Presented at the 15th European Congress of Work and Organisational psychology (EAWOP), May 25-28, 2011, Maastricht, The Netherlands

1. A Cross-cultural investigation of the role of planning in the gain spiral of resources, work engagement and entrepreneurial success Marjan Gorgievski, Ph.D., Erasmus University Rotterdam DominikaDej, Ph.D. , Technical University Dresden Ute Stephan, Ph.D. , University of Sheffield 15th International Conference of the European Association of Work and Organizational Psychology, Maastricht, The Netherlands, May 25th-28th, 2011

3. Ex role performance

5. EmpiricalEvidence Ample evidence for a positive gain spiral of personal and job resources and work engagement (overview: Salanova, Schaufeli, Xanthopoulou & Bakker, 2010) Ampleevidencefor the positive relationship between work engagement and performance, also for entrepreneurs (Overview: Gorgievski, Bakker & Schaufeli, 2010)

7. Proces planning

9. Research Model Job resources Decisionlatitude Skillvariety Work engagement Planning Full planning Criticalpoint planning Subjective business success Personal resources Personalinnitiative Selfefficacy

10. What the studyadds Evidence on the relationship between resources job resources, perdsonal resources and planning? Evidence on the relationship planning and work engagement? Evidence for a possible mediating effect of planning styles in the resources – performance, and resources – engagement relationship.

11. Method N=150 business owners (response rate 29%) Germany N=62 The Netherlands N = 40 Poland N = 49 Invited by telephone, face to face interviews Mean age 43.06 years (sd = 9.63) On average 12.11 years in business (sd = 7.12) 76 % males 30 % from entrepreneurialfamily

12. Measurements Job Resources Skill discretion and Decision making latitude (JCQ; 8 items, alpha = .71) Personal resources Personal Initiative (Frese et al. 1996; 7 items, alpha = .79 ) Self efficacy (Schwarzer und Jerusalem; 10 items, alpha = .84) Planning styles Critical point planning (Zempel, 2003; 5 items = .69) Complete planning (Zempel, 2003; 4 items, alpha = .77) work-engagement (UWES; 9 items, alpha = .92); entrepreneurs’ subjective firm business success (Stephan, Dej, Lukes & Richter, 2007; 7 items, alpha = .81);

13. Correlations between study variables Upper diagonal: Germany/The Netherlands (N = 102) Lower diagonal, Poland (N=49)

14. CriticalpointGermany / The Netherlands Job resources Decisionlatitude Skillvariety .80** Work engagement Planning Criticalpoint .82** .41** Subjective business success Personal resources Personalinnitiative Selfefficacy .60*** N = 102; X2 = 36.66, df = 38, TLI = 1.01, CFI = 1.00, RMSEA = .000

15. Full planning Germany / The Netherlands Job resources Decisionlatitude Skillvariety .75** Work engagement .23** .79** Planning Full planning Subjective business success Personal resources Personalinnitiative Selfefficacy .52** N = 102; X2 = 46.34, df = 38, TLI = .93, CFI = .96, RMSEA = .04

16. CriticalpointPoland Job resources Decisionlatitude Skillvariety .28** Work engagement .36** Planning Criticalpoint .69** -.61* .46** Subjective business success Personal resources Personalinnitiative Selfefficacy .58*** N = 49 ; X2 = 36.66, df = 38, TLI = 1.01, CFI = 1.00, RMSEA = .000

17. Job resources Decisionlatitude Skillvariety Full planningPoland Work engagement .76** Planning Full planning .49** .54** Subjective business success Personal resources Personalinnitiative Selfefficacy .43*** N = 49 ; X2 = 46.34, df = 38, TLI = .93, CFI = .96, RMSEA = .04

18. Conclusions Major conclusion is there are important cross national differences. The data show little evidence for a mediating role of planning styles in the positive spiral of resources, well-being and performance in Germany and The Netherlands. However, in the Polish sample, both critical point and full planning related to more work engagement. Strangely, both planning styles and work engagement related negatively to subjective success . Robustness checks showed similar relations with objective indicators of business performance. Question is what moderator is at work ?

19. Future research Collect more data, comparing developed and developing countries. Find meaningful moderator variables Conduct longitudinal studies to investigate causality. For example: Prior studies showed poor planning results in poor business performance. However, poor performance caused by environmental factors might stimulate planning, which increases performance (although it may still be poor) which in turn increases work engagement.