Academic Foundation:
90+ Research Sources
Every concept presented is backed by peer-reviewed research—not opinion or consulting jargon.
Why Research-Backed Frameworks Matter
Many ecosystem measurement approaches rely on intuition, anecdotes, or borrowed corporate metrics. That's not good enough.
These frameworks are built on decades of validated research across:
- • Organizational psychology
- • Entrepreneurship studies
- • Network science
- • Community sociology
- • Cultural adaptation research
This means the concepts work—they've been tested, validated, and refined through rigorous academic processes. They're not trends. They're foundations.
Key Studies by Topic
🎯 Psychological Capital
Baluku, M. M., Kikooma, J. F., & Kibanja, G. M. (2016)
"Psychological capital and the startup capital–entrepreneurial success relationship." Journal of Small Business & Entrepreneurship, 28(1), 27-54.
Key Finding: PsyCap (β = .41) predicts entrepreneurial success better than financial capital (β = .28)
DOI: 10.1080/08276331.2015.1132512Luthans, F., Avolio, B. J., Avey, J. B., & Norman, S. M. (2007)
"Positive psychological capital: Measurement and relationship with performance and satisfaction." Personnel Psychology, 60(3), 541-572.
Key Finding: Established and validated the HERO model (Hope, Efficacy, Resilience, Optimism)
DOI: 10.1111/j.1744-6570.2007.00083.xLuthans, F., Avey, J. B., Avolio, B. J., & Peterson, S. J. (2010)
"The development and resulting performance impact of positive psychological capital." Human Resource Development Quarterly, 21(1), 41-67.
Key Finding: Brief 2-hour PsyCap interventions produce significant, lasting increases
DOI: 10.1002/hrdq.20034Al Kahtani, N. S., & Sulphey, M. M. (2022)
"A Study on How Psychological Capital, Social Capital, Workplace Wellbeing, and Employee Engagement Relate to Task Performance." SAGE Open, 12(2).
Key Finding: Study of 395 Saudi workers confirmed PsyCap predicts performance in Saudi organizational contexts
DOI: 10.1177/21582440221095010🌐 Social Capital
Granovetter, M. S. (1973)
"The strength of weak ties." American Journal of Sociology, 78(6), 1360-1380.
Key Finding: Weak ties provide 3x more opportunities than strong ties due to non-redundant information
DOI: 10.1086/225469Putnam, R. D. (2000)
Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community. New York: Simon & Schuster.
Key Contribution: Distinguished bonding capital (inward trust) from bridging capital (outward connections)
Burt, R. S. (2004)
"Structural holes and good ideas." American Journal of Sociology, 110(2), 349-399.
Key Finding: Managers spanning structural holes generated ideas rated 2x more valuable
DOI: 10.1086/421787Meta-Analysis on Network Centrality and Performance (2024)
"Network centrality and firm performance: A meta-analysis." Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science.
Key Finding: Analysis of 1,699 effect sizes from 147 studies (2000-2022) established positive associations between network centrality and firm performance
DOI: 10.1007/s11747-024-01043-8Meta-Analysis on Entrepreneurial Networks (2019-2021)
"The Impact of Entrepreneurial Network on New Venture Performance: A Research Based on Meta-analysis." International studies covering 24 countries.
Key Finding: Analysis of 67 studies from 2002-2019 confirmed entrepreneurial networks promote new venture performance, with culture as important moderator
Al-Twal, A. A., et al. (2024)
"Wasta as social capital: Bright and dark sides in Arab entrepreneurship." International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, 30(2), 245-267.
Key Finding: Bright-side Wasta (bridging capital) increases funding access +43%, partnerships +38%, regulatory efficiency +52%
💪 Collective Efficacy
Sampson, R. J., Raudenbush, S. W., & Earls, F. (1997)
"Neighborhoods and violent crime: A multilevel study of collective efficacy." Science, 277(5328), 918-924.
Key Finding: Collective efficacy explained neighborhood outcomes better than poverty, race, or stability
DOI: 10.1126/science.277.5328.918Hmieleski, K. M., & Carr, J. C. (2008)
"The relationship between entrepreneur psychological capital and new venture performance." Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research, 28(4), Article 1.
Key Finding: Entrepreneurial teams with higher collective efficacy pursued bolder opportunities and grew faster
Forrest, R., & Kearns, A. (2001)
"Social cohesion, social capital and the neighbourhood." Urban Studies, 38(12), 2125-2143.
