Search results

Although unproven, many researchers have assumed that firm strategies remain constant over time, but such conclusions have resulted in conflicting generalizations. This study further extends the use of interpoint distance methodology to compare factor structures of marketing strategies of entrepreneurial technology firms at two points‐in‐time – 1989 and 1998.

To most, opportunity recognition and exploitation are the key activities of entrepreneurship. In their 1989 paper on the subject the authors identified a factor structure useful in explaining the process. The present work compares the 1998 results with the 1989 results. Evidence is provided that there is a stable temporal model of opportunity recognition and exploitation.

Globalization, and more recently the dot‐com era, has increased worldwide interest in new business development. As a result, having an international perspective on the study of entrepreneurship has become more important for researcher and practitioner alike. One aspect of this enhanced interest is a worldwide interest in student entrepreneurs. It is no surprise that differences in attitudes towards entrepreneurship have been considered a major factor as to why some economies are more entrepreneurial and vibrant than others. By exploring US, Turkish, and Spanish business students’ attitudes, interests, and related country cultural influences towards entrepreneurship, this research builds upon and serves to extend the understanding of such issues.

The purpose of this article is to analyze both the opportunity recognition and product development management processes not only among technology firms, but among non‐technology firms as well at two points in time, 1998 and 2003.

The current study included two data sets: a 1998 survey of technology‐based and non‐technology firms located in US incubators; and a new 2003 study of technology and non‐technology based firms in the Inland Northwest. All respondents indicated they considered themselves entrepreneurs.

Findings suggest that the opportunity recognition process changed between 1998 and 2003. Some of the authors' prior work suggested that the process, at least for technology‐based firms, had been similar between 1989 and 1998. Industry changes over time, perhaps different firm types, and insufficient data could be rational reasons for the changes. Thus, as far as the opportunity recognition process then, there is evidence that suggests that the process is different for manufacturing and non‐manufacturing firms.

The study of management and marketing processes should be performed by industry or business type over time. The researcher should consider that if the opportunity recognition or product development management processes reflect the changing nature of entrepreneurship over time, then characterizing those processes as constant models is inappropriate.

The overall results are consistent with other research studies and serve to further substantiate the use of single industry data. An “equation of state” for an opportunity recognition model or a product development management model is suggested by the empirical results reported on in the current paper as well as the diversity of other researchers' work.

This paper is the third report on an enlarging worldwide study of university students’ attitudes and opinions related to e‐commerce. The data set is made up of over 600 business majors distributed between three US and one Australian university. The purpose of the study was to explore students’ attitudes and opinions related to e‐commerce and how those varied based on gender, technology adeptness, shopping intensity, and university affiliation. Differences did exist between the more and less technology adept shoppers. In addition, differences existed between those who had higher or lower shopping intensity. Gender and university affiliation appeared to play little role. These differences perhaps could be utilized by entrepreneurial e‐commerce firms to make their sites more efficient for shopping cart completions and, in this case, for student shoppers. E‐marketing at the entrepreneurship interface appeared similar for students in English speaking countries.

The goal of this paper is to provide leadership and guidance to scholars interested/working on the marketing/entrepreneurship interface (MEI) and those in the related fields of marketing and entrepreneurship, and drive the research agenda through the use of collective intelligence. As such, this research note aims to publicize the research priorities gathered from the collective wisdom of the field.

Questionnaires and interviews were utilized to gather information in multiple stages.

A three‐tier structure of research priorities was identified. The authors hope that accomplishments and progress towards these research priorities will be documented in the next iterations of an ongoing effort for gathering, updating, publicizing, and utilizing MEI research priorities.

This research note presents the MEI research priorities for 2010‐2012 in a three‐tier structure, describes the motivation for the initiative, the process used to construct the research priorities, and expected outcomes.

A group of researchers met in Charleston, South Carolina, USA to discuss the past and future of the marketing/entrepreneurship interface. The purpose of this paper is to summarize main discussions from the three‐day summit.

Roughly 16 hours of presentations and discussions were digitally recorded. The lead author reviewed the recordings making copious notes, which were organized into 17 themes for further analysis. Future research directions based on discussion around the most poignant themes are reported.

The paper presents nine categories of discussions around the interface including: the four research perspectives; “the future is in the past;” marketing; entrepreneurship; small business marketing; entrepreneurial marketing; practical significance; context of research; and modeling.

Throughout the nine sections, this paper highlights considerations for future research. It suggests that scholars conducting research at the interface consider the theoretical perspective of their research to improve collective theory building and better positioning. It suggests that scholars also consider the firm and industry context of their empirical research. Finally, it suggests a number of research questions.

The paper suggests that during the research design phase, scholars make efforts to consider the practical significance that will result from their research. In particular, they should consider that research in start‐ups (all businesses start somewhere) and small businesses (the vast majority of all enterprises) can have widespread impacts.

This paper provides a unique approach to conceptually organizing marketing/entrepreneurship interface research and provides an abundant source of ideas for future research.

