The effects of personal-organizational fit on employee’s positive work attitudes: An entrepreneurial orientation perspective Текст научной статьи по специальности «Экономика и бизнес»

DOI: 10.29141/2218-5003-2024-15-1-2 EDN: JXONRO

JEL Classification: J24, L26, M54

The effects of personal-organizational fit on employee's positive work attitudes: An entrepreneurial orientation perspective

Zuo Wenjun1, Svetlana V. Panikarova1,2, Li Zhiyuan3

1 Ural Federal University named after the first President of Russia B.N. Yeltsin, Ekaterinburg, Russia

2 Institute of Economics of the Ural Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Ekaterinburg, Russia

3 East China Normal University, Shanghai, China

Abstract. Entrepreneurial orientation (EO) has become a critical characteristic for individual career advancement and the development of corporate entrepreneurship. Nevertheless, the connection between personal-organizational fit regarding EO and the working attitudes of employees remains underexplored in the existing literature. This paper explores the impact of alignment between organizational entrepreneurial orientation (OEO) and individual entrepreneurial orientation (IEO) on employee's positive work attitudes, focusing on affective commitment (AC) and organizational identity (OI). The foundation of research resides in the personal-organization fit theory, as well as social information processing theory. To rigorously evaluate our proposed hypotheses, we implemented a research design that incorporates polynomial regression with surface response analysis, sourcing our data from 292 valid survey replies gathered from personnel employed by private sector organizations in China. Results reveal a positive correlation between entrepreneurial orientation and positive work attitudes, but also a "too-much-of-a-good-thing" effect, where excessive alignment between IEO and OEO can lead to diminished positive work attitudes. These findings highlight the need for a balanced approach to aligning entrepreneurial values during recruitment and underscore the importance of supporting entrepreneurial employees in highly entrepreneurial organizations.

Keywords: entrepreneurial orientation; positive work attitudes; affective commitment; organizational identity; polynomial regression; China.

Funding: This article was prepared with the financial support of the China Scholarship Council (project no. 202310100005 "Labour Productivity and Creativity in the New Economy: An Intrapreneurship Perspective").

Acknowledgements: We express our gratitude to the anonymous reviewers and editors for their valuable contributions to our work.

Article info: received October 30, 2023; received in revised form December 11, 2023; accepted December 22, 2023

For citation: Wenjun Z., Panikarova S.V., Zhiyuan L. (2024). The effects of personal-organizational fit on employee's positive work attitudes: An entrepreneurial orientation perspective. Upravlenets/The Manager, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 15-34. DOI: 10.29141/22185003-2024-15-1-2. EDN: JXONRO.

M

о

M

et

et а.

Роль соответствия личности и организации в формировании положительного отношения сотрудников к труду: предпринимательские ориентации

Ц. Вэньцзюнь1, С.В. Паникарова1,2, Л. Чжиюань3

1 Уральский федеральный университет имени первого Президента России Б.Н. Ельцина, г. Екатеринбург, РФ

2 Институт экономики Уральского отделения Российской академии наук, г. Екатеринбург, РФ

3 Восточно-Китайский педагогический университет, г. Шанхай, Китай

Аннотация. Предпринимательская ориентация (EO) - важная характеристика индивидуального карьерного роста и развития корпоративного предпринимательства. Тем не менее связь между соответствием личности и организации (person-organization fit) в отношении EO и рабочими установками сотрудников остается недостаточно изученной в существующей научной литературе. Статья посвящена исследованию влияния согласованности между организационной предпринимательской ориентацией (OEO) и индивидуальной предпринимательской ориентацией (IEO) на рабочие установки сотрудников с акцентом на их аффективную приверженность (AC) компании и организационную идентичность (OI). Методологическая основа исследования представлена концепциями соответствия личности и организации (P-O Fit) и обработки социальной информации (SIPT). Проверка выдвинутых гипотез реализована с помощью аналитической конструкции, основанной на методе полиномиальной регрессии с анализом поверхности отклика. Информационную базу работы составили данные опроса 292 респондентов - работников частных предприятий Китая, отобранных методом удобной выборки. Результаты исследования свидетельствуют, во-первых, о наличии положительной корреляции между предпринимательской ориентацией и позитивными рабочими установками работников и, во-вторых, о существовании эффекта «слишком много хорошего», когда чрезмерная согласованность IEO и OEO способна привести к снижению мотивации работников к труду. Полученные результаты подчеркивают необходимость использования сбалансированного подхода при согласовании предпринимательских ценностей в процессе найма персонала и важность поддержки предпринимательски ориентированных сотрудников в проактивных предпринимательских организациях.

2 Ключевые слова: предпринимательская ориентация; позитивные установки сотрудников; аффективная привержен-

й ность; организационная идентичность; полиномиальная регрессия; Китай.

I Финансирование: Статья подготовлена при финансовой поддержке Китайского совета по стипендиям (проект

Я № 202310100005 «Трудовая производительность и креативность в новой экономике: перспективы интрапренерства»). о

ÎJ Благодарность: Авторы выражают благодарность рецензентам и редакторам за их ценный вклад в работу.

ш

5 Информация о статье: поступила 30 октября 2023 г.; доработана 11 декабря 2023 г.; одобрена 22 декабря 2023 г.

« Ссылка для цитирования: Wenjun Z., Panikarova S.V., Zhiyuan L. (2024). The effects of personal-organizational fit on employ-

jjj ee's positive work attitudes: An entrepreneurial orientation perspective // Управленец. Т. 15, № 1. С. 15-34. DOI: 10.29141/22185003-2024-15-1-2. EDN: JXONRO.

INTRODUCTION

With the advent of Industry 4.0, the commercial sphere and conditions of employment have experienced a profound metamorphosis, propelled by the swift progress in information technology, an accelerated circulation of goods, services, and capital at both national and international levels, and an intensifying fragmentation of production, commerce, and consumption [Kolot, Herasymenko, 2020]. These developments have ushered in a dual-faced scenario for incumbent organizations, teeming with both prospects and uncertainties. On one front, this metamorphosis necessitates that business leaders cultivate an entrepreneurial ethos, empowering them to pinpoint and capitalize on market opportunities amidst prevailing uncertainties, thereby catalysing a process of creative destruction to elevate organizational performance [Schumpeter, Swedberg, 2021]. In other respects, the evolving commercial terrain has precipitated significant changes in the labour market. Scholars have posited that the rise of a new phase of neocapitalism, marked by the aforementioned characteristics, has heralded the onset of the post-employment era [Nystrom, 2018], characterized by a dwindling stability in employment, a heightened expectation for continuous diligence, and a deepening wage disparity [Reich, 2002]. To maintain employability and mitigate the negative impacts of "neoliberal hegemony," there is an increasing imperative for wage laborers to adopt an entrepreneurial orientation [Avle et al., 2019; Ikonen, 2013].

As a result, the inherent duality of entrepreneurial orientation (EO), which involves organizational and labour aspects, presents a significant imperative within the current business landscape. This notion is consistent with recent scholarly investigations into EO [Covin et al., 2020; Wales, Gupta, Mousa, 2013], which delineate two intersecting spheres: individual entrepreneurial orientation (IEO) at the individual level and organizational entrepreneurial orientation (OEO) at the corporate level. Within the framework of this research, scholars have categorized their investigations into various themes, revealing a dual-tiered exploration of EO. However, the scant attention given to the dual nature of EO has left a gap in the understanding of the interaction between personal

and organizational levels of EO. Equally underexplored are the ramifications of this dual-level EO on employees' work attitudes.

From the standpoint of organizational science, it is noteworthy that attitudes held by laborers in the context of their work, encompassing their sentiments towards various facets of the working environment, have long been recognized as significant predictive factors influencing employee work intentions and consequent behaviours [Pollack et al., 2020]. This provides a robust rationale for our research focus on two pivotal attitudes: affective commitment (AC) and organizational identity (OI), both widely acknowledged as being closely linked to critical work-related outcomes [De Giorgio et al., 2023; Vanden-berghe, Bentein, Stinglhamber, 2004]. Conversely, it is essential to acknowledge that an employee's personal EO does not consistently align with the overarching EO of the organization they are affiliated with [Abualoush et al., 2022; Das, 2023; Yang, Pu, Guan, 2019]. This incongruity can be effectively elucidated by the presence of moral hazard issues stemming from information asymmetry within the internal labour market. In contemporary economic discourse, this confluence of moral hazard challenges is often integrated into the broader framework of principal-agent problems [Madhavan et al., 2023], particularly when considering corporate governance concerns. Leveraging the principal-agent theory, incongruence in EO between employees and the organization can be attributed to four primary factors [Zhang, 2013]. Firstly, employees may exhibit a reluctance to embrace risk when compared to business owners or shareholders. Secondly, the capacity to shoulder responsibilities differs across ordinary employees, managers at various hierarchical levels, and shareholders. Thirdly, distinctions arise in the preferences and objectives of ordinary employees, managers at different tiers, and shareholders. Finally, the actions of employees may prove challenging to monitor.

To address this research gap, the purpose of the current study is to investigate the repercussions that stem from the congruence between OEO and IEO, particularly concerning the cultivation of positive work-related attitudes among employees. The primary focus is placed

on the dimensions of AC and OI. To elucidate the relationship between these variables and facilitate the achievement of our research purpose, the study sets forth specific research objectives: (1) to scrutinize the influence of either OEO or IEO on the positive work attitudes of employees, paying meticulous attention to the significance, strength, and direction of the relationship between EO and positive work attitudes, and (2) to investigate how the alignment between OEO and IEO manifests in positive work attitudes.

This paper is structured as follows. Firstly, in the formulation of our research hypotheses, we drew upon a comprehensive review of social information processing theory (SIPT) and personal-organization (P-O) fit theory. Furthermore, these hypotheses are substantiated by pertinent empirical research that lends credence to our propositions. The ensuing sections of this study encompass a delineation of our methodological approach, including the precise measures employed for key variables, the data collection procedures, and the strategies for data analysis. Then, we present the data analysis results, such as the data quality examination result and hypotheses verification result. Lastly, we conclude this article with the result discussion and implications and point out the limitations and future research directions.

THEORETICAL BACKGROUND

EO at two levels. Within the realm of organizational research, the investigation of EO has yielded two distinct focal points: the individual level [Clark et al., 2023; Covin et al., 2020; Langkamp Bolton, Lane, 2012; Wenjun, 2023] and the corporate level [Soares, Perin, 2019; Wiklund, Shepherd, 2005; Yang, Pu, Guan, 2019]. Implementing EO within a corporation represents a comprehensive approach aimed at sustaining its competitive advantage [Iqbal et al., 2021]. Within such entrepreneurial enterprises, individuals possessing an entrepreneurial mindset constitute a crucial human resource, essential for the pursuit of corporate objectives [Das, 2023].

OEO is characterized as the process of formulating strategies that equip organizations with a foundation for entrepreneurial decisions and activities [Rauch et al., 2009]. It is widely recognized as playing a crucial role in bolstering a firm's performance by stimulating companies to proactively introduce product innovations, explore potential opportunities, and prioritize the development of new products [Li, Liu, Zhao, 2006]. Consequently, firms demonstrating this corporate attribute are typically perceived as dynamic, adaptable entities poised to capitalize on emerging prospects [Kuratko, Goldsby, Hornsby, 2018].

