Detalhes bibliográficos
| Ano de defesa: |
2020 |
| Autor(a) principal: |
Di Petta, Arnaldo
 |
| Orientador(a): |
Lima, Edmilson de Oliveira |
| Banca de defesa: |
Lima, Edmilson de Oliveira,
Nassif, Vânia Maria Jorge,
Cunha, Júlio Araújo Carneiro da,
Teles, Renato,
Stefanini, Cláudio |
| Tipo de documento: |
Tese
|
| Tipo de acesso: |
Acesso aberto |
| Idioma: |
por |
| Instituição de defesa: |
Universidade Nove de Julho
|
| Programa de Pós-Graduação: |
Programa de Pós-Graduação em Administração
|
| Departamento: |
Administração
|
| País: |
Brasil
|
| Palavras-chave em Português: |
|
| Palavras-chave em Inglês: |
|
| Área do conhecimento CNPq: |
|
| Link de acesso: |
http://bibliotecatede.uninove.br/handle/tede/2896
|
Resumo: |
The growing interest in the study of entrepreneurship has given rise to new theoretical perspectives that seek to explain the actions and logic inherent in entrepreneurial behavior. One of the recent theoretical perspectives is the entrepreneurial bricolage, which studies the entrepreneur who deals with the scarcity of resources since the beginning of his business, doing something with nothing (BAKER; NELSON, 2005) and mainly, who consistently refuse to enact limitations imposed by the environment and commonly accepted by society. Since such a process of limitations rejection generates important contributions, it deserves attention and investigation. However, this has not occurred in the study of entrepreneurship regarding the rejection of institutional limitations, which represents an opportunity for research. Thus, based on the perspective of entrepreneurial bricolage and using one of its central points, refuse to enact limitations, this thesis proposes to contribute to generate some explanations about how the rejection of institutional limitations occurs. In this thesis, structured from multiple complementary studies, study 1, a review of the relevant literature, confirmed the existing gap regarding the study of how entrepreneurs reject institutional limitations, in particular, the limitations imposed by business partners. To help fill this theoretical gap, two other studies were carried out on the rejection of institutional limitations in the context of cosmetics direct selling in Brazil, a market that, in 2019, generated almost US$ 10 billion and gave business opportunities to almost 4 million people. In this relevant context, study 2, a qualitative study, identified the institutional limitations imposed on entrepreneurs by cosmetics companies that operate in the direct selling model. Managers representing four of these companies were informants in semi-structured interviews and their responses allowed to gather the institutional limitations that these companies impose on entrepreneurs who resell their products. The interviews identified business rules and also other institutional limitations imposed by cosmetics companies. The interviews also raised the managers' perceptions about the process of limitations rejection by entrepreneurs to establish and operate a retail store, sometimes even reselling products of different brands - practices that subvert the direct selling business model. Finally, study 3 was carried out to contribute to filling the gap (confirmed by study 1) regarding the understanding of how the institutional limitations imposed by cosmetics companies operating in the direct sales model occur (explained by study 2). For study 3, semi-structured interviews were carried out with eight entrepreneurs who, in addition to rejecting other limitations, rejected the business rules imposed by cosmetics companies and established fixed multi-brand stores to resell cosmetic products. The sequence of the results of these three studies shows entrepreneurs rejecting limitations and presents an explanatory proposal for how such rejection occurs according to the entrepreneurial bricolage theory. This thesis contributes to the development of the study of entrepreneurship when dealing with a neglected theme until now: how the rejection of limitations occurs, so common in the practice of entrepreneurship. It also contributes to the deepening of research on entrepreneurial bricolage with a proposal for an empirically grounded explanation of how institutional limitations are rejected. Entrepreneurs progressively and ostensibly reject the different types of institutional limitations: i) pretend they comply with the business rules, ii) evaluate the attractiveness that the business represents, iii) establish an alliance of support and protection with the actors of the process and iv) feed on a personal challenge. |
