Search results

The purpose of this paper is to contribute a deeper understanding of how natural disasters influence entrepreneurial intentionality as an important antecedent of entrepreneurial intention. It reviews the conceptual and operational backgrounds of natural disaster research and entrepreneurship theories and formulates a distinctive conceptual approach to entrepreneurial intentions in natural disaster settings.

An exhaustive review of research articles published in peer-reviewed entrepreneurship journals is provided and focuses on entrepreneurship, natural disasters, and entrepreneurial opportunities.

Six propositions about the influence of natural disasters on entrepreneurial intentions in ways that are distinct to the specific circumstances of post-disaster environments.

The paper’s findings serve as a useful foundation for future research of post-disaster entrepreneurial behavior. The propositions highlight the relationship between opportunities, self-efficacy, feasibility, desirability, fear of failure, and resilience that complement macro-level research with micro-level antecedents. Implications entail new methodological avenues for future studies of humanitarian and post-disaster entrepreneurial activities.

This paper suggests ways in which public policy and educational, state and community programs can be designed and executed so that entrepreneurial intentions are developed and entrepreneurial action is not hindered. Moreover, it clarifies several ways to achieve more effective action (or inaction) to serve those affected by natural disasters and minimize disaffection.

The study illustrates that natural disasters can and do create opportunities for entrepreneurial behavior even as they generate powerful and sweeping negative effects on socioeconomic systems. Its unique approach explores individual-level variables concerning intent and motivation that drive entrepreneurial decisions in disaster contexts.

Social enterprises are defined in practice in terms of one operational model generating measurable value in more than one of the economic, social and natural/ecological value denomination categories. However, entrepreneurship theory does not generally or explicitly reflect this definition, which has generated confusion about the social enterprise concept. The purpose of this paper is to contribute to social enterprise theory by delineating novel aspects of this definition and their conceptual ramifications.

The authors review the social enterprise literature with a focus only on the most original contributions and most distinct research questions. The authors do not explicitly review research on traditional for-profit entrepreneurial ventures, not-for-profit/non-governmental organizations or mainstream social entrepreneurial ventures.

The authors offer several implications for social enterprise theory based on practices that are unique to the area but not amenable other areas of entrepreneurship. The contribution is instrumental to establishing social enterprise as a distinct theoretic area.

By focusing on novel aspects of social enterprise not easily explainable by mainstream theoretic traditions, the authors offer an original contribution to the development of social enterprise theory.

This study aims to argue that opportunism is central to management thought and illustrate its evolution into a central element of the entrepreneurship theory. The authors show that many criticisms of opportunism tend to conflate the concept with other theoretic traditions.

The authors trace foundational works by Taylor, Mayo, Fayol, Barnard, Follett and Simon to limit opportunism under the guise of promoting cooperation in organizations.

Opportunism is conceptualized in transaction cost economics as one of the most controversial concepts in management. While modern management is based on handling opportunism, it is bad for practice, as it ignores innovation, and damages trust and goodwill among organizational members. These interventions serve as a knowledge filter, damaging organizational entrepreneurship.

By tracing the roots of opportunism in early management thought, the authors clarify ethical and entrepreneurial issues of mutual obligations in organizations. The authors also place workplace conflict to be a more coherent framework that better reflects the core concept of opportunism.

This paper examines the case of Nashoba, a Tennessee-based social enterprise founded in 1824 by Scottish immigrant Frances Wright. The Nashoba venture intended to diminish the institution of slavery in the USA through entrepreneurial activity over its five years of operation.

This study methodology entailed mining primary source data from Wright’s letters; communications with her cofounders and contemporaries; and documentations of enterprise operations. The authors examined these data using social enterprise theory with a focus on personal identity and time-laden empirical aspects not captured by traditional methodologies.

The social enterprise concept of a single, self-sustaining model generating more than one denomination of value in a blended form has a deeper history than the literature acknowledges. As an entrepreneur, Wright made strategic decisions in a context of supply-side and demand-side threats to the venture. The social enterprise engaged injustice by going beyond market and state contexts to generate impact in the realms of institutions and non-excludable public goods.

This study generates two formal implications for the development of new research questions in social enterprise studies. The first implication addresses the relation between social entrepreneurs and their constituencies. The second implication pertains to the effects of macro-level education, awareness and politics on social enterprise performance and impact. The implications herald new insights in social enterprise, such as the limits of moral conviction and the importance of social disruption.

This paper broadens the current understanding of how social enterprises redress unjust and unethical institutions. It also contributes new insights into social enterprise launch and growth based on shared values within communities and coordinated strategic intentions across communities.

In this article we define, validate, and propose a construct of entrepreneurial intensity, or the degree of entrepreneurship in firms. First, in defining the construct, we explore theoretical differences between entrepreneurial intensity and orientation in order to distinguish it. Second, we empirically validate a measure of entrepreneurial intensity using data based on a sample of 563 entrepreneurs. Third, we propose avenues for research on how entrepreneurial intensity distinguishes entrepreneurs and entrepreneurial action. Finally, we detail theoretical implications of using entrepreneurial intensity as an antecedent and outcome.

Competition and entrepreneurship are driving forces in the development of economic systems. They create jobs, new opportunities to generate value, and lead to the fulfillment of personal career and life goals. As such, it is important to understand the basic economic and cultural factors that influence these activities in developing economies. We undertook a series of analyses in an examination of a heterogeneous sample of economic zones in Southeast Asia. Results illustrate relations between national culture, human development, and business and growth competitiveness. Implications hold that human development and power distance are enablers of entrepreneurial activities in these cultural and national settings. Our contribution is instrumental to development of public policy and regulatory guidelines for facilitating entrepreneurial activity in the developing economies of Southeast Asia.

The author applies methodological concepts from The Poverty of Historicism to contemporary research in the area of entrepreneurship. This paper aims to explain why current theoretic models do not adequately explain entrepreneurial phenomena and to present outlines of a distinct entrepreneurship research paradigm.

The author examines the essay from the perspective of a historian and then summarizes its concepts. Next, the author reviews the current state of entrepreneurship research and theory and applies concepts from the essay to its contemporary challenges. Finally, the author presents five implications.

The five implications are that entrepreneurship research should include designs that predict failure, strive to develop theory that is distinct from other areas, emphasize novel arrangements of empirical elements that are also novel, utilize nonparametric statistics and case studies more fully, and push for a paradigmatic shift.

The contribution of this paper is useful to entrepreneurship scholars interested in developing and distinguishing their research area in a substantial and lasting way alongside other established research areas in the domain of business studies.