Corruption and Entrepreneurship: How Formal and Informal Institutions Shape Small Firm Behavior in Transition and Mature Market Economies

By V. Tonoyan, R. Strohmeyer, M. Habib, F. Seger. 2010

476 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Demography, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/aa99dcd2ac24986233e583e3ef95ae5caf6d06f1

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Demography

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

Taxes, corruption, and entry (2016, unknown): “This pressure is greater on potential entrepreneurs or new firms because they tend to have fewer resources to cope (see Tonoyan et al. 2010).”
All you need is trust? A critical review of the trust and entrepreneurship literature (2012, background): “…is seen as something benign and helpful (Garguilo and Ertug, 2006); however, recently the potentially negative effects of trust and its dark sides have become more clearly acknowledged within the entrepreneurial context (e.g. Goel and Karri, 2006; Tonoyan et al., 2010; Zahra et al., 2006).”
Understanding the Social Role of Entrepreneurship (2016, unknown): “It can also raise the level of business uncertainty, reducing the willingness of entrepreneurs to invest and create companies (for discussion, Anokhin and Schulze, 2009; Tonoyan et al., 2010).”
Which Institutions Encourage Entrepreneurial Growth Aspirations (2013, background): “…have adapted their behaviour to the corresponding informal norms in order to limit the negative effects of corrupt practices (Choi and Thum, 2005; Tonoyan et al., 2010) 4 Seen this way, corruption is an example of a social element that can become institutionalised without gaining legitimacy…”
Institutional polycentrism, entrepreneurs' social networks, and new venture growth (2013, background): “Weak political institutions and bureaucratic regulatory controls tend to foster corruption and bribery that hinder entrepreneurs’ risk taking (Tonoyan, Strohmeyer, Habib, & Perlitz, 2010).”
Institutional asymmetry: How formal and informal institutions affect entrepreneurship in Bulgaria (2015, background): “Research on institutions argues that formal and informal institutions interact in two key ways, with formal institutions either supporting (i.e. complementing) or undermining (i.e. substituting) informal institutions (Estrin and Prevezer, 2011; North, 1990; Tonoyan et al., 2010).”
Economic inequality – Is entrepreneurship the cause or the solution? A review and research agenda for emerging economies (2021, background): “Those in the formal sector also benefit from informal institutions such as norms and understandings that allow trusted and beneficial relationships to develop between key stakeholders and/or government entities (Tonoyan et al., 2010).”
Does corruption ever help entrepreneurship? (2016, unknown): “2 While most articles approach the subject from the standpoint of viewing corruption as the exogenous determinant of entrepreneurial activity, Tonoyan et al. (2010) examine the choice of entrepreneurs to engage in bribe-paying schemes in these economies.”