According to Clark et al. [2023], IEO is described as the "autonomous, proactive, innovative, competitive, and risk-taking dispositions and behaviours that individuals exhibit when pursuing value-creating opportunities." For an enterprise focused on entrepreneurial pursuits, the incorporation of individual entrepreneurial capacities within

the corporate framework is pivotal for driving innovation ° and achieving the objectives of corporate entrepreneur- 3 ship [Kuratko, Hornsby, McKelvie, 2023]. Apart from its rel- I evance in the internal labour market, scholarly discourse g has recognized the prevalence of entrepreneurial indi- £ viduals as a widespread labour phenomenon, highlight- < ing their significance as a vital soft skill for navigating the | increasingly volatile economic landscape. Specifically, x scholarly discourse suggests that EO could extend to £ encompass a prevalent disposition within the workforce, 5 implying that individuals such as corporate innovators | [Duane Ireland, Kuratko, Morris, 2006], managerial figures £ [Covin, Slevin, 2017], and employees [Hwang, Shin, 2019] are inclined towards organizational entrepreneurship. In general, entrepreneurially oriented individuals are characterized as independent and self-reliant individuals who hold entrepreneurial beliefs that are reflected in their daily activities [Pidduck, Clark, Lumpkin, 2023]. However, they may not necessarily conform to the traditional definition of an entrepreneur who initiates a business venture [Clark et al., 2023].

SIPT as a Foundational Theory. Put forth by Salancik and Pfeffer in 1978, SIPT emerged as a response to the critical assessment of the conventional Need-Satisfaction (NS) model. Their critique pinpointed four primary limitations inherent in traditional NS models, such as Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs, Alderfer's ERG theory, and Frederick Herzberg's Two-Factor Theory [Salancik, Pfeffer, 1978]. First and foremost, these traditional NS models struggle to provide a comprehensive elucidation of the nature of needs. They often categorically assign needs to either innate or learned origins. This generalized classification poses a significant challenge for scientists seeking to predict human behaviour, given the inherent ambiguity and variability of the antecedent variables. Secondly, the vague definition of needs, a characteristic of traditional NS models, renders them easily accepted as explanations but ultimately devoid of scientific verifiability. They highlight the significance of Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs in elucidating the ambiguity surrounding higher-order needs. While fundamental needs such as "physiological" and "safety" are explicitly characterized, the elucidation of needs in the higher tiers remains enigmatic and susceptible to subjective perspectives. Thirdly, contemporary scholars have critically challenged the fundamental assumption of NS models, which postulate that job or task environmental attributes are indicative of external, objective realities. Rather, these scholars argue that such attributes should be perceived as subjective social constructions and representations of the work environment.

Figure 1 presents the main variables and the relationship between those variables. Specifically, it shows the transmission mechanism from the characteristics of the work or task environment to the attitude (need), from the attitude (need) to the behaviour, and the feedback mechanism from the behaviour to the attitude (need). Based on

ю ■н s

*

сч о сч

Social Reality Construction Processes

Enactment Process

I

Social Information

I_

Attributional Process

Job or Task Enviromental Characteristics

Perceptual/Judgement Processes

Attitudes-Needs

i к Evaluation/Choice Process

Behaviors

4

Social Influence/Social Information

Fig. 1. A social information processing approach to attitudes, behaviour, and job characteristics1 Рис. 1. Логическая модель оценки отношений, поведения и характеристик работы

the proposed theoretical framework, it is posited that the construct of OEO represents a socially constructed characteristic within the work environment, that is inherently shaped by IEO. Within this analytical framework, our selection of SIPT as the foundational theoretical underpinning becomes justifiable as this theory effectively elucidates the dynamics of work-related attitudes arising from the interplay between OEI and IEO. Salancik and Pfeffer [1978] further posit that the construction of one's needs and attitudes is influenced by the information contained in a specific social context. Consequently, both needs and attitudes are constructed by employees, and they utilize needs and attitudes to depict and understand their own or their colleague's working behaviour.

According to SIPT, the formation of job characteristics is a process of social construction, among which social information and personal cognitive style play a key role. Consequently, when employees perceive OEO, an emerging job characteristic in today's business environment, they use their social information around them and their personal traits. This perception of the organizational entrepreneurial orientation, according to the rationale of SIPT, has an influence on the employees' attitudes. Under the framework of SIPT, IEO can be understood as an inherent personal trait that influences the perceptual or judgment processes. Consequently, it can be argued that the interplay between OEO as a job characteristic and an employee's IEO as a trait affecting the judgment process might impact the employee's positive work attitudes, specifically AC and OI, which are the focal points of our research. Drawing from the principles of SIPT and the defined concepts of IEO and OEO, we formulate the following hypotheses:

Hypothesis 1: Both OEO and IEO positively contribute to employee's AC.

Hypothesis 2: Both OEO and IEO positively contribute to employee's OI.

1 Source: remade by the authors using Microsoft Visio based on Salancik and Pfeffer [1978].

P-O fit and Working attitudes. It is widely recognized that human conduct is shaped through ongoing exchanges between the individual and their surroundings, as proposed in the need-press theory by Murray and Mc-Adams [2007] and the concept of interactional psychology by Terborg [1981]. According to the perspective held by Kristof [1996], P-O fit denotes a continuous interaction that arises from the alignment between individuals and the organization. This alignment is characterized by the fulfilment of each party's requirements, the presence of shared fundamental traits, or both. Besides, there can be two types of congruencies under the P-O fit framework: complementary congruence and supplementary congruence [González, Greve, 2023]. Complementary congruen-cy suggests that the individual possesses attributes that fill the gaps or deficiencies within the organization, creating a complementary relationship between the individual and the organization, while supplementary congruence suggests that the individual and the organization possess similar fundamental attributes or values, resulting in a harmonious relationship that is based on shared beliefs and principles.

The complex interplay between the alignment of personal and organizational factors significantly influences employee attitudes and behaviours, presenting a nuanced model. In their study, Wiegand, Drasgow and Rounds [2021] explored the dynamics between interest fit, interest misfit, and job satisfaction across different interest types, categorizing interests as realistic, investigative, artistic, social, enterprising, and conventional, following Holland's [1997] framework. The findings highlighted an asymmetric relationship between interest misfit and job satisfaction, with variations in job satisfaction levels even within interest fit scenarios. Argyris [1957] also contributed to this discourse, suggesting that the level of congruence or incongruence between these elements can lead to diverse outcomes. He proposed that a certain degree of misalignment between an individual's preferences and job requirements could act as a catalyst for motivation.

It is inherently acknowledged that disparities exist be-

tween organizational structures and employee predispositions in managerial settings. The debate on the appropriate strategies to achieve the desired alignment remains unresolved in scholarly discussions. While some academics propose that individuals should actively conform to the organizational environment, Argyris argues for a reconfiguration of organizational frameworks to align with employee aspirations. He asserted that restructuring organizations to enhance employees' perceived control and participation in decision-making, subsequently reducing incongruence, is likely to produce positive results.

Working attitudes represent a frequently explored outcome in studies investigating the alignment between an individual and their work environment. Verquer, Beehr and Wagner [2003] delineated three principal reasons accounting for the prevalent use of work attitudes as the dependent variable in P-O fit research. Initially, relative to constructs like behaviour and work outputs, the measurement of working attitude is relatively straightforward, relying on subjective assessments derived from self-reported data using standardized scales. Secondly, prevalent theories and models emphasize the substantial impact of the interplay between an individual and their environment on working attitudes. This proposition finds support in Locke's [1976] theory of job satisfaction and Schneider's [1987] ASA model. Finally, compared to other dependent variables, a more consistent and significant association is observed in studies exploring the relationship between personal-environment fit and working attitudes.

AC and P-E fit. This study focuses on two central working attitudes: AC and OI. AC is characterized as a motivational condition, expressing the extent and consistency of employees' emotional engagement in their roles, as outlined by Kahn [1990]. The hypothesis of this research posits a positive correlation between the alignment of IEO and OEO, contributing to heightened levels of AC among employees. Hornsby et al. [1993] delineated five dimensions - management support, work discretion, rewards, time availability, and organizational boundaries - to assess the efficacy of an entrepreneurial organizational climate. In alignment with these parameters, it is imperative for entrepreneurial organizations to enhance AC among their workforce, thus fostering a supportive environment for entrepreneurial activities. Building upon this framework, Kassa and Raju [2015] postulated and substantiated that a considerable portion of the variance in commitment dimensions is attributable to variables associated with corporate entrepreneurship.

The Social Exchange Theory (SET) provides a theoretical lens to elucidate the interplay between IEO and OEO and its subsequent impact on AC among employees. SET proposes that mutual beneficial interactions between two entities foster commitment, arising from a state of reciprocal dependency [Saks, 2006]. In essence, each party is expected to reciprocate in kind for the other's contributions or sacrifices. To address the moral hazard issues

inherent in principal-agent relationships, corporations ° with an entrepreneurial orientation are thus compelled 3 to actively foster positive employee attitudes towards en- I trepreneurial initiatives. Drawing upon the SET and P-E fit g theories, the study formulates the following hypothesis 2 for further examination: <

Hypothesis 3: A positive correlation exists between IEO- | OEO fit, and an employee's AC. Specifically, in scenarios x where there is a "high-high" alignment of IEO and OEO, as £ opposed to a "low-low" congruence, employees tend to ex- 5 hibit a heightened level of AC. |

OI and P-E fit. OI is assumed to be the degree of the £ individual's broad personal identification with the organization. Increasing OI can be one of the main managerial goals as it can simultaneously benefit the organization's outcomes such as low turnover intention [Shaikh et al., 2022], employees' innovative behaviour [Zhang, Wang, 2022], job performance [Lee, Zablah, Noble, 2023], and individuals through outcomes such as self-esteem [George, Chattopadhyay, 2005], sense of security [Ashforth et al., 2013], and self-development [Sluss et al., 2012]. Based on the studies of Ashforth and Mael [1989], the concept of OI has been closely related to social identity theory, which was proposed by Tajfel and Turner [1979]. The core position of this theory is that individuals derive a portion of their self-concept from their membership in the social groups, which seeks to explain the cognitive processes and social conditions underlying intergroup behaviour. Applying this theory to organizational groups, it is thought that with the activation of OI, the members of the organization no longer appear as unique individuals but as members of the organization [Voci, 2006]. With this OI in the employee's self-concept, OI forms a basis for explaining its organizational outcomes.

One of the most important antecedents of OI is P-O fit [Pratt, 1998]. Unal's [2014] research identified a significant relationship between P-E fit and OI, among which AC plays a mediating role. Zorlu, Avan and Baytok's [2019] research based on samples from 193 academicians reveals that an employee's fit for the organization plays a mediating role in the relationship between perceived organizational support and OI. Concretely, in their research, they find that organizational support does not statistically show a direct significant relationship with OI but indirectly contributes to OI through perceived fit between themselves and the organization. Thus, we generate the below hypothesis:

Hypothesis 4: A positive correlation exists between IEO-OEO fit and an employee's OI. Specifically, in scenarios where there is a "high-high" alignment of IEO and OEO, as opposed to a "low-low" congruence, employees tend to exhibit a heightened level of OI.

RESEARCH METHOD

Sampling strategy. A convenience sampling approach was utilized to administer an online survey targeting indi-

viduals identified as "employed" within China's private en-3 terprise sector. The survey distribution encompassed vari-£ ous channels, such as social media platforms like WeChat g and Douban, in addition to survey tools like Tencent Sur-£ vey. To guarantee data integrity, stringent screening crite-£ ria were implemented, which included specific screening | questions and a minimum completion time of 120 sec-1 onds. Respondents meeting these stipulations were acknowledged with a nominal 2 CNY (roughly 0.3 USD) incentive. The survey yielded 353 responses, of which 292 were validated, marking a retention rate of 82.71%.

