Search results

Entrepreneurship education has moved from an elitist view focussing on a start-up and picking-the-winners philosophy towards a broader enterprising behaviour approach; recognising entrepreneurship as an activity of relevance for everybody. The purpose of this paper is to extend this development and identify how university entrepreneurial ecosystems can be expanded to support communities that are under-represented in entrepreneurship.

Based on an integrative literature review (Torraco, 2005), this paper draws together and synthesises literature from the field of entrepreneurship, higher education studies and under-represented communities in an integrated fashion, leading to the development of a new conceptual model.

This paper challenges the traditional role of universities in supporting entrepreneurship as focussing mainly on economic growth and new venture creation, and identifies how universities are also positioned to provide greater civic support to entrepreneurial learning amongst under-represented communities. Through a critical analysis of the literature, the conceptual model proposed identifies six key considerations in the expansion of university entrepreneurial ecosystems for under-represented communities.

There are currently 96.6m people at risk of poverty and social exclusion in the EU (OECD, 2017) and an estimated 43.1m Americans (US Census Bureau, 2017). This paper explores how university entrepreneurial ecosystems can be expanded to support minority and disadvantaged communities who are under-represented in terms of entrepreneurial activity.

Given that there is little research regarding how universities might activate inclusive entrepreneurship initiatives amongst under-represented communities, this paper expands existing knowledge as it identifies the key considerations encompassing university-led community collaborative enterprise support.

The importance of contextualizing theory development in entrepreneurship education has recently been raised. Nevertheless, efforts often lead to rather decontextualized concepts and generic theories that are unable to bring together the complexities of applying entrepreneurship education to particular institutional logics and local pedagogical understandings. Based on a narrow and selective literature review, this study aims to identify and reconstruct how entrepreneurship education can adjust to the disciplines in which it unfolds. To contribute to transcending this dilemma, this article raises the following question: How can entrepreneurship education be understood in a differentiated manner and contextually reconstructed to the many disciplines and professions in which it unfolds?

The study follows the general idea of an integrative literature review, meaning that a few references, in particular Jones' work on a signature pedagogy for entrepreneurship education, led to a deeper search of the older background literature from Shulman on the idea of a signature pedagogy for professions.

The authors identify three existing notions (MK-0, MK-1 and MK-2) of signature pedagogy within entrepreneurship education and propose a fourth notion that combines the established understandings into a signature pedagogy, MK-3, in which entrepreneurship education should be adjusted to the disciplines in which it unfolds, by integrating and balancing general, disciplinary/professional and entrepreneurial purposes of education.

Accepting that context matters to entrepreneurship education creates a need for understanding the contextual influence on pedagogies. The paper contributes by establishing a theory-based framework that can help educators formulate and balance general, professional and entrepreneurial purposes of education, depending on the particular context of their educational activities. Furthermore, the paper is a call to action for additional scholarship that identifies avenues for future research.

The aim of this paper is to examine the usefulness of the stimulus-organism-response (S-O-R) model for systematizing and further exploring the knowledge of the role of entrepreneurship education (EE) in fostering students' entrepreneurial mindset (EM). Current research studying the EM in an educational setting often fails to conceptualize this mindset and its attributes rigorously and to include epistemological considerations regarding how the authors can know whether a person has developed an EM or not.

The authors test the S-O-R model by combining it with a critical realist approach to develop a conceptual model for understanding the EM and its development in an educational setting.

The authors identify eight psychological constructs that represent markers of the EM. The authors further surface the multi-causal characteristic of learning in EE. The authors' model cannot be applied to detect causal relationships, but it is useful in exploring potential causal tendencies and plausible explanations of the mechanisms and circumstances of EE, which may, in concert, potentially foster the psychological attributes associated with an EM.

The paper addresses the often-overlooked epistemological considerations related to how the authors can know anything about psychological and theoretical constructs, such as the EM. A conscious discussion about how the authors can develop knowledge and insight about the EM and how individuals develop it is critical to justify a continued focus on the EM in EE.

This paper aims to introduce the concept of Entrepreneurial Collective Intelligence (ECI) as a means of understanding how communities of entrepreneurial actors learn to act both collectively and knowingly. It explores how connections between processes of CI, agency and action can explain and enable the development entrepreneurial community organisations.

There is a selective literature review of prior works on the related fields of community and collective entrepreneurship; collectives and intelligence; agency and action. The review is used to propose a framework of collective entrepreneurial intelligence, agency and action. An interpretive approach is used to research four case studies of community organisations which use CI to generate entrepreneurial outcomes.

The cases are compared with themes from prior literature to develop a conceptual model of four ECI processes which enable intelligence, agency and action: collaborative processes; distributed working; intelligence representations and organisation of infrastructures. These are theorised to discuss ideas, challenges, methods and questions to enhance entrepreneurial actions, based on sharing knowledge and learning, in the context of collective agency, action and intelligence.

The four processes, both together and separately, represent a coherent framework useful for further studies on the role of collectives in enterprising communities.