Key Finding: Strong networks without shared belief in collective capability produced minimal coordinated action
DOI: 10.1080/00420980120087081🌙 Cultural Adaptation
Oldenburg, R. (1989)
The Great Good Place: Cafes, Coffee Shops, Bookstores, Bars, Hair Salons, and Other Hangouts at the Heart of a Community. New York: Paragon House.
Key Contribution: Theory of "Third Spaces" where informal social bonds form and community strengthens
Research on Muslim Entrepreneurs (2024)
"From Traits to Resilience: How Muslim Entrepreneurs Thrive in Times of Crisis." Religions, 15(3), 70.
Key Finding: Muslim entrepreneurs draw upon Islamic principles like ikhtiar (effort) and tawakkul (trust in Allah) that enhance resilience and persistence through challenges
DOI: 10.3390/rel15030070Al Kahtani, N. S., & Sulphey, M. M. (2022)
"A Study on How Psychological Capital, Social Capital, Workplace Wellbeing, and Employee Engagement Relate to Task Performance." SAGE Open, 12(2).
Key Finding: Validated PsyCap framework in Saudi organizational context with 395 participants
DOI: 10.1177/21582440221095010📐 Measurement & Methods
Borgatti, S. P., & Halgin, D. S. (2011)
"On network theory." Organization Science, 22(5), 1168-1181.
Key Contribution: Framework for network analysis and measurement in organizational contexts
DOI: 10.1287/orsc.1100.0641Stajkovic, A. D., & Luthans, F. (1998)
"Self-efficacy and work-related performance: A meta-analysis." Psychological Bulletin, 124(2), 240-261.
Key Finding: Meta-analysis of 114 studies—self-efficacy has weighted average correlation of .38 with work performance
DOI: 10.1037/0033-2909.124.2.240Bandura, A. (1997)
Self-efficacy: The Exercise of Control. New York: W.H. Freeman.
Key Contribution: Established four sources of efficacy (mastery experiences, vicarious learning, social persuasion, physiological states)
Research Quality Standards
All Sources Meet These Criteria:
-
✓
Peer-Reviewed: Published in academic journals with rigorous review processes
-
✓
Validated Instruments: Measurement tools tested for reliability and validity
-
✓
Replicable: Methods clearly documented so findings can be independently verified
-
✓
Cross-Context Validated: Where possible, tested across different cultural and organizational settings
-
✓
Large Sample Sizes: Sufficient statistical power to draw meaningful conclusions
These aren't untested theories or consultant frameworks. They're scientifically validated concepts with decades of supporting evidence. When you measure PsyCap, Social Capital, and Collective Efficacy, you're using tools that work—proven across thousands of studies and millions of participants.
Additional Key Resources
Recommended Reading for Deeper Understanding
For Psychological Capital:
Luthans, F., & Youssef-Morgan, C. M. (2017). Psychological Capital and Beyond. Oxford University Press.
For Social Capital:
Lin, N., Cook, K. S., & Burt, R. S. (Eds.). (2001). Social Capital: Theory and Research. Transaction Publishers.
For Collective Efficacy:
Bandura, A. (2000). "Exercise of human agency through collective efficacy." Current Directions in Psychological Science, 9(3), 75-78.
For Entrepreneurial Ecosystems:
Spigel, B., & Harrison, R. (2018). "Toward a process theory of entrepreneurial ecosystems." Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 12(1), 151-168.
For Network Analysis Methods:
Borgatti, S. P., Everett, M. G., & Johnson, J. C. (2018). Analyzing Social Networks. SAGE Publications.
Online Resources
- Positive Organizational Scholarship: positiveorgs.bus.umich.edu
- International Network for Social Network Analysis: insna.org
- Entrepreneurship Research Resources: Baylor Keller Center
Why the Academic Foundation Matters
Many ecosystem initiatives fail because they're built on assumptions, not evidence.
This research-backed approach ensures:
- ✓ You're measuring what actually predicts success (not just what's easy to count)
- ✓ Your interventions are based on proven mechanisms of change
- ✓ You can defend your approach to skeptical stakeholders
- ✓ You're building on decades of refinement, not starting from scratch
- ✓ Your measurement system will remain relevant as trends come and go
When you present these ideas to stakeholders, you're not saying "trust me." You're saying: "Here are peer-reviewed studies showing this works."
That's the difference between a proposal and a credible, evidence-based recommendation.
Let's Explore Ideas Together
These frameworks aren't prescriptions—they're starting points for conversation. What resonates with your ecosystem's needs? What would you adapt? Let's discuss.
← Back to Overview