Search results

Entrepreneurship is an emerging and evolving field of inquiry. Entrepreneurship research has been expanding its boundaries by exploring and developing explanations and predictions of entrepreneurship phenomena in terms of events such as innovation, new venture creation and growth as well as characteristics of individual entrepreneurs and entrepreneurial organizations. The largest institutionalized community of entrepreneurship scholars – the Entrepreneurship Division of the Academy of Management – has developed an entrepreneurship specific domain that incorporates the creation and management of new businesses, small businesses and family businesses, and the characteristics and special problems of entrepreneurs; it has further identified major topics such as new venture ideas and strategies, ecological influences on venture creation and demise, the acquisition and management of venture capital and venture teams, self-employment, the owner-manager, management succession, corporate venturing, and the relationship between entrepreneurship and economic development. One growing entrepreneurship research sub-field is corporate entrepreneurship (intrapreneurship), i.e. entrepreneurship in existing organizations. Emerging in the past two decades, the initial research in corporate entrepreneurship focused on new business venturing, i.e. the formation of new ventures by existing organizations, mostly corporations, and the focus on the entrepreneurial individual inside a corporation – this focus was then extended to include entrepreneurial characteristics at the organizational level. Corporate entrepreneurship research has evolved into three focal areas. The first area of focus is on the individual intrapreneur (Jennings, Cox & Cooper, 1994; Jones & Butler, 1992; Knight, 1989; Lessem, 1988; Luchsinger & Bagby, 1987; McKinney & McKinney, 1989; Pinchot, 1985; Ross, 1987; Souder, 1981), mainly emphasizing the intrapreneur’s individual characteristics. The recognition and support of entrepreneurs in organizations is also a part of this focal area. The second area of focus has been on the formation of new corporate ventures (Burgelman, 1985; Carrier, 1994; Cooper, 1981; Fast & Pratt, 1981; Hisrich & Peters, 1984; Hlavacek & Thompson, 1973; Krueger & Brazeal, 1994; MacMillan, Block & Narasimha, 1984; Szypersky & Klandt, 1984; Vesper, 1990); this area’s primary emphasis is on the different of types of new ventures, their fit with the corporation, and their enabling corporate internal environment. The third area of focus is on the entrepreneurial organization (Burgelman, 1983; Drucker, 1985; Duncan et al., 1988; Hanan, 1976; Kanter, 1984; Kuratko et al., 1993; Merrifield, 1993; Muzyka, de Konning & Churchill, 1995; Pinchot, 1985; Quinn, 1979; Rule & Irwin, 1988; Schollhammer, 1981; Stevenson & Jarillo, 1990; Stopford & Baden-Fuller, 1994), which mainly emphasizes the characteristics of these organizations.

This chapter introduces the two main topics of ‘entrepreneurial policing’ and ‘criminal entrepreneurship’ and begins in Section 1.1 by considering the concept and scope of entrepreneurial policing around which this monograph is organised. Its definition and ontological development are considered. Thereafter, the author briefly discuss what entrepreneurship is (and is not) and set out examples of entrepreneurship of interest to policing, including – ‘Corporate’ and ‘Team’ Entrepreneurship, ‘Intrapreneurship’, ‘Social Entrepreneurship and Animateurship’, ‘Civic Entrepreneurship’, and ‘Public Service Entrepreneurship’. The author then discusses why entrepreneurship is of critical importance to the police service and discuss worked examples. Having developed a basic understanding of the power and utility of entrepreneurship, then in more detail what the term entrepreneurial policing means and how it evolved in practice and in the academic literature are considered. In Section 1.2, the foundations of entrepreneurial policing considering its ontological and epistemological development from ‘New Public Management’ to ‘New Entrepreneurialism’ and also the influence of the merging literatures of ‘Criminal Entrepreneurship’ and ‘Entrepreneurial Leadership’ are critically examined. In Section 1.3, our consideration to include a more nuanced understanding of the what is referred to as the ‘Entrepreneurship–Policing Nexus’ including consideration of the influence of dyslexia on policing and crime and the power of the ‘Entrepreneurial’ and ‘Gangster’ dreams on entrepreneurial motivation and propensity are expanded. In Section 1.4, an attempt is made to identify who the stakeholders of this new policing philosophy are? Finally, in Section 1.5, the chapter takeaway points which both articulates and confirms the inherent importance of entrepreneurship in policing and criminal contexts are discussed and detailed.

This chapter covers intrapreneurship, ecopreneurship, and digitalization, and presents qualitative research findings on eco-innovations and digitalization in Slovenia. Eco-innovations and digitalization are important aspects of intrapreneurship and the performance of existing companies. Practices of the participating company in circular economy and eco-innovations and digitalization are presented and discussed.

The aim of this chapter is to present social entrepreneurship as the main driver of poverty alleviation in emerging economies. The concept is aimed at providing innovative solutions to unresolved social problems; a transformative and sustainable, innovative market solutions towards addressing societal problems.

Literature review was conducted on conceptual issues relating to boost entrepreneurship and economic development within the context of emerging economies and its connection to tourism.

This chapter identifies opportunities to resolve social unjust equilibrium by developing a value chain proposition and bringing creativity to forge a stable equilibrium in the market place. The rationale behind lies in a solution to alleviate poverty by creating an environment that encourages job creation. Social entrepreneurship is not a science as such but a multi-disciplinary that intends to equip people with business competencies and skills.

This chapter is explorative in nature, based on a literature review.

Social entrepreneurship is a practical response to unmet societal needs with a globalised business environment. It values corporations and introduces the concept of social entrepreneurship. The chapter also suggests a linkage between various research fields, such as entrepreneurship, corporate entrepreneurship and intrapreneurship.