The four processes each represent a central area of attention, not only for development, learning, decision-making and leadership within enterprising communities but also for entrepreneurship education in terms of alternative didactics, pedagogies and learning forms.

The improved knowledge on the role of collective agency and CI within entrepreneurial processes is useful for strengthening civil activism and other fruitful forms of entrepreneurial collective processes. This may help solve complicated societal problems where traditional conceptions of entrepreneurship fail.

The conceptual contribution is to explain the dynamic relationships between ECI and action, mediated by collective agency. The role of CI in informing entrepreneurial communities is explored and four enabling processes are proposed. This coherent framework is useful for further studies on the role of collectives in enterprising communities, whilst informing their learning, decision-making and leadership.

This conceptual chapter re-actualizes the Didaktik-inspired discussions in entrepreneurship education, initiated by Kyrö, Blenker et al., and Bechard and Toulouse over 15 years ago. Didaktik in the German educational tradition is a pedagogical sub-discipline which, unlike the Anglo-American understanding of “didactics” as teaching methods, focuses on the relations between the subject, teacher, and students, and considers questions regarding what to teach, how to teach, and why, as being interdependent. A review of literature on entrepreneurship education published in the last decades shows that research in the German Didaktik tradition is sparse, and that the awareness of the differences between Didaktik and “didactics” has been overlooked. This chapter has practical implications for entrepreneurship educators as it presents Didaktik as an approach which comprises planning, implementing, and evaluating teaching in a way that includes an awareness of the learners’ relationship to the subject without excluding the teacher’s key role in education. In a theoretical perspective, the chapter challenges the Anglo-American understanding of “didactics” and proposes Didaktik as an approach to developing entrepreneurship education research and practice to be scientifically based in two fields and encompass transformative learning and critical perspectives, rather than being driven by political agendas and focusing on results.

Research in entrepreneurship education faces substantial tensions and methodological challenges. Building on a review of extant empirical studies in the field, the purpose of this paper is to develop an integrative methodological framework for studying entrepreneurship education. Central questions are: What forms of entrepreneurship education research exist? Which data sources, research methods and approaches are used in this research? What are the methodological strengths and weaknesses of entrepreneurship education research? How can entrepreneurship education research be improved methodologically?

The paper combines a literature review with a conceptual discussion. The review identifies 88 journal articles reporting empirical studies of entrepreneurship education published between 2002 and 2012. The literature is coded according to method used, type of study, data collection and analysis techniques. From the analysis of the reviewed literature, a conceptual discussion of the advantages and drawbacks of various methods is undertaken, and an integrated approach to entrepreneurship education research is proposed.

Research in entrepreneurship education is fragmented both conceptually and methodologically. Findings suggest that the methods applied in entrepreneurship education research cluster in two groups: first, quantitative studies of the extent and effect of entrepreneurship education; and second, qualitative single case studies of different courses and programmes. Benefits and drawbacks haunt both clusters. Quantitative studies bring objectivity, comparability and generalizability, but show limited appreciation of the heterogeneity of the education they seek to measure. Qualitative single case studies are ripe with contextually sensitive descriptions and best pedagogical practices, but suffer from limited comparability and generalizability as well as severe biases of teacher-researcher conflation.

The suggested methodological framework builds on a systematic review of the research methods applied in extant entrepreneurship education research. It integrates qualitative and quantitative techniques, the use of research teams consisting of insiders (teachers studying their own teaching) and outsiders (research collaborators studying the education) as well as multiple types of data. To gain both in-depth and analytically generalizable studies of entrepreneurship courses and programmes, the suggested framework integrates the empirical sensitivity of qualitative techniques and diverse research positions, with the rigour of quantitative measures. The authors argue that studies of entrepreneurship education benefit from this integration. Furthermore, the authors describe a variety of helpful methods, explore the potential relation between insiders and outsiders in the research process and discuss how different types of data can be combined. The integrated framework urges researchers to extend investments in methodological efforts and to enhance the in-depth understanding of the dynamics and challenges of teaching entrepreneurship.

Provides evidence of the criteria for the choice of domestic cash management banks adopted by large European firms. A questionnaire completed by 1,129 corporate customers from 20 European countries indicates that service quality is the most important criterion for choice of domestic cash management banking, followed by pricing and relationship. Using the empirical findings, discusses the appropriateness of relationship‐oriented and transaction‐oriented bank strategies across Europe. Based on the customers’ ranking of choice criteria finds no evidence of widespread successful implementation of relationship banking in Europe.

The objective of this article is to analyse the Danish policies used to promote entrepreneurship during the last 30 years. The initiatives to promote entrepreneurship have been implemented as part of the Danish industrial policy. The initiatives are presented and ordered according to a model of planned social change, examining whether they are trying to create a change in attitudes or in behaviour or in both? This analysis has implications beyond the Danish case, as general reflections on entrepreneurship policy are induced from the analysis. It is argued that policy makers should reflect whether the target groups towards which policy initiatives are directed: first, have a positive or negative attitude towards entrepreneurship, and second, are engaged or not engaged in entrepreneurial action.