Search results

The concept of “Thought Self‐Leadership” involves individual self‐influence through cognitive strategies that focus on self‐dialogue, mental imagery, beliefs and assumptions, and thought patterns. A plethora of studies from various fields including management, counseling psychology, sports psychology, education, and communication, address the effect of these Thought Self‐Leadership cognitive strategies on cognitions and behaviors. This research provides consistent support for the relationship between constructive self‐leadership of these cognitive processes and enhanced performance. The application of these cognitive strategies to the entrepreneurship domain, however, is sparse. We propose that the application of these principles to the entrepreneurial process offers the potential to enhance individual performance and mental states for both practicing and aspiring entrepreneurs. Propositions derived from the proposed framework are developed to serve as catalysts for empirically testing the applicability of Thought Self‐Leadership to the entrepreneurship context.

In this paper the authors aim to introduce a concept that they call the “entrepreneurial growth ceiling” (EGC). They develop arguments that new venture IPOs hit the EGC prior to their IPO, and the ceiling is part of the impetus for going public. The paper argues that proceeds from the IPO will aid firms in breaking through the ceiling if the proceeds are strategically allocated.

The study examines a cohort of firms that went public in the same year. The authors code data from the prospectuses of 366 organizations, including how proceeds were to be spent, and then add performance data post‐IPO.

The results from a longitudinal study of IPOs indicate that firms that allocate proceeds to human resources and innovation (research and development) are more likely to break through the EGC quickly and enhance long‐term stock performance.

Entrepreneurial firms will have higher success when investing money into their human resources (people) and in research and development (innovation). Given the current high rate of change in business, the authors expect these findings are even more relevant for not just IPOs but for all organizations going through change.

Organizations that support and fund entrepreneurship and new venture growth should consider expanding their training to include human resource management, in particular as it ties to innovation.

The entrepreneurial growth ceiling is a new concept introduced in this paper. This research has important implications for IPOs and other high‐growth organizations.

Research on corporate entrepreneurship (CE) has grown rapidly over the past decade (for reviews, see Dess et al., 2003). This interest in CE stems from rising international competition, requiring companies to learn new skills and develop new competencies (Eisemhardt & Santos, 2003). These competencies enable companies to compete in new market arenas both at home and internationally, creating value for shareholders (McGrath, MacMillan & Venkataraman, 1995). With more and more companies focusing on international expansion, recent research on CE has focused on examining international issues. Though most past research is comparative in nature, some has investigated companies’ international expansion as a forum within which CE activities unfold (Zahra & Garvis, 2000).

The history of the field of entrepreneurship and the entrepreneurship program at Saint Louis University is discussed, along with the descriptions of the Gateways to Entrepreneurship Conferences and the creation of the Advances in Entrepreneurship, Firm Emergence, and Growth (AEFEG) series given in relation to those national- and campus-level contexts. The growth and development of the AEFEG series is discussed and the editorial contributors are noted, which could be of use to those interested in editorial roles and processes. Based on these elements, the chapter concludes with observations on the field of entrepreneurship and some ideas about its future.

Arguably, one of the most unexpected findings of the Panel Study of Entrepreneurial Dynamics has been the discovery of higher levels of corporate entrepreneurship (CE) than expected. One entrepreneur in seven is starting a business for or with their current employers. Given the current numbers for independent start-ups, that rate translates into 150,000 corporate entrepreneurship efforts annually in the USA. Another way to think of it is that in terms of firms with employees, corporate entrepreneurial ventures represent one-quarter of new start-ups each year. Those efforts also potentially represent a disproportionate percentage of surviving efforts, because corporate entrepreneurial projects tend to have superior initial access to financial, human and organizational resources than the vast majority of independently started firms.