Search results

This exploratory study examines differences in opportunity recognition by industry. A sample of 142 entrepreneurs completed a detailed questionnaire. Certain differences by industry were in the product, firm and respondents’ characteristics as well as in opportunity recognition processes, especially in regards to innovation and level of creativity. In addition, there was a very clear, significant relationship between level of creativity and the number of opportunities identified and pursued across industries. The implications of this is that future research that involves creativity, such as using the creativity‐based model provided by Lumpkin et al. (2003), should include industry in the analysis.

A group of researchers met in Charleston, South Carolina, USA to discuss the past and future of the marketing/entrepreneurship interface. The purpose of this paper is to summarize main discussions from the three‐day summit.

Roughly 16 hours of presentations and discussions were digitally recorded. The lead author reviewed the recordings making copious notes, which were organized into 17 themes for further analysis. Future research directions based on discussion around the most poignant themes are reported.

The paper presents nine categories of discussions around the interface including: the four research perspectives; “the future is in the past;” marketing; entrepreneurship; small business marketing; entrepreneurial marketing; practical significance; context of research; and modeling.

Throughout the nine sections, this paper highlights considerations for future research. It suggests that scholars conducting research at the interface consider the theoretical perspective of their research to improve collective theory building and better positioning. It suggests that scholars also consider the firm and industry context of their empirical research. Finally, it suggests a number of research questions.

The paper suggests that during the research design phase, scholars make efforts to consider the practical significance that will result from their research. In particular, they should consider that research in start‐ups (all businesses start somewhere) and small businesses (the vast majority of all enterprises) can have widespread impacts.

This paper provides a unique approach to conceptually organizing marketing/entrepreneurship interface research and provides an abundant source of ideas for future research.

This paper seeks to detail an exploratory examination of a multidimensional, creativity‐based theoretical model of opportunity recognition originally proposed by Hills et al. and later refined by Lumpkin et al., but never empirically tested. The paper also aims to examine the relationship between individual dimensions of the model and creativity.

Analyses were conducted using AMOS software on a sample of 145 entrepreneurs. One structural equation model (SEM) and three confirmatory factor analysis models were tested.

The five‐dimensional model – consisting of preparation, incubation, insight, evaluation, and elaboration – was determined to be the best fitting model. The SEM model also indicated that incubation and elaboration were significantly related to creativity. Overall, a multidimensional, creativity‐based approach to modeling opportunity recognition is supported by this study.

Cross‐sectional data do not allow for testing of the process aspect of the model; however, they do provide evidence that the model can stand up to empirical tests of the five elements of the model. Future research should examine opportunity using multiple dimensions and a creativity perspective. Additional research is needed to examine the process aspects of opportunity recognition.

Fostering opportunity recognition processes that are iterative and involve multiple stages is likely to promote more creative entrepreneurial outcomes.

This study provides one of the few examples of a multidimensional perspective on opportunity recognition as well as an empirical examination of a creativity‐based theoretical model of opportunity recognition.

The purpose of this exploratory study is to examine the development of entrepreneurial opportunities within the context of environmentally‐sustainable business. The “4P” creativity framework (person, process, press/situation, and product) was used.

Three cases were used to examine opportunity development. Each case involved an entrepreneur in the process of starting a new environmentally‐friendly business. The entrepreneurs were interviewed on a weekly basis.

Findings suggest that the 4Ps are useful framework for examining entrepreneurial opportunity development. Furthermore, they are strongly interrelated.

Given their inherent creative nature, a creativity perspective is useful for examining opportunities. Additionally, the findings suggest that future research should consider the interaction within the constellation of creative factors – person, process, press and product – when using a creativity perspective.

This study provides one of the few accounts of the development of entrepreneurial opportunities in which data were collected contemporaneously.

If we are to better understand what it means to think “sustainably,” the entrepreneurship literature suggests that entrepreneurial cognition offers us two powerful tools. Human cognition operates with two nearly parallel systems for information processing, intentional and automatic. Entrepreneurial cognition has long focused on how entrepreneurial thinking and action are inherently intentional. Thus, intentions-based approaches are needed to understand how to encourage the identification of actionable sustainable opportunities. But first, however, we need to address key elements of our automatic processing, anchored on deep assumptions and beliefs. In short, if sustainable entrepreneurship is about addressing sustainable opportunities, then before we can take advantage of research into entrepreneurial intentions, we need a better understanding of how we enact our deep mental models of constructs such as “sustainable.”