Table 1 provides a detailed breakdown of the respondent demographics. Out of the 292 valid responses, 96 respondents identified with a male gender role, making up 32.9%, while 196 respondents identified as female, comprising 67.1%; 219 respondents were aged between 18 and 30, representing 75%; and 73 respondents were aged between 31 and 40, constituting 25%. Educational qualifications were varied, with 166 respondents (56.8%) having attained a bachelor's degree, while 126 (43.2%) held a master's or doctoral degree. In terms of income levels, 145 respondents earned below 6,000 CNY, which is 49.7%; 35 respondents had earnings ranging between 6,000 and 8,000 CNY, which equates to 12%; 22 respondents earned between 8,000 and 10,000 CNY, representing 7.5%; lastly, 90 respondents reported earnings above 10,000 CNY, which is 30.8%.

Table 1 - Characteristics of the respondents Таблица 1 - Характеристики респондентов

Variables Items Number Proportion, %

Gender Male 96 32.9

Female 196 67.1

Age 18-30 219 75

31-40 73 25

Education Undergraduate 166 56.8

Master's or doctoral degree 126 43.2

Income Below 6,000 CNY 145 49.7

6,000-8,000 CNY 35 12

8,000-10,000 CNY 22 7.5

Above 10,000 CNY 90 30.8

Source: calculated by the authors using SPSS version 26.0 based on collected data.

Measurement. The study's constructs of interest encompass OEO, IEO, OI, and AC. These constructs were measured using pre-existing scales with confirmed reliability. The questionnaire incorporated items from these validated scales, presented in a five-point Likert scale format. Priority was given to scales developed or adapted locally in China, such as the OI scale and the AC scale, due to their proven suitability in the Chinese context, as vali-

dated by local scholars. When a Chinese version of a scale was unavailable, established scales from international sources were utilized. To ensure the precision of measurements from international scales, a back-translation technique, as suggested by Parameswaran and Yaprak [1987], was implemented. The questionnaire, specifically created for this study, was first drafted in English, then translated into Chinese, then back-translated into English, and subsequently reviewed for consistency with the original content.

The OEO scale, originating from the works of Lumpkin and Dess [2001] and Covin and Slevin [1986], serves as the assessment tool in our research, evaluating three distinct dimensions: risk-taking, innovativeness, and pro-activeness. Ferreras-Mendez et al. [2021] previously utilized this scale in their investigation of the connection between OEO and the performance of SMEs in developing new products, resulting in a Cronbach's a coefficient of 0.83, which indicates high internal consistency. Similarly, the IEO, parallel to its OEO counterpart, was evaluated using the same three dimensions. This measure was adopted from Langkamp Bolton and Lane [2012], with all items achieving a Cronbach a exceeding 0.7, surpassing the 0.7 threshold proposed by Nunnally and Bernstein [1994], thereby affirming the instrument's internal consistency.

OI utilized the Chinese-adapted scale by Smidts, Pruyn and Van Riel [2001], translated by Zhonghua and Chen [2014]. The reliability of this Chinese OI scale yielded an internal consistency score of 0.84. Additionally, its discriminant validity was ascertained through confirmatory factor analysis. AC was gauged using the Chinese-adapted scale by Tang, Wengbo and Xiucheng [2008], which was based on items from the AC scales originally formulated by Meyer, Allen and Smith [1993] and Ko, Price and Mueller [1997]. The Cronbach a for this Chinese AC scale was recorded as 0.85 by Tang, Wengbo and Xiucheng [2008], reinforcing its suitability for this study.

Analytical strategy. Polynomial regression paired with response surface analysis was employed to examine the hypotheses presented in this study. This methodological approach is recognized as an evolving technique, offering a detailed perspective on the relationships between combinations of two predictor variables and an outcome variable. Such relationships can be visualized by plotting the results from polynomial regression analyses within a three-dimensional space [Edwards, Parry, 1993]. Of note, there has been an increasing adoption of polynomial regression combined with response surface analysis within organizational research. This approach has been instrumental in exploring the implications of value congruence in various aspects, such as job satisfaction [Audenaert et al., 2018], work engagement [Qiu, Dooley, Xie, 2020], employee creativity [Li, Xie, 2023], and innovative performance [Ceptureanu, Ceptureanu, Cerqueti, 2022].

The general formula representing the relationships tested using this polynomial approach is:

Z = b0 + b X + b2 Y + b3 X2 + b4 XY + b5 Y2 + e. (1)

In equation (1), Z represents the dependent variable, while X and Y serve as the predictors. Within the framework of polynomial regression, Z is regressed against the two primary predictors X and Y, their interaction XY, and the squared terms for each predictor. Adhering to the guidelines set forth by Cohen, Nahum-Shani and Doveh [2010], centralized processing was performed on both IEO and OEO. Demographic variables were systematically controlled within the regression model to mitigate alternative explanations arising from socio-demographic parameters, as emphasized by Bernerth and Aguinis [2016]. Additionally, the effects of value congruence and value incongruence on the outcome variable are depicted through two subsequent equations:

Z = b0 + (bi + b2) X + (b3 + b4 + b5) X2 + e, (2)

Z = b0 + (b1 - b2) X + (b3 - b4 + b5) X2 + e. (3)

Equation (2) represents the statistical nuances of the consistency line, while equation (3) elucidates the information pertaining to the inconsistency line. The terms b1 + b2 and b3 + b4 + b5 in Equation (2) describe the slope and curvature of the consistency line. A positive value for b1 + b2 suggests an upward trajectory of the consistency line, which may contribute positively to the outcome variable, while a positive value for b3 + b4 + b5 indicates a convex surface. Similarly, b1 - b2 and b3 - b4 + b5 in Equation (3) can be interpreted in a comparable manner. For the current investigation, the dependent variables encompass two work-related positive attitudes: OI and AC. The primary independent variables considered are OEO and IEO. The foundational polynomial regression equations for these work attitudes are as follows:

OI = b0 + b1 IEO + b2 OEO + b3 IEO2 +

+ b4 IEO OEO + b5 OEO2 + e, (4)

AC = b0 + b1 IEO + b2 OEO + b3 IEO2 +

+ b4 IEO OEO + b5 OEO2 + e. (5)

RESULTS

Reliability and validity analyses of the research scales.

This research utilized a two-step approach, comprising confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and polynomial regression with response analysis, to validate the proposed hypotheses. For the CFA, Mplus 8.3 was used to determine the statistical outcomes related to reliability and validity. To ensure the adequacy of the data for subsequent hypotheses testing, metrics on composite reliability, convergent validity, and discriminant validity were acquired, as suggested by Hair [2009].

Table 1 details the statistical data concerning the composite reliability and convergent validity of the research measurement. Composite reliability (CR) is gauged using

the CR value found in Table 2, representing the internal °

consistency of the scale items. Fornell and Larcker [1981] 3

propose a recommended threshold above 0.6, while a I

more rigorous threshold above 0.7 was later suggested g

by Hair et al. [1984]. The CR values within this construct 2

' u

vary from 0.841 to 0.915, indicating a high composite < reliability of the collected data. The average variance ex- | tracted (AVE) serves as an index of convergent validity, x denoting the closeness of the relationship between an £ item and other items that gauge analogous constructs. 5 A threshold AVE value greater than 0.5 is recommended | for established convergent validity, as per Fornell and £ Larcker [1981]. However, even if the AVE is below 0.5, a CR above 0.6 signifies acceptable convergent validity, as corroborated by Fornell and Larcker [1981] and Lam [2012]. The majority of AVE values in this study surpass 0.5, with the IEO construct's AVE at 0.432. Considering the IEO's CR value stands at 0.841, its convergent validity remains acceptable.

Table 2 - Results of composite reliability and convergent validity Таблица 2 - Результаты проверки надежности и валидности

Constructs Items Std.Factor Loading Square Multiple Correlations CR AVE

IEO1 0.616 0.379

IEO2 0.613 0.376

IEO3 0.690 0.476

IEO IEO4 0.612 0.375 0.841 0.432

IEO5 0.597 0.356

^б 0.679 0.461

IEO7 0.776 0.602

OEO1 0.659 0.434

OEO2 0.700 0.490

OEO3 0.760 0.578

OEO OEO4 0.720 0.518 0.895 0.551

OEO5 0.776 0.602

OEO6 0.787 0.619

OEO7 0.783 0.613

OI1 0.708 0.501

OI2 0.793 0.629

OI OI3 0.820 0.672 0.915 0.685

OI4 0.863 0.745

OI5 0.938 0.880

AC1 0.829 0.687

AC AC2 0.814 0.663 0.915 0.73

AC3 0.795 0.632

AC4 0.968 0.937

Note: CR is composite reliability, AVE is average variance extracted, IEO is individual entrepreneurial orientation, OEO is organizational entrepreneurial orientation, OI is organizational identification, AC is affective commitment.

Source: calculated by the authors using Mplus version 8.3 based on collected data.

2 Table 3 provides the results of the discriminant valid-

3 ity analysis. Discriminant validity ensures that constructs £ that should not correlate remain unrelated. According g to the Fornell-Larcker criteria, the square root of AVE by £ a construct should exceed the correlation between said

u

£ construct and any other. In Table 2, the majority of the AVE | square roots (italicized on the diagonal line) are greater Is than the correlations beneath them, barring the square root of lEO's AVE, which is less than the 0.690 correlation between Ol and IEO. While these findings suggest minimal issues with discriminant validity, further validation was sought through criteria by David [2016] and Garson [2001]. Both scholars posit a correlation less than 0.85 between the two constructs to demonstrate the absence of discriminant validity concerns. The highest correlation in

this study, as reflected in Table 2, is 0.813, confirming the discriminant validity of the research instrument.

Lastly, to assess the common method bias among variables, the Harman single-factor test method was applied. The leading factor accounted for 42.473% of the total variance, falling short of the 50% mark, which implies that common method bias is not a significant issue in the data.

Polynomial regression. The findings from the polynomial regression analysis are detailed in Table 4. Model 1 and Model 2 outline the linear and quadratic effects of the fit between IEO and OEO on employees' AC, respectively. The data suggest a significant and positive association between both IEO and OEO and employees' AC. Notably, the impact of OEO (p2 = 0.486, p < 0.001) surpasses that of IEO (p1 = 0.143, p < 0.05). This observation suggests

Table 3 - Discriminant validity test results and descriptive statistics of research variables Таблица 3 - Результаты теста дискриминантной валидности и описательная статистика переменных модели

Constructs Mean Std. Deviation IEO OEO OI AC

IEO 3.843 0.587 0.657

OEO 3.870 0.682 0.501 0.742

OI 3.970 0.706 0.691 0.615 0.827

AC 4.038 0.673 0.435 0.556 0.813 0.854

Note: IEO is individual entrepreneurial orientation, OEO is organizational entrepreneurial orientation, OI is organizational identification, AC is affective commitment.

Source: calculated by the authors using Mplus version 8.3 based on collected data.

