Frontiers in Business, Economics and Management ISSN: 2766-824X | Vol. 17, No. 2, 2024 190 Hybrid Entrepreneurial Intentions: The Influence of Team-Member Exchange Kelvin Phineas Mbeveri School of Economics and Management, Management Science and Engineering Master Pro-gram, Chongqing University of Post and Telecommunication, Chongqing, 400060, China Abstract: Full-time entrepreneurs are an integral part of economic growth, the rise of a distinct category of entrepreneurs known as hybrid entrepreneurs is no exception. Hybrid entrepreneurship has re-ceived notable attention in recent years. Therefore, this study seeks to examine the influence of team-member exchange (TMX) on hybrid entrepreneurial intentions (HEIs) within organizational settings, elucidating the mediating role of perceived desirability of entrepreneurship (PDE), per-ceived normativeness towards entrepreneurship (PNE) and perceived feasibility towards entrepre-neurship (PFE). Through the lens of the theory of planned behavior (TPB), a research model is pro-posed to explore these relationships. More so, by employing a quantitative research design, data will be collected using a questionnaire in an online survey utilizing a convenience sampling technique. Regression analysis will be adopted to assess the direct and indirect effects of TMX on HEIs through the proposed mediators. The aim of this study is to advance theoretical understanding of HEI, extending TPB and contributing to the existing board of literature on hybrid entrepreneurship. Moreover, the study also has practical implications to policy makers, manager s and employees. Keywords: Team-member exchange, Hybrid entrepreneurial intentions, Perceived desirability of entrepreneur-ship, Perceived normativeness towards entrepreneurship, Perceived feasibility towards entrepre-neurship. 1. Introduction The emergence of a heterogeneous group of entrepreneurs within the entrepreneurship landscape, known as the hybrid entrepreneurs as coined by [1], has since garnered substantial attention in the entrepreneurship academia in recent years. Hybrid entrepreneurship has been exercised by more than 50% of nascent entrepreneurs, according to recent empirical studies [2]. Throughout history, a great number of well- known and prosperous businesspeople have at some point in their careers been hybrid entrepreneurs. For example, Steve Wozniak was still an employee at Hewlett-Packard long after co-founding Apple [3, 4], Pierre Omidyar founded eBay while still an employee at a software-development company General Magic [5], and, with the help of investors, Henry Ford founded the Detroit Automobile Group while still an employee at Edison Illuminating Company [6]. Consequently, it is critical for scholars and practitioners in the field of entrepreneurship to delve into the domain of hybrid entrepreneurship to explicate its multifaceted nature and identify its influence on entrepreneurial outcomes, economic growth and social development. The current landscape of entrepreneurship is changing. Shifting in labor markets contributed immensely in the evolving of traditional entrepreneurship [7]. The adoption of an all-or-nothing phenomenon has been the mainstream in entrepreneurship entry [1]. Such an approach on entrepreneurship involves risk and tension on the entrepreneurs and their families due to the load that comes with traditional entrepreneurship [8]. The phenomenon of hybrid entrepreneurship, is defined as the process of engaging in self-employment while simultaneously holding a primary job in wage work [1]. Hybrid entrepreneurship entails similar levels of risk; however, the benefit lies in the ability of hybrid entrepreneurs to manage risk effectively than their full-time counterparts. The benefit that hybrids have stem from having their wage job as their fallback in case venture into entrepreneurship fails [9]. Even though hybrid entrepreneurship is not a completely new phenomenon [10], researchers and policy makers have only recently begun to take interest in this category of entrepreneurs [1, 11]. The Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM) report of 2016 highlighted that hybrid entrepreneurs account for 18.5% of the entrepreneurs globally [12]. Additionally, recent studies pointed that hybrid entrepreneurs are often better educated than full-time entrepreneurs, therefore, their business ideas might have the capacity to grow into valuable high-growth ventures [1, 13]. Moreover, businesses started through hybrid entrepreneurship survive longer on average than full-time entrepreneurship [4]. Also, an issue of whether or not hybrid entrepreneurship benefits the economy is debatable in existing literature, however, the relevance of these hybrid entrepreneurs emerges from their potential to transition into valuable full-time businesses that otherwise would not have existed which in turn leads to creation of employment and economic growth [1, 4, 13, 14]. Another vital contribution worth noting is the importance of hybrid entrepreneurship in the growth of high-tech industries. [1] asserted that hybrid entrepreneurs account for a significant share among new entrants in high-tech industries which have received particular attention by policymakers. Although hybrid entrepreneurial phenomenon is still in its infant regarding garnering the attention of scholars and policymakers, it has opened up many avenues for further scrutiny. The scrutiny is necessary for us to gain a more nuanced understanding of this category of entrepreneurs. Extant research on hybrid entrepreneurship converges on several key areas. Primarily, the financial motives (i.e. the need to supplement income), non-financial motives (self- actualization, autonomy, passion) and the idea of transition into full-time entrepreneurship as the drivers for individual to become hybrid entrepreneurs [1, 15]. However, rationales 191 behind the intention to engage in hybrid entrepreneurship have been randomly explored. Therefore, it ideal to explore further motives that lead to hybrid entrepreneurship. The research questions that guided the development of this