The chapter analyses frameworks and models, as well as the disruptions driven by the fourth industrial revolution, evolving challenges and opportunities in the fields of business and employment.

This chapter introduces the term “interpreneurship” to refer to entrepreneurship that occurs through inter-organizational alliances, which represent a salient vehicle for combining complementary resources and capabilities across firms in order to gain a competitive advantage. The interpreneurship concept implies the integration of internal (firm) and external (network) resources through alliance formation and management. The purpose of this research is to introduce social structure to the rational action paradigm by examining the complementarity of entrepreneurial and relational resources in achieving organizational goals in an alliance context. In this study, interpreneurial capability is operationalized as the combination of entrepreneurial resources (via an internal growth strategy) with relational resources (via an external growth strategy). These effects are assessed through the examination of three competing research models. The hypothesized interaction-only model tests the impact of complementarity of entrepreneurial and relational resources on firm-level performance for both partners to an alliance. A second model tests relational resources as a mediator of the relationship between entrepreneurial resources and the alliance partners’ performance. Finally, a third model assumes that the two resources have independent effects on the alliance partners’ performance. We find that the interaction-only model yields the strongest relationship to organizational performance, supporting the interpreneurial perspective we proffer in this chapter.

First things first: being an entrepreneur is not all glory, flexible hours, and being the owner of your own time. As a matter of fact, it is quite the opposite, at least in the early years. The stories we read about successful entrepreneurs are quite compelling and cause an urge and desire in people to pursue that kind of life. What is often left out of those great stories and news are all the businesses that have failed along the way. The odds of being one of those renowned entrepreneurs are extremely low. This is not to dissuade people of starting his or her own business, but for them to be aware of the reality and challenges of starting a new business. This chapter will focus on the different types of entrepreneurship.

Entrepreneurial education is gaining traction in Ghana. The purpose of this chapter was to assess the influences of social enterprises in promoting entrepreneurial education, using Ghanaian social enterprises as a case study. The study adopted a qualitative research approach. A multiple case study analysis examined the influences of social enterprises in Ghana. Four in-depth qualitative case studies offer insight into social enterprise practices. Sustainability, innovation, control and employment issues stand out as key effects of Ghanaian social enterprise practices. The social practice theory framework is used to draw the linkages of the structure and agency relationships. Sustainability emerges as the most dominant impact of social enterprise practice followed by innovation, control and employment. These four descriptive terms summarise the universal effects of Ghanaian social enterprises' practices. The study identifies and assesses the role of social enterprises in social entrepreneurial education in addressing social ills and environmental challenges facing Ghana. The emphasis placed on each of the identified four constructs describes the plausible roles of Ghana's social enterprises in achieving productive entrepreneurship through entrepreneurship education. The result shows the pursuit of multiple practices is a common feature of social enterprises. The limitations of the study stem from methodological approach as it is qualitative approach bias and a single country case. Likewise, the subjectivities of the samples direct the results of the study. The study draws the attention of stakeholders and policymakers to the goodwill of social entrepreneurship education in Ghana. Many studies have been conducted on entrepreneurial education in the contextual setting of this study. This present study focused on the practices of social enterprises in Ghana that influences entrepreneurial education.

The concept of entrepreneurial orientation (EO) attracts considerable attention in the organizational literature. Focusing on issues related to measurement of EO and using a three-pronged framework to organize the growing diversity of EO measures, the authors conduct a systematic literature review on how EO is captured and assessed in the empirical literature. Specifically, the authors classify 551 empirical works according to the approach to measurement (i.e., managerial perceptions, content analysis, and resource allocations) which allows the authors to document and critically analyze prevalent measurement practices within the literature. Based on the synthesis, the authors identify key measurement-related tensions that may inhibit cumulative knowledge development in the area of EO, such as ad hoc modification of seminal scales and lack of theoretical clarity with respect to measurement. Additionally, the authors find that research into the antecedents of EO as well as causality and temporality of the phenomenon is underdeveloped, which the authors attribute to scarce use of mixed methods. The authors conclude chapter by discussing the challenges involved in measuring EO and offering possible recommendations for future inquiry.

Purpose – The purpose of this chapter is to study how dimensions of entrepreneurial orientation (competitive aggressiveness, proactiveness and risk taking) affect international performance in competitive and technology-intensive international environments.

Methodology/approach – To address the research questions, structural equation modelling is applied to Finnish survey data (N=271).

Findings – Our findings reveal that the dimensions of entrepreneurial orientation are differentially related to international performance, and that their effect is contingent on moderating variables.

Research limitations – One limitation is the use of cross-sectional data as it limits the possibility of drawing strong conclusions from the development of the relationships between the different constructs. Also the fact that the study was conducted in a single-country setting is a limitation.

Practical implications – Results indicate that entrepreneurial behaviour is of importance for international business managers. However, results imply that prior to striving for proactive behaviour, competitive aggressiveness and venturesome risk taking managers should study their international market environments carefully and truly understand the nature of these turbulent markets, as in many occasions strong emphasis on entrepreneurial behaviour did not contribute positively to the international performance indicators, such as increasing sales and profits.

Originality/value of the chapter – Present study extends the works of Zahra and Garvis (2000), Lumpkin and Dess (2001) and Wiklund and Shepherd (2005), for example, by (a) applying entrepreneurial orientation on international business, (b) examining the effects of different dimensions of entrepreneurial orientation on a firm's international performance and (c) extending the research of the role of moderating effects on the relationship between entrepreneurial orientation and firm performance.