Content uploaded by Lowell W. Busenitz
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Lowell W. Busenitz on Nov 09, 2015
Content may be subject to copyright.
THE ROLE OF CHARISMATIC
RHETORIC IN CROWDFUNDING:
AN EXAMINATION WITH
COMPUTER-AIDED TEXT
ANALYSIS
Aaron H. Anglin, Thomas H. Allison,
Aaron F. McKenny and Lowell W. Busenitz
ABSTRACT
Purpose !Social entrepreneurs often make public appeals for funding
to investors who are motivated by nonfinancial considerations. This
emerging research context is an opportunity for researchers to expand
the bounds of entrepreneurship theory. To do so, we require appropriate
research tools. In this chapter, we show how computer-aided text analy-
sis (CATA) can be applied to advance social entrepreneurship research.
We demonstrate how CATA is well suited to analyze the public appeals
for resources made by entrepreneurs, provide insight into the rationale
of social lenders, and overcome challenges associated with traditional
survey methods.
Social Entrepreneurship and Research Methods
Research Methodology in Strategy and Management, Volume 9, 19!48
Copyright r2014 by Emerald Group Publishing Limited
All rights of reproduction in any form reserved
ISSN: 1479-8387/doi:10.1108/S1479-838720140000009010
19
Method !We illustrate the advantages of CATA by examining how
charismatic language in 13,000 entrepreneurial narratives provided by
entrepreneurs in developing countries influences funding speed from
social lenders. CATA is used to assess the eight dimensions of charis-
matic rhetoric.
Findings !We find that four of the dimensions of charismatic rhetoric
examined were important in predicting funding outcomes for
entrepreneurs.
Implications !Data collection and sample size are important challenges
facing social entrepreneurship research. This chapter demonstrates
how CATA techniques can be used to collect valuable data and increase
sample size. This chapter also examines how the rhetoric used by entre-
preneurs impacts their fundraising efforts.
Keywords: Social entrepreneurship; content analysis; charismatic
rhetoric; entrepreneurial narratives
INTRODUCTION
Scholarly interest in social entrepreneurship has increased substantially in
recent years (Austin, Stevenson, & Wei-Skillern, 2006;Short, Moss, &
Lumpkin, 2009). To date, social entrepreneurship research has been largely
descriptive with a focus on case studies of exemplar firms (Hitt, Gimeno, &
Hoskisson, 1998;Short et al., 2009). While this research is vital to the
development of social entrepreneurship theory, researchers in this space
will benefit from new methods to respond to the unique challenges of social
entrepreneurship research. In this chapter, we demonstrate computer-aided
text analysis (CATA) as a valuable method for answering a number of
questions of interest to social entrepreneurship scholars.
CATA is a content analytic technique in which a computer program mea-
sures the presence of a construct in a narrative by examining emphasis on
words or phrases associated with the construct (Krippendorff, 2004). There
are three reasons why CATA has potential for social entrepreneurship
research. First, social entrepreneurship delivers social and public goods in
an attempt to reconcile larger social issues (cf. Austin, 2006). Because of the
public nature of the goods and services provided, entrepreneurs tend to
make public appeals for support. In consequence, entrepreneurs often make
20 AARON H. ANGLIN ET AL.
open calls for funding to a mass audience through narratives (cf. Allison,
McKenny, & Short, 2013). CATA is well suited for the analysis of public
documents and is frequently used by organizational researchers to measure
constructs present in these documents (e.g., Short, Broberg, Cogliser, &
Brigham, 2010).
Second, compared to traditional investors, individuals that invest in
social entrepreneurial ventures are more concerned with nonfinancial issues
since social entrepreneurship seeks to deliver social value and achieve social
change (Austin, 2006). A primary implication of this dynamic is that fund-
ing decisions from social investors are rarely based solely on profits and
returns. Persuasive, emotional elements present in the language used in
social entrepreneurship funding appeals tend to move social investors to
support some entrepreneurs over others. (cf. Allison et al., 2013). CATA
techniques are well suited to capture and categorize this language because
they are able to extract rich meaning from organizational texts (Duriau,
Reger, & Pfarrer, 2007).
Third, testing hypotheses requires sizeable samples of quantitative data.
One reason for the substantial absence of empirical tests of theory in social
entrepreneurship to date may be that collecting data from social entrepre-
neurs using traditional methods is challenging (Short et al., 2009). Surveys
tend to work best when respondents are easily identifiable and concentrated
(Fowler, 2009). Social entrepreneurs, like other entrepreneurs, tend to be
geographically dispersed. Social entrepreneurs also may not be identified in
secondary data on new ventures. Moreover, the challenges of nonresponse
are substantial in social entrepreneurship research, further limiting the
sample sizes of survey methods (e.g., Dennis, 2003). Thus, while it may be
challenging to survey social entrepreneurs, researchers may be able to learn
much from their publicly available appeals, making CATA an advanta-
geous research method.
We demonstrate CATA in the context of crowdfunded microlending to
illustrate these three advantages. Microlending refers to the issuance of
small, unsecured loans to entrepreneurs in poor communities (Bruton,
Khavul, & Chavez, 2011). Crowdfunded microlending is a form of micro-
lending that uses public platforms !typically websites on the internet !to
make an open call for resources from the general public. Microlending
enables impoverished entrepreneurs in developing countries to access funds
that are often unavailable through traditional sources of funding such as
government programs, venture capital, angel investors, and banks (Allison
et al., 2013). Microlending is an important phenomenon in social entrepre-
neurship research because microlending creates social value by helping
21Charismatic Rhetoric in Crowdfunding
entrepreneurs lift themselves out of poverty by forming their own ventures
(Galak, Small, & Stephen, 2011;Yunus, 1999). Consequently, this empha-
sis on the creation of social value provides a unique context for a distin-
guishing form of social entrepreneurship (e.g., Austin et al., 2006;Nicholls,
2006).
To illustrate the potential of CATA in social entrepreneurship research,
we examine the role charismatic leadership plays in the funding of entrepre-
neurial ventures. Charismatic leadership is the ability to attract and retain
followers stemming from the followers’ belief that the leader possesses
exceptional talents or abilities (Weber, 1946). Researchers have demon-
strated that charismatic leadership is positively associated with both firm
performance (e.g., Barling, Weber, & Kelloway, 1996;Howell & Frost,
1989) and external support for the business (e.g., Flynn & Staw, 2004).
The use of charismatic language is an important way to expand our
understanding of charismatic leadership (Bligh, Kohles, & Meindl, 2004;
Conger, 1991;Conger & Kanungo, 1988). The positive links of leadership
and charismatic language with firm development and external support
suggest that charismatic language may play an important role for social
entrepreneurs seeking financial support for their organizations. Thus, we
study the influence of charismatic language in crowdfunded microlending
investment profiles on the speed with which entrepreneurial ventures
receive funding.
This chapter makes two key contributions to the social entrepreneurship
literature. First, we demonstrate the use of CATA as a valuable research
method for testing and advancing theory in social entrepreneurship
research. In doing so, we show how CATA is well suited to address the
unique contextual challenges of social entrepreneurship research by mea-
suring the content of social entrepreneurship funding appeals. Second, we
examine the relationship between charismatic language in entrepreneurial
narratives and microlending funding outcomes. Because social lenders are
likely to be motivated by factors other than profit, analysis of charismatic
language provides valuable insight into what inspires social lenders to
provide funds for entrepreneurial ventures (cf. Allison et al., 2013).
CATA AND SOCIAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP RESEARCH
Content analysis refers to a family of research methods that can be applied
to written, visual, or spoken text to make inferences about its meaning
22 AARON H. ANGLIN ET AL.
(Neuman, 1997;Weber, 1990). The value of textual content analysis
stems from the idea that language is an important component in human
cognition !analysis of text allows the researcher to gain insight into
the author’s cognitive schemas (Duriau et al., 2007;Huff, 1990). Insight is
often derived from word frequency counts, shifts in word use, and word
groupings, which may imply cognitive centrality or importance, a change
in attention or cognitive schema, or the presence of underlying themes or
concepts (Duriau, et al., 2007;Huff, 1990;Namenwirth & Weber, 1990).