paper were as follows: How does team-member exchange influence hybrid entrepreneurial intentions? What is the role of the Theory of Planned Behavior in mediating the relationship between TMX and HEI? The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. Section 2 outlines the theoretical framework used to support individual’s intentions to engage in hybrid entrepreneurship, followed by a review of the literature on team-member exchange and hybrid entrepreneurship. Section 3 presents the hypotheses, explaining how team-member exchange, along with perceived desirability of entrepreneurship (PDE), perceived normativeness towards entrepreneurship (PNE), and perceived feasibility of entrepreneurship (PFE), is expected to significantly influence hybrid entrepreneurial intention (HEI). Section 4 describes the data and methodology employed in this study. Section 5 presents the results, while Section 6 provides a discussion of the findings and concludes the study. Finally, Section 7 discusses the implications, limitations, and directions for future research. 2. Theoretical Framework and Literature Review 2.1. Theory of Planned Behavior In order to substantiate this research topic, enhancing credibility and establishing a scholarly foundation, the research is founded on the theory of planned behavior (TPB). The theory of planned behavior (TPB) was coined by Icek Ajzen as an extension of the theory of reasoned action (TRA) which was created to help in comprehending the decision made by people with incomplete volitional control [16]. The theory is well supported by empirical evidence. Planned behaviors, such as applying for a job, are intentional, meaning that they are driven by intentions toward the behavior. Hybrid entrepreneurial intention indicates a consciousness and voluntary decision to start a business. Following [17] this study examines hybrid entrepreneurial intention by looking at three main variables which: perceived desirability of entrepreneurship, perceived normativeness towards entrepreneurship, perceived feasibility towards entrepreneurship. PDE is the individual’s perception of the positive or negative outcome of commencing a business [18]. PNE is the individual’s perception of what the important people or groups such as colleagues, family and friends think of someone who engage in entrepreneurship [16, 18]. PFE is an important factor in predicting entrepreneurial intentions and behavior. It is defined as the degree by which one feels personally capable or competent to start a business [19]. Existing literature supported the influence these variables on entrepreneurial intentions. The variance across the determinants of the TPB on behavior and situations was noted by [16] who observed that in some cases, only attitude (PDE in our study) significantly impacts intentions, while in others, both attitude (PDE) and perceived behavioral control (PFE in our study) play a role, and in some instances, all determinants make independent contributions. It is against this background that PDE, PNE and PFE is proposed in this study to mediate the impact of team-member exchange on hybrid entrepreneurial intentions. 2.2. Team-Member Exchange Team-member exchange garnered attraction from the academia due to its importance in providing understanding of the internal relations of a team. Team-member exchange (TMX) also known as high-quality interpersonal relationship among peers, refers to the reciprocal exchange and interactions between team members within a work environment [20-22]. Before the concept of team-member exchange which is a horizontal-exchange between subordinates, researchers focused on Leader-member exchange which is vertical-exchange between the manager or supervisor and subordinates [23]. The emergence of self- managed teams may weaken the impact of leadership due to the role played by team-member exchanges [24, 25]. Relationship exists in different dimensions, [26] conducted a research based on the qualitative and quantitative analysis review of two exchanges that occur within team member environment which include relationship-oriented exchanges and task-oriented exchanges. Relationship-oriented exchange involves exchanging care, support, recognition, friendship and help whereas task-oriented exchanges involve the exchange of work-related information such as idea sharing, knowledge sharing, feedback among others and is considered to be vital to team performance. Additionally, pivotal components that have been subject to scrutiny from scholar over the years are the three dimensions of team-member exchange which includes exchange, meetings and cohesiveness. [20, 25]. Exchange dimension of team-member exchange (TMX) refers to a voluntary provision of support or ideas to other team members and the willingness to also receive support, feedback, assistance and recognition [20, 27]. Meetings dimension of team-member exchange (TMX) proposes the effectiveness of conducting meetings as a team. Team meetings make reciprocity of ideas, knowledge, suggestion and problem solving possible [20]. Finally, cohesiveness, which refers to an individual’s feeling of belonging and a sense of close association to a particular group [28]. Cohesion together with other dimensions of team- member exchange (TMX) are important elements of an efficient team. 2.3. Hybrid Entrepreneurial Intentions Entrepreneurship has been traditionally viewed as dichotomous, that is, an individual can either be an entrepreneur or not [29]. The field of entrepreneurship has evolved with regards to discovering more nuances which make up the entrepreneurial process. Hybrid entrepreneurship is one the important phenomenon that has been uncovered in the entrepreneurship field in recent years. Hybrid entrepreneurship refers to process of engaging in self- employment activities while simultaneously holding a primary job in wage work [1, 4, 30]. Entrepreneurial intention is the first step in the entrepreneurial process [31]. Entrepreneurial intention is defined as the readiness and desire to put the required effort and action to start a business [32]. Extant research has used the theory of planned behavior [16, 33] to measure the intention of individuals and it will be the underpinning theory for our study. Other researchers have used the entrepreneurial event model [34] to comprehend the antecedents of entrepreneurial intentions. In hybrid entrepreneurship literature, studies have shown that the intentions of individuals to engage in hybrid entrepreneurship are motivated by a result of a number of reasons. 