Search results

This paper comments on Allan Gibb’s keynote address to the Small Business and Enterprise Conference earlier this year reproduced in this issue of the Journal. Gibb offers a critical assessment of the ways in which small business theory and research and policy making have handled the transfer of ideas as a basis for small business support policies. The arguments offered are hard hitting and persuasive, especially as an explanation for the poor record of support programmes in transitional economies. This response extends Gibb’s arguments, drawing out some implications. For instance, one of his themes is that small business theorising and research needs to give more attention to cultural and non‐economic phenomena, and this paper suggests ways in which this needs to occur. It concludes that, by accepting Gibb’s arguments, policy making would be more effective and small business theorising and research would be stronger, achieving closer relations with other social science disciplines.

This paper seeks to demonstrate that a truly learner‐centred enterprise education programme can be developed within a traditional business school environment.

This paper unites the broad teaching philosophy of Alfred Whitehead with that of Allan Gibbs's enterprise specific teaching philosophies to consider the fitness of the recently developed hic et nunc enterprise framework. This is largely achieved by testing the framework for constructive alignment.

It is argued that the hic et nunc framework is consistent with the philosophies of both Whitehead and Gibb. Further, the framework illustrates a process through which enterprise education programmes can be developed independently of any pressures to conform to more traditional pedagogy.

Through careful consideration of the process of constructive alignment, an analytical approach to developing and/or refining an enterprise education program exists. Importantly, it represents an approach that is explicitly learner‐centred, and therefore free from the constraints of the environment within which the programme is delivered.

This paper brings to life the wonderful ideas of the great philosopher, Alfred Whitehead, combining them with the contemporary ideas of Allan Gibb. In doing so, the complementary nature of their thoughts helps to illustrate the minimal requirements of a learner‐centred approach to enterprise education.

The paper focuses upon the issue of the transfer of ideas between countries and cultures in the field of small and medium enterprise (SME) development. It argues that there has been a neglect of such work in academe. Yet there has been a growing import into the UK of ideas from abroad (mainly from the US). There has also been an extensive export particularly to Transition economies. The results in both respects have been less than satisfactory. There is also greater opportunity for ideas transfer via the new communication technologies. The European Commission is particularly active in the field of transfer. There is therefore a strong case for greater academic interest. The paper explores the concept of transfer by posing four questions: (1) What does the notion of transfer mean? (2) Where are the academic challenges in such processes? (3) Where might there be opportunities for transfer in the future of relevance to UK SME development? (4)How and where might we begin to address the issue? In addressing question one, six key areas are identified: ideology transfer; concept/paradigm transfer; benchmarking; institutional development; programme transfer; and transfer of process insights. The second question looks at the academic challenge through the lens of a number of problems, including those of ideology, culture, language, concept, context, agency, reasoning and rationality, agenda, field of production, and customer. Each of these areas is defined, and examples are given of the kinds of problems that arise and their impact. The third question is addressed by a short and speculative review of possibilities for transfer of ideas to the UK relating to the broad areas of policy, institution development and assistance to SME development. The final question is approached by a brief review of the potential for action by journal editors, academic groups and policy makers.

This study aims to examine the design of effective support systems for micro‐, small‐ and medium‐sized enterprise (MSME) development at the local and regional level in China.

The paper calls on the experience of China, in fostering the fastest growing MSME sector in the world over the past 20 years, to suggest a paradigm based upon the Chinese guanxi model of relationships.

The paper argues that the extensive international experience has not been massively successful and that the application of a stricter market‐led approach to the provision of MSME business development services will not be successful if it ignores the way that western “institutionalism” dictates the supply offer.

It is argued that the model of entrepreneurial networking and relationships demands a fundamental repositioning of policy support and a major reorganisation of the way that knowledge is made explicit and disseminated to MSMEs.

The paper explores what is termed as a stakeholder relationship model for the entrepreneur, the policy maker and the local delivery agent.

This paper aims to explore a range of conceptual and practical challenges faced in delivering an innovative programme targeted at staff of UK higher Education (HE) and further education (FE) institutions. The two major foci of the programme are: on the pedagogies and organization of knowledge required to provide a true “feel” for the life world, values and ways of behaving of entrepreneurs in very different academic disciplinary contexts; and on strategically and operationally making things happen in the participant institution.

