Search results

This paper aims to discuss how over the past 180 years, a succession of largely unrelated entrepreneurs of differing capabilities have either created or recognised and exploited opportunities offered by this enduring company, their heritage and brand.

Primary data was provided from discussions with Fabergé experts and the new owners of the brand. Extensive secondary data was also used and analysed.

The original Fabergé creations numbered some 200,000, but their creator is remembered best for 65 unique Imperial (and other) Eggs. Many pieces have survived, although the business disappeared in 1917. Since then, dealers and collectors have intervened symbiotically to protect the brand equity – supported by serendipitous popular cultural interventions – although a series of parallel entrepreneurial but parasitic interventions meant the brand and the original products became separated. This changed in 2007 with new owners acquiring the brand and resurrecting high-end jewellery production with a new business model. Their contemporary journey is both informed and shaped by Fabergé’s tumultuous past.

Reinforces that while a universal theory of entrepreneurship eludes us that these three key elements – opportunity, uncertainty and resources – help explain the related behaviour of a series of different intervening entrepreneurs. This framework is offered for wider use and testing.

Advances the understanding of how entrepreneurs spot and enact opportunity.

Develops a model embracing parasitic and symbiotic interventions in the history of a brand, and a conceptual entrepreneurial model capturing three key elements that explain entrepreneurial behaviour. These being: opportunity seeking and exploitation, addressing uncertainty and deploying appropriate resources.

Lilliput Lane, based on the edge of the English Lake District, manufactures a range of miniature plaster cottages which are marketed to customers throughout the world, many of whom are committed collectors. This case study traces the early growth of the company in the 1980s, its subsequent setbacks, a successful turn‐around, followed by a flotation and sale in the 1990s. It focuses on the issues of strategic leadership, stakeholder expectations, core competencies, adding value, diversification and focus strategies. Lilliput Lane has been written for the purpose of class discussion. It should not be taken to reflect either effective or ineffective management.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the provision and reported outcomes of Experiential Entrepreneurship Education (EEE), from learner, educator and university perspectives, in order to reflect upon the progress of the Entrepreneurial University. It proposes a conceptual framework for integrating the multiple stakeholder perspectives for an “education led” and student-focused Entrepreneurial University, something yet to be identified from existing research and, consequentially, future research.

A reflective literature review explores the depth and breadth of EEE provision in Universities, noting: what is taking place, who is involved, where EEE is situated (within the university context), and how the knowledge base is informed. From these reflections, a conceptual framework is proposed as a means of exploring and categorizing progress towards a student-focused Entrepreneurial University through education experiences.

The literature review is largely informed by case studies developed by educators reflecting on student learner experiences for the purpose of course enhancement. These case exemplars provide the resource for emergent, bottom-up strategy that could support the Entrepreneurial University. However, the role of the University is less researched, in terms of providing context and external strategic relationships to resource EEE and deliver a more planned approach to the Entrepreneurial University. The Entrepreneurial University and EEE are mainstream agendas and the development of both must consider the role and contribution of the University in terms of strategy formulation and implementation.

This study takes a holistic view, seeing EEE and the Entrepreneurial University as connected agendas. The student-focused Entrepreneurial University cannot result from emergent, bottom-up strategy alone and thus there is a need to address the role of top-down resource-based University strategy in creating real progress. The paper provides a conceptualization, for the purpose of analysing and informing the relationship between EEE and the Entrepreneurial University that places the University as a key stakeholder, and in doing so asks that scholars and educators build the knowledge base not only from cases of good practice but also from the review of strategic management within Universities.

Little is known about how experiential entrepreneurship education approaches contribute toward enhancing the engagement of students in the learning process. Using a purposive and convenience sample of individual student reflective journals, the purpose of this paper is to critically evaluate how the process of constructive misalignment enhances the level of student engagement through a team-based experiential entrepreneurship education assessment.

Data were gathered from a purposive and convenience sample of reflective journals, an individual “performance assessment” element of three Masters-level courses (courses 1, 2 and 3) that included an “active” group business ideas generation presentation and a report. These texts were analyzed through content analysis that critically evaluates and summarizes the content of data and their messages.