192 To start with, hybrid entrepreneurial intentions arises from the need to generate supplementary income since the hybrid mode can meet those need as identified by [2, 35] who postulated that self-employment as a second job increases the probability of having higher average earnings as compared to being employed in two occupations. Additionally, non- monetary benefit is another reason why individual pursue hybrid entrepreneurship [1, 7]. Non-monetary benefits such autonomy that comes as a result of being your own boss, flexibility of the primary job or from the venture and self- actualization or personal fulfillment necessitates hybrid entrepreneurial intentions [1, 2, 12]. Another reasons is, hybrid entrepreneurship can be used as a path to transition into full-time entrepreneurship since it helps in testing entrepreneurial waters and assessing whether or not an individual is competent enough to become a full-time entrepreneur [1]. In this way, risk, opportunity cost, switching costs and uncertainty involved in self-employment is mitigated by retaining the wage job as one attempts to transition into full-time entrepreneurship [1, 4]. 3. Hypotheses Development 3.1. Team-member Exchange and Hybrid Entrepreneurial Intentions Work environment plays a crucial role influencing employees to have hybrid entrepreneurial intentions [2]. Little is talked about with regards to the influence of contextual characteristics such as organizational culture, team dynamics, fellow employees on individual’s intention to pursue hybrid entrepreneurship [30]. In this study the influence of team member exchange as a contextual mechanism impacts hybrid entrepreneurial intentions in various ways. To begin with, knowledge creation at an individual level, is necessitated by high quality interpersonal relationship between team members [25, 36, 37]. Knowledge creation comprises of knowledge exchange and knowledge combination. Knowledge exchange refers to the transfer of knowledge to other parties in the organization and knowledge combination is the process of creating new knowledge [38]. It is through these exchanges with other members that domain-related knowledge, creative-related skills and socioemotional benefits are shared which in turn leads to hybrid entrepreneurial intentions [21, 22]. Exchange of knowledge with team members from different career backgrounds, some of whom may have engaged in entrepreneurship in the past can create intentions towards hybrid entrepreneurship [39]. Additionally, innovation arising from work autonomy and flexibility in decision-making which is made possible in team-member exchange setting as corroborated by [20, 25], prompts other members of the team to have hybrid entrepreneurial intention [1, 38]. More so, team member exchange reduces turnover intentions, which means employees can venture into entrepreneurship while keeping their wage job and also prevent higher opportunity costs or switching costs associated with quitting a job in case of full-time entrepreneurship [25, 40]. Based on the above premises, we expect team-member exchanges to be positively associated with hybrid entrepreneurial intentions. Thus, we posit that: H1: Team-member exchange (TMX) have a positive effect on hybrid entrepreneurial intentions (HEI). 3.2. Impact of Team-member Exchange on PDE, PNE and PFE According to prior research, the three antecedents of the theory of planned behavior are influenced by exogenous factors, such as employment status, demographic characteristics or personality traits [17-19, 41]. In hybrid entrepreneurship studies, a review of literature shows a paucity with regards to drivers which predicts hybrid entrepreneurship [30]. Team-member exchange [20-22] is the exogenous variable used in this research to influence the three antecedents of the theory of planned behavior which in turn influence hybrid entrepreneurial intention. The interpersonal relationships between peers is important for knowledge creation and the transfer of tacit knowledge which in turn facilitate action [36] and consequently entrepreneurial intentions through PDE, PNE and PFE. PDE, PNE and PFE are influenced individually by team- member exchange. To begin with, perceived desirability of entrepreneurship (PDE), due to high quality exchanges that happening within a team, various positive experiences and innovative ideas are shared between team members which trigger a sense of passion and fulfilment associated with entrepreneurship and consequently the desire to pursue entrepreneurship [42-45]. In addition, high quality team- member exchange also influence perceived normativeness towards entrepreneurship [46]. A team that encourages and supports their team-members are likely to view hybrid entrepreneurship as socially acceptable. Positive exchanges that happen in a team set up are capable of building social norms which promote and value hybrid entrepreneurial activities resulting in the formation of positive normativeness towards entrepreneurship [44]. Lastly, perceived feasibility towards entrepreneurship (PFE) in a team environment is also influenced by team-member exchange. A team environment characterized by trust and reciprocal exchanges of ideas, knowledge, and cooperation among team-members, including those with prior experience of indulging in entrepreneurship [39], fosters a sense of self-efficacy and self-confidence within individuals to overcome challenges and acquire necessary expertise, resources, or social capital needed to engage in hybrid entrepreneurship [44]. Hence, we propose the following hypothesis to support the influence of team- member exchange on TPB constructs: H2: Team-member exchange (TMX) has a positive influence on Perceived Desirability of Entrepreneurship (PDE). H3: Team-member exchange (TMX) has a positive influence on Perceived Normativeness towards Entrepreneurship (PNE). H4: Team-member exchange (TMX) has a positive influence on Perceived Feasibility of Entrepreneurship (PFE). 