Hustle: A conceptual exploration of work at the margins

Nicolai C. Jepsen & Lauren Eaton

Management & Organizational History2025https://doi.org/10.1080/17449359.2025.2503154article
AJG 2ABDC C
Weight
0.44

What the paper says

The concept of hustle is integral to the relationship between entrepreneurship and evolving perceptions of ‘good’ work. However, the relationship between what is regarded as good work and how entrepreneurial language shapes that perception remains underexplored. Using the concept of hustle, we investigate how language has shaped the perceived legitimacy of different forms of work and, in turn, how these changing perceptions have reshaped the meaning and practice of hustle itself. By employing conceptual history methods, we trace the evolving uses and meanings of hustle in the United States from the late nineteenth century to the present. We demonstrate how societal contexts and deliberate discursive shifts have continuously reconfigured hustle’s boundaries to legitimize, stigmatize, and valorize what is considered legitimate and desirable work. We argue that hustle has been promoted as (1) emancipation for workers from adverse conditions, (2) a tool for removing stigma from nontraditional work, and (3) a means of sanctifying alternative work arrangements within entrepreneurial ideology. This study contributes to the literature on entrepreneurialism and to management scholarship on hustle as a theoretical construct.

3 citations

Open paper page →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/17449359.2025.2503154

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{nicolai2025,
  title        = {{Hustle: A conceptual exploration of work at the margins}},
  author       = {Nicolai C. Jepsen & Lauren Eaton},
  journal      = {Management & Organizational History},
  year         = {2025},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/17449359.2025.2503154},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

Hustle: A conceptual exploration of work at the margins

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.


Evidence weight

0.44

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.32 × 0.4 = 0.13
M · momentum0.57 × 0.15 = 0.09
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.