Table 4 - Results of polynomial regression with response surface analysis Таблица 4 - Результаты полиномиальной регрессии с анализом поверхности отклика

Variables Affective Commitment Organizational Identification

Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4

Constant 4.634""" 5.641""" 4.057""" 4.698"""

Gender -0.553""" -0.606""" -0.210"" -0.182"

Age 0.508""" 0.197" 0.123 -0.052

Education 0.026 -0.222" 0.088 -0.117

Income 0.199""" -0.024 -0.016 -0.100"

IEO, Pt 0.143" 0.079 0.473""" 0.454"""

OEO, 02 0.486""" 0.092 0.320""" 0.089

IEO2, вз - -0.303" - -0.329""

IEO*OEO, в4 - -0.082 - 0.327"""

OEO2, p5 - -0.419""" - -0.360"""

Response surface

Slopes ß1+ß2 - 0.171 - 0.543"""

Curvature1: ß3 + ß4 + ß5 - -0.804""" - -0.362""

Slope2: ß1 - ß2 - -0.013 - 0.365"""

Curvature2: ß3 - ß4 + ß5 - -0.640""" - -1.016"""

R2 0.467 0.557 0.508 0.591

Note: (*), (**), and (***) indicate significance at p < 0.05, p < 0.01, and p < 0.001, respectively. IEO is individual entrepreneurial orientation, OEO is organizational entrepreneurial orientation, OI is organizational identification, AC is affective commitment. Slope1 and curvature1 represent the characteristics of the congruence line, while slope2 and curvature2 represent the characteristics of the incongruence line. Source: calculated by the authors using SPSS version 26.0 based on collected data.

that an entrepreneurially oriented organization is more effective in enhancing an employee's AC than the EO of the employees themselves. While the IEO-OEO fit effect on AC presents an insignificant linear trend, a significant curvature on both congruence and incongruence lines is observed. This signifies that the quadratic effect of the IEO-OEO fit on AC is still significant. As a result, the alignment between IEO and OEO does not make a substantial contribution to employees' AC. Nevertheless, when examining the effects of IEO and OEO independently, both are found to have a significant influence on employees' AC. Additionally, the negative curvature values for both congruence and incongruence lines suggest that these trends follow an inverted-U shape, indicating the presence of an optimal value. As evidenced in Fig. 2, the peak value of AC is achieved when both IEO and OEO are at moderate levels within the P-O fit framework. In conclusion, Hypothesis 1 receives empirical support, while Hypothesis 3 does not.

The results from Model 3 reveal a significant and positive association between both IEO and OEO and an employee's OI. Notably, the impact of IEO (p1 = 0.473, p < 0.001) exceeds that of OEO (p2 = 0.320, p < 0.001). This suggests that although both IEO and OEO contribute to enhanced OI, the role of IEO is slightly more pronounced. Model 4 elucidates the quadratic effect of the

IEO-OEO fit on OI. The findings highlight a significantly positive slope and a significantly negative curvature in the congruency line. This demonstrates a general upward trend in the curve depicting the relationship between IEO-OEO fit and OI. Additionally, the negative curvature indicates that this relationship assumes an inverted-U shape. Moreover, for the inconsistency line in Model 4, both the slope and curvature exhibit significance. The significantly negative curvature reaffirms the inverted-U shape of the incongruence line, which is clearly represented in Fig. 3. Given that both the consistency line and the inconsistency line are inverted U-shaped, a maximum OI value exists. As illustrated in Fig. 3, the optimal value of OI is attained when IEO and OEO are both at relatively high levels. Consequently, this supports Hypotheses 2 and 4. Hypothesis 4 receives statistical validation as the slope (p1 + p2) of the congruence line is not only significant but also positive. However, it is crucial to highlight that there is a significant and positive curvature (p3 + p4 + p5) present as well. This indicates that the amplifying impact of a heightened IEO-OEO alignment diminishes after reaching a certain point, eventually transitioning into a diminishing effect, as the inverted U-shaped congruence line in Fig. 3 demonstrates. Overall, the hypothesis testing results are summarized in Table 5.

Consistency line

Inconsistency line

Consistency line

Inconsistency line

Fig. 2. Effects of IEO-OEO fit on AC1 Рис. 2. Влияние соответствия IEO-OEO на AC

Fig. 3. Effects of IEO-OEO fit on OI2 Рис. 3. Влияние соответствия IEO-OEO на OI

1 Source: calculated by the authors using SPSS version 26.0 based on collected data.

2 Ibid.

Table 5 - Hypotheses testing results Таблица 5 - Результаты проверки гипотез

Hypotheses Descriptions Results

Hypothesis 1 Both OEO and IEO positively contribute to employee's AC Supported

Hypothesis 2 Both OEO and IEO positively contribute to employee's OI Supported

Hypothesis 3 A positive correlation exists between IEO-OEO fit and an employee's AC. Specifically, in scenarios where there is a "high-high" alignment of IEO and OEO, as opposed to a "low-low" congruence, employees tend to exhibit a heightened level of AC Not Supported

Hypothesis 4 A positive correlation exists between IEO-OEO fit and an employee's OI. Specifically, in scenarios where there is a "high-high" alignment of IEO and OEO, as opposed to a "low-low" congruence, employees tend to exhibit a heightened level of OI Supported

DISCUSSION

The initial contribution of the present research is the provision of a comprehensive analysis regarding the influence of IEO and OEO on two distinct workplace attitudes: AC and OI. The employment of linear regression models within this study reveals a significant and positive correlation of both IEO and OEO with AC and OI, contributing positively to employees' workplace attitudes. However, when considering AC specifically, it becomes apparent that an organization with an entrepreneurial orientation holds greater significance than an individual entrepreneurial orientation. This denotes that variables associated with the organization serve as a more robust predictor for AC than individual variances. In substantiating this hypothesis, a comprehensive examination of the metaanalysis results regarding its antecedents, conducted by Meyer et al. [2002], was undertaken. The aforementioned meta-analysis scrutinizes the correlation between individual variances and AC, encompassing over 1,010 samples pertaining to locus of control and 580 samples related to self-efficacy. The findings exhibit a weighted average corrected correlation of 0.29 for locus of control and 0.11 for self-efficacy. Conversely, organizational-related antecedents such as organizational support, transformational leadership, and interactional justice demonstrate weighted average corrected correlations of 0.63, 0.46, and 0.50, respectively.

Research by Matzler and Renzl [2007] further elucidates this phenomenon, suggesting that an employee's personality shapes their AC predominantly through job satisfaction. This observation fortifies our hypothesis, considering that personality falls under the umbrella of individual differences. In the case of OI, the impact stemming from IEO is marginally more pronounced than that from OEO, with coefficients of 0.473 and 0.320, respectively. Nonetheless, this distinction is not markedly evident, aligning with the fundamental principles of OI, which accentuates an individual's tendency to associate themselves with their organization. Herein, personal perception takes precedence, though the organizational milieu also plays a pivotal role in cultivating an individual's affiliation with their organization. This finding is in congruence with SIPT, presented in the literature review,

asserting that our needs and attitudes are not merely reflections of reality but rather the result of a "social and personal construction of reality" [Salancik, Pfeffer, 1978]. This lends itself to a nuanced understanding of the interplay between individual and organizational factors in shaping workplace attitudes.

The endeavour to draw clear distinctions between OI and AC has long held a place of significance in the domain of organizational studies. A seminal differentiation is provided by Van Knippenberg and Sleebos [2006], delineating commitment as a relationship wherein the individual and the organization maintain their separate existences, in contrast to identification, which they describe as a cognitive and perceptual construct intertwined with self-referential processes. Additionally, scholarly investigations, as illustrated by Riketta [2005], have succeeded in differentiating OI and AC based on their respective impacts on organizational outcomes. To elucidate, the connection between OI and the propensity to depart from an organization proved to be more substantial than that between AC and the intention to leave. Through this study, a contribution is made to the ongoing scholarly discourse on the disparities between OI and AC, shedding light on their distinct mechanisms of formation and further enriching the understanding of these two pivotal concepts in organizational research.

Subsequently, the results illustrate the presence of an inverted U-shaped correlation between IEO-OEO fit and OI, observed consistently along both the congruence and incongruence trajectories. Optimal levels of OI are attained when IEO and OEO are both at comparatively high levels, albeit not at their peak. In contrast, a notable decline in OI rates is evident from the incongruence trajectory depicted in Fig. 3, showcasing a marked escalation in the reduction rate of OI when misalignment between IEO and OEO is present. This phenomenon underscores the imperative for corporations with an EO to foster a commensurate level of EO among their workforce to augment OI levels. This occurrence can be coherently elucidated through an examination of both the inherent principles of OI theory and the dynamic interplay between intrinsic and extrinsic motivations, as posited by Ryan and Deci [2000]. OI is conceptualized within its theoretical frame-

work as a process where "a decision maker identifies with an organization [and] is inclined to select the option that most effectively advances the perceived interests of that organization" [Cheney, Tompkins, 1987]. This reciprocal acknowledgment of interests posits that a disparity in the IEO-OEO relationship can precipitate a substantial decline in OI levels. This finding aligns with recent scholarly work by Weisman et al. [2023], which identified the congruence between the organization and the individual as a pivotal precursor to OI.

The current findings corroborate the "too-much-of-a-good-thing" effect, a well-established phenomenon in organizational research, in the context of IEO-OEO fit outcomes. Vleugels and Flatau-Harrison [2023] also provide empirical support for this occurrence. In an effort to forecast the variable of interest, economists tend to simplify the association into a linear model. Nonetheless, in organizational and behavioural studies, such a linear relationship is more of a theoretical concept than a practical reality. In recent years, there has been a scholarly call to focus on non-linear relationships within organizational research, with particular attention given to the inverted-U shape. Pierce and Aguinis [2013] argue that this effect stems from the inherent contradictory relationship in the independent variable's process. Hence, the inverted U-shaped relationship essentially reflects the reconciliation of trade-offs within this contradictory relationship, serving as the net result of considering both additive benefits and costs. Applying this theory to the IEO-OEO fit, which signifies the alignment between an employee's values and the organizational culture in terms of EO, reveals its potential to exert contradictory effects on OI. When the decreasing effect surpasses the increasing effect, there is a resultant decline in OI levels. As illustrated in Fig. 3, this inflection point is reached when both IEO and OEO are at a moderately high level, at which point OI reaches its peak. However, at extremely high levels of IEO and OEO, the OI level begins to diminish. This phenomenon could be attributed to the entrepreneurially oriented organization setting unattainable goals, thereby increasing the employees' burden to innovate and be creative and ultimately resulting in a lower OI level, even when there is a fit between OEO and IEO.

Consideration of socio-demographic factors is essential when examining research findings and evaluating the practical significance of a study. Firstly, specific socio-de-mographic parameters, such as gender [Lim, Envick, 2013] and income level [Wenjun, Panikarova, 2023], have been acknowledged for their significant influence on EO. The study by Jelenc, Pisapia and Ivanusic [2015] highlights the influence of demographic factors on EO. It notes a trend of diminished risk-taking behaviour among individuals aged 40-60. Additionally, the research points out that female entrepreneurs generally demonstrate a higher level of proactivity compared to male entrepreneurs. Secondly, socio-demographic variables can act as moderators in

the relationship between entrepreneurial orientation ° and employees' work behaviours and attitudes. For in- 3 stance, Wenjun and Panikarova [2023] identified income I level and gender as moderators in the link between an g employee's entrepreneurial mindset and their intrapre- £ neurial activities. This association was found to be more < pronounced among male employees and those with low- | er income levels within the organization. Consequently, x we can infer that demographic parameters may exert an £ influence on the outcome of the relationship between EO 5 and employees' positive work attitudes. Therefore, it is im- | perative to control for the influence of socio-demograph- £ ic variables in causal inference analysis to enhance the research's credibility before drawing conclusions based on statistical results regarding the relationship between EO and employees'positive work attitudes, such as AC and OI. Following the recommendations of Cook, Campbell and Day [1979], our research has controlled for socio-demo-graphic parameters such as gender, age, education, and income to ensure that the variance in AC and OI can be attributed to EO. However, in addition to addressing this issue through demographic control, future researchers are also encouraged to strive for a more representative sample in terms of socio-demographic characteristics to further enhance the study's validity.

CONCLUSION

EO is acknowledged as a vital strategy for sustaining a competitive advantage at both corporate and individual levels in today's challenging business landscape. However, existing studies predominantly examine EO unilaterally [Clark et al., 2023; Ferreras-Mendez et al., 2021; Rauch et al., 2009; Soares, Perin, 2019]. This research introduces a novel perspective by investigating EO on dual fronts, exploring how the interaction between OEO and IEO influences outcomes within the organization. Drawing on SIPT and P-O fit theory, employing polynomial regression analysis, and focusing on two key work attitudes as dependent variables, the study reveals that both IEO and OEO positively impact work attitudes. However, a "too-much-of-a-good-thing" effect emerges, indicating that excessive alignment between IEO and OEO can diminish positive work attitudes. These findings underscore the importance of a balanced approach to aligning entrepreneurial values at both organizational and individual levels in management practice.