3.3. Influence of PDE, PNE and PFE on Hybrid Entrepreneurial Intentions High quality team-member exchanges influence PDE, PNE and PFE which in turn lead individuals to develop hybrid entrepreneurial intentions. Firstly, PDE, the perception of desirability of entrepreneurship is altered due to the positive interactions, exchanges, meetings and knowledge sharing that happens in a team environment. Interacting with individuals with entrepreneurial backgrounds or motives, sharing of ideas and skills makes the passion and desire for entrepreneurship to be conceived, prompting individuals to have hybrid 193 entrepreneurial intentions. Since ample time is spend at the workplace with fellow team-members, the interactions and social networks influence the decision for other employees to become hybrid entrepreneurs [39]. The positive interactions that happens in a team environment gives individuals a positive desire towards entrepreneurship resulting in hybrid entrepreneurial intentions [47]. Additionally, high quality team-member exchanges within a team environment bring forth a positive perception of normativeness towards entrepreneurship which leads to hybrid entrepreneurial intentions [48]. The more an individual perceive the support and encouragements of their team members with regards to their hybrid entrepreneurial endeavors, the more they feel compelled to pursue those hybrid entrepreneurial intentions. The approval of hybrid entrepreneurial engagement by an individual’s social network within a team environment can motivate that individual to pursue hybrid entrepreneurial career path. Lastly, an individuals’ perception of the feasibility of entrepreneurship is ignited by the high-quality team-member exchange in the organizational environment. When individuals feel that they possess the requisite skills and capabilities required to pursue hybrid entrepreneurship, they will engage in that career trajectory [47, 49]. It is through the high-quality exchanges that happens in a team environment that PDE, PNE and PFE are formed and consequently the intentions to engage in hybrid entrepreneurship. Therefore, we postulate that: H5: Perceived desirability of entrepreneurship (PDE) is positively related to hybrid entrepreneurial intention (HEI). H6: Perceived normativeness towards entrepreneurship (PNE) is positively related to hybrid entrepreneurial intention (HEI). H7: Perceived feasibility of entrepreneurship (PFE) is positively related to hybrid entrepreneurial intention (HEI). 3.4. Mediating Effect of PDE, PNE and PFE The relationship between team-member exchange and hybrid entrepreneurial intention can be influenced through individual’s perception of desirability, normativeness and feasibility of entrepreneurship. In light of this assertion, we postulate that team-member exchange may indirectly impact hybrid entrepreneurial intention through the mediation of PDE, PNE and PFE. A high-quality team-member exchange can deposit a positive perception of entrepreneurship in a team-member, through sharing compelling and rewarding view about hybrid entrepreneurship, others can develop a desires and intentions to pursue hybrid entrepreneurship [33, 50]. Additionally, having strong and supportive team- members, along with social acceptance of hybrid entrepreneurship, can fuel the morale of individuals in the team to pursue hybrid entrepreneurship. Such social acceptance is valuable in constructing a perception of normativeness towards entrepreneurship if one wants to pursue entrepreneurship while simultaneously keeping their wage job [19, 33, 48]. Moreover, high-quality team-member exchange may enhance the self-efficacy and self-confidence of individuals in their capabilities to engage in hybrid entrepreneurship. The support, encouragements and knowledge sharing that happens in these team environments enhances other team-member’s perception of the feasibility towards engaging in hybrid entrepreneurship [33]. Therefore, PDED, PNE and PFE fostered by a high-quality team- member exchange can act as mediators to enhance the individual’s intentions to engage into hybrid entrepreneurship [33, 51]. Based on these suggestions, we hypothesize that: H8: Perceived desirability of entrepreneurship (PDE) mediates the effects of Team-member exchange (TMX) on Hybrid Entrepreneurial Intentions (HEI). H9: Perceived normativeness towards entrepreneurship (PDE) mediates the effects of Team-member exchange (TMX) on Hybrid entrepreneurial intentions (HEI). H10: Perceived feasibility towards entrepreneurship (PFE) mediates the effects of Team-member exchange (TMX) on Hybrid entrepreneurial intentions (HEI). 4. Data and Methods 4.1. Sample and Data Collection Table 1. Profile of respondents in a sample (n = 238) Variable Frequency % Gender Male 123 51.7 Female 115 48.3 Total 238 100.0 Age < 20 years 4 1.7 20 – 30 years 105 44.1 31 – 40 years 55 23.1 41 – 60 years 43 18.1 > 60 years 31 13.0 Total 238 100.0 Education High diploma 10 4.2 College diploma 24 10.1 Bachelor 129 54.2 Masters 52 21.8 PhD 23 9.7 Total 238 Occupation Healthcare & Sci. 24 10.1 Tech & Eng. 92 38.7 Education & Bus. 82 34.5 Business & Ind. 40 16.8 Total 238 100.0 A questionnaire was developed after a careful perusal of existent entrepreneurship literature from frequently cited scholars such as [19, 34, 51] so as to obtain questions which meet the objectives of our study. Participations in the survey was voluntary. Respondents were assured that their answers would remain confidential and were meant sole for academic purpose. Since this study was aimed at investigating potential hybrid entrepreneurs, who hold a wage job while simultaneously pursuing entrepreneurship, an online survey was administered to collect data at random from salaried/waged employees in Zimbabwe from July 2024 to September 