Content analysis provides many practical advantages to researchers. It is
a nonintrusive, replicable method that does not suffer from demand bias or
low response rates (Short & Palmer, 2008;Woodrum, 1984). Content ana-
lysis is analytically flexible, applicable to a wide range of organizational
phenomena, and can be used to conduct inductive or deductive research
(Duriau et al., 2007). It is easily combined with other research methods,
allowing for triangulation (Erdener & Dunn, 1990). Furthermore, it enables
researchers to extract meaning in organizational documents and quantita-
tively model the results (Duriau et al., 2007).
Content analysis comes in two forms: human coding and computer cod-
ing (Short & Palmer, 2008). Human coding involves individuals as coders,
who follow a standardized process to decode content and record observa-
tions on preestablished variables (Neuendorf, 2002). Trained human coders
can interpret the context of a text, which allows for richness in interpreta-
tion. However, human coding is often time consuming and may suffer from
bias or lack of reliability (Weber, 1990). In computer coding, commonly
referred to as CATA, the analyses of the text allow researchers to harness
the speed, reliability, and consistency of computers in content analysis.
CATA counts key words, phrases, or other textual markers (Neuendorf,
2002). This method provides a variety of benefits for researchers. The pro-
cessing speed and data storage capabilities of computers increase the scope
and size of the study that can be undertaken, simultaneously removing the
tediousness of human coding, which is a potential source of error (Duriau
et al., 2007,Kabanoff, 1997). Furthermore, the “rules” of coding text are
explicit and not subject to human bias (Weber, 1990). CATA programs
ensure that preestablished rules are followed, resulting in perfect reliability
(Weber, 1990). This frees the researcher to focus on “other aspects of
inquiry such as validity, interpretation, and explanation” (Weber, 1990,
p. 17). The output provided by CATA programs can easily be loaded into
statistical software for quantitative analysis.
There are three forms of CATA for content analysis: individual word
count systems, artificial intelligence (AI) systems, and hybrids of the two
23Charismatic Rhetoric in Crowdfunding
(Short & Palmer, 2008). Individual word count systems classify the words in
a text by meaning, group them together, and then use frequency counts to
determine the relative importance of each category (Short & Palmer, 2008;
Weber, 1990). Short et al. (2010) use this process to examine the salience
of each of the five dimensions of entrepreneurial orientation in a sample of
firms through their shareholder letters. For example, words synonymous
with “innovativeness” are tabulated for each shareholder letter to provide
an assessment of the importance of innovation to the firm. AI systems
include mechanisms to resolve words with multiple meanings by including
features that consider the syntax and lexicon of words (Rosenberg,
Schnurr, & Oxman, 1990;Short & Palmer, 2008). For example, the word
“right” has a different meaning in the phrases “you were right” and “turn
right.” AI systems attempt to reconcile the meaning of this word given its
context.
Many CATA programs include preloaded dictionaries that can be
employed to measure constructs that have been used elsewhere in content
analytic research. These dictionaries search for language that relates to cer-
tain characteristics. For example, the CATA package DICTION contains
31 predefined dictionaries that can be used to search for characteristics
such as tenacity, inspiration, and awareness (cf. Short & Palmer, 2008).
Many programs also allow users to create custom dictionaries. These dic-
tionaries allow researchers to develop research-specific dictionaries relevant
to a construct that may not have been measured using content analysis in
previous research.
The Benefits of CATA for Social Entrepreneurship Research
Social entrepreneurship research to this point has been largely descriptive
and has relied heavily on case studies for insight into social entrepreneur-
ship phenomena (Short et al., 2009). Case studies play an instrumental role
in building theories and constructs (Eisenhardt, 1989). However, as a field
advances, it moves toward forming testable hypotheses (cf. Busenitz et al.,
2003). Propositional research in social entrepreneurship is sparse with
researchers just beginning to see the “tip of the iceberg” on many important
questions. We suggest that CATA is a useful tool that can advance social
entrepreneurship research in at least three ways: examining the public
context of social entrepreneurship, extracting meaning from the content of
social entrepreneurial narratives, and avoiding some of the challenges
associated with survey research.
24 AARON H. ANGLIN ET AL.
The Social Entrepreneurship Context: Public Goods and Public Appeals
Social entrepreneurs address social (or public) problems (Austin, 2006).
Addressing these problems may conflict with traditional economic motiva-
tors such as increasing shareholder value and profit maximization.
Consequently, social entrepreneurs often lack access to private funding
sources that are available to other businesses, such as bank loans or private
equity (Bugg-Levine, Kogut, & Kulatilaka, 2012). When funding sources
are available (e.g., foundations, microlenders, and social impact bonds),
acquiring such funds often involves making public appeals.
CATA allows researchers to study the public appeals made by social
entrepreneurs when they seek support from external constituents. These
public appeals result in the creation of analyzable texts that can be evalu-
ated to collect data for research questions relevant to social entrepreneur-
ship. For example, Kiva, an organization that links microlenders and
entrepreneurs via the process of crowdfunding, requires entrepreneurs to
submit narratives discussing themselves and their business. These narratives
are available to the public and have been used to examine the impact of
political rhetoric on crowdfunded microlending outcomes (e.g., Allison
et al., 2013).
The Content of Social Entrepreneurship Narratives:
What Stakeholders Care About
People who back social entrepreneurs !social investors !are likely driven
by similar motivations as social entrepreneurs such as the desire to create
social change (Schueth, 2003). This suggests that support for social entre-
preneurs and their firms is likely rooted in nonfinancial concerns; conse-
quently, monetary-focused measures may yield little insight. For example,
a social venture cannot be labeled as “successful” or a “good investment”
based solely on profits, return on investment, or market share (Austin
et al., 2006). Social good, and the effect this has on people, matters.
Because the decisions of social investors are likely influenced by sentiments
and emotion (e.g., a desire to do good), language drawing on these emo-
tions is likely to influence the venture funding decision. We need methods
that are able to reliably capture these motivations.
Using CATA to examine the language used in entrepreneurial narratives
can provide valuable insight into the motivational forces driving social
investors. CATA methods can capture, count, and categorize pieces of text
25Charismatic Rhetoric in Crowdfunding
that are relevant to a certain emotional or motivational construct (Duriau
et al., 2007). Such data can be employed to test various research questions
relating to rhetorically embedded constructs. For example, are lenders
more likely to fund an entrepreneur who stresses concrete, tangible
outcomes or an entrepreneur who focuses on futuristic, inspirational
outcomes?
Building on the Unique Strengths of CATA in Social Entrepreneurship:
Data Acquisition
Sampling has long been a challenge in entrepreneurship research
(e.g., Low & MacMillan, 1988) with survey research usually garnering low
or modest response rates. Moreover, there are few solid archival data
sources containing information on entrepreneurial ventures (Chandler &
Lyon, 2001;Dennis, 2003). This makes acquiring large samples of data
difficult. The inability to collect large samples in turn limits the testing of
propositional theory (Cohen, 1992). Small sample sizes reduce statistical
power, making statistical significance difficult to detect when hypotheses
are tested (Kerlinger & Lee, 2000). Without the ability to generate reason-
ably sized samples, social entrepreneurship researchers will be limited in the
rigorous inquiry they can conduct.
CATA techniques provide a solution for collecting large samples of
quantitative data in social entrepreneurship research. CATA programs are
capable of analyzing large amounts of text very quickly, and the collection
of entrepreneurial narratives does not require entrepreneurs to actively par-
ticipate in the study if publicly available narratives are used (e.g., Allison
et al., 2013). For example, Allison et al. (2013) used CATA to analyze over
6,000 entrepreneurial narratives, written by entrepreneurs all over the
world, to examine the role of political rhetoric in microlending outcomes.
The data produced from CATA processes comes in the form of word
and/or category counts. These counts can easily be loaded into statistical
software to be used in a variety of quantitative techniques that allow for
the testing of hypotheses (e.g., Allison et al., 2013).
CATA techniques examine text that was produced by the entrepreneur
or venture, thus analysis of this text avoids the various biases associated
with recall or present emotions. Examining language from its source allows
us to peer directly into the motivations of those involved in social entre-
preneurial phenomena. Furthermore, CATA techniques are a powerful
approach for examining cognitive concepts, such as emotion (cf. Duriau
et al., 2007).