Practical implication. In light of the findings from our research, a variety of practical recommendations can be put forward for organizations with an entrepreneurial focus. Paramount among these is the consideration of entrepreneurial values in the recruitment process, ensuring alignment between the candidate's IEO and the organization's OEO. Further investigation has elucidated the complex dynamics between IEO-OEO fit and the enhancement of positive working attitudes among employees. It has been confirmed that while a good fit between

IEO and OEO generally correlates with positive outcomes, 3 an excessively high level of either can negatively impact £ OI and AC. This highlights the necessity for organizations g to continuously monitor and support employees' posi-£ tive attitudes, particularly in environments that highly £ value entrepreneurial endeavours. Providing adequate | resources and support to those with a strong EO, yet Is who may be lacking in necessary resources, becomes imperative. Without such measures, there is a risk that the IEO-OEO fit could deteriorate, leading to diminished morale and a decrease in positive employee attitudes. This underscores the importance of maintaining a balanced approach to fostering entrepreneurship within the corporate structure.

Limitations and future research. This study is accompanied by certain limitations, yet it also opens up novel avenues for forthcoming inquiries. While in our research design, we have controlled socio-demographic parameters such as age and gender in the polynomial regression analysis to mitigate its impact on our hypothesis results, it does not replace the need for a representative sample if the goal is to generalize findings to a broader population. Especially, the primary age of participants in this study is concentrated within the 18 to 30 years old bracket. For future research aiming at wide generalizability, it is still essential to strive for a sample that accurately reflects the population of interest in terms of age distribution. What's more, our research introduces and corroborates the inverted U-shaped relationship through polynomial analy-

ses, aligning it with prevalent theories associated with the "too-much-of-a-good-thing" phenomenon in organizational studies. Nevertheless, there is a call for academic exploration to empirically investigate the mechanisms underlying the inverted U-shaped association between IEO-OEO fit and positive working attitudes, encompassing OI and AC.

The present study attempts to shed light on this relationship from the perspective of the additive benefits and costs associated with IEO-OEO fit. A specific avenue for future investigation would involve conducting targeted research to unravel the distinct pathways through which benefits and costs impact OI. Following this line of inquiry, the initial hypothesis posited in this research suggests that the formation of OI and AC might exhibit variations, particularly in terms of the influence exerted by antecedents, depending on whether they originate from organizational or individual levels. This hypothesis introduces a fresh perspective to the enduring debate surrounding the distinctions between OI and AC, urging further empirical work to substantiate or challenge these preliminary findings. In conclusion, there is an imperative for future studies to replicate and extend the present research, notably through the enlargement of the sample size and the incorporation of diverse demographic groups from varied cultural backgrounds. This is crucial to ascertaining the extent to which the results of this study hold validity across different cultural and demographic scenarios, ensuring the robustness and universality of the findings.

Appendix - Questionnaire items Приложение - Анкета

Construct Items Descriptions Sources

IEO1 In general, I prefer a strong emphasis in projects on unique, one-of-a-kind approaches rather than revisiting tried and true approaches used before

IEO2 I prefer to try my own unique way when learning new things rather than doing it like everyone else does

IEO IEO3 I favour experimentation and original approaches to problem solving rather than using methods others generally use for solving their problems Lumpkin, Dess [2001], Covin, Slevin [1986]

IEO4 I usually act in anticipation of future problems, needs or changes

IEO5 I tend to plan ahead on projects

IEO6 I like to take bold action by venturing into the unknown

IEO7 I am willing to invest a lot of time and/or money on something that might yield a high return

Appendix (concluded) ° Окончание приложения £

15

Construct Items Descriptions Sources

OEO OEO1 In general, top managers of my company favour a strong emphasis on R&D, technological leadership and innovations Langkamp Bolton, Lane [2012]

OEO2 In the last five years, my company has marketed many new product lines or services

OEO3 In the last years, my company has typically initiated actions which the competition then responds to

OEO4 In the last years, my company was very often the first business to introduce new products/ services, administrative techniques, and operating technologies

OEO5 In the last years, my company had a strong proclivity for high risk projects (with chances of very high return)

OEO6 In the last years, my company believed that owing to the nature of the environment, wideranging acts are necessary to achieve the company's objectives

OEO7 When confronted with decision-making situations involving uncertainty, my company has typically adopted a bold, aggressive posture to maximize the probability of exploiting potential opportunities

OI OI1 I feel strong ties with my organization Smidts, Pruyn, Van Riel [2001], Zhonghua, Chen [2014]

OI2 I experience a strong sense of belonging to my company

OI3 I feel proud to work for my company

OI4 I am sufficiently acknowledged in my organization

OI5 I am glad to be a member of my organization

AC AC1 I would be very happy to spend the rest of my career with this organization Tang, Wengbo, Xiucheng [2008], Meyer, Allen, Smith [1993], Ko, Price, Mueller [1997]

AC2 I really feel as if this organization's problems are my own

AC3 I feel a strong sense of belonging to my organization

AC4 I do not feel emotionally attached to this organization

Note: IEO is individual entrepreneurial orientation, OEO is organizational entrepreneurial orientation, OI is organizational identification, AC is affective commitment.

References

Abualoush S., Obeidat A.M., Abusweilema M.A., Khasawneh M.M. (2022). How does entrepreneurial leadership promote innovative work behaviour? Through mediating role of knowledge sharing and moderating role of person-job fit. International Journal of Innovation Management, vol. 26, no. 01, 2250011. https://doi.org/10.1142/S1363919622500116 Argyris C. (1957). Personality and organization: the conflict between system and the individual. Harpers. Ashforth B.E., Joshi M., Anand V., O'Leary-Kelly A.M. (2013). Extending the expanded model of organizational identification

to occupations. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, vol. 43, no. 12, pp. 2426-2448. https://doi.org/10.1111/jasp.12190 Ashforth B.E., Mael F. (1989). Social Identity theory and the organization. The Academy of Management Review, vol. 14, no. 1,

pp. 20. https://doi.org/10.2307/258189 Audenaert M., Carette P., Shore L.M., Lange T., Van Waeyenberg T., Decramer A. (2018). Leader-employee congruence of expected contributions in the employee-organization relationship. The Leadership Quarterly, vol. 29, no. 3, pp. 414-422. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2017.09.003 Avle S., Hui J., Lindtner S., Dillahunt T. (2019). Additional labors of the entrepreneurial self. Proceedings of the ACM on HumanComputer Interaction, vol. 3, pp. 1-24. https://doi.org/10.1145/3359320 Bernerth J.B., Aguinis H. (2016). A critical review and best-practice recommendations for control variable usage. Personnel Psychology, vol. 69, no. 1, pp. 229-283. https://doi.org/10.1111/peps.12103 Ceptureanu S.I., Ceptureanu E.G., Cerqueti R. (2022). Innovation ambidexterity and impact on the performance in IT companies: The moderating role of business experience. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, vol. 34, no. 7, pp. 746-759. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537325.2021.1918337 Cheney G., Tompkins P.K. (1987). Coming to terms with organizational identification and commitment. Central States Speech

Journal, vol. 38, no. 1, pp. 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1080/10510978709368225 Clark D.R., Pidduck R.J., Lumpkin G.T., Covin J.G. (2023). Is it okay to study Entrepreneurial Orientation (EO) at the individual level? Yes! Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/10422587231178885

¡2 Cohen A., Nahum-Shani I., Doveh E. (2010). Further insight and additional inference methods for polynomial regression applied 3 to the analysis of congruence. Multivariate Behavioral Research, vol. 45, no. 5, pp. 828-852. https://doi.org/10.1080/002731 J 71.2010.519272

£ Cook T.D., Campbell D.T., Day A. (1979). Quasi-experimentation: Design & analysis issues for field settings (vol. 351). Houghton § Mifflin Boston.

" Covin J.G., Rigtering J.P.C., Hughes M., Kraus S., Cheng C.-F., Bouncken R.B. (2020). Individual and team entrepreneurial ori-< entation: Scale development and configurations for success. Journal of Business Research, vol. 112, pp. 1-12. https://doi. 2 org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.02.023

^ Covin J.G., Slevin D.P. (1986). The development and testing of an organizational-level entrepreneurship scale. Frontiers of Entre-preneurship Research, vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 628-639. Covin J.G., Slevin D.P. (2017). The entrepreneurial imperatives of strategic leadership. In M.A. Hitt, R.D. Ireland, S.M. Camp,

D.L. Sexton. (Eds.). Strategic Entrepreneurship (1st ed., pp. 307-327). Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781405164085.ch14 Das R. (2023). Selecting entrepreneurial employees using a person-group fit perspective. International Journal of Selection and

Assessment, vol. 31, no. 2, pp. 336-346. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijsa.12431 David K. (2016). Multiple latent variable models: Confirmatory factor analysis. https://davidakenny.net/cm/mfactor.htm De Giorgio A., Barattucci M., Teresi M., Raulli G., Ballone C., Ramaci T., Pagliaro S. (2023). Organizational identification as a trigger for personal well-being: Associations with happiness and stress through job outcomes. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, vol. 33, no. 1, pp. 138-151. https://doi.org/10.1002/casp.2648 Duane Ireland R., Kuratko D.F., Morris M.H. (2006). A health audit for corporate entrepreneurship: Innovation at all levels: Part I.

Journal of Business Strategy, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 10-17. https://doi.org/10.1108/02756660610640137 Edwards J.R., Parry M.E. (1993). On the use of polynomial regression equations as an alternative to difference scores in organizational research. Academy of Management Journal, vol. 36, no. 6, pp. 1577-1613. https://doi.org/10.2307/256822 Ferreras-Méndez J.L., Olmos-Peñuela J., Salas-Vallina A., Alegre J. (2021). Entrepreneurial orientation and new product development performance in SMEs: The mediating role of business model innovation. Technovation, vol. 108, pp. 102325. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2021.102325 Fornell C., Larcker D.F. (1981). Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: Algebra and

statistics. Journal of Marketing Research, vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 382-388. https://doi.org/10.2307/3150980 Garson G.D. (2001). Guide to writing empirical papers, theses, and dissertations. CRC Press.

George E., Chattopadhyay P. (2005). One foot in each camp: The dual identification of contract workers. Administrative Science

Quarterly, vol. 50, no. 1, pp. 68-99. https://doi.org/10.2189/asqu.2005.50.1.68 González C., Greve P. (2023). Supplementary and complementary congruence at the apex of the organization: Management and board as a strategic-oriented multiteam system. British Journal of Management, vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 1510-1533. https:// doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.12645 Hair J.F. (2009). Multivariate data analysis. Pearson.

Hair J.F., Anderson R.E., Tatham R., Black W.C. (1984). Multivariate data analysis with readings. Macmillan Pub. Indianapolis, IN. Holland J.L. (1997). Making vocational choices: A theory of vocational personalities and work environments. Psychological Assessment Resources.

Hornsby J.S., Naffziger D.W., Kuratko D.F., Montagno R.V. (1993). An interactive model of the corporate entrepreneurship process. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 29-37. https://doi.org/10.1177/104225879301700203 Hwang S., Shin J. (2019). Using Lean Startup to Power Organizational Transformation: Creating an internal division that implemented concepts from Lean Startup helped a consumer electronics firm foster an entrepreneurial mindset among employees. Research-Technology Management, vol. 62, no. 5, pp. 40-49. https://doi.org/10.1080/08956308.2019.1638224 Ikonen H.-M. (2013). Precarious work, entrepreneurial mindset and sense of place: female strategies in insecure labour markets.

