Search results

Within the last two decades, entrepreneurship education has become institutionalized in Germany. It is offered as a stand-alone program or as part of a business degree, combining academic knowledge, practical skills, and personal development to enhance the entrepreneurial success of university graduates. While entrepreneurship education has experienced similar growth worldwide, its emergence in Germany is closely tied to the country’s political and economic developments. The significance of entrepreneurship education for a thriving entrepreneurial ecosystem and contemporary economic policy has been instrumental in advancing its academic recognition. This chapter provides a historical analysis of the academization of entrepreneurship in Germany. It explores the recursive and often idiosyncratic processes involving state and financial institutions, companies, and universities that have created, respecified, and mutually reinforced a subdiscipline and field of study. Academic entrepreneurship knowledge successively not only became relevant for starting a business but also for employment within the entrepreneurial infrastructure and beyond. This chapter follows a chronological order, highlighting three key stages in the academization of entrepreneurship education. First, the academic, financial, and political roots (I) of entrepreneurship up until the 1970s. Second, it explores the transformation (II) of entrepreneurship into a viable policy alternative and the challenges faced in establishing complementary research and education in higher education institutions during the 1980s. Finally, it sketches the institutionalization (III) of entrepreneurship as a central driver of government economic policy, allowing for the late bloom of entrepreneurship education and research at universities around the turn of the millennium.

This chapter uses the expertise literature (e.g., Ericsson et al., 2018; Ericsson & Pool, 2016) to explore ways that entrepreneurship education might be enhanced through the deliberate practice of specific entrepreneurial behaviors and cognitive skills. What is appealing about the use of expertise methods and theory is the application of very rigorous standards for improving behavioral and cognitive skills that are correlated to better outcomes. The authors suggest that an expertise approach challenges entrepreneurship educators to identify what aspects of the entrepreneurial process might be “deliberately practiced” and to consider modifying aspects of training entrepreneurs to better develop their entrepreneurial capabilities.

Most of us believe that entrepreneurs are special. We do this because both scholars and practitioners tell us so.

This study enriches the theory of effectuation by discussing the four independent dimensions of effectuation and their relationships with causation. Additionally, we fill the gap in prior literature by showing how entrepreneurial experience moderates the relationship between effectuation and innovativeness of the venture. Our study of 171 practising entrepreneurs regarding their entrepreneurial decision-making logic yielded multiple findings. The authors find that entrepreneurs rely on causation as well as effectuation in their decision-making; the more experienced entrepreneurs are, the more they actually use causation; and entrepreneurial experience moderates the relationship between effectuation and innovativeness of the venture firm.

A decade after the 2008 global financial crisis, economic growth is returning to many OECD countries and EU states. However, a “rising tide does not lift all boats” and there are currently 96.6 million people at risk of poverty and social exclusion in the EU (OECD, 2017). Addressing this concerning social situation, requires innovative approaches and it has been suggested that inclusive entrepreneurship may be part of the solution. Yet, many under-represented groups (in terms of entrepreneurial activity) face significant barriers to entrepreneurship. This research study identifies how Higher Education Institutions can utilise their multidisciplinary knowledge and expertise in partnership with government, industry and civil society to address the economic and social challenges within under-represented communities by engendering higher levels of enterprising behaviour. Emerging studies in the literature have demonstrated how some Higher Education Institutions are providing tailored and holistic enterprise support to under-represented groups in their communities. However, such initiatives are not common and there is little research on how other HEIs might replicate inclusive entrepreneurship initiatives. Through the presentation of a conceptual model, this chapter identifies how HEIs can move outside of their formal education setting and dynamically support the development of enterprising competencies and behaviours amongst people within their local communities. The findings highlight six key areas for consideration in such developments including: 1. Teaching and Learning; 2. Resources; 3. Infrastructure; 4. Multidisciplinary Approaches; 5. Stakeholders and 6. Culture. These findings highlight the requirements for impactful HEI-community engagement and suggest that HEI community engagement through entrepreneurial education is a novel way of adding value for both under-represented communities and HEIs.