2024. Respondents were asked to provide demographic information and to rate their TMX, PDE, PNE, PFE and HEI using a Likert scale from 1 (Strongly disagree) to 7 (Strongly agree). A total of 238 valid sample was collected. Table 1 shows the profile of the respondents. Among the 238, respondents 51.7% were male and 48.3% were female. Males are higher than females who participated in this study, this is consistent with research conducted by [52] were he found that a higher percentage of male than females among hybrid entrepreneurs. The demographic information also shows that a larger portion of the respondents (44%) are 194 in between the age of 20–30 years, followed by the age group of 31–40 years which account for (23.1%). This finding is consistent with [2] who found that being under the age 44 increases the likelihood of having hybrid entrepreneurial intentions. In terms of qualifications, the majority of the respondents were also well-educated, holding bachelor’s degree or higher, consistent with findings from earlier studies by [1, 53]. Regarding occupation, the majority of respondents are from technology and engineering, which aligns with the findings of [1, 7, 13], who stated that hybrid entrepreneurship is popular among professionals in high-technology and R & D sector. 4.2. Reliability and Variable Measurements The constructs used in this study were measured using measurement items or questions, with 7-point Likert scale from 1 (Strongly disagree) to 7 (Strongly agree), which have been validated in previous studies. All the variables of this study are not dichotomous, therefore the 10 measurement items used for team-member exchange were developed by [20]. The four items used to measure Perceived desirability of entrepreneurship (PDE) were developed [19, 34]. Perceived normativeness towards entrepreneurship (PNE) was measured using the three items developed by [51] to assess the perceived social pressure to perform or not to perform the behavior. Perceived feasibility towards entrepreneurship (PFE) was measured by five items developed [34, 41] to capture the perceived ease or difficulty of performing the behavior. Six measurement items from [51] were also adopted to measure Hybrid entrepreneurial intentions (HEI), assessing the individual’s the readiness and desire to engage in entrepreneurship while maintaining a primary job. Certain items in the questionnaire were modified to align with the specific context and objectives of this study, specifically PDE, PNE, PFE and HEI. Table 2 shows the constructs, measurement items, source and overall reliability of the constructs after data collection and measurement. All the values of Cronbach’s alpha are above the acceptable threshold of 0.70 [54], indicating internal consistency. Table 2. Measurement items of the variables Variables Measurement items Source Cronbac h’s 𝛼 Team-member exchange (TMX) 1. I often make suggestions about better work methods to other colleagues. 2. Other colleagues usually let me know when I do something that makes their job easier. 3. I often let other colleagues know when they have done something that makes my job easier. 4. Other colleagues recognize my potential. 5. Other colleagues understand my problems and needs. 6. I’m flexible about switching job responsibilities to make things easier for other colleagues. 7. In busy situations, other colleagues ask me to help out. 8. In busy situations, I often volunteer my effort to help other colleagues. 9. I am willing to help finish work that had been assigned to other colleagues. 10. Other colleagues are willing to help finish work that was assigned to me. [20] 0.896 Perceived desirability of entrepreneurshi p (PDE) 1. I would love engaging in hybrid entrepreneurship. 2. I would be tense engaging in hybrid entrepreneurship. 3. I would be enthusiastic to be a hybrid entrepreneur. 4. I would be overworked if i engage in hybrid entrepreneurship. [19, 34] 0.802 Perceived normativeness towards entrepreneurshi p (PNE) 1. My friends would approve of my decision to start a business as a hybrid entrepreneur. 2. My immediate family would approve of my decision to start a business as a hybrid entrepreneur. 3. My colleagues would approve of my decision to start a business as a hybrid entrepreneur. [51] 0.898 Perceived feasibility towards entrepreneurshi p (PFE) 1. I think it would be hard become a hybrid entrepreneur. 2. I am certain of success. 3. I would be overworked. 4. I know enough to start a business as a hybrid entrepreneur. 5. I am sure of myself. [34, 41] 0.874 Hybrid entrepreneurial intentions (HEI) 1. I am ready to do anything to be a hybrid entrepreneur. 2. My professional goal is to become a hybrid entrepreneur. 3. I will make every effort to start and run my own firm while keeping my job. 4. I am determined to create a firm in the future while keeping my wage job. 5. I have very seriously thought of starting a firm while keeping my wage job. 6. I have a firm intention to start a firm someday as a hybrid entrepreneur. [51] 0.896 4.3. Validity Analysis After determining the reliability of the scale, exploratory factor analysis using principal component method was conducted. Factor analysis with varimax rotation extracted five factors from the data. All the measurement items surpassed the communalities threshold of 0.50 as recommended by [55]. Items for each factor were chosen if their loadings were above the 0.4 threshold. The five factors extracted explained 63.115% of the total variance. 195 Table 3. Results of validity analysis Variables Factor loadings Communalities 1 2 3 4 5 TMX 1 TMX 2 TMX 3 TMX 4 TMX 5 TMX 6 TMX 7 TMX 8 TMX 9 TMX 10 .731 .707 .768 .723 .657 .705 .719 .705 .714 .742 .548 .551 .597 .536 .534 .513 .524 .508 .520 .567 PDE 1 PDE 2 PDE 3 PDE 4 .839 .694 .830 .789 .717 .507 .693 .631 PNE 1 PNE 2 PNE 3 .904 .899 .908 .839 .817 .835 PFE 1 PFE 2 PFE 3 PFE 4 PFE 5 .841 .732 .779 .874 .829 .714 .552 .612 .769 .699 HEI 1 HEI 2 HEI 3 HEI 4 HEI 5 HEI 6 .775 .841 .828 .841 .779 .791 .624 .713 .687 .718 .621 .636 Eigenvalues (initial) Variance explained % Cumulative variance explained % Extraction sums of square loadings Variance explained % Cumulative variance explained % 5.442 19.434 19.434 5.442 19.434 19.434 4.140 14.787 34.221 4.140 14.787 34.221 3.205 11.446 45.668 3.205 11.446 45.668 2.719 9.710 55.378 2.719 9.710 55.378 2.178 7.777 63.155 2.178 7.777 63.155 KMO value Bartlett’s test of sphericity Approx. 