26 AARON H. ANGLIN ET AL.
Charismatic Rhetoric in Social Entrepreneurial Narratives
Entrepreneurs in impoverished countries are frequently unable to secure
adequate funding from traditional sources of capital, leaving many to seek
capital by applying for microloans (Bruton et al., 2011). Microloans are
small, unsecured loans made to entrepreneurs in poor communities (Bruton
et al., 2011). Microloans are directed at the social good of lifting the
entrepreneur and those around them out of poverty, in so doing also reme-
dying the ills that are associated with poverty (e.g., Allison et al., 2013).
Entrepreneurs typically apply for these loans through nongovernment
organizations and nonprofit organizations (e.g., Kiva) that attempt to link
entrepreneurs and socially inclined lenders (Allison et al., 2013;Bruton
et al., 2011). As a part of the process, entrepreneurs submit narratives
detailing their business, aspects of their personal life, and their aspirations
as an entrepreneur. These narratives are the primary source of information
the lenders have to make their funding decisions (e.g., Allison et al., 2013).
As a result, the language used in these narratives is critical in garnering
financial support for an organization (e.g., Allison et al., 2013). By way of
example, we evaluate the influence of charismatic leadership through the
use of charismatic language.
Charismatic leaders possess an ability to attract and retain followers
that emanates from the follower’s belief that the leader embodies excep-
tional talents or abilities (Weber, 1946). Present throughout charismatic
leadership research is the notion that these leaders frequently show up in
business organizations or as entrepreneurs (e.g., Conger, 1999;Conger &
Kanungo, 1987). The presence of charismatic leadership in organizations
has been linked to elevated firm performance (e.g., Barling et al., 1996;
Howell & Frost, 1989). Charismatic leadership is positively associated with
external support for a business (e.g., Flynn & Staw, 2004) and has also
been linked with firm performance (e.g., Cogliser & Brigham, 2004).
Much of the influence of charismatic leaders emanates from the lan-
guage they use (Conger, 1991;Conger & Kanungo, 1988). This implies that
charismatic language potentially has a profound impact on follower atti-
tudes and perceptions (Bligh et al., 2004;Den Hartog & Verburg, 1998).
Given the positive links of charismatic leadership with organizational sup-
port and performance, as well as the impact that charismatic leaders’
language has on their followers, the use of language indicative of charis-
matic leadership may play an instrumental role for entrepreneurs seeking
monetary support. In our case, the presence of charismatic language in
entrepreneurial narratives may influence funding outcomes, an indication
of positive follower perceptions and organizational support.
27Charismatic Rhetoric in Crowdfunding
Research on charismatic rhetoric has identified several linguistic ele-
ments used by charismatic leaders: references to collective history and to
the continuity between past and present; increased references to the collec-
tive and collective identity, and fewer references to individual self-interest;
positive references to followers’ worth and efficacy as individuals and as a
collective; references to the leader’s similarity to followers and identifica-
tion with followers; increased references to values and moral justifications,
and fewer references to tangible outcomes and instrumental justifications;
more references to distal goals and the distant future, and fewer references
to proximal goals and the near future; and references to hope and faith
(Shamir, Arthur, & House, 1994). Previous research has examined eight
hypotheses built upon these linguistic elements to measure the impact
of charismatic language (e.g., Bligh et al., 2004;Bligh & Robinson, 2010).
We build on these constructs in the social entrepreneurship microlending
context to develop the eight hypotheses below.
Collective Focus Rhetoric in Entrepreneurial Narratives
A collective focus refers to placing an emphasis on group or shared concepts
and can include references to shared histories, group identities, or collective
action (Shamir et al., 1994). Charismatic leaders create a shared identity
and advocate communal goals to motivate followers to take collective
action (House, Spangler, & Woycke, 1991). In doing so, they frequently use
language that references collective goals, ideals, and action, while avoiding
references that convey self-interest (Bligh et al., 2004;Shamir et al., 1994).
By using language that focuses on collectives, these leaders unite followers
by imprinting the importance of shared values and collective identities
on followers’ self-concepts (Bligh et al., 2004;Shamir, Zakay, Breinin, &
Popper, 1998).
Social change is not an individualist, self-interested concept, it is collec-
tively focused (cf. Austin, 2006;Nicholls, 2006). Social lenders invest to
maximize the influence of their dollars on social change (Schueth, 2003).
This implies that social lenders will be drawn to entrepreneurs who use
language that focuses on collectives and avoids self-interest. Therefore, we
suggest that social lenders will be motivated to fund an entrepreneur’s loan
request more rapidly if the corresponding narrative frequently uses refer-
ences to collective ideals, goals, values, and identities. Formally:
Hypothesis 1. Collective focus rhetoric will be negatively related to the
number of days needed for a venture to receive funding, thus speed to
funding is shortened.
28 AARON H. ANGLIN ET AL.
Temporal Orientation Rhetoric in Entrepreneurial Narratives
Temporal orientation refers to the relationship between past and present
events (Bligh et al., 2004). Leaders may invoke a temporal orientation in
order to compare past and present concerns with their vision of a brighter
future (e.g., Bligh & Robinson, 2010). However, the vision for a brighter
future is the core component of a charismatic leader’s appeal (Beyer, 1999;
Conger & Kanungo, 1988). Stated differently, there is a need for the leader
to be future oriented in order to successfully motivate followers (Bass,
1985;House, 1977). This suggests that references to past and present
should be limited so they do not detract from the leader’s ability to convey
his or her vision for the future. Focusing too much on the past and present
will hinder a leader’s ability to rally followers around a future cause.
Social lenders are focused on creating a brighter future though social
change (Schueth, 2003). This suggests that social lenders will be future
focused and less concerned with past or present events. The implication is
that entrepreneur focusing too much on the past and present will have diffi-
culty connecting with future-oriented social lenders. Therefore, we suggest
that the emphasis on the past and present in temporal orientation rhetoric
will reduce the speed of venture funding. Formally:
Hypothesis 2. Temporal orientation rhetoric will be positively related to
the number of days needed for a venture to receive funding, thus speed
to funding is lengthened.
Followers’ Worth Rhetoric in Entrepreneurial Narratives
Follower’s worth refers to a leader’s open expression of the value of their
followers (House et al., 1991). For example, they may address the vital role
their followers play in achieving an important and shared goal. In doing
so, leaders bolster the followers’ self-efficacy and self-concepts, while link-
ing salience of the leader’s values to the self-concepts of followers (Lord &
Brown, 2001;Shamir et al., 1994;Shamir, House, & Arthur, 1993). The
increases in self-efficacy and self-concepts spur action among followers
toward a leader’s vision (e.g., Gagne
´& Deci, 2005;Lord & Brown, 2001;
Maddux & Rogers, 1983).
Social lenders see themselves as catalysts of positive change (Schueth,
2003). Individuals seek to engage in behavior consistent with their self-
concept (Cooper & Thatcher, 2010), which implies that being a part of
social change is important to the self-concepts of social lenders. This sug-
gests that an entrepreneur praising the value of those involved in his or her
venture will bolster the self-efficacy and self-concept of social lenders
29Charismatic Rhetoric in Crowdfunding
(cf. Lord & Brown, 2001;Shamir et al., 1994). The lenders will believe that
they can make an impact in the entrepreneur’s success (self-efficacy) and
that they are an important part of enacting social change (self-concept).
Therefore, we suggest that language focusing on follower’s worth will
increase the speed in which a venture receives funding. Formally:
Hypothesis 3. Followers’ worth rhetoric will be negatively related to the
number of days needed for a venture to receive funding, thus speed to
funding is shortened.
Similarity to Followers Rhetoric in Entrepreneurial Narratives
Similarity to followers refers to the idea that individuals are thought to
identify with charismatic leaders through their shared values, backgrounds,
or experiences (Avolio, Gardner, Walumbwa, Luthans, & May, 2004;
Howell & Shamir, 2005). For example, if a charismatic leader is focused on
saving the rainforests, then a follower who is also concerned with saving
the rainforest will identify with that leader. To encourage followers to
identify with them, leaders often use simple, “everyday” language that
focuses on human beings and their normal activities (Bligh et al., 2004).
This identification between leader and follower fosters a sense of trust and
authenticity, making one more likely follow a leader’s call (Avolio et al.,
2004).
Social investors will be drawn to those entrepreneurs who identify similar
values and ideals (cf. Schueth, 2003). The identification of these similarities
will also foster the feeling that the entrepreneur is authentic and trustworthy
(cf. Avolio et al., 2004). These ideas imply that narratives reflecting lan-
guage that allows lenders to identify with the entrepreneur, creating a sense
of trust, will be more likely to invoke support. Therefore, we suggest
language focusing on similarities to followers will increase the speed in
which a venture receives funding. Formally:
Hypothesis 4. Similarity to followers’ rhetoric will be negatively related
to the number of days needed for a venture to receive funding, thus
speed to funding is shortened.