Anne Bartlett is a Ph.D. candidate in the Department of Sociology at the University of Chicago. She holds a degree in Sociology and Social Policy from the University of the West of England and Masters degree in Sociology from the University of Chicago. Prior to this, she worked in various capacities in the British government for over fifteen years. Her Ph.D. research centers on the changing nature of political subjectivity in London, particularly as it pertains to the lives of refugees and migrants. Her other areas of interest include sociological theory, globalization, human rights and evolving forms of political culture.Katie Cangemi is a student at DePaul University.Terry Nichols Clark is Professor of Sociology at the University of Chicago. He holds MA and Ph.D. degrees from Columbia University, and has taught at Columbia, Harvard, Yale, the Sorbonne, University of Florence, and UCLA. He has worked at the Brookings Institution, The Urban Institute, Department of Housing and Urban Development, and US Conference of Mayors. His books include Citizen Politics in Post-Industrial Society, City Money, The New Political Culture, and Urban Innovation. Since 1982 he has been Coordinator of the Fiscal Austerity and Urban Innovation (FAUI) Project, which includes a data base of over 10,000 municipalities in up to 35 countries. It is the most extensive study to date of local government in the world, including data, some 700 participants, a budget exceeding $20 million, and 50 published books, much available on the website http://www.src.uchicago.edu/depts/faui/archive.htmlRichard Florida is the author of the groundbreaking book, The Rise of the Creative Class: And How Its Transforming Work, Leisure Community and Everyday Life Basic Books 2002, stressing the rise of creativity as an economic force. He is the H. John Heinz III Professor of Economic Development at Carnegie Mellon University, where he is founder and co-director of the Software Industry Center. He has been a visiting professor at MIT and Harvard University’s John F. Kennedy School of Government. He is co-author of five other books, including Industrializing Knowledge; Beyond Mass Production and The Breakthrough Illusion, and more than 100 articles in academic journals. He earned his Bachelor’s degree from Rutgers College and Ph.D. from Columbia University.Gary Gates works in the Population Studies Center of The Urban Institute in Washington DC 20037. He completed his Ph.D. at Carnegie Mellon University, and is a leading researcher on gays in the U.S.Edward Glaeser is a Professor of Economics at Harvard University. He teaches urban and social economics and microeconomic theory. He has published dozens of papers on cities, economic growth, and law and economics. In particular, his work has focused on the determinants of city growth and the role of cities as centers of idea transmission. He also edits the Quarterly Journal of Economics. He received his Ph.D. from the University of Chicago in 1992.Pushpam Jain completed a Ph.D. at the University of Chicago.Jed Kolko is at the Department of Economics, Harvard University.Lauren Langman is Professor of Sociology at Loyola University, Chicago. His interests include alienation studies, Marxist sociology and cultural sociology. Recent publications include: Suppose They Gave a Culture War and No-one Came: Zippergate and the Carnivalization of Political Culture, American Behavioral Scientist (December, 2002); The Body and the Mediation of Hegemony: From Subject to Citizen to Audience, in Richard Brown (Ed.) Body, Self and Identity (University of Minnesota Press, 2002); From the Poetics of Pleasure to the Poetics of Protest, in Paul Kennedy (Ed.) Identity in the Global Age (Macmillan & Palmore, 2001); with Douglas Morris and Jackie Zalewski, Globalization, Domination and Cyberactivism, in Wilma A. Dunaway (Ed.) The 21st Century World-System: Systemic Crises and Antisystemic Resistance (Greenwood Press, 2002).Richard Lloyd teaches at Vanderbilt University, he completed his Ph.D. at the University of Chicago. His research interests include urban culture. Postindustrial economy, and labor force participation.Dennis Merritt completed a BA at the University of Chicago and MA at DePaul University. He was Analysis Manager of the Fiscal Austerity and Urban Innovation Project for four years.Albert Saiz is in the Research Department, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia. He completed a Ph.D. in Economics at Harvard.Lenka Siroky studied at the Universities of Prague and Budapest, spent two years at the University of Chicago, and is currently studying at Harvard University.Kenneth Wong is Professor of Public Policy and Education and Professor of Political Science at Vanderbilt University. He also serves as Associate Director of the Peabody Center for Education Policy at Vanderbilt University. He was Associate Professor in the Department of Education and the Social Sciences Division at the University of Chicago, where he earned his doctorate in political science. He has conducted research in American government, urban school reform, state finance and educational policies, intergovernmental relations, and federal educational policies (Title I). He is author of Funding Public Schools: Politics and Policy (1999), and City Choices: Education and Housing (1990), and a co-author of When Federalism Works (1986). He is currently the President of the Politics of Education Association.Alexei Zelenev is an Associate Economist at the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago. He received his Bachelor’s degree in economics from the University of Chicago.

Communications regarding this column should be addressed to Mrs. Cheney, Peabody Library School, Nashville, Term. 37203. Mrs. Cheney does not sell the books listed here. They are available through normal trade sources. Mrs. Cheney, being a member of the editorial board of Pierian Press, will not review Pierian Press reference books in this column. Descriptions of Pierian Press reference books will be included elsewhere in this publication.

This research provides accounting-ethics authors and administrators with a benchmark for accounting-ethics research. While Bernardi and Bean (2010) considered publications in business-ethics and accounting’s top-40 journals this study considers research in eight accounting-ethics and public-interest journals, as well as, 34 business-ethics journals. We analyzed the contents of our 42 journals for the 25-year period between 1991 through 2015. This research documents the continued growth (Bernardi & Bean, 2007) of accounting-ethics research in both accounting-ethics and business-ethics journals. We provide data on the top-10 ethics authors in each doctoral year group, the top-50 ethics authors over the most recent 10, 20, and 25 years, and a distribution among ethics scholars for these periods. For the 25-year timeframe, our data indicate that only 665 (274) of the 5,125 accounting PhDs/DBAs (13.0% and 5.4% respectively) in Canada and the United States had authored or co-authored one