𝜒2 df p value 0.826 3330.676 378 .000 5. Results Table 4 provides descriptive statistics and correlations for the variables analyzed. The correlation matrix provides initial evidence in favor of all of hypotheses. The correlation between Team-member exchange and hybrid entrepreneurial intention is significant and in the expected direction. Moreover, team-member exchange and the proposed mediators are significantly correlated. Additionally, the mediators are also significantly correlated with hybrid entrepreneurial intentions. VIF was conducted to check for multicollinearity, and no multicollinearity was found. All VIF values were below the threshold on 10, with the highest VIF value being 1.1. After meeting all the preliminary requirements, regression analysis was conducted. Direct effects analysis comprising of H1-H7 as shown in table 5: Table 4. Summary statistics and correlations Variable Mean SD TMX PDE PNE PFE HEI VIF TMX 50.0672 9.29292 1 1.044 PDE 19.6008 3.84460 .128* 1 1.104 PNE 14.9496 3.21218 .132* .174** 1 1.045 PFE 24.2101 5.20933 .144* .249** .038 1 1.081 HEI 30.3824 5.89221 .206** .654** .129* .258** 1 Notes: n = 238. Correlation is significant at levels: **p < 0.01, *p < 0.05 (two-tailed test) Was conducted. The direct effects results revealed that all the hypotheses were supported accept H3 and H6. Based on these findings, it is evident that team-member exchange has a positive influence on hybrid entrepreneurial intentions, perceived desirability towards entrepreneurship and perceived. 196 Table 5. Direct effects Hypotheses Paths 𝑅2 F Std. Err 𝛽 (T-values) Hypotheses results H1 TMX HEI 0.240 5.441 0.072 0.227*** (3.772) Supported H2 TMX PDE 0.215 4.705 0.098 0.140* (2.292) Supported H3 TMX PNE 0.094 1.797 0.079 0.129 (1.960) Not supported H4 TMX PFE 0.086 1.621 0.088 0.142* (2.156) Supported H5 PDE HEI 0.481 15.988 0.040 0.600*** (11.183) Supported H6 PNE HEI 0.204 4.405 0.062 0.114 (1.828) Not supported H7 PFE HEI 0.243 5.534 0.054 0.235*** (3.900) Supported Notes: Significance at levels: ***p < 0.001, *p < 0.05 Feasibility towards entrepreneurship. The findings are consistent with earlier researches by [25, 44, 45], suggesting that high-quality TMX facilitates the sharing of resources, knowledge, and support among team members, thereby enhancing their collective motivation and individual intentions to engage in entrepreneurial activities alongside traditional employment. Contrary to the proposed hypothesis, team-member exchange had an insignificant impact on perceived normativeness towards entrepreneurship and, subsequently on hybrid entrepreneurial intentions, despite the correlation matrix indicating significance. Moving forward, mediation analysis was conducted to examine the mediating effect of PDE, PNE and PFE. The findings indicate that both PDE and PFE partially mediate the relationship between TMX and HEI as shown in table 6. All the mediation preliminary steps were met and found to be significant, including indirect effects. This suggest that while TMX directly influences HEI, its impact is also channeled through individual’s attraction to hybrid entrepreneurship and their belief in their ability to pursue it successfully [33, 50]. PNE, however, was found to be insignificant, as the direct relationships were already insignificant as shown it Table 5. The insignificant direct effects of TMX on PNE and PNE on HEI do not meet the mediation preliminary steps required to establish either partial or full mediation. Table 6. Mediation effects Hypothesis Path 𝑅2 Direct Effect (β) Indirect Effect (β) Total Effect (β) Mediation Results H8 TMX HEI 0.240 0.227*** 0.227*** Direct TMX PDE 0.215 0.140* 0.140* Direct PDE HEI 0.481 0.576*** 0.600*** Direct TMX HEI (Mediation PDE) 0.501 0.146** 0.081* 0.226*** Partial Mediation H9 TMX HEI 0.240 0.227*** 0.227*** Direct TMX PNE 0.094 0.129 0.129 Unsupported PNE HEI 0.204 0.085 0.085 Unsupported TMX HEI (Mediation PNE) 0.247 0.216*** 0.011 0.227*** No mediation H10 TMX HEI 0.240 0.227*** 0.227*** Direct TMX PFE 0.086 0.142* 0.142* Direct PFE HEI 0.243 0.206*** 0.235*** Direct TMX HEI (Mediation PFE) 0.279 0.197** 0.029* 0.226*** Partial Mediation Notes: Significance at levels: ***p < 0.001, **p < 0.01, *p < 0.05 6. Discussion and Conclusion This study aimed to examine the role of team-member exchange (TMX) in shaping hybrid entrepreneurial intentions (HEI) and to explore the mediating roles of perceived desirability for entrepreneurship (PDE), perceived norm for entrepreneurship (PNE), and perceived feasibility for entrepreneurship (PFE) in this relationship. The findings of this study demonstrated that TMX has a significant positive impact on HEI. As hypothesized and supported by literature, an organizational setting characterized by relationship- oriented and task-oriented exchanges can foster hybrid entrepreneurial intentions among team members. This is attributed to factors such as domain-related knowledge, creativity-related skills, socioemotional support, autonomy, flexibility in decision-making within a team, and reciprocity with former entrepreneurs, among others [20, 22, 25, 39]. The inclusion of PDE, PNE, and PFE as mediators between TMX and HEI was pivotal in this study. The results highlighted how TMX can instill desire and confidence among individuals to pursue hybrid entrepreneurship. Furthermore, the findings support the theory of planned behavior (TPB), which posits that exogenous variables, such as TMX in this case, can influence TPB constructs represented by PDE, PNE, and PFE [18, 19]. While hypotheses H3, H6, and H9, involving PNE, were found to be insignificant, [16] noted that not all TPB determinants 197 consistently predict intentions. In some instances, only one determinant, in others two, and occasionally all determinants play a role. In this study, PNE was insignificant. 