Values and Moral Justification Rhetoric in Entrepreneurial Narratives
Charismatic leaders often invoke values and moral justifications when
speaking to followers (Shamir et al., 1994). They may reference these
directly or refer to universal themes of morality and faith (Bligh &
Robinson, 2010). In doing so, these leaders elevate the importance of values
in followers and demonstrate consistency between advocated goals and
actions and the values of their followers (Shamir et al., 1994, 1998). This
30 AARON H. ANGLIN ET AL.
alignment of values and moral justifications creates a sense of trust between
the leader and followers (Gillespie & Mann, 2004).
Social investors are motivated to engage in social lending because they
value social change and value making a difference (e.g., Austin et al., 2006;
Schueth, 2003). This implies that social lenders are primed to align with an
entrepreneur who expresses shared values or who is concerned with creat-
ing the type of change valued by the lender. Entrepreneurial narratives
using language that references these values and moral justifications will
instill a sense of trust in the lender. Therefore, we suggest references to
values and moral justifications in entrepreneurial narratives will reduce the
amount of time it takes to fund a loan request. Formally:
Hypothesis 5. Values and moral justification rhetoric will be negatively
related to the number of days needed for a venture to receive funding,
thus speed to funding is shortened.
Tangibility Rhetoric in Entrepreneurial Narratives
Tangibility refers to the concreteness and clarity of a goal (Bligh &
Robinson, 2010). Charismatic leaders frequently emphasize intangible
future goals and speak less of concrete, tangible goals (Bligh et al., 2004;
Shamir et al., 1994). Concrete, tangible goals tend to feel short term and
uninspired (Bligh & Robinson, 2010). In contrast, intangible goals are often
idealistic, aspirational, and transcendent and are used to convey a holistic,
brighter vision for the future (cf. Bligh et al., 2004). This promise of a
brighter future resonates with followers motivating them to action
(e.g., Bligh & Robinson, 2010;Shamir et al., 1994).
Social lenders are driven by a vision of a brighter future and invest their
dollars to further this vision (Schueth, 2003). This implies that social len-
ders will be interested in backing entrepreneurs who they believe can deliver
on this vision. Since generalized visions for a brighter future are most effec-
tively created by using broader, intangible language rather than concrete,
tangible goals, we suggest that tangibility rhetoric will increase the amount
of time it takes for an entrepreneur’s loan request to be fulfilled. Formally:
Hypothesis 6. Tangibility rhetoric will be positively related to the num-
ber of days needed for a venture to receive funding, thus speed to fund-
ing is lengthened.
Action Rhetoric in Entrepreneurial Narratives
Action refers to the language used by charismatic leaders to rally followers
toward a cause or goal (Shamir et al., 1994). This language conveys a sense
of optimism and confidence that the leader’s vision can be achieved
31Charismatic Rhetoric in Crowdfunding
(Bligh & Robinson, 2010). In addition, these leaders often express a sense
of excitement and adventure to be had by taking action (Bass, 1990). By
stressing optimism, confidence, and excitement that change can occur or
is already underway, a charismatic leader’s call to action motivates their
followers to take action as well (Den Hartog et al., 1999).
Social investors feel a strong need to put their capital to work in order
to impact social change (Schueth, 2003). This implies that they will prefer
to respond to a call to action that enables them to have this impact.
Entrepreneurs who express a call to action while conveying a sense of confi-
dence and optimism that their visions can be achieved should be able to
draw upon a social lenders desire to get behind a cause. Social lenders will
be motivated by this call to action and be more likely to fund the venture.
Thus, action-oriented language should reduce the amount of time it takes
for a venture to receive funding. Formally:
Hypothesis 7. Action-oriented rhetoric will be negatively related to the
number of days needed for a venture to receive funding, thus speed to
funding is shortened.
Adversity in Entrepreneurial Narratives
Adversity refers to a leader’s presentation of a challenge that must be
overcome (Fiol, Harris, & House, 1999). Charismatic leaders are adept at
framing the current situation as being intolerable for the leader and the
followers and asserting that the situation must be corrected to create a
brighter future (Bligh & Robinson, 2010). In framing these challenges,
charismatic leaders commonly reference hardship and discontent (Carver &
Scheier, 1998;Cogner, 1991). By creating this perception of adversity that
must be overcome, they motivate their followers toward change (Bligh &
Robinson, 2010;Fiol et al., 1999).
Social lenders provide capital to address social problems (Schueth, 2003).
An underlying assumption of this view is that change is necessary, implying
some sort adversity must be overcome (Allison et al., 2013). Given this view
and provided the opportunity, social lenders will likely be interested in
assisting entrepreneurs in overcoming adverse circumstances (e.g., Allison
et al., 2013). Narratives expressing this adversity will make social lenders
more apt to support the corresponding organization. Therefore, we suggest
language reflecting adversity will decrease the amount of time it takes for a
loan to receive funding. Formally:
Hypothesis 8. Language reflecting adversity will be negatively related to
the number of days needed for a venture to receive funding, thus speed
to funding is shortened.
32 AARON H. ANGLIN ET AL.
RESEARCH METHOD
Data
Our sample is comprised of 13,000 entrepreneurial narratives collected
from Kiva Microfunds. Kiva is a nonprofit organization that connects
entrepreneurs from impoverished countries in need of venture funding with
socially minded lenders via a crowdfunding process. To connect entrepre-
neurs and lenders, Kiva partners with various field partners around the
world. These field partners facilitate Kiva loans in their respective commu-
nities and collect borrower stories, pictures, descriptions of the venture,
and loan details. This information is uploaded to the Kiva site where the
narratives are reviewed, translated, and published. Lenders can browse the
entrepreneurial narratives and decide which loans they would like to fund.
As borrowers repay the loan to the third party, the lender is reimbursed.
We use DICTION to perform our CATA (Hart, 1984). DICTION has
been used in previous studies to measure charismatic rhetoric (e.g., Bligh
et al., 2004;Zachary, McKenny, Short, Davis, & Wu, 2011). We use
the DICTION dictionaries identified by Bligh et al. (2004) to measure
charismatic rhetoric in our sample.
Dependent Variable
The dependent variable in our model is speed of funding. This is operatio-
nalized by examining the number of days a loan takes to receive full fund-
ing (e.g., Allison et al., 2013).
Independent Variables
Collective Focus
Charismatic leaders reference the collective whole as opposed to any
singular individual (Shamir et al, 1994). To do this, these leaders may use
language containing more allusions to shared ideals, goals, or missions and
fewer allusions to individualist, self-interests (Bligh et al., 2004;Shamir
et al., 1994). For this measure, we use the DICTION dictionaries relevant
to collections, people, and self-reference. The collective focus variable is
computed by adding together collective and public references and then
subtracting references to self, creating a collective focus score for each
narrative (e.g. Bligh et al., 2004;Bligh & Robinson, 2010).
33Charismatic Rhetoric in Crowdfunding
Temporal Orientation
Charismatic leaders make references to the continuity between past and
present (Bligh et al., 2004;Shamir et al., 1994). For example, they may
address past ills while looking toward a brighter future. However, the
future vision is the key to mobilizing followers indicating references to past
and present should be minimized. To address this construct, we measure an
entrepreneur’s references to both the past and the present in the narrative
as identified by the DICTION present and past concern dictionaries.
References to past and present are added together to create a temporal
index score for each particular narrative (e.g., Bligh et al., 2004;Bligh &
Robinson, 2010).
Follower’s Worth
Charismatic leaders demonstrate the worth of their followers by expressing
confidence in them, resulting in elevated self-concepts of their followers
(Bligh et al., 2004;House et al., 1991;Shamir et al., 1994). To measure this
concept, we add together the results from the praise, satisfaction, and
inspiration DICTION dictionaries for each narrative, providing us with an
overall follower’s worth score (e.g., Bligh et al., 2004;Bligh & Robinson,
2010). The praise dictionaries include terms referencing positive affirma-
tions, positive affective states, moments of joy and triumph, and attractive
moral and personal qualities (Hart, 1984).
