Today’s labor market dynamics offer more work flexibility than ever before, enabling various types of professional careers (Gänser-Stickler et al., 2022). Under these conditions, the phenomenon of hybrid entrepreneurship (HE) has emerged and is gaining increasing academic interest (e.g., Ardianti et al., 2022; Duhamel and St-Jean, 2023; Uriarte et al., 2023). HE is the engagement in self-employment activity while simultaneously holding a primary job in wage employment (Folta et al., 2010). The novelty of HE as a distinct research concept has resulted in a surge of publications in the past decade (Demir et al., 2022). This research has recognized that hybrid entrepreneurs defy classification as either self-employed or wage-employed individuals, instead forming a distinct group with unique antecedents (e.g., Thorgren et al., 2014), characteristics (e.g., Kurczewska et al., 2020; Maritz et al., 2023), dynamics (e.g., Schulz et al., 2016; Wennberg et al., 2006), and outcomes (e.g., Fini et al., 2017; Marshall et al., 2019). Recognizing the distinctive nature of hybrid entrepreneurs has unveiled their significant presence within the entrepreneurial landscapes of various countries (Bosma et al., 2008; Duhamel and St-Jean, 2023; Dvouletý and Bögenhold, 2023). Hybrid entrepreneurs are prevalent across diverse occupations and industries, notably in knowledge-intensive, innovative, and high-tech sectors (Fini et al., 2017; Folta et al., 2010; Markman et al., 2008; Marshall et al., 2019; Raffiee and Feng, 2014). Moreover, they can be found in all stages of an entrepreneurial carrier, especially in the periods of entry into and exit out of entrepreneurship (Folta et al., 2010; Raffiee and Feng, 2014). Despite its growing significance, HE remains underrepresented in scientific academic discourse. While existing research has provided both empirical and conceptual insights, knowledge about its distinct characteristics—particularly in comparison to full-time entrepreneurship—remains limited (Duhamel and St-Jean, 2023). Given the growing number of professionals actively opting for this form of entrepreneurship (Brändle and Kuckertz, 2022; Duhamel and St-Jean, 2023), the need for further investigation becomes evident. Additionally, hybrid entrepreneurs demonstrate significantly higher business survival rates compared to individuals transitioning directly from wage employment to entrepreneurship (Raffiee and Feng, 2014), further justifying the ongoing exploration of this phenomenon. To draw a more accurate picture of this entrepreneurial activity and the individuals involved, this dissertation explores and elucidates the concept of HE. In doing so, it takes as the focal point of its theoretical considerations the definition of HE outlined by Folta et al. (2010). According to this frequently used definition (e.g., Ferreira, 2020; Kuske et al., 2024; Marshall et al. 2019), the primary occupation must be wage employment, while self-employment is considered the secondary occupation. Apart from this condition, “hybrid entrepreneurship” is a relatively comprehensive term that does not consider time allocation between both jobs (Petrova, 2005, 2010a, 2010b, 2012) or the proportion of income generated from entrepreneurial activity (Mungaray and Ramirez-Urquidy, 2011). Yet this understanding of HE is nuanced enough to distinguish it from related concepts such as multiple job holding (MJH; Bouwhuis et al., 2017) and part-time entrepreneurship (Petrova, 2005, 2010a, 2010b, 2012). The initial study in this dissertation, a systematic literature review, demonstrates the significance of this delineation in facilitating conceptual and empirical progress in the research stream. The theoretical frameworks established in the second and third study within this dissertation examine the antecedents and outcomes of HE on the individual level. The analysis compares hybrid entrepreneurs with full-time entrepreneurs and places specific emphasis on periods of job transitions. In this context, HE is considered a two-staged process involving the initial transition from wage employment to HE, followed by the transition from HE to full-time entrepreneurship (Thorgren et al., 2016). The second study analyzes the impact of social capital by examining the existence and the occupational position of a hybrid entrepreneur’s life partner; this approach adopts a contextual perspective in considering the smallest micro-unit of the socio-economic environment, namely, the couple relationship (Özcan, 2011). The third study explores how HE, a status that enables an individual to test and learn about their entrepreneurial ability (Petrova, 2010a, 2010b; Wennberg et al., 2006) while requiring only modest initial commitments of time and capital (Raffiee and Feng, 2014), influences an individual’s well-being. Consequently, the study’s focus lies on the individual’s experience of satisfaction about starting and running an entrepreneurial venture (Wiklund et al., 2019). Well-being is an important outcome variable in entrepreneurship (Stephan, 2018), as it can influence persistence (e.g., Gorgievski et al., 2014; Patel and Thatcher, 2014; Wincent et al., 2008), firm performance (e.g., Ayala and Manzano, 2014), opportunity recognition (e.g., Gielnik et al., 2012; Rietveld et al., 2016), and work behavior (e.g., Foo et al., 2009; Laguna et al., 2016). The theoretical frameworks established in the second and third study aim to refine the profile of hybrid entrepreneurs, to reveal systematic differences between full-time and hybrid entrepreneurs, and to enhance the examination of causes and effects over time. Due to the novelty of the research stream, theory-driven data collection about HE is scarce (Kurczewska et al., 2020). Consequently, the first study—the systematic