7. Implications, Limitations and Future Research Exploring the relationship between TMX and HEI provides valuable insights into both the internal and external environments of organizations. First, the study offers meaningful information to policymakers for formulating strategies that encourage hybrid entrepreneurship. Businesses initiated by hybrid entrepreneurs have higher survival rates and often lead to full-time entrepreneurship, increasing entrepreneurial ventures and contributing to economic growth [4, 13]. Second, in light of employment instability, job uncertainty, and economic challenges, this study raises awareness among employers and managers about the benefits of encouraging employees to engage in hybrid entrepreneurship. Although allowing employees to pursue hybrid entrepreneurship may seem counterintuitive, research indicates that not all hybrid entrepreneurs intend to leave their salaried jobs to transition into full-time entrepreneurship [56]. More importantly, hybrid entrepreneurs bring significant advantages to their employers, as they often transfer innovations and capabilities from their entrepreneurial ventures into their wage employment [57]. Lastly, employees may also benefit from this study, as it underscores the importance of teamwork in the workplace. Embracing TMX is crucial for employees aiming to develop hybrid entrepreneurial endeavors. This study is not without limitations. Firstly, the factors presented are not the only ones that could prompt individuals to engage in hybrid entrepreneurship. Future studies could explore additional factors such as personal circumstances and organizational context. Secondly, the sample size in this study was small, highlighting the need for future research to increase the sample size to enable more precise estimates regarding the influence of TMX or other variables on hybrid entrepreneurial intention, as well as the decision to transition to full-time entrepreneurship. Thirdly, the study was conducted in a single region, which limits the generalizability of the findings to the broader population or other regions and countries. Finally, the study focused solely on the internal environment of organizations. Future research could examine the role of the external environment, specifically the influence of the microenvironment or macroenvironment on individuals' intentions to engage in hybrid entrepreneurship. References [1] Folta TB, Delmar F, Wennberg K. Hybrid entrepreneurship. Management science. 2010; 56(2):253-69. [2] Luc S, Chirita GM, Delvaux E, Kepnou AK. Hybrid entrepreneurship: Employees climbing the entrepreneurial ladder. International Review of Entrepreneurship. 2018; 16(1):89-114. [3] Wozniak S. iWoz: Computer geek to cult icon: How I invented the personal computer, co-founded Apple, and had fun doing it: WW Norton & Company; 2007. [4] Raffiee J, Feng J. Should I quit my day job? A hybrid path to entrepreneurship. Academy of management journal. 2014;57(4):936-63. [5] Cohen A. The perfect store: Inside eBay: Back Bay Books; 2003. [6] Ford H, Crowther S. My life and work: Doubleday, Page & Company; 1922. [7] Solesvik MZ. Hybrid entrepreneurship: how and why entrepreneurs combine employment with self-employment. Technology Innovation Management Review. 2017; 7(3). [8] Wright M, Zahra S. The other side of paradise: Examining the dark side of entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship Research Journal. 2011; 1(3):20123002. [9] Petrova K. Part-Time Entrepreneurship and Risk Tolerance. Journal of Applied Business & Economics. 2018;20(1). [10] Smallbone D, Welter F. The distinctiveness of entrepreneurship in transition economies. Small business economics. 2001; 16:249-62. [11] Petrova K, editor Part-time entrepreneurship and wealth effects: New evidence from the panel study of entrepreneurial dynamics. 50th ICSB Conference, Washington, June; 2005. [12] Liu Z, Wu G. Gendered motives towards hybrid entrepreneurial intentions: Empirical evidence from China. International Studies of Economics. 2022; 17(1):36-64. [13] Schulz M, Urbig D, Procher V. Hybrid entrepreneurship and public policy: The case of firm entry deregulation. Journal of Business Venturing. 2016; 31(3):272-86. [14] Petrova K. Part-time entrepreneurship, learning and ability. Journal of management policy and practice. 2010; 12(1):64-75. [15] Thorgren S, Nordström C, Wincent J. Hybrid entrepreneurship: The importance of passion. Baltic journal of management. 2014; 9(3):314-29. [16] Ajzen I. The theory of planned behavior. Organizational behavior and human decision processes. 1991; 50(2):179-211. [17] Roxas HB, Azmat F. Community social capital and entrepreneurship: Analyzing the links. Community Development. 2014; 45(2):135-50. [18] Fayolle A. Evaluation of entrepreneurship education: behaviour performing or intention increasing? International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business. 2005; 2(1):89-98. [19] Krueger Jr NF, Reilly MD, Carsrud AL. Competing models of entrepreneurial intentions. Journal of business venturing. 2000; 15(5-6):411-32. [20] Seers A. Team-member exchange quality: A new construct for role-making research. Organizational behavior and human decision processes. 1989; 43(1):118-35. [21] Liden RC, Wayne SJ, Sparrowe RT. An examination of the mediating role of psychological empowerment on the relations between the job, interpersonal relationships, and work outcomes. Journal of applied psychology. 2000; 85(3):407. [22] Ozer M, Zhang G. Interpersonal relationships and creativity at work: A network building perspective. Journal of Product Innovation Management. 2022; 39(3):312-33. [23] Graen G, Cashman JF. A role-making model of leadership in formal organizations: A developmental approach. Leadership frontiers. 1975; 143(165):86-96. [24] Mehta A, Mehta N. Knowledge integration and team effectiveness: A team goal orientation approach. Decision Sciences. 2018; 49(3):445-86. [25] Chen Z. A literature review of team-member exchange and prospects. Journal of Service Science and Management. 