So far, in Chapters 1 and 2, we have explored the scope and power of entrepreneurship in policing and criminal contexts, and in particular, entrepreneurial policing, as well as having examined the inherent cultural and organisational dynamics within the service which make its implementation problematic. In Chapter 3, the author looked at how the philosophy and practice of entrepreneurial leadership has initiated entrepreneurial change in respect of organisational governance; and, in Chapter 4, the author examined the related concept of criminal entrepreneurship and established that there is also an inherent entrepreneurial nature to crime and in particular organised crime. This inherent phenomenon is also present in ordinary disorganised crime. Accordingly, the author developed an enterprise-based ecosystem model of crime and discussed what this means in terms of the entrepreneurial organisational capabilities of the police and in turn how this affects how they interdict serious and organised crime. There is a palpable mismatch. In Chapters 5 and 6, the author turned to further explore how the service can inject entrepreneurial vigour into its structures, philosophies, and everyday practices, processes, and procedures by understanding the mismatch and taking steps to initiate change. In Chapter 7, the author draws the threads of the argument together by discussing the critical need for change and provide suggestions on how to overcome obstacles and difficulties. This will entail reversing the cultures of risk-aversion, anti-entrepreneurialism, anti-intellectualism and by learning to lead entrepreneurially. Policing is a complex social process which changes as a result of social pressures and political changes and accordingly the author briefly examines some important changes brought about by the global Covid-19 pandemic which may change the way the police in the twenty-first century. Finally, the author ends by considering how to move towards a more entrepreneurial future in policing and criminal contexts.

Literature has recognised entrepreneurship education as the main conduit through which entrepreneurial behaviours, attitudes and actions can be built, enacted and delivered. Since the founding of new ventures is largely a resourceful founder-driven enterprise, entrepreneurship education has largely centred on galvanising and shifting the mindsets and cognition of the entrepreneur. Yet, despite over 60 years of delivering entrepreneurship education programmes, hard evidence of the generation of high-growth-oriented and sustainable ventures has been scarce as student entrepreneurship intentions do not always translate into successful venture creation. This is largely because of the complexities of the practicality of entrepreneurial education particularly, the dissonance between acquired education in business schools and the knowledge and competencies needed in the entrepreneurial field. Such dissonance can be attributed to the lack of clarity on the pedagogical approach that most resonates with entrepreneurial action, the diversity in assessment methods and the scholarly illusion pertaining to how pedagogical approaches can be channelled to the generation of growth-oriented ventures. Drawing on Girox's concepts of transformative critical pedagogy (including pedagogy of repression), Socratic dialogue, Hegelian dialectic and Yrjö Engeström's transformative expansive agency, I demonstrate how a flipped transformative critical pedagogy can be harnessed in digitally enhanced learning environments to create new entrepreneurial possibilities for facilitating critical inquiry, complex problem-solving, innovation for the market and fostering tolerance for failure in ambiguous entrepreneurial contexts.

This study applies theoretical perspectives from urban, environmental, and organization studies to examine if “smart growth” represents an ecological restructuring of the political economy of conventional urban development, long theorized as a “growth machine” (Molotch, H. (1976) The city as growth machine: Toward a political economy of place. American Journal of Sociology, 82, 309–332; Logan & Molotch, 2007); the purpose is to determine if there is a “smart growth machine.”

Nine smart growth projects (SGPs) in four cities in California and Oregon were identified and semistructured interviews were held with the respective developers, architects, and civic officials involved in their implementation process. Comparative, descriptive, and grounded approaches were used to generate themes from interviews and other data sources.

The findings suggest that an ecological modernization of urban political economy occurs through the coordination of entrepreneurial action, technical expertise, and “smart” regulation. Individual and institutional entrepreneurs shift the organizational field of urban development. Technical expertise is needed to make projects sustainable and financially feasible. Finally, a “smart” regulatory framework that balances regulations and incentives is needed to forge cooperative relationships between local governments and developers. This constellation of actors and institutions represents a smart growth machine.

The author questions whether urban growth can become “smart” using an original study of nine SGPs in four cities across California and Oregon.

This chapter outlines a general framework for studying the entrepreneurial method. Simply put, what the scientific method has afforded us in terms of understanding the actual world we live in, the entrepreneurial method enables us in terms of making new ones. At least one key ingredient of the entrepreneurial method for worldmaking consists in the logic of effectuation identified through a decade long research program into the elements of entrepreneurial expertise. More specifically, given a world imbued with true uncertainty, the framework outlined here urges us to develop research streams focused on choosing between Type I and Type II errors in addition to ways of avoiding them altogether or finding the perfect Goldilocks balance between them.

In Chapter 1, a broad overview of the scope of entrepreneurialism in policing and criminal contexts which are broadly positive in nature was developed. In Chapter 2, the scrutiny to cover socio-cultural and organisational barriers to the implementation of entrepreneurial policing are extended. These include police culture, organisational traits such as ‘Machismo’ and ‘Conformism’, the restrictive nature of the police rank structure, the military model of policing, bureaucracy, risk-aversion, anti-entrepreneurialism, anti-intellectualism, the ‘Maverick’ stereotype, and the ‘Questioning Constable’. Many of these elements are of a negative nature and inhibit the implementation of entrepreneurial policing and practices. Also the entrepreneurial organisation and issues such as privatisation, commercialisation, innovation, and technology which also inhibit entrepreneurialism in policing contexts, but which also offer significant opportunities, are considered.