问题描述：
英语翻译
Teams’ external network structure
As elaborated below,we use Burt’s (1992) constraint
measure to measure teams’ external network
structure.In addition,we draw on the work of
Hansen,Podolny,and Pfeffer (2001) on project
team networks,which pioneered the method of
team aggregation used in this study.To draw up
individual entrepreneurial team member’s external
networks,we asked respondents to name a maximum
of five of the most important people,not
employed by their company,whom they rely on
for valuable advice,guidance,or information relevant
to the company.Since respondents could
list up to five contacts (consistent with past studies;
e.g.,McEviley and Zaheer,1999),and the
entrepreneurial team was restricted to three members,
the maximum possible number of contacts
in an entrepreneurial team’s external network is
limited to 15.
The external networks of individual team members
were then added up to obtain the team’s
external network as illustrated through an example.
Figure 1 shows the external network of Bacchan
and Dharam,the entrepreneurial team members
of the focal venture.Bacchan reports five network
contacts,of which there are two indirect ties
(between Rekha and Kamal and between Hema
and Rekha,shown as dotted lines).Dharam also
reports five network contacts,with three indirect
ties (between Dimple and Amir; Ash and Rekha
and Hema and Rekha,all shown as dotted lines).
We constructed the team’s external network by
adding the network ties of all team members,
counting an external contact only once,even if
that contact had been named by several team members.
So,in the example above,the total number
of ties in the team’s network is seven = five
(Bacchan’s external ties) + five (Dharam’s external
ties)—three (to avoid double counting Rekha,
Amir,and Hema who were cited by both Bacchan
and Dharam).After aggregating the team’s
network in this manner,we measured the team’s
structural holes using Burt’s (1992) constraint
measure.1
Burt’s (1992) constraint (c) score captures the
extent to which an alter j constrains entrepreneurial
team i,and is a multiplication of (i) team i’s
investment of time and energy in the relationship
with j and (ii) the lack of structural holes
around j and is given by the following formula
(Burt,1992):cij = (pij +_qpiqpqj)2,for q _= i,j
where pij is the proportion of team i’s relations
invested in contact j and _qpiqpqj is the portion
of team i’s relations invested in contact q,
who are in turn invested in contact j.Summed up
over all the alters,_jcij is the network constraint
measure.Network constraint is lowest when an
entrepreneurial team spans many structural holes
and is highest when the team spans few structural
holes.Hence,the coefficient of network constraint
should be negative and significant if Hypothesis 1a
is supported.
呵呵~让我看看哪种机器翻的更有参考价值吧~各位可以顺便说下自己用的什么软件翻译的吗？
Teams’ external network structure
As elaborated below,we use Burt’s (1992) constraint
measure to measure teams’ external network
structure.In addition,we draw on the work of
Hansen,Podolny,and Pfeffer (2001) on project
team networks,which pioneered the method of
team aggregation used in this study.To draw up
individual entrepreneurial team member’s external
networks,we asked respondents to name a maximum
of five of the most important people,not
employed by their company,whom they rely on
for valuable advice,guidance,or information relevant
to the company.Since respondents could
list up to five contacts (consistent with past studies;
e.g.,McEviley and Zaheer,1999),and the
entrepreneurial team was restricted to three members,
the maximum possible number of contacts
in an entrepreneurial team’s external network is
limited to 15.
The external networks of individual team members
were then added up to obtain the team’s
external network as illustrated through an example.
Figure 1 shows the external network of Bacchan
and Dharam,the entrepreneurial team members
of the focal venture.Bacchan reports five network
contacts,of which there are two indirect ties
(between Rekha and Kamal and between Hema
and Rekha,shown as dotted lines).Dharam also
reports five network contacts,with three indirect
ties (between Dimple and Amir; Ash and Rekha
and Hema and Rekha,all shown as dotted lines).
We constructed the team’s external network by
adding the network ties of all team members,
counting an external contact only once,even if
that contact had been named by several team members.
So,in the example above,the total number
of ties in the team’s network is seven = five
(Bacchan’s external ties) + five (Dharam’s external
ties)—three (to avoid double counting Rekha,
Amir,and Hema who were cited by both Bacchan
and Dharam).After aggregating the team’s
network in this manner,we measured the team’s
structural holes using Burt’s (1992) constraint
measure.1
Burt’s (1992) constraint (c) score captures the
extent to which an alter j constrains entrepreneurial
team i,and is a multiplication of (i) team i’s
investment of time and energy in the relationship
with j and (ii) the lack of structural holes
around j and is given by the following formula
(Burt,1992):cij = (pij +_qpiqpqj)2,for q _= i,j
where pij is the proportion of team i’s relations
invested in contact j and _qpiqpqj is the portion
of team i’s relations invested in contact q,
who are in turn invested in contact j.Summed up
over all the alters,_jcij is the network constraint
measure.Network constraint is lowest when an
entrepreneurial team spans many structural holes
and is highest when the team spans few structural
holes.Hence,the coefficient of network constraint
should be negative and significant if Hypothesis 1a
is supported.
呵呵~让我看看哪种机器翻的更有参考价值吧~各位可以顺便说下自己用的什么软件翻译的吗？
问题解答：
我来补答展开全文阅读