2018; 11(04):433. [26] Tse HH, Dasborough MT. A study of exchange and emotions in team member relationships. Group & organization management. 2008; 33(2):194-215. 198 [27] Farh CIC, Lanaj K, Ilies R. Resource-Based Contingencies of When Team–Member Exchange Helps Member Performance in Teams. Academy of Management Journal. 2017; 60(3):1117-37. [28] Abu Bakar H, Sheer VC. The mediating role of perceived cooperative communication in the relationship between interpersonal exchange relationships and perceived group cohesion. Management Communication Quarterly. 2013; 27(3):443-65. [29] Kurczewska A, Mackiewicz M, Doryń W, Wawrzyniak D. Peculiarity of hybrid entrepreneurs–revisiting Lazear’s theory of entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Economics and Management. 2020; 21(1):277-300. [30] Demir C, Werner A, Kraus S, Jones P. Hybrid entrepreneurship: A systematic literature review. Journal of Small Business & Entrepreneurship. 2020; 34(1):29-52. [31] Molino M, Dolce V, Cortese CG, Ghislieri C. Personality and social support as determinants of entrepreneurial intention. Gender differences in Italy. PloS one. 2018; 13(6):e0199924. [32] Elnadi M, Gheith MH. Entrepreneurial ecosystem, entrepreneurial self-efficacy, and entrepreneurial intention in higher education: Evidence from Saudi Arabia. The International Journal of Management Education. 2021; 19(1):100458. [33] Ajzen I. From intentions to actions: A theory of planned behavior. Action control: From cognition to behavior: Springer; 1985. p. 11-39. [34] Shapero A, Sokol L. The social dimensions of entrepreneurship. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign's Academy for Entrepreneurial Leadership Historical Research Reference in Entrepreneurship. 1982. [35] Schulz M, Urbig D, Procher V. The role of hybrid entrepreneurship in explaining multiple job holders’ earnings structure. Journal of business venturing insights. 2017; 7:9-14. [36] McFadyen MA, Cannella Jr AA. Social capital and knowledge creation: Diminishing returns of the number and strength of exchange relationships. Academy of management Journal. 2004; 47(5):735-46. [37] Fini R, Perkmann M, Ross J-M. The Impact of Hybrid Entrepreneurship on Individual Performance in Research Organizations. Academy of Management Proceedings. 2017; 2017(1):14241. [38] Weerakoon C, McMurray AJ, Rametse N, Arenius P. Knowledge creation theory of entrepreneurial orientation in social enterprises. Journal of Small Business Management. 2020; 58(4):834-70. [39] Nanda R, Sørensen JB. Workplace peers and entrepreneurship. Management science. 2010; 56(7):1116-26. [40] Banks GC, Batchelor JH, Seers A, O'Boyle Jr EH, Pollack JM, Gower K. What does team–member exchange bring to the party? A meta‐analytic review of team and leader social exchange. Journal of Organizational Behavior. 2014; 35(2):273-95. [41] Krueger NF, Carsrud AL. Entrepreneurial intentions: Applying the theory of planned behaviour. Entrepreneurship & regional development. 1993; 5(4):315-30. [42] Seers A, Petty M, Cashman JF. Team-member exchange under team and traditional management: A naturally occurring quasi- experiment. Group & Organization Management. 1995; 20(1):18-38. [43] Lee L, Wong PK, Foo Md, Leung A, editors. Entrepreneurial intentions: The influence of organizational and individual factors2009. [44] Li Y, Li N, Guo J, Li J, Harris TB. A Network View of Advice- giving and Individual Creativity in Teams: A Brokerage-driven, Socially Perpetuated Phenomenon. Academy of Management Journal. 2018. [45] Lazar M, Miron-Spektor E, Agarwal R, Erez M, Goldfarb BD, Chen G. Entrepreneurial Team Formation. The Academy of Management Annals. 2020; 14:29-59. [46] Hmieleski KM, Sheppard LD. The Yin and Yang of entrepreneurship: Gender differences in the importance of communal and agentic characteristics for entrepreneurs' subjective well-being and performance. Journal of Business Venturing. 2019. [47] Vamvaka V, Stoforos C, Palaskas T, Botsaris C. Attitude toward entrepreneurship, perceived behavioral control, and entrepreneurial intention: dimensionality, structural relationships, and gender differences. Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship. 2020; 9(1):1-26. [48] Santos SC, Liguori EW. Entrepreneurial self-efficacy and intentions: Outcome expectations as mediator and subjective norms as moderator. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research. 2020; 26(3):400-15. [49] Al-Mamary YHS, Alraja MM. Understanding entrepreneurship intention and behavior in the light of TPB model from the digital entrepreneurship perspective. International Journal of Information Management Data Insights. 2022; 2(2):100106. [50] Li L, Wu D. Entrepreneurial education and students' entrepreneurial intention: does team cooperation matter? Journal of Global Entrepreneurship Research. 2019; 9(1):1-13. [51] Liñán F, Chen YW. Development and cross–cultural application of a specific instrument to measure entrepreneurial intentions. Entrepreneurship theory and practice. 2009; 33(3):593-617. [52] Bögenhold D. Are hybrids the new normal? A labour market perspective on hybrid self-employment. International Review of Entrepreneurship. 2019; 17(4):429-48. [53] Petrova K. Part-time entrepreneurship and financial constraints: evidence from the Panel Study of Entrepreneurial Dynamics. Small business economics. 2012; 39:473-93. [54] Hair JF, Ringle CM, Sarstedt M. Partial least squares structural equation modeling: Rigorous applications, better results and higher acceptance. Long range planning. 2013; 46(1-2):1-12. [55] Hair JF, Black WC, Babin BJ, Anderson RE, Tatham RL. Multivariate data analysis 6th Edition. Pearson Prentice Hall. New Jersey. humans: Critique and reformulation …; 2006. [56] Cestino J, Herath R, Woodhouse Schmit E, editors. Perceived Organizational Support and Transition Intentions in Hybrid Entrepreneurs. Academy of Management Proceedings; 2022: Academy of Management Briarcliff Manor, NY 10510. [57] Marshall DR, Davis WD, Dibrell C, Ammeter AP. Learning off the job: Examining part-time entrepreneurs as innovative employees. Journal of Management. 2019; 45(8):3091-113.