Global Discourse, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 467-481. https://doi.org/10.1080/23269995.2013.864085 Iqbal S., Moleiro Martins J., Nuno Mata M., Naz S., Akhtar S., Abreu A. (2021). Linking entrepreneurial orientation with innovation performance in SMEs; the Role of Organizational commitment and transformational leadership using Smart PLS-SEM. Sustainability, vol. 13, no. 8, 4361. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13084361 Jelenc L., Pisapia J., Ivanusic N. (2015). Demographic variables influencing individual entrepreneurial orientation and strategic

thinking capability. Proceedings of 10th International Scientific Conference on Economic and Social Development. Kahn W.A. (1990). Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at work. Academy of Management

Journal, vol. 33, no. 4, pp. 692-724. https://doi.org/10.2307/256287 Kassa A.G., Raju R.S. (2015). Investigating the relationship between corporate entrepreneurship and employee engagement.

Journal of Entrepreneurship in Emerging Economies, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 148-167. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEEE-12-2014-0046 Ko J.-W., Price J.L., Mueller C.W. (1997). Assessment of Meyer and Allen's three-component model of organizational commitment in South Korea. Journal of Applied Psychology, vol. 82, no. 6, pp. 961-973. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.82.6.961 Kolot A., Herasymenko O. (2020). Digital transformation and new business models as determinants of formation of the economy of nontypical employment. Social and Labour Relations: Theory and Practice, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 33-54. https://doi. org/10.21511/slrtp.10(1).2020.06 Kristof A.L. (1996). Person-organization fit: An integrative review of its conceptualizations, measurement, and implications.

Personnel Psychology, vol. 49, no. 1, pp. 1-49. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1996.tb01790.x Kuratko D.F., Goldsby M.G., Hornsby J.S. (2018). Corporate innovation: Disruptive thinking in organizations. Routledge.

Kuratko D.F., Hornsby J.S., McKelvie A. (2023). Entrepreneurial mindset in corporate entrepreneurship: Forms, impediments, °

and actions for research. Journal of Small Business Management, vol. 61, no. 1, pp. 132-154. https://doi.org/10.1080/00472 3

778.2021.1907585 §

Lam L.W. (2012). Impact of competitiveness on salespeople's commitment and performance. Journal of Business Research, *

vol. 65, no. 9, pp. 1328-1334. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2011.10.026 8

Langkamp Bolton D., Lane M.D. (2012). Individual entrepreneurial orientation: Development of a measurement instrument. g

Education + Training, vol. 54, no. 2/3, pp. 219-233. https://doi.org/10.1108/00400911211210314 |

Lee N.Y., Zablah A.R., Noble S.M. (2023). A meta-analytic investigation of the organizational identification - Job performance ®

relationship in the frontlines. Journal of Retailing, vol. 99, no. 3, pp. 370-384. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretai.2023.07.003 |

Li G., Xie L. (2023). The effects of job involvement and supervisor developmental feedback on employee creativity: A polynomi- ff

al regression with response surface analysis. Current Psychology, vol. 42, no. 20, pp. 17120-17131. https://doi.org/10.1007/ u

s12144-022-02901-w I

Q¡

Li Y., Liu Y., Zhao Y. (2006). The role of market and entrepreneurship orientation and internal control in the new product devel- % opment activities of Chinese firms. Industrial Marketing Management, vol. 35, no. 3, pp. 336-347. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. indmarman.2005.05.016

Lim S., Envick B.R. (2013). Gender and entrepreneurial orientation: A multi-country study. International Entrepreneurship and

Management Journal, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 465-482. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-011-0183-2 Locke E.A. (1976). The nature and causes of job satisfaction. In M.D. Dunnette. (Ed.). Handbook of industrial and organizational

psychology (pp. 1297-1343). Chicago, IL: Rand McNally. Lumpkin G.T., Dess G.G. (2001). Linking two dimensions of entrepreneurial orientation to firm performance. Journal of Business

Venturing, vol. 16, no. 5, pp. 429-451. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0883-9026(00)00048-3 Madhavan V., Venugopalan M., Gupta B., Sisodia G.S. (2023). Addressing agency problem in employee training: The role of goal

congruence. Sustainability, vol. 15, no. 4, 3745. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15043745 Matzler K., Renzl B. (2007). Personality traits, employee satisfaction and affective commitment. Total Quality Management &

Business Excellence, vol. 18, no. 5, pp. 589-598. https://doi.org/10.1080/14783360601061528 Meyer J.P., Allen N.J., Smith C.A. (1993). Commitment to organizations and occupations: Extension and test of a three-component

conceptualization. Journal of Applied Psychology, vol. 78, no. 4, pp. 538-551. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.78A538 Meyer J.P., Stanley D.J., Herscovitch L., Topolnytsky L. (2002). Affective, continuance, and normative commitment to the organization: A meta-analysis of antecedents, correlates, and consequences. Journal of Vocational Behavior, vol. 61, no. 1, pp. 20-52. https://doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.2001.1842 Murray H.A., McAdams D.P. (2007). Explorations in personality. Oxford University Press. Nunnally J.C., Bernstein I.H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed). McGraw-Hill.

Nystrom K. (2018). Pre-and post-entrepreneurship labor mobility of entrepreneurs and employees in entrepreneurial firms. In

SAGE handbook for entrepreneurship and small business (pp. 60-73). Parameswaran R., Yaprak A. (1987). A cross-national comparison of consumer research measures. Journal of International Business Studies, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 35-49. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490398 Pidduck R.J., Clark D.R., Lumpkin G.T. (2023). Entrepreneurial mindset: Dispositional beliefs, opportunity beliefs, and entrepreneurial behavior. Journal of Small Business Management, vol. 61, no. 1, pp. 45-79. https://doi.org/10.1080/00472778.2021.1 907582

Pierce J.R., Aguinis H. (2013). The too-much-of-a-good-thing effect in management. Journal of Management, vol. 39, no. 2,

pp. 313-338. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206311410060 Pollack J.M., Ho V.T., O'Boyle E.H., Kirkman B.L. (2020). Passion at work: A meta-analysis of individual work outcomes. Journal

of Organizational Behavior, vol. 41, no. 4, pp. 311-331. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2434 Pratt M.G. (1998). To Be or not to be?: Central questions in organizational identification. In D.A. Whetten, P.C. Godfrey. Identity in organizations: Building theory through conversations (pp. 171-208). SAGE Publications, Inc. https://doi. org/10.4135/9781452231495.n6 Qiu S., Dooley L.M., Xie L. (2020). How servant leadership and self-efficacy interact to affect service quality in the hospitality industry: A polynomial regression with response surface analysis. Tourism Management, vol. 78, pp. 104051. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.tourman.2019.104051 Rauch A., Wiklund J., Lumpkin G.T., Frese M. (2009). Entrepreneurial orientation and business performance: An assessment of past research and suggestions for the future. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, vol. 33, no. 3, pp. 761-787. https://doi. org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2009.00308.x Reich R.B. (2002). The future of success: Working and living in the new economy. Vintage.

Riketta M. (2005). Organizational identification: A meta-analysis. Journal of Vocational Behavior, vol. 66, no. 2, pp. 358-384.

https://doi.org/10.1016/jjvb.2004.05.005 Ryan R.M., Deci E.L. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary Educational

Psychology, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 54-67. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1999.1020 Saks A.M. (2006). Antecedents and consequences of employee engagement. Journal of Managerial Psychology, vol. 21, no. 7,

pp. 600-619. https://doi.org/10.1108/02683940610690169 Salancik G.R., Pfeffer J. (1978). A social information processing approach to job attitudes and task design. Administrative Science Quarterly, vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 224-253. https://doi.org/10.2307/2392563

¡2 Schneider B. (1987). The people make the place. Personnel Psychology, vol. 40, no. 3, pp. 437-453. https://doi.org/10.1111/ Й j.1744-6570.1987.tb00609.x

J Schumpeter J.A., Swedberg R. (2021). The theory of economic development. Routledge.

5 Shaikh E., Brahmi M., Thang P.C., Watto W.A., Trang T.T.N., Loan N.T. (2022). Should I stay or should I go? Explaining the turnover 8 intentions with corporate social responsibility (CSR), organizational identification and organizational commitment. Sustain! ability, vol. 14, no. 10, 6030. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14106030

< Sluss D.M., Ployhart R.E., Cobb M.G., Ashforth B.E. (2012). Generalizing newcomers' relational and organizational identifica-2 tions: Processes and prototypicality. Academy of Management Journal, vol. 55, no. 4, pp. 949-975. https://doi.org/10.5465/ g amj.2010.0420

Smidts A., Pruyn A.T.H., Van Riel C.B.M. (2001). The impact of employee communication and perceived external prestige on organizational identification. Academy of Management Journal, vol. 44, no. 5, pp. 1051-1062. https://doi.org/10.2307/3069448 Soares M.D.C., Perin M.G. (2019). Entrepreneurial orientation and firm performance: An updated meta-analysis. RAUSP Management Journal, vol. 55, no. 2, pp. 143-159. https://doi.org/10.1108/RAUSP-01-2019-0014 Tajfel H., Turner J.C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In W.G. Austin, S. Worchel. (Eds.). The social psychology

of intergroup relations (pp. 33-47). Monterey, CA:Brooks/Cole. Tang Y., Wengbo H., Xiucheng F. (2008). A study on the degree of loyalty of employees in service industry based on organizational commitment mechanism. Management World, no. 5, pp. 102-114, 123. (in Chinese) Terborg J.R. (1981). Interactional psychology and research on human behavior in organizations. The Academy of Management

Review, vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 569-576. https://doi.org/10.2307/257635 Unal Z.M. (2014). Does affective commitment mediate the relationship between person-organization fit and organizational identification? International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 270-283. https:// doi.org/10.6007/IJARBSS/v4-i3/706 Van Knippenberg D., Sleebos E. (2006). Organizational identification versus organizational commitment: Self-definition, social exchange, and job attitudes. Journal of Organizational Behavior, vol. 27, no. 5, pp. 571-584. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.359 Vandenberghe C., Bentein K., Stinglhamber F. (2004). Affective commitment to the organization, supervisor, and work group: Antecedents and outcomes. Journal of Vocational Behavior, vol. 64, no. 1, pp. 47-71. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0001-8791(03)00029-0

Verquer M.L., Beehr T.A., Wagner S.H. (2003). A meta-analysis of relations between person-organization fit and work attitudes.

