal of product innovation management, 31(5), 1057-1075. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12144
Wang, W., Zhu, K., Wang, H., & Wu, Y. C. J. (2017). The impact of sentiment orientations on successful crowdfunding campaigns through text analytics. IET Software, 11(5), 229-238.
Zhang, Yan, and Margarethe F. Wiersema. Stock Market Reaction to CEO Certification: The Signaling Role of CEO Background. Strategic Management Journal, vol. 30, no. 7, 2009, pp. 693–710. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/20536072. Accessed 7 Sept. 2024.
Zhao, H., & Seibert, S. E. (2006). The Big Five personality dimensions and entrepreneurial status: A meta-analytical review. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(2), 259–271.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.91.2.259.
Zimmerman, M.A. and Zeitz, G.J. (2002) Beyond Survival: Achieving New Venture Growth by Building Legitimacy. Academy of Management Review, 27, 414-431.
https://doi.org/10.2307/4134387
)