While expected learning outcomes included teamwork and communication, the higher levels of active learning and student engagement related to innovation and generating a business idea was much more modest. Rather, the study finds that significant learning opportunities were apparent when students experienced unexpected aspects of constructive misalignment, such as linguistic–cultural challenges, nonparticipation and freeriding.

Building on Biggs’ (2003) model of constructive alignment in course design and delivery/assessment, this paper elucidates various unexpected and surprising aspects. It suggests that constructive misalignment could provide major learning opportunities for students and is thus more likely in these team contexts where entrepreneurship students experience constructive misalignment. Educators should, therefore, continue to design experiential entrepreneurship courses and their performance assessments through team-based approaches that achieve higher levels of engagement as well as more active learning.

Reinforces the need for organisations to seek appropriate measures of corporate and competitive performance. Develops a cause‐manifestations‐outcomes model to embrace the relevant issues and possible measures. Discusses the relative value of various financial, stakeholder, admiration, reputation and corporate logic approaches. Concludes with a holistic framework from which organisations can select an appropriate and comprehensive set of measures.

Discusses the terms entrepreneur and entrepreneurship, emphasises the economic and social importance of entrepreneurs and summarises key research findings to produce a model of outcomes and capital created by entrepreneurs. Shows how entrepreneurs can be found in many walks of life, not just business, and explains that they are responsible for creating social and artistic capital as well as financial wealth. Concludes with reflections on the challenges faced, in part by educationalists, in trying to develop both more entrepreneurs and more enterprise in organisations.

Considers aspects of change in large retail organizations. Debates the apparent dilemma posed, on the one hand, by the opportunities for using information technology to improve efficiency and centralize decision making, and, on the other hand, the case being argued by a number of management “gurus” for increasing the empowerment of front‐line managers. Develops a simple analytical framework for considering the issues, and isolates the important variables involved in the decision.

People who start new businesses vary in the degree of entrepreneurial talent and temperament they possess. The same is true of strategic leaders and intrapreneurs inside large organisations, where entrepreneurial people are required to champion the change agenda in dynamic and turbulent environments. These issues can be explored in the context of six key entrepreneur character themes, or natural and instinctive behaviours. Techniques help, but alone they cannot compensate for missing characteristics. Without the important entrepreneur characteristics, survival and growth rates are lower. This paper outlines a new framework for identifying entrepreneurs and describes the research programme through which the model has been validated.

The purpose of this paper is to discuss social enterprises, social entrepreneurship and social entrepreneurs. The paper draws on published work to flag key issues and discussion points that affect the clarity of the understanding. It aims to provide some greater insight and help both scholars and practitioners in their respective quests for understanding and improvement. The paper could further help people clarify what needs to be covered on courses and degrees in this subject area.

The paper draws on the work of others and to this adds personal conclusions from both direct experience and observation. It attempts to deal with complex issues and tensions in a straightforward style and thus draw attention to key debates.

The central argument is that if we see social enterprises, social entrepreneurship and social entrepreneurs bound together, operating with a common purpose and approach and pursuing the same ends, then we misunderstand this critically important sector. They are clearly linked but there are important distinctions.

This is a conceptual discussion paper. It is not directly a research paper and it is not written to either present the findings of a specific project or to inform a future research agenda. It could well‐trigger ideas for researchers, however.

The core material for this paper is not original but the presentation, synthesis and arguments offer a distinctive treatment. They should help clarify some of the debates and issues that hamper our ability to clearly understand the world of social enterprises.

Reinforces the argument that strategic and competitive success demands competence at three levels: content, change and learning. Notes that to achieve this, organizations must draw on a range of generic competences and develop an appropriate mix and measure, and that if they can achieve this they can become both competent and conscious of why they are competent and successful. Points out that this demands effective information management at a number of distinct levels, and the ability of the organization to manage both continuous and discontinuous change. Comments that the latter requires double‐loop learning and involves all members of the organization together with its external stakeholders, and that strategy, structure and style may need to be changed simultaneously. Concludes that the process of competence management must be underpinned by robust measurement, and that while organizations actively measure resource efficiencies, the extent to which they seek to measure all their strategic competences remains an issue.