literature review—relies on already published studies as its foundational data source. The second and third study draw on data from the German Socio-Economic Panel (GSOEP), spanning the years 1984 to 2019. GSOEP is the largest wide-ranging representative panel study in Germany; it is conducted annually, with 30,000 respondents in approximately 10,000 households. It contains detailed information on demographics, employment, income, and satisfaction indicators. Furthermore, its panel structure allows researchers to exploit information for each year, to observe individuals over several waves, and thus to conduct longitudinal regression with fixed effects, as undertaken in the second and third study in this dissertation. The plausibility of the data is longitudinally validated, making it a reliable source for analysis. This dissertation has three main implications both for the theory and practice of HE. First, it emphasizes the critical importance of clearly distinguishing HE from related concepts through precise nomenclature and criteria. This distinction aids in evaluating the existing knowledge base and identifying areas where further research is needed. Secondly, the research findings indicate that for direct transitions, the presence of a life partner does not significantly affect the likelihood, for either gender, of entering entrepreneurship—although having a self-employed life partner appears to decrease that likelihood. For indirect transitions via HE, neither the presence nor the self-employment status of a life partner has a measurable effect. When analyzing genders separately, neither factor influences the direct transition. For indirect transitions via HE, having a life partner has no effect on either gender; however, the probability of indirect transition is higher for women with self-employed partners, an outcome not observed for men. Overall, the results indicate that the mere presence of a life partner does not significantly influence entrepreneurial transitions, whether direct or indirect. However, the self-employment status of the life partner does play a role. These results suggest that the influence of social capital within partnerships is nuanced and highlight the need to investigate additional factors that may affect job transitions. Finally, this dissertation provides evidence that different types of job transitions within the entrepreneurial context have varying effects on life, job, and leisure time satisfaction, at varying intensities. The findings show that transitioning from wage employment to HE is associated with a decline in job and life satisfaction, while leisure time satisfaction remains unaffected. Notably, the negative impact is significantly greater for job satisfaction than for life and leisure time satisfaction. In contrast, moving from wage employment to full-time entrepreneurship has a positive effect on job satisfaction but does not influence life or leisure time satisfaction. Also here, job satisfaction was found to be the most significantly affected outcome. These results highlight that well-being outcomes are distinctively shaped by the specific pathways into entrepreneurship. In conclusion, all three studies covered by this dissertation offer valuable insights by outlining the current state of knowledge and deepening the understanding of entrepreneurial behavior and the impact of hybrid entrepreneurs. This knowledge holds practical utility. Individuals engaged in HE can leverage these results to gain insights into the opportunities and risks associated with the hybrid path. For instance, they should be mindful of the potential dual burden that comes with this choice and its possible negative effects on job satisfaction. Additionally, although HE might allow for greater flexibility and a more mindful use of leisure time, it may not necessarily enhance leisure time satisfaction due to time constraints. Moreover, policies aimed at promoting entrepreneurship can draw on these studies to create tailored economic opportunities and legal frameworks. Since having a self-employed life partner decreases an individual’s inclination to pursue entrepreneurship directly, indicating a tendency toward risk diversification, policymakers could consider providing financial assistance, such as tax incentives or subsidies for self-employed couples, to help mitigate risk and uncertainty. Policy interventions are especially important given that hybrid entrepreneurs are more responsive than full-time entrepreneurs to regulatory changes (Schulz et al., 2016). Additionally, when the strength of downside risk aversion—also referred to as prudence—in entrepreneurship is sufficiently high, hybrid entrepreneurs tend to allocate more time to their side businesses during periods of increased risk as a precautionary measure to mitigate potential losses (Benitez et al., 2024). However, despite this increased time investment, elevated opportunity costs reduce hybrid entrepreneurs’ willingness to sustain their businesses during crises (Block et al., 2022). Because of this sensitivity, policy interventions strategically designed to ensure the resilience and continuity of hybrid businesses have the potential for significant success. In summary, this dissertation will assist researchers and practitioners in gaining insights into the unique dynamics of HE. On the individual level and when compared to self-employed individuals, it illuminates the intricate interplay of factors guiding hybrid entrepreneurs into this entrepreneurial journey and explores the consequences for their well-being. Thus, it fosters a more nuanced comprehension of the evolving landscape of entrepreneurship.

Research-Data-Policy of the University of Siegen Adopted by the Rectorate of the University of Siegen on March 30th 2017