Journal of Vocational Behavior, vol. 63, no. 3, pp. 473-489. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0001-8791(02)00036-2 Vleugels W., Flatau-Harrison H. (2023). Curvilinear relationships in person-environment fit research: Is there evidence for a too-much-of-a-good-thing effect? Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, vol. 96, no. 3, pp. 669-677. https://doi. org/10.1111/joop.12432

Voci A. (2006). Relevance of social categories, depersonalization and group processes: two field tests of self-categorization

theory. European Journal of Social Psychology, vol. 36, no. 1, pp. 73-90. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.259 Wales W.J., Gupta V.K., Mousa F.-T. (2013). Empirical research on entrepreneurial orientation: An assessment and suggestions for future research. International Small Business Journal: Researching Entrepreneurship, vol. 31, no. 4, pp. 357-383. https://doi. org/10.1177/0266242611418261 Weisman H., Wu C.-H., Yoshikawa K., Lee H.-J. (2023). Antecedents of organizational identification: A review and agenda for

future research. Journal of Management, vol. 49, no. 6, pp. 2030-2061. https://doi.org/10.1177/01492063221140049 Wenjun Z. (2023). Intrapreneurship as a growing demand: Igniting entrepreneurial mindset to fuel employees' strategic

renewal behavior. Human Progress, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 13. https://doi.org/10.34709/IM.193.14 Wenjun Z., Panikarova S.V. (2023). Intrapreneurial Behavior in Employees: Influence of Entrepreneurial Mindset and Demographics. BENEFICIUM, vol. 4, no. 49, pp. 100-108. https://doi.org/10.34680/BENEFICIUM.2023.4(49).100-108 Wiegand J.P., Drasgow F., Rounds J. (2021). Misfit matters: A re-examination of interest fit and job satisfaction. Journal of Vocational Behavior, vol. 125, pp. 103524. https://doi.org/10.1016/jjvb.2020.103524 Wiklund J., Shepherd D. (2005). Entrepreneurial orientation and small business performance: A configurational approach. Journal of Business Venturing, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 71-91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2004.01.001 Yang J., Pu B., Guan Z. (2019). Entrepreneurial leadership and turnover intention of employees: The role of affective commitment and person-job fit. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, vol. 16, no. 13, 2380. https://doi. org/10.3390/ijerph16132380

Zhang G., Wang Y. (2022). Organizational identification and employees' innovative behavior: The mediating role of work engagement and the moderating role of creative self-efficacy. Chinese Management Studies, vol. 16, no. 5, pp. 1108-1123. https://doi.org/10.1108/CMS-07-2021-0294 Zhang W. (2013). Understanding Corporations: Property Rights, Incentives, and Governance. Shanghai ren min chu ban she. (in Chinese)

Zhonghua G., Chen Z. (2014). Does organizational politics at the workplace harm employees' job performance? A person-

organization fit perspective. Acta Psychologica Sinica, vol. 46, no. 8, pp. 1124-1143. (in Chinese) Zorlu O., Avan A., Baytok A. (2019). Perceived organizational support and organizational identification: The mediating role of fit to organization. Turizm Akademik Dergisi, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 277-291.

Источники °

Abualoush S., Obeidat A.M., Abusweilema M.A., Khasawneh M.M. (2022). How does entrepreneurial leadership promote inno- g vative work behaviour? Through mediating role of knowledge sharing and moderating role of person-job fit. International g Journal of Innovation Management, vol. 26, no. 01, 2250011. https://doi.org/10.1142/S1363919622500116 «¡

Argyris C. (1957). Personality and organization: the conflict between system and the individual. Harpers. 3

Ashforth B.E., Joshi M., Anand V., O'Leary-Kelly A.M. (2013). Extending the expanded model of organizational identification § to occupations. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, vol. 43, no. 12, pp. 2426-2448. https://doi.org/10.1111/jasp.12190 S Ashforth B.E., Mael F. (1989). Social Identity theory and the organization. The Academy of Management Review, vol. 14, no. 1, s pp. 20. https://doi.org/10.2307/258189 £

Audenaert M., Carette P., Shore L.M., Lange T., Van Waeyenberg T., Decramer A. (2018). Leader-employee congruence of expect- ff ed contributions in the employee-organization relationship. The Leadership Quarterly, vol. 29, no. 3, pp. 414-422. https:// 5 doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2017.09.003 |

Avle S., Hui J., Lindtner S., Dillahunt T. (2019). Additional labors of the entrepreneurial self. Proceedings of the ACM on Human- |

Computer Interaction, vol. 3, pp. 1-24. https://doi.org/10.1145/3359320 Bernerth J.B., Aguinis H. (2016). A critical review and best-practice recommendations for control variable usage. Personnel Psychology, vol. 69, no. 1, pp. 229-283. https://doi.org/10.1111/peps.12103 Ceptureanu S.I., Ceptureanu E.G., Cerqueti R. (2022). Innovation ambidexterity and impact on the performance in IT companies: The moderating role of business experience. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, vol. 34, no. 7, pp. 746-759. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537325.2021.1918337 Cheney G., Tompkins P.K. (1987). Coming to terms with organizational identification and commitment. Central States Speech

Journal, vol. 38, no. 1, pp. 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1080/10510978709368225 Clark D.R., Pidduck R.J., Lumpkin G.T., Covin J.G. (2023). Is it okay to study Entrepreneurial Orientation (EO) at the individual level? Yes! Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/10422587231178885 Cohen A., Nahum-Shani I., Doveh E. (2010). Further insight and additional inference methods for polynomial regression applied to the analysis of congruence. Multivariate Behavioral Research, vol. 45, no. 5, pp. 828-852. https://doi.org/10.1080/002731 71.2010.519272

Cook T.D., Campbell D.T., Day A. (1979). Quasi-experimentation: Design & analysis issues for field settings (vol. 351). Houghton Mifflin Boston.

Covin J.G., Rigtering J.P.C., Hughes M., Kraus S., Cheng C.-F., Bouncken R.B. (2020). Individual and team entrepreneurial orientation: Scale development and configurations for success. Journal of Business Research, vol. 112, pp. 1-12. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.02.023 Covin J.G., Slevin D.P. (1986). The development and testing of an organizational-level entrepreneurship scale. Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research, vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 628-639. Covin J.G., Slevin D.P. (2017). The entrepreneurial imperatives of strategic leadership. In M.A. Hitt, R.D. Ireland, S.M. Camp,

D.L. Sexton. (Eds.). Strategic Entrepreneurship (1st ed., pp. 307-327). Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781405164085.ch14 Das R. (2023). Selecting entrepreneurial employees using a person-group fit perspective. International Journal of Selection and

Assessment, vol. 31, no. 2, pp. 336-346. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijsa.12431 David K. (2016). Multiple latent variable models: Confirmatory factor analysis. https://davidakenny.net/cm/mfactor.htm De Giorgio A., Barattucci M., Teresi M., Raulli G., Ballone C., Ramaci T., Pagliaro S. (2023). Organizational identification as a trigger for personal well-being: Associations with happiness and stress through job outcomes. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, vol. 33, no. 1, pp. 138-151. https://doi.org/10.1002/casp.2648 Duane Ireland R., Kuratko D.F., Morris M.H. (2006). A health audit for corporate entrepreneurship: Innovation at all levels: Part I.

Journal of Business Strategy, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 10-17. https://doi.org/10.1108/02756660610640137 Edwards J.R., Parry M.E. (1993). On the use of polynomial regression equations as an alternative to difference scores in organizational research. Academy of Management Journal, vol. 36, no. 6, pp. 1577-1613. https://doi.org/10.2307/256822 Ferreras-Méndez J.L., Olmos-Peñuela J., Salas-Vallina A., Alegre J. (2021). Entrepreneurial orientation and new product development performance in SMEs: The mediating role of business model innovation. Technovation, vol. 108, pp. 102325. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2021.102325 Fornell C., Larcker D.F. (1981). Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: Algebra and

statistics. Journal of Marketing Research, vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 382-388. https://doi.org/10.2307/3150980 Garson G.D. (2001). Guide to writing empirical papers, theses, and dissertations. CRC Press.

George E., Chattopadhyay P. (2005). One foot in each camp: The dual identification of contract workers. Administrative Science

Quarterly, vol. 50, no. 1, pp. 68-99. https://doi.org/10.2189/asqu.2005.50.1.68 González C., Greve P. (2023). Supplementary and complementary congruence at the apex of the organization: Management and board as a strategic-oriented multiteam system. British Journal of Management, vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 1510-1533. https:// doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.12645 Hair J.F. (2009). Multivariate data analysis. Pearson.

Hair J.F., Anderson R.E., Tatham R., Black W.C. (1984). Multivariate data analysis with readings. Macmillan Pub. Indianapolis, IN. Holland J.L. (1997). Making vocational choices: A theory of vocational personalities and work environments. Psychological Assessment Resources.

¡2 Hornsby J.S., Naffziger D.W., Kuratko D.F., Montagno R.V. (1993). An interactive model of the corporate entrepreneurship pro-Й cess. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 29-37. https://doi.org/10.1177/104225879301700203 J Hwang S., Shin J. (2019). Using Lean Startup to Power Organizational Transformation: Creating an internal division that imple-£ mented concepts from Lean Startup helped a consumer electronics firm foster an entrepreneurial mindset among employ-8 ees. Research-Technology Management, vol. 62, no. 5, pp. 40-49. https://doi.org/10.1080/08956308.2019.1638224 g Ikonen H.-M. (2013). Precarious work, entrepreneurial mindset and sense of place: female strategies in insecure labour markets. < Global Discourse, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 467-481. https://doi.org/10.1080/23269995.2013.864085

cl Iqbal S., Moleiro Martins J., Nuno Mata M., Naz S., Akhtar S., Abreu A. (2021). Linking entrepreneurial orientation with innova-^ tion performance in SMEs; the Role of Organizational commitment and transformational leadership using Smart PLS-SEM. Sustainability, vol. 13, no. 8, 4361. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13084361 Jelenc L., Pisapia J., Ivanusic N. (2015). Demographic variables influencing individual entrepreneurial orientation and strategic

thinking capability. Proceedings of 10th International Scientific Conference on Economic and Social Development. Kahn W.A. (1990). Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at work. Academy of Management

Journal, vol. 33, no. 4, pp. 692-724. https://doi.org/10.2307/256287 Kassa A.G., Raju R.S. (2015). Investigating the relationship between corporate entrepreneurship and employee engagement.

Journal of Entrepreneurship in Emerging Economies, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 148-167. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEEE-12-2014-0046 Ko J.-W., Price J.L., Mueller C.W. (1997). Assessment of Meyer and Allen's three-component model of organizational commitment in South Korea. Journal of Applied Psychology, vol. 82, no. 6, pp. 961-973. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.82.6.961 Kolot A., Herasymenko O. (2020). Digital transformation and new business models as determinants of formation of the economy of nontypical employment. Social and Labour Relations: Theory and Practice, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 33-54. https://doi. org/10.21511/slrtp.10(1).2020.06 Kristof A.L. (1996). Person-organization fit: An integrative review of its conceptualizations, measurement, and implications.

Personnel Psychology, vol. 49, no. 1, pp. 1-49. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1996.tb01790.x Kuratko D.F., Goldsby M.G., Hornsby J.S. (2018). Corporate innovation: Disruptive thinking in organizations. Routledge. Kuratko D.F., Hornsby J.S., McKelvie A. (2023). Entrepreneurial mindset in corporate entrepreneurship: Forms, impediments, and actions for research. Journal of Small Business Management, vol. 61, no. 1, pp. 132-154. https://doi.org/10.1080/00472 778.2021.1907585

Lam L.W. (2012). Impact of competitiveness on salespeople's commitment and performance. Journal of Business Research,

vol. 65, no. 9, pp. 1328-1334. https://doi.org/10.1016/jjbusres.2011.10.026 Langkamp Bolton D., Lane M.D. (2012). Individual entrepreneurial orientation: Development of a measurement instrument.