The paper is action research‐focused. Its aim is to explore the validity of a concept of entrepreneurship and entrepreneurship education which is truly interdisciplinary. It tests out in practice a “Mastery” model of an entrepreneurship educator in HE and FE.

The basic structure of the model is found to be appropriate as is its social constructionist view of education upon which it is founded. Importantly it values learning through practice, which may not be a total reflection of what is taught on the programme, equally with the application of programme knowledge.

The conceptual model and resultant programme are arguably unique in their total focus on behaviours in different organizational and disciplinary contexts.

The relationship between education and training and the currently popular theme of “enterprise culture” is explored. The expression “enterprise culture”, is at present ill‐defined, if defined at all. The confusions surrounding this expression relate in turn to the failure to make proper distinctions between entrepreneurship, enterprise and small business. These terms are defined in this context, as well as “intrapreneur”. Entrepreneurs are defined in terms of a set of attributes, some of which can be measured. Small business is defined in terms of ownership and task structure. Enterprise is seen to be something that means the exercise of entrepreneurial attributes in a wide range of different situations. Intrapreneurship is the exercise of entrepreneurial attributes within a large company or bureauracy. The relationship between these redefined concepts is explored and the issue of whether entrepreneurship can be socially engineered through education and training is addressed. A definition of what constitutes “enterprise culture” is then related to education and training. This link is discussed, both in general terms and particularly in respect of university and management education. It is argued that many of the values and structures pervading in university education and university business schools may be the antithesis of entrepreneurship. In this respect, the links between entrepreneurship as practised in small business and as fostered under the “intrapreneurship” banner in large companies is explored. Finally, policy objectives in fostering entrepreneurship, small business and intrapreneurship, particularly in respect of education and training, are reviewed.

Great effectiveness in support of technological product and market development of small firms may be produced by programmes which are local, easily accessed, time efficient, understandable, informal, personal, visible, credible, accepted, opportunity and problem oriented, trustworthy, cheap and integrated, in that they may combine advice, consultancy, training, financial provision and provision of premises. Current assistance fails to identify existing deficiencies of firms, fails to recognise that different types of support are needed at different stages and fails to realise that scaled down versions may not be appropriate. Better qualified personnel need to be employed and managerial development is necessary to cope with new technology. Support for marketing should be an integral part of the support.

This paper aims to introduce current debates on assessment practice in higher education and to explore educational research on assessment.

The paper progresses by exploring a number of outcomes and highlights their role in helping one to understand the potential reasons for engaging in enterprise education. The paper then applies this outcomes framework to assessment practice. It does so by reporting a series of focus groups undertaken at the International Small Business and Entrepreneurship (ISBE) Conference in 2005.

The focus groups engaged over 40 entrepreneurship and small business academics in a brainstorming exercise, which explored forms of assessment that could be used to meet particular outcomes in enterprise education. These results are presented according to different potential entrepreneurial outcomes.

The concluding part of the paper categorises these practices to develop and present the views of the participants and it provides a detailed analysis of assessment practice in enterprise education.

This article provides an overview of the changing pattern of education and training for small business in the UK (in so far as such training is carried out in the education sector). The article is divided into two parts. Part I provides an overview of the key factors influencing training provision in the UK, in particular the growth of official policies of support for small firms development. It then reviews the overall needs that might be met by programmes for small business and postulates a model based on the career cycle for consideration of teaching and training opportunities. Part II, to be published later, surveys the management problems that the education sector faces in coming to terms with small business and discusses how these might be overcome. The evidence for this is based on a 1982 survey of teachers who have attended the UK Small Business Management Teachers Programme. This programme, which has been operating since 1977, is presently run by a consortium of Trent Polytechnic, Central London Polytechnic, London Business School and Durham University Business School. The programme aims to encourage the systematic development of the response of the education sector in the UK to the needs of the smaller business.

What is “enterprise culture?” How can organisations benefit from this new ideology and its consequent practices?