Similarity to Followers
Charismatic leaders try to identify with their followers, stressing their simi-
larity (Bligh et al., 2004). To measure this construct, we use the leveling,
familiarity, and human interest DICTION dictionaries. Specifically, we add
together the results from each dictionary for each narrative to create an
overall similarity to followers score (e.g., Bligh et al., 2004;Bligh &
Robinson, 2010). These dictionaries are designed to measure words that
specifically focus on human beings and their everyday activities through the
use of “everyday” words (Bligh et al., 2004;Hart, 1984).
Values and Moral Justifications
Charismatic leaders refer to values and moral justifications in order to
elevate the importance of these concepts in the hearts and minds of their
followers (Shamir et al., 1994, 1998). They may also allude to ideas of mor-
ality and faith (Bligh & Robinson, 2010). In some cases, leaders may use
patriotic language, as the prescribed morals and values of a nation are rele-
vant to a cause (e.g., Bligh et al., 2004). The dictionaries for religious terms
34 AARON H. ANGLIN ET AL.
and inspiration are used to capture these themes and combined with terms
referencing patriotic speech. Words from each narrative are added together,
providing the narrative with overall values and moral justifications score
(e.g., Bligh et al., 2004;Bligh & Robinson, 2010).
Tangibility
Charismatic leaders tend to allude to intangible, future goals and make
fewer references to concrete, tangible outcomes (Bligh et al., 2004;
Conger, 1991;Shamir et al., 1994). This variable was measured by creating
a score consisting of a narrative’s concreteness score or the use of language
referencing tangibility and materiality measured by the insistence
dictionary, then subtracting a score on variety (Bligh et al., 2004). Lower
variety scores indicate more precise language and less grandiose speech,
thus a lower variety score is associated with lower levels of charisma (Hart,
1984).
Action
Charismatic leaders are often seen as those taking action to accomplish
results, conveying a sense of confidence that their vision can be achieved
(cf. Bligh & Robinson, 2010;Conger, 1991;Maranell, 1970). They express
excitement and adventure in mobilizing followers toward a cause (cf. Bass,
1990;Fiol et al., 1999;Shamir et al., 1993). To measure this construct, we
combine terms identified by the aggression and accomplishment diction-
aries and then subtract terms identified by the passivity and ambivalent dic-
tionaries, creating an action score for each narrative (e.g., Bligh et al.,
2004;Bligh & Robinson, 2010).
Adversity
Charismatic leaders possess an ability to characterize a current situation as
suboptimal and use this characterization to generate support for a future
mission or value (Fiol et al., 1999). Leaders use references concerning dis-
content and hardship to reflect the adversity of a situation (Bligh &
Robinson, 2010). To capture this adversity, we measure language “reflec-
tive of social inappropriateness, downright evil, unfortunate circumstances,
and censurable human behavior” (Bligh et al., 2004, p. 219). This language
is measured by adding terms identified by the blame, hardship, and denial
dictionaries, creating an adversity score (e.g., Bligh et al., 2004;Bligh &
Robinson, 2010).
35Charismatic Rhetoric in Crowdfunding
Control Variables
Country
An entrepreneur’s home country may present a variety of challenges or
benefits for entrepreneurs seeking funding (cf. Makino, Isobe, & Chan,
2004;Minniti, 2008). The narratives used for this study come from 55 dif-
ferent countries. To control for country-level effects, we created a dummy
variable for the countries represented in the sample (e.g., Cohen, 1968).
Industry
A venture’s industry may also influence an entrepreneur’s ability to raise
capital (cf. Makino et al., 2004). In addition, social lenders may view some
industries more favorably than others. To control for industry effects, we
included dummy variables representing the 14 sector classifications of the
North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) (e.g., Cohen,
1968).
Loan Amount
Larger loans may take longer and perhaps require more lenders to fund
than smaller loans. Thus, the size of the loan must be controlled for. To
control for this, we incorporate the natural log of loan amounts into the
model (e.g., Allison et al., 2013).
Statistical Methods
The funding time is regressed on the controls and independent variables.
Ordinary least squares (OLS) regression is used as our statistical method.
We use Tobit regression to check the robustness of our results to the influ-
ence of nonnegative values. The Tobit regression provided substantially
identical results to the OLS model.
RESULTS
Table 1 summarizes the means, standard deviations, and correlations for
all variables with the exception of the controls for country and industry.
Table 2 presents the results for the regression analysis. Because our depen-
dent variable is the number of days it takes for a firm to receive full fund-
ing, negative coefficients reflect a decrease in the number of days it takes
36 AARON H. ANGLIN ET AL.
Table 1. Descriptive Statistics and Correlations.
Variables Mean SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Days to funding 7.18 9.64
Loan amount 6.30 0.82 0.31
Collective focus 5.25 5.77 −0.06 0.03
Temporal orientation 17.36 8.18 0.01 −0.07 −0.11
Followers’ worth 8.38 7.24 0.06 0.17 0.05 0.07
Similarity to followers 176.32 21.29 −0.01 0.09 0.06 0.08 0.14
Values 0.48 0.98 −0.06 −0.11 0.11 0.05 0.002 −0.00
Tangibility 55.69 29.00 −0.05 0.09 0.21 −0.14 0.03 −0.05 0.24
Action 28.04 13.68 0.06 −0.08 −0.05 −0.08 −0.19 −0.04 −0.03 −0.09
Adversity 3.03 4.16 0.05 0.02 −0.01 0.04 0.05 0.11 −0.02 −0.03 0.01
N=13,000. Correlations with an absolute value of 0.02 or beyond are significant at p<0.05.
37Charismatic Rhetoric in Crowdfunding
for a loan to become funded, thus indicating that speed to funding has
been shortened.
Hypothesis 1 stated that language exhibiting a collective focus will be
inversely related to the number days it takes for a loan to become funded.
The coefficient is negative and significant (β=−0.031; p<0.05) thus we find
support for Hypothesis 1. Hypothesis 2 proposed that temporal orientation
rhetoric will be positively related to the number days it takes for a loan
to become funded. The coefficient is positive and significant (β=0.030;
Table 2. Results of Regression Analysis on Funding Speed.
a
Variables Coefficient p-value
Country controls
b
Industry controls
c
Agriculture, forestry, fishing, and hunting −4.674 0.000
Construction −3.553 0.000
Manufacturing 31 −3.222 0.000
Manufacturing 32 −9.325 0.000
Manufacturing 33 −8.867 0.000
Wholesale trade −7.667 0.000
Retail trade −1.201 0.001
Transportation and warehousing 3.683 0.000
Education services −11.376 0.000
Health care and social assistance −10.362 0.000
Arts, entertainment, and recreation −7.116 0.000
Other services −2.612 0.000
Loan amount 4.453 0.000
Independent variables
Collective focus −0.031 0.025
Temporal orientation 0.030 0.002
Followers’ worth 0.030 0.006
Similarity to followers −0.023 0.000
Values −0.164 0.039
Tangibility −0.002 0.423
Action 0.010 0.084
Adversity 0.038 0.035
Constant −14.860 0.000
Adjusted R
2
0.306
F76.470 0.000
a
N=13,000.
b
56 Counties, 55 controls, included in model but not reported.
c
13 Industries, 12 controls.
38 AARON H. ANGLIN ET AL.
p<0.01), thus Hypothesis 2 is supported. Hypothesis 3 proposed that fol-
lower’s worth language will be inversely related to the number days it takes
for a loan to become funded. The relationship is positive and significant
(β=0.030; p<0.01). This is the opposite of what we predicted, thus we do
not find support for Hypothesis 3.
Hypothesis 4 stated that language creating a shared identity with lenders
will be negatively related to the number days it takes for a loan to become
funded. The coefficient is negative and significant (β=−0.023; p<0.01), thus
we find support for Hypothesis 4. Hypothesis 5 proposed that that language
referencing values and moral justifications will be negatively related to the
number days it takes for a loan to become funded. The coefficient is negative
and significant (β=−0.164; p<0.05). We find support for Hypothesis 5.
Hypothesis 6 proposed that references focusing on concrete, tangible goals
would be positively related to the number of days it takes for a loan to
become funded. The coefficient is negative, opposite of what we expect, but
not significant (β=−0.002; p=0.42), thus we do not find support for
Hypothesis 6. Hypothesis 7 stated that action-oriented language will be nega-
tively related to the number days it takes for a loan to become funded. The
coefficient is positive and not significant (β=0.010; p=0.08). Hypothesis 7 is
not supported. Hypothesis 8 proposed that language reflecting adversity will
be negatively related to the number days it takes for a loan to become
funded. However, the opposite is found as the coefficient is positive and
significant (β=0.038; p<0.05). We do not find support for Hypothesis 8.
DISCUSSION
Scholars have demonstrated growing interest in social entrepreneurship
research in recent years (Austin et al., 2006;Short et al., 2009). To date,
social entrepreneurship research has been mostly descriptive, relying on
case study approaches for most inquires (Hitt et al., 1998;Short et al.,
2009). Descriptive research provides an important foundation for the
advancement of social entrepreneurship theory. However, as researchers
begin to use deductive reasoning to hypothesize relationships between con-
structs, additional approaches will be needed. In this chapter, we have
shown that CATA is well suited to address the challenges associated with
social entrepreneurship research.
Charismatic leadership plays an important role in several positive orga-
nizational outcomes (e.g., Barling et al., 1996; Flynn & Staw, 2004;
39Charismatic Rhetoric in Crowdfunding
Howell & Frost, 1989). Much of a charismatic leader’s influence is reflected
in the language they use (cf. Bligh et al., 2004;Conger, 1991;Shamir et al.,
1994). Building on these ideas, we use CATA to examine the influence of
charismatic language on microfinancing outcomes. CATA enabled us to
capture quantifiable measures of the eight characteristics of charismatic
language from microlending narratives.
We found support for four of our eight hypotheses. Language reflecting
a collective focus, showing similarity to followers, and referencing values
and moral justifications all exhibited an negative relationship with the num-
ber of days needed for a loan to become funded, thus these loans received
faster funding. Temporal orientation rhetoric showed a positive impact on
the number of days in which it took a venture received funding, indicating
acquiring funding took longer.
Tangibility rhetoric was hypothesized to have a positive relationship
with the days needed for funding. However, we found no support for this
hypothesis, nor was there evidence that the reverse was true. This may sug-
gest that social lenders are indifferent to whether goals are expressed in
abstract or concrete terms, which is consistent with the process view of
social entrepreneurship (e.g., Alter, 2006;Dees & Elias, 1998;Mair &
Marti, 2006). The implication in our case is that social lenders are attracted
more to the process of change and creating social value but are not
motivated by any particular abstract or specific outcomes (cf. Alter, 2006;
Dees & Elias, 1998). For example, it is not the building of a particular
water purification company in an impoverished area or the overall idea of
clean drinking water for the world’s poor that is the motivator, it is the act
of helping others and creating change itself that matters.
We hypothesized that charismatic language expressing action would
induce quicker funding from social lenders. We did not find support for this
hypothesis. Lenders may already be fairly motivated to act by the time they
begin browsing entrepreneurial narratives. By the time loan decisions are
made, the social lenders have already sought out, registered, and entered
financial information into the microlending platform to be able to lend. In
short, they have taken a substantial amount of action toward making a loan
before the selection process begins. This suggests that they are already
primed to take action and just need to find the “right” loan. Our study
identified that rhetoric such as collective focus, similarity to followers, and
values may influence the desirability of funding the entrepreneur.
We hypothesized that language reflecting adversity would reduce the
number of days needed for funding. Interestingly, we found that adversity
rhetoric actually increased days needed for funding. A closer review of
40 AARON H. ANGLIN ET AL.
the narratives reveals a possible explanation for these findings. Narratives
with high adversity scores appeared to focus primarily on personal adver-
sity. This finding conflicts with how adversity rhetoric is used in charismatic
leadership research. This literature speaks to adversity at the societal level
rather than the individual level. Individual references to adversity may be
interpreted by the lender as the antithesis of creating a shared, collective
view of the future (cf. House et al., 1991;Shamir et al., 1994).
We hypothesized that language reflecting followers’ worth would be
associated with faster funding. Surprisingly, our results indicated the oppo-
site effects. This may also be attributable to the alternative context in which
followers’ worth rhetoric is used. A review of the narratives scoring high in
followers’ worth indicates that these entrepreneurs tended to reference the
worth of their employees and supporting community rather than of the len-
ders who constitute the followers in this context. This is an important
caveat. Recall, an important effect of stressing followers’ worth is that it
links the salience of the leader’s values to the self-concepts of followers,
leading to increases in self-efficacy and self-concepts of followers (Lord &
Brown, 2001;Shamir et al., 1993). This spurs action among followers
(Gagne
´& Deci, 2005;Lord & Brown, 2001). If the entrepreneurs do not
focus on the lender’s worth, then the initial link is not made, thus lenders
are less likely to support the entrepreneur.
Limitations
We made several trade-offs in our examination of the influence of charis-
matic rhetoric on microlending performance. First, we employed CATA
because it is able to reliably measure rhetorical content in texts and, in parti-
cular, has been used to measure charismatic rhetoric in the management
literature (Bligh et al., 2004;Duriau et al., 2007). However, while CATA
can identify words and phrases associated with charismatic rhetoric, it
cannot interpret the use of this language in context (cf. Weber, 1990). This
opens the door for misinterpretations.
Second, the constructs identified as components of charismatic language
are derived from the language of political and social leaders with a big
stage (cf. Bligh & Robinson, 2010;Shamir et al., 1994). Unlike leaders with
a large follower base, nascent entrepreneurs are involved in startups, imply-
ing that their initial follower base is small, which may drive differences in
how charismatic rhetoric is used. However, research into charismatic lea-
dership among entrepreneurs suggests that similar attributes (e.g., creating
41Charismatic Rhetoric in Crowdfunding
a collective vision for the future) are shared by charismatic entrepreneurs
and the political and social leaders used to formulate the charismatic
leadership construct (e.g., Baum, Locke, & Kirkpatrick, 1998).
Opportunities for Future Research
Our study presents opportunities for future research in social entrepreneur-
ship. We have demonstrated CATA to be a useful tool for examining
constructs salient to social entrepreneurship in microlending narratives.
However, its uses are not limited to examining microlending narratives.
CATA can be used to collect data relevant to testable hypotheses from an
assortment of narratives. Management research has used web sites, social
media, press releases, letters from managers, business plans, and policy
documents as sources of content analytic data (e.g., Buttner, 2001;
Chandler, Broberg, & Allison, 2014;Short et al., 2010). The data gathered
from these sources can be used to further define, develop, and test the
theoretical relationships and boundaries of social entrepreneurship.
Our study identified that the use of charismatic rhetoric in entrepreneur-
ial narratives impacts the entrepreneur’s ability to acquire funding. Future
research could build from our findings by examining how other constructs
influence funding outcomes using CATA. For example, CATA could be
used to examine how entrepreneurial orientation rhetoric influences fund-
ing outcomes. It may be that entrepreneurial narratives that convey high
entrepreneurial orientations will attract investors interested in innovation
and novel approaches to social problems (cf. Lyon, Lumpkin, & Dess,
2000).
Market orientation is another construct that could be useful for under-
standing funding outcomes. Firms high in market orientation tend to be
better at attracting resources than firms low in market orientation
(Morgan, Vorhies, & Mason, 2009). Since the activity of microfinance is
largely concerned with the acquisition of resources, this suggests that mar-
ket orientation could help researchers better understand the phenomena of
microfinance and crowdfunding. Future research might draw from the
computer-aided text analytic measure of market orientation developed by
Zachary, McKenny, Short, and Payne (2011) to examine the role of market
orientation in microlending and crowdfunding outcomes.
Ambidexterous firms also tend to be proficient at acquiring resources
and devising solutions in response to market demands (Raisch &
Birkinshaw, 2008). Firms displaying ambidexterity could be appealing to
42 AARON H. ANGLIN ET AL.
investors as they may be seen as able to successfully enact the change which
social investors desire. Several studies have used CATA to examine ambi-
dexterity in organizational narratives (e.g., Allison, McKenny, & Short,
2014;Uotila, Maula, Keil, & Zahra, 2009). Future research might use
Uotila et al.’s (2009) computer-aided text analytic measure of ambidexterity
to examine the balance struck between exploration and exploitation by
entrepreneurs who seek funds via microfinance and crowdfunding and the
performance consequence of striking this balance.
Constructs that align with social investors’ desire to “do good” and
create positive change could be particularly useful in understanding micro-
finance outcomes. For example, given that social investors are concerned
with virtuous behaviors that create social value, organizational virtue
orientation might also be a salient construct for understanding the nature
of microfinance. Organizational virtue orientation is concerned with ethical
and moral character of a firm (Chun, 2005). For example, firms who
express a strong organizational virtue orientation may be viewed more
positively by investors and, thus, better able to attract funds. Future
research might use the computer-aided text analytic measure of organiza-
tional virtue orientation developed by Payne, Brigham, Broberg, Moss, and
Short (2011) to examine its role in investor decision making.
The psychological capital construct may also convince social investors
that their investment will create a positive change for the entrepreneur and
society. This construct includes the dimensions of confidence, hope,
optimism, and resilience (Luthans, Luthans, & Luthans, 2004). Firms
expressing hope for a brighter future, optimism and confidence that this can
be achieved, and resilience in the face of adversity could be quite appealing
to investors. Thus, future research may wish to use the organizational
psychological capital dictionaries created by McKenny, Short, and Payne
(2013) to explore the fundraising outcomes associated with entrepreneurs
who espouse this positive organizational orientation.
The insights gained from examining these constructs could be put to use
by those who facilitate microloans. The NGOs and nonprofit organizations
offering microloans could use these insights from entrepreneurial narratives
and lender information to better match a lender with an entrepreneur. This
could hasten funding speed, allowing resources to get to entrepreneurs in
need much quicker. In addition, researchers could examine cultural nuan-
ces (e.g., Tiessen, 1997) in language that assist or impede entrepreneurs
who are seeking funds. Identifying cultural nuances that influence funding
would assist with matching lenders and entrepreneurs while also benefiting
those involved with developing and translating narratives.
43Charismatic Rhetoric in Crowdfunding
CONCLUSION
Social entrepreneurship is a growing field, presenting researchers with
new challenges and exciting research questions. We presented CATA as a
valuable method for moving this research toward theory-driven hypothesis
testing. Furthermore, we demonstrated how CATA is well suited to analyze
the public appeals made by entrepreneurs, how it can provide insight
into the rationale of social lenders, and how CATA can help researchers
overcome challenges facing social entrepreneurship research inherent in
traditional survey methods. In doing so, we also provided insight into the
microlending process by examining charismatic language and its impact on
social lender decisions.
REFERENCES
Allison, T. H., McKenny, A. F., & Short, J. C. (2013). The effect of entrepreneurial rhetoric
on microlending investment: An examination of the warm-glow effect. Journal of
Business Venturing,28(6), 690!707.
Allison, T. H., McKenny, A. F., & Short, J. C. (2014). Integrating time into family business
research: Using random coefficient modeling to examine temporal influences on family
firm ambidexterity. Family Business Review,27(1), 20!34.
Alter, S. K. (2006). Social enterprise models and their mission and money relationships. In
A. Nicholls (Ed.), Social entrepreneurship: New models of sustainable social change
(pp. 205!232). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Austin, J. E. (2006). Three avenues for social entrepreneurship research. In J. Mair,
J. Robinson, & K. Hockerts (Eds.), Social entrepreneurship (pp. 22–33). New York,
NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
Austin, J., Stevenson, H., & Wei-Skillern, J. (2006). Social and commercial entrepreneurship:
Same, different, or both? Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice,30(1), 1!22.
Avolio, B. J., Gardner, W. L., Walumbwa, F. O., Luthans, F., & May, D. R. (2004).
Unlocking the mask: A look at the process by which authentic leaders impact follower
attitudes and behaviors. The Leadership Quarterly,15(6), 801!823.
Barling, J., Weber, T., & Kelloway, E. K. (1996). Effects of transformational leadership
training on attitudinal and financial outcomes: A field experiment. Journal of Applied
Psychology,81(6), 827!832.
Bass, B. M. (1985). Leadership and performance beyond expectations. New York, NY: Free
Press.
Bass, B. M. (1990). Bass and Stogdill’s handbook of leadership: Theory, research, and manage-
rial applications (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Free Press.
Baum, J. R., Locke, E. A., & Kirkpatrick, S. A. (1998). A longitudinal study of the relation of
vision and vision communication to venture growth in entrepreneurial firms. Journal of
Applied Psychology,83(1), 43.
44 AARON H. ANGLIN ET AL.
Beyer, J. M. (1999). Taming and promoting charisma to change organizations. The Leadership
Quarterly,10(2), 307!330.
Bligh, M. C., Kohles, J. C., & Meindl, J. R. (2004). Charisma under crisis: Presidential leader-
ship, rhetoric, and media responses before and after 9/11. The Leadership Quarterly,
15(2), 211!239.
Bligh, M. C., & Robinson, J. L. (2010). Was Gandhi “charismatic”? Exploring the rhetorical
leadership of Mahatma Gandhi. The Leadership Quarterly,21(5), 844!855.
Bruton, G. D., Khavul, S., & Chavez, H. (2011). Microlending in emerging economies:
Building a new line of inquiry from the ground up. Journal of International Business
Studies,42(5), 718!739.
Bugg-Levine, A., Kogut, B., & Kulatilaka, N. (2012). A new approach to funding social enter-
prises. Harvard Business Review,90(1/2), 118–123.
Busenitz, L. W., West, G. P., Shepherd, D., Nelson, T., Chandler, G. N., & Zacharakis, A.
(2003). Entrepreneurship research in emergence: Past trends and future directions.
Journal of Management,29(3), 285!308.
Buttner, E. H. (2001). Examining female entrepreneurs’ management style: An application of a
relational frame. Journal of Business Ethics,29(3), 253!269.
Carver, C. S., & Scheier, M. F. (1998). On the self-regulation of behavior. Cambridge, UK:
Cambridge University Press.
Chandler, G. N., Broberg, J. C., & Allison, T. H. (2014). Customer value propositions in
declining industries: Differences between industry representative and high-growth firms.
Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal. doi:10.1002/sej.1181
Chandler, G. N., & Lyon, D. W. (2001). Entrepreneurial teams in new ventures: Composition,
turnover and performance. In Academy of Management Proceedings (Vol. 2001, No. 1,
pp. A1!A6). Academy of Management.
Chun, R. (2005). Ethical character and virtue of organizations: An empirical assessment and
strategic implications. Journal of Business Ethics,57(3), 269!284.
Cogliser, C. C., & Brigham, K. H. (2004). The intersection of leadership and entrepreneurship:
Mutual lessons to be learned. The Leadership Quarterly,15(6), 771–799.
Cohen, J. (1968). Multiple regression as a general data-analytic system. Psychological Bulletin,
70(6p1), 426.
Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin,112(1), 155.
Conger, J. (1991). Inspiring others: The language of leadership. Academy of Management
Executive,5(1), 31!45.
Conger, J. A., & Kanungo, R. N. (1987). Toward a behavioral theory of charismatic leader-
ship in organizational settings. Academy of Management Review,12(4), 637–647.
Conger, J., & Kanungo, R. N. (1988). Behavioral dimensions of charismatic leadership. In
J. A. Conger & R. N. Kanungo (Eds.), Charismatic leadership: The elusive factor in
organizational effectiveness (pp. 78!97). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Conger, J. A. (1999). Charismatic and transformational leadership in organizations: An insi-
der’s perspective on these developing streams of research. The Leadership Quarterly,
10(2), 145!179.
Cooper, D., & Thatcher, S. M. (2010). Identification in organizations: The role of self-concept
orientations and identification motives. Academy of Management Review,35(4),
516!538.
Dees, G. J., & Elias, J. (1998). The challenges of combining social and commercial enterprise.
Business Ethics Quarterly,8(1), 165!178.
45Charismatic Rhetoric in Crowdfunding
Den Hartog, D. N., House, R. J., Hanges, P. J., Ruiz-Quintanilla, S. A., Dorfman, P. W., &
Other Globe Country Investigators (1999). Culture specific and cross-culturally general-
izable implicit leadership theories: Are attributes of charismatic/transformational
leadership universally endorsed? Leadership Quarterly,10(2), 219–256.
Den Hartog, D. N., & Verburg, R. M. (1998). Charisma and rhetoric: Communicative techni-
ques of international business leaders. The Leadership Quarterly,8(4), 355!391.
Dennis, W. J., Jr. (2003). Raising response rates in mail surveys of small business owners:
Results of an experiment. Journal of Small Business Management,41(3), 278!295.
Duriau, V. J., Reger, R. K., & Pfarrer, M. D. (2007). A content analysis of the content analysis
literature in organization studies: Research themes, data sources, and methodological
refinements. Organization Research Methods,10,5!34.
Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management
Review,14(4), 532!550.
Erdener, C., & Dunn, C. (1990). Content analysis. In A. S. Huff (Ed.), Mapping strategic
thought (pp. 291–300). Chichester, NY: Wiley.
Fiol, C. M., Harris, D., & House, R. (1999). Charismatic leadership: Strategies for effecting
social change. The Leadership Quarterly,10(3), 449!482.
Flynn, F. J., & Staw, B. M. (2004). Lend me your wallets: The effect of charismatic leadership
on external support for an organization. Strategic Management Journal,25(4),
309!330.
Fowler, F. J. (Ed.). (2009). Survey research methods (Vol. 1). London: Sage.
Gagne
´, M., & Deci, E. L. (2005). Self-determination theory and work motivation. Journal of
Organizational Behavior,26(4), 331!362.
Galak, J., Small, D., & Stephen, A. T. (2011). Microfinance decision making: A field study of
prosocial lending [Special issue]. Journal of Marketing Research,48, S130!S137.
Gillespie, N. A., & Mann, L. (2004). Transformational leadership and shared values: The
building blocks of trust. Journal of Managerial Psychology,19(6), 588!607.
Hart, R. P. (1984). Verbal style and the presidency: A computer-based analysis. New York, NY:
Academic Press.
Hitt, M. A., Gimeno, J., & Hoskisson, R. E. (1998). Current and future research methods in
strategic management. Organizational Research Methods,1(1), 6!44.
House, R. J. (1977). A 1976 theory of charismatic leadership effectiveness. In J. G. Hunt &
L. L. Larson (Eds.), Leadership: The cutting edge. Carbondale, IL: Feffer and Simons.
House, R. J., Spangler, W. D., & Woycke, J. (1991). Personality and charisma in the US
presidency: A psychological theory of leader effectiveness. Administrative Science
Quarterly,36(3), 364!396.
Howell, J. M., & Frost, P. J. (1989). A laboratory study of charismatic leadership.
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,43(2), 243!269.
Howell, J. M., & Shamir, B. (2005). The role of followers in the charismatic leadership process:
Relationships and their consequences. Academy of Management Review,30(1), 96!112.
Huff, A. S. (1990). Mapping strategic thought. Chichester, NY: Wiley.
Kabanoff, B. (1997). Computers can read as well as count: Computer-aided text analysis in
organizational research. Journal of Organizational Behavior,18(S1), 507–511.
Kerlinger, F. N., & Lee, H. B. (2000). Foundations of behavioral research. New York, NY:
Cengage Learning.
Krippendorff, K. (2004). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology (2nd ed.).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
46 AARON H. ANGLIN ET AL.
Lord, R. G., & Brown, D. J. (2001). Leadership, values, and subordinate self-concepts. The
Leadership Quarterly,12(2), 133!152.
Low, M. B., & MacMillan, I. C. (1988). Entrepreneurship: Past research and future challenges.
Journal of Management,14(2), 139!161.
Luthans, F., Luthans, K. W., & Luthans, B. C. (2004). Positive psychological capital: Beyond
human and social capital. Business Horizons,47(1), 45!50.
Lyon, D. W., Lumpkin, G. T., & Dess, G. G. (2000). Enhancing entrepreneurial orientation
research: Operationalizing and measuring a key strategic decision making process.
Journal of Management,26(5), 1055!1085.
Maddux, J. E., & Rogers, R. W. (1983). Protection motivation and self-efficacy: A revised
theory of fear appeals and attitude change. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,
19(5), 469!479.
Makino, S., Isobe, T., & Chan, C. M. (2004). Does country matter? Strategic Management
Journal,25(10), 1027!1043.
Mair, J., & Marti, I. (2006). Social entrepreneurship research: A source of explanation,
prediction, and delight. Journal of World Business,41(1), 36!44.
Maranell, G. M. (1970). The evaluation of presidents: An extension of the Schlesinger polls.
The Journal of American History,57, 104!113.
McKenny, A. F., Short, J. C., & Payne, G. T. (2013). Using computer-aided text analysis to
elevate constructs: An illustration using psychological capital. Organizational Research
Methods,16(1), 152!184.
Minniti, M. (2008). The role of government policy on entrepreneurial activity: Productive,
unproductive, or destructive? Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice,32(5), 779!790.
Morgan, N. A., Vorhies, D. W., & Mason, C. H. (2009). Market orientation,
marketing capabilities, and firm performance. Strategic Management Journal,30(8),
909!920.
Namenwirth, J., & Weber, R. P. (1990). Dynamics of cultures. Winchester, MA: Allen & Unwin.
Neuendorf, K. A. (2002). The content analysis guidebook. London: Sage.
Neuman, W. (1997). Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative approaches.
Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Nicholls, A. (2006). Social entrepreneurship: New models of sustainable social change. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Payne, G. T., Brigham, K. H., Broberg, J. C., Moss, T. W., & Short, J. C. (2011).
Organizational virtue orientation and family firms. Business Ethics Quarterly,21(2),
257!285.
Raisch, S., & Birkinshaw, J. (2008). Organizational ambidexterity: Antecedents, outcomes,
and moderators. Journal of Management,34(3), 375!409.
Rosenberg, S. D., Schnurr, P. P., & Oxman, T. E. (1990). Content analysis: A comparison
of manual and computerized systems. Journal of Personality Assessment,54(1!2),
298!310.
Schueth, S. (2003). Socially responsible investing in the United States. Journal of Business
Ethics,43(3), 189!194.
Shamir, B., Arthur, M. B., & House, R. J. (1994). The rhetoric of charismatic leadership:
A theoretical extension, a case study, and implications for research. The Leadership
Quarterly,5(1), 25!42.
Shamir, B., House, R. J., & Arthur, M. B. (1993). The motivational effects of charismatic
leadership: A self-concept based theory. Organization Science,4(4), 577!594.
47Charismatic Rhetoric in Crowdfunding
Shamir, B., Zakay, E., Breinin, E., & Popper, M. (1998). Correlates of charismatic leader
behavior in military units: Subordinates’ attitudes, unit characteristics, and superiors’
appraisals of leader performance. Academy of Management Journal,41(4), 387!409.
Short, J. C., Broberg, J. C., Cogliser, C. C., & Brigham, K. H. (2010). Construct validation
using computer-aided text analysis (CATA) an illustration using entrepreneurial
orientation. Organizational Research Methods,13(2), 320!347.
Short, J. C., Moss, T. W., & Lumpkin, G. T. (2009). Research in social entrepreneurship:
Past contributions and future opportunities. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal,3(2),
161!194.
Short, J. C., & Palmer, T. B. (2008). The application of DICTION to content analysis research
in strategic management. Organizational Research Methods,11(4), 727!752.
Tiessen, J. H. (1997). Individualism, collectivism, and entrepreneurship: A framework for
international comparative research. Journal of Business Venturing,12(5), 367!384.
Uotila, J., Maula, M., Keil, T., & Zahra, S. A. (2009). Exploration, exploitation, and financial
performance: Analysis of S&P 500 corporations. Strategic Management Journal,30(2),
221–231.
Weber, M. (1946). In H. H. Gerth & C. W. Mills (Eds.), From Max Weber. New York, NY:
Oxford University Press.
Weber, R. P. (Ed.). (1990). Basic content analysis (No. 49). London: Sage.
Woodrum, E. (1984). “Mainstreaming” content analysis in social science: Methodological
advantages, obstacles, and solutions. Social Science Research,13(1), 1!19.
Yunus, M. (1999). Microlending: Toward a poverty-free world: Bridging the gap between
economic theory and human reality. Brigham Young University Studies (BYU Studies),
38(2), 149!155.
Zachary, M. A., McKenny, A. F., Short, J. C., Davis, K. M., & Wu, D. (2011). Franchise
branding: An organizational identity perspective. Journal of the Academy of Marketing
Science,39(4), 629!645.
Zachary, M. A., McKenny, A., Short, J. C., & Payne, G. T. (2011). Family business and
market orientation construct validation and comparative analysis. Family Business
Review,24(3), 233!251.
48 AARON H. ANGLIN ET AL.