Education + Training, vol. 54, no. 2/3, pp. 219-233. https://doi.org/10.1108/00400911211210314 Lee N.Y., Zablah A.R., Noble S.M. (2023). A meta-analytic investigation of the organizational identification - Job performance

relationship in the frontlines. Journal of Retailing, vol. 99, no. 3, pp. 370-384. https://doi.org/10.1016/jjretai.2023.07.003 Li G., Xie L. (2023). The effects of job involvement and supervisor developmental feedback on employee creativity: A polynomial regression with response surface analysis. Current Psychology, vol. 42, no. 20, pp. 17120-17131. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s12144-022-02901-w

Li Y., Liu Y., Zhao Y. (2006). The role of market and entrepreneurship orientation and internal control in the new product development activities of Chinese firms. Industrial Marketing Management, vol. 35, no. 3, pp. 336-347. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. indmarman.2005.05.016

Lim S., Envick B.R. (2013). Gender and entrepreneurial orientation: A multi-country study. International Entrepreneurship and

Management Journal, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 465-482. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-011-0183-2 Locke E.A. (1976). The nature and causes of job satisfaction. In M.D. Dunnette. (Ed.). Handbook of industrial and organizational

psychology (pp. 1297-1343). Chicago, IL: Rand McNally. Lumpkin G.T., Dess G.G. (2001). Linking two dimensions of entrepreneurial orientation to firm performance. Journal of Business

Venturing, vol. 16, no. 5, pp. 429-451. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0883-9026(00)00048-3 Madhavan V., Venugopalan M., Gupta B., Sisodia G.S. (2023). Addressing agency problem in employee training: The role of goal

congruence. Sustainability, vol. 15, no. 4, 3745. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15043745 Matzler K., Renzl B. (2007). Personality traits, employee satisfaction and affective commitment. Total Quality Management &

Business Excellence, vol. 18, no. 5, pp. 589-598. https://doi.org/10.1080/14783360601061528 Meyer J.P., Allen N.J., Smith C.A. (1993). Commitment to organizations and occupations: Extension and test of a three-component

conceptualization. Journal of Applied Psychology, vol. 78, no. 4, pp. 538-551. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.78A538 Meyer J.P., Stanley D.J., Herscovitch L., Topolnytsky L. (2002). Affective, continuance, and normative commitment to the organization: A meta-analysis of antecedents, correlates, and consequences. Journal of Vocational Behavior, vol. 61, no. 1, pp. 20-52. https://doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.2001.1842 Murray H.A., McAdams D.P. (2007). Explorations in personality. Oxford University Press. Nunnally J.C., Bernstein I.H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed). McGraw-Hill.

Nystrom K. (2018). Pre-and post-entrepreneurship labor mobility of entrepreneurs and employees in entrepreneurial firms. In

SAGE handbook for entrepreneurship and small business (pp. 60-73). Parameswaran R., Yaprak A. (1987). A cross-national comparison of consumer research measures. Journal of International Business Studies, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 35-49. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490398

Pidduck R.J., Clark D.R., Lumpkin G.T. (2023). Entrepreneurial mindset: Dispositional beliefs, opportunity beliefs, and entrepre- ¿ neurial behavior. Journal of Small Business Management, vol. 61, no. 1, pp. 45-79. https://doi.org/10.1080/00472778.2021.1 й 907582 §

Pierce J.R., Aguinis H. (2013). The too-much-of-a-good-thing effect in management. Journal of Management, vol. 39, no. 2, Я pp. 313-338. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206311410060 «

Pollack J.M., Ho V.T., O'Boyle E.H., Kirkman B.L. (2020). Passion at work: A meta-analysis of individual work outcomes. Journal g of Organizational Behavior, vol. 41, no. 4, pp. 311-331. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2434 |

Pratt M.G. (1998). To Be or not to be?: Central questions in organizational identification. In D.A. Whetten, P.C. God- J frey. Identity in organizations: Building theory through conversations (pp. 171-208). SAGE Publications, Inc. https://doi. S org/10.4135/9781452231495.n6 g

Qiu S., Dooley L.M., Xie L. (2020). How servant leadership and self-efficacy interact to affect service quality in the hospitality 5 industry: A polynomial regression with response surface analysis. Tourism Management, vol. 78, pp. 104051. https://doi. § org/10.1016/j.tourman.2019.104051 I

Rauch A., Wiklund J., Lumpkin G.T., Frese M. (2009). Entrepreneurial orientation and business performance: An assessment of past research and suggestions for the future. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, vol. 33, no. 3, pp. 761-787. https://doi. org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2009.00308.x Reich R.B. (2002). The future of success: Working and living in the new economy. Vintage.

Riketta M. (2005). Organizational identification: A meta-analysis. Journal of Vocational Behavior, vol. 66, no. 2, pp. 358-384.

https://doi.org/10.1016/jjvb.2004.05.005 Ryan R.M., Deci E.L. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary Educational

Psychology, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 54-67. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1999.1020 Saks A.M. (2006). Antecedents and consequences of employee engagement. Journal of Managerial Psychology, vol. 21, no. 7,

pp. 600-619. https://doi.org/10.1108/02683940610690169 Salancik G.R., Pfeffer J. (1978). A social information processing approach to job attitudes and task design. Administrative Science

Quarterly, vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 224-253. https://doi.org/10.2307/2392563 Schneider B. (1987). The people make the place. Personnel Psychology, vol. 40, no. 3, pp. 437-453. https://doi.org/10.1111/

j.1744-6570.1987.tb00609.x Schumpeter J.A., Swedberg R. (2021). The theory of economic development. Routledge.

Shaikh E., Brahmi M., Thang P.C., Watto W.A., Trang T.T.N., Loan N.T. (2022). Should I stay or should I go? Explaining the turnover intentions with corporate social responsibility (CSR), organizational identification and organizational commitment. Sustain-ability, vol. 14, no. 10, 6030. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14106030 Sluss D.M., Ployhart R.E., Cobb M.G., Ashforth B.E. (2012). Generalizing newcomers' relational and organizational identifications: Processes and prototypicality. Academy of Management Journal, vol. 55, no. 4, pp. 949-975. https://doi.org/10.5465/ amj.2010.0420

Smidts A., Pruyn A.T.H., Van Riel C.B.M. (2001). The impact of employee communication and perceived external prestige on organizational identification. Academy of Management Journal, vol. 44, no. 5, pp. 1051-1062. https://doi.org/10.2307/3069448 Soares M.D.C., Perin M.G. (2019). Entrepreneurial orientation and firm performance: An updated meta-analysis. RAUSP Management Journal, vol. 55, no. 2, pp. 143-159. https://doi.org/10.1108/RAUSP-01-2019-0014 Tajfel H., Turner J.C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In W.G. Austin, S. Worchel. (Eds.). The social psychology

of intergroup relations (pp. 33-47). Monterey, CA:Brooks/Cole. Tang Y., Wengbo H., Xiucheng F. (2008). A study on the degree of loyalty of employees in service industry based on organizational commitment mechanism. Management World, no. 5, pp. 102-114, 123. (in Chinese) Terborg J.R. (1981). Interactional psychology and research on human behavior in organizations. The Academy of Management

Review, vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 569-576. https://doi.org/10.2307/257635 Unal Z.M. (2014). Does affective commitment mediate the relationship between person-organization fit and organizational identification? International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 270-283. https:// doi.org/10.6007/IJARBSS/v4-i3/706 Van Knippenberg D., Sleebos E. (2006). Organizational identification versus organizational commitment: Self-definition, social exchange, and job attitudes. Journal of Organizational Behavior, vol. 27, no. 5, pp. 571-584. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.359 Vandenberghe C., Bentein K., Stinglhamber F. (2004). Affective commitment to the organization, supervisor, and work group: Antecedents and outcomes. Journal of Vocational Behavior, vol. 64, no. 1, pp. 47-71. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0001-8791(03)00029-0

Verquer M.L., Beehr T.A., Wagner S.H. (2003). A meta-analysis of relations between person-organization fit and work attitudes.

Journal of Vocational Behavior, vol. 63, no. 3, pp. 473-489. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0001-8791(02)00036-2 Vleugels W., Flatau-Harrison H. (2023). Curvilinear relationships in person-environment fit research: Is there evidence for a too-much-of-a-good-thing effect? Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, vol. 96, no. 3, pp. 669-677. https://doi. org/10.1111/joop.12432

Voci A. (2006). Relevance of social categories, depersonalization and group processes: two field tests of self-categorization

theory. European Journal of Social Psychology, vol. 36, no. 1, pp. 73-90. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.259 Wales W.J., Gupta V.K., Mousa F.-T. (2013). Empirical research on entrepreneurial orientation: An assessment and suggestions for future research. International Small Business Journal: Researching Entrepreneurship, vol. 31, no. 4, pp. 357-383. https://doi. org/10.1177/0266242611418261

¡2 Weisman H., Wu C.-H., Yoshikawa K., Lee H.-J. (2023). Antecedents of organizational identification: A review and agenda for S future research. Journal of Management, vol. 49, no. 6, pp. 2030-2061. https://doi.org/10.1177/01492063221140049 J Wenjun Z. (2023). Intrapreneurship as a growing demand: Igniting entrepreneurial mindset to fuel employees' strategic £ renewal behavior. Human Progress, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 13. https://doi.org/10.34709/IM.193.14

§ Wenjun Z., Panikarova S.V. (2023). Intrapreneurial Behavior in Employees: Influence of Entrepreneurial Mindset and Demo-| graphics. BENEFICIUM, vol. 4, no. 49, pp. 100-108. https://doi.org/10.34680/BENEFICIUM.2023.4(49).100-108 < Wiegand J.P., Drasgow F., Rounds J. (2021). Misfit matters: A re-examination of interest fit and job satisfaction. Journal of Voca-2 tional Behavior, vol. 125, pp. 103524. https://doi.org/10.1016/jjvb.2020.103524

^ Wiklund J., Shepherd D. (2005). Entrepreneurial orientation and small business performance: A configurational approach. Journal of Business Venturing, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 71-91. https://doi.org/10.1016/jjbusvent.2004.01.001 Yang J., Pu B., Guan Z. (2019). Entrepreneurial leadership and turnover intention of employees: The role of affective commitment and person-job fit. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, vol. 16, no. 13, 2380. https://doi. org/10.3390/ijerph16132380

Zhang G., Wang Y. (2022). Organizational identification and employees' innovative behavior: The mediating role of work engagement and the moderating role of creative self-efficacy. Chinese Management Studies, vol. 16, no. 5, pp. 1108-1123. https://doi.org/10.1108/CMS-07-2021-0294 Zhang W. (2013). Understanding Corporations: Property Rights, Incentives, and Governance. Shanghai ren min chu ban she. (in Chinese)

Zhonghua G., Chen Z. (2014). Does organizational politics at the workplace harm employees' job performance? A person-

organization fit perspective. Acta Psychologica Sinica, vol. 46, no. 8, pp. 1124-1143. (in Chinese) Zorlu O., Avan A., Baytok A. (2019). Perceived organizational support and organizational identification: The mediating role of fit to organization. Turizm Akademik Dergisi, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 277-291.

Information about the authors Информация об авторах

Zuo Wenjun

PhD Student (Economics), Regional Economics, Innovative Entrepreneurship and Security Dept. Ural Federal University named after the first President of Russia B.N. Yeltsin, Ekaterinburg, Russia. E-mail: zuo. wenjun@outlook.com

Svetlana V. Panikarova

Dr. Sc. (Econ.), Senior Research Fellow of the Center for Economic Theory. Institute of Economics of the Ural Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Ekaterinburg, Russia; Professor of Regional Economics, Innovative Entrepreneurship and Security Dept. Ural Federal University named after the first President of Russia B.N. Yeltsin, Ekaterinburg, Russia. E-mail: s.v.panikarova@urfu.ru

Li Zhiyuan

PhD Student (Management), School of Economics and Management. East China Normal University, Shanghai, China. E-mail: 452502984@ qq.com

Вэньцзюнь Цзо

Аспирант кафедры региональной экономики, инновационного предпринимательства и безопасности. Уральский федеральный университет имени первого Президента России Б.Н. Ельцина, г. Екатеринбург, РФ. E-mail: zuo.wenjun@outlook.com

Паникарова Светлана Викторовна

Доктор экономических наук, старший научный сотрудник Центра экономической теории. Институт экономики УрО РАН, г. Екатеринбург, РФ; профессор кафедры региональной экономики, инновационного предпринимательства и безопасности. Уральский федеральный университет имени первого Президента России Б.Н. Ельцина, г. Екатеринбург, РФ. E-mail: s.v.panikarova@urfu.ru

Чжиюань Ли

Аспирант Школы экономики и управления. Восточно-Китайский педагогический университет, г. Шанхай, Китай. E-mail: 452502984@ qq.com