Research
I explore the dynamic world of entrepreneurship and the strategic challenges faced by modern organisations. My research dives into how new ventures are born, how small firms outmanoeuvre larger rivals, and what makes entrepreneurial strategies succeed in a digital-first world. I focus on the power of collaboration, learning, and strategic alliances to drive competitive advantage.
​
Beyond entrepreneurship, I'm also drawn to big-picture questions at the intersection of science, philosophy, and research integrity. From exposing questionable research practices like p-hacking, to unpacking deep theoretical debates—such as equifinality vs. linearity—I’m passionate about advancing how we think about, and conduct, research.
​
Here are three key research areas I’m currently exploring:
1. Entrepreneurship
How Do New Ventures Emerge, Endure, and Impact Established Firms?
My research in entrepreneurship focuses on how founders’ subjective perceptions shape their ventures — from opportunity recognition to long-term survival. Every entrepreneurial decision starts with a personal view of what success looks like. These perceptions form the “reality” that founders act upon, influencing not only what they pursue, but how effectively they compete.
​
One line of inquiry explores how human, social, and financial capital affect new venture survival. Drawing on the Subjectivist Theory of Entrepreneurship, I investigate how individual worldviews can create gaps between spotting opportunities and actually acting on them. These subjective filters also shape what kind of competencies founders develop — and which types of capital they are able to acquire.
​
In another stream of research, I examine the role of social norms and group dynamics in shaping gender imbalances in digital entrepreneurship. Using Optimal Distinctiveness Theory and Jellinek's “Normative Force of the Factual,” I show how shared subjectivities can create powerful group norms — reinforcing existing biases and influencing who gets to participate in IT-driven startups.
​
I'm also interested in entrepreneurial outliers — rare, high-impact individuals who distort how we understand entrepreneurship itself. These power-law players attract attention and shape narratives, but often distract from more typical, scalable paths to success.
Three examplary papers are:
Linder, Christian, Christian Lechner, and Frank Pelzel. 2020. “Many roads lead to Rome: How human, social, and financial capital are related to
new venture survival.” Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 44(5): 909–932.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1042258719867558
Crawford, Christopher, Christian Linder, Christian Lechner, and Elisa Villani. 2024. “Outlier entrepreneurs: Nonlinear paths and novel ventures.”
Journal of Business Venturing Insights, 21, e00437.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbvi.2023.e00437
Sperber, Sonja, and Christian Linder. 2023. “Gender imbalance in IT entrepreneurship: The self-referential role of male over-representation in
digital businesses.” European Journal of Information Systems, 32(5), 902–919.
2. Management and Organisation
How Do Managers, Employees, and Organisations Co-Create Organisational Reality?
​
In the field of Management and Organisation, my research explores how meaning is constructed through the complex interplay between managers, employees, and the organisation itself.
​
I approach management through a communication lens, drawing on Speech Act Theory and Jakobson's model of communication. I study how managers attempt to transmit ideas—about a firm’s history, identity, or need for innovation—and how employees subjectively interpret these messages. These interpretations are shaped by individual experiences, values, and cognitive frameworks, often leading to mismatches between intention and understanding. This perspective questions the assumptions of traditional theories like agency theory, which tend to overlook the interpretive act as a central unit of analysis.
​
From the employee perspective, I examine how perceived paradoxes—like the tension between tradition and innovation—shape their sensemaking and identification with the organisation. These tensions are particularly acute during times of transformation, such as in family firms, where long-standing values must be balanced with a need for agility and change. I investigate how emotional attachments to the past affect strategic decisions and whether these dynamics require rethinking traditional incentive systems to foster innovation.
​
Overall, my research looks at how subjective experiences and organisational paradoxes shape not only individual identity, but the collective evolution of the firm.
Two examplary papers are:
Farahbakhsh, Siavash, Christian Linder, Torsten Oliver Salge, and Elisa Villani. 2024. “How paradoxes shape members and the member–
organization relationship: An identity threat perspective”. Organization Science. (online first)
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2020.14630
Villani, Elisa, Christian Linder, Alfredo de Massis, and Kimberly Eddleston. 2023. “Employee incentives and family firm innovation: A
configurational approach”. Journal of Management, 50(5), 1797-1835.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/01492063231157323
AWARD: Winner 18th EBS Best Paper Award 2023 on Innovation, Corporate Entrepreneurship, and Transformation
3. The Academic Production of Management Knowledge
What Philosophical and Sociological Foundations Shape How We Build Knowledge in Management?
​
My research in the philosophy and sociology of science interrogates the very foundations of how we produce academic knowledge in management and entrepreneurship. I focus on the subjective biases that influence both researchers and the individuals they study—biases that often remain hidden, yet shape how theories are constructed, methods chosen, and “facts” interpreted.
​
One line of inquiry explores causality in management research. Inspired by David Hume’s critique of empiricism, I argue that causal relationships in entrepreneurship are rarely as objective as they seem. Researchers frequently apply mathematical models to express A-causes-B relationships, assuming objectivity where subjective judgments are deeply embedded. The choice of what counts as a cause—and even the decision to measure it—reflects the researcher’s worldview.
​
This perspective extends to questionable research practices. Rather than viewing these as violations of static rules, I examine how subjective boundaries—formed by institutional, philosophical, or personal values—define what is deemed acceptable or not. Just as managers and entrepreneurs act within subjective frameworks, so too do scholars who develop theories to explain those actions.
​
I’m also intrigued by the role of aesthetics in theory-building—particularly in strategic management. Strategy theories often aim for scientific “truth,” but truth is just one epistemic value. I explore how aesthetic qualities like symmetry, simplicity, originality, and surprise shape what is seen as a “good” theory. In this way, beauty and clarity don’t just dress up a theory—they help legitimize it.
Two examplary papers are:
Linder, Christian, Abhisekh Ghosh Moulick, and Christian Lechner. 2022. “Necessary Conditions and Theory-Method Compatibility in Quantitative
Entrepreneurship Research.” Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 47(5), 1971–1994.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/10422587221102103
Linder, Christian, and Siavash Farahbakhsh. 2020. “Unfolding the Black Box of questionable research practices: Where is the line between
acceptable and unacceptable practices?” Business Ethics Quarterly, 30(3): 335–360.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/beq.2019.52
​
AWARD: 1st Runner-up 2020 Best Paper Award for papers published in Business Ethics Quarterly
Outreach and Media Attention
