Search results

The purpose of this paper is to investigate, through practices and capabilities, how entrepreneurs use microfinance in a context of serious constraints.

The chosen methodology for this paper is longitudinal. A three-and-a-half-year study was conducted to be able to capture the entrepreneurial journeys of ten entrepreneurs at a micro-level in the developing economy of Ghana. This was augmented by a further 15 interviews with entrepreneurs and loan officers. This data is used to develop a theoretical model of entrepreneurial practices in this context.

The paper identifies two distinct pathways for understanding the recursive nature of entrepreneurial practices. It highlights how entrepreneurs generate capabilities through microfinance resources through convergent or divergent venturing in response to the serious constraints they face. This is identified as a generative recursive mechanism for the process, representing the “chain of actions” and how entrepreneurs engage with their “settings” and “intended relations” in practice.

The research is limited by its focus on one nation in Sub-Saharan Africa and therefore how the findings may be transferred to other contexts.

The paper contributes to a practice approach in entrepreneurship by identifying how mechanisms of practice relate to entrepreneurial action in this context. It also provides an important contribution to discussion at the intersection of entrepreneurship and the capabilities approach by using Amartya Sen's concepts of process and opportunity freedom to understand practices.

The purpose of this paper is to revisit the conceptualization and measurement of human capital in entrepreneurship research.

By contrasting reflective and formative conceptions, it shows that human capital is more appropriately seen as defined and formed by its indicators (education, work experience, entrepreneurial experience, industry experience, and managerial experience). It, then, explores the configurations of these indicators in a qualitative comparative analysis framework based on Boolean algebra and fuzzy-set methodology. It derives an empirical typology of the human capital of nascent entrepreneurs, based on two primary combinations of indicators.

The paper shows that the relationship between human capital and venture emergence is best represented as multiple, conjectural causation, i.e. human capital matters through certain combinations of its indicators.

The discussion and results offer novel and valuable insights into entrepreneurship researchers for the conceptualization and use of human capital constructs.

This paper aims to adopt a practice-theory, “site ontology” perspective to understand how venture capitalists (VCs) add value to their portfolio companies (PCs).

The empirical research involves a field ethnographic study of a VC firm in Dubai, focused on revealing what constitutes value and what VCs do to add this value to their PCs.

Value adding is a profoundly social, embedded process interconnected with other ecosystem actors, investment practices and organizations. The value adding threads of VC activity are part of a holistic configuration of practices that span the investment lifecycle and different levels within the firm.

This research contributes a rich account of the social, symbolic nature of VC activity, depicting the everyday activities that comprise value adding practices. It is among the first to introduce practice theory to the VC context and open up a new conversation about its social ontology.

Twenty-one years ago (1997), the entrepreneurial revolution, both academic and actual, was just beginning. Entrepreneurial opportunities represent both the core theoretical construct and the plethora of products, services, processes, and business models, which dramatically changed daily life. This chapter examines key developments, which have emerged in the scholarly investigation of the opportunity identification process during the intervening years: what fundamentally is an opportunity; what socio-cognitive processes are involved; what is the role of time, of meaning, of context; and finally, what is the relationship between the academic and practitioner. In addition, exemplary research work is highlighted and guidelines for future academic efforts are offered.

This chapter outlines a design-science perspective of entrepreneurship. It zooms in on the junction between present and future to distinguish entrepreneurship as a natural and as an artificial phenomenon. While the current study of entrepreneurship speaks to the former, it has been silent on the latter. The chapter discusses design as a distinct mode of research, opportunity as a design artifact, and the generative power of recursive action to make the case for problematizing entrepreneurial action as a focus of research. It then defines its research questions, discusses the logic and process for addressing them, and outlines the nature of research outputs.

The hallmark of the “European Approach to Entrepreneurship,” if there is such a thing, has been its diversity. European entrepreneurship research has been like Europe itself, a panoply of diverse ways of thinking, expressed in theories, methods, or research questions. Only when comparing European research to North American do observers find a semblance of commonality. For example, it appears that European researchers as a whole tend to use more fieldwork and qualitative analysis approaches than do their North American counterparts (e.g., Aldrich, 2000). However, this perhaps reflects a stronger academia-based and quantitative dominant research paradigm among North American researchers than among the diverse research traditions currently active in Europe.

Our focus on external growth and related competence development as a process required observing and jointly examining a large number of variables that influence growth processes and, in particular, the complex relationships among them (Huber & Van de Ven, 1995). The heterogeneity of the phenomenon requires rich and deep descriptions aimed at assessing the abstractions and generalizations that can be meaningfully attempted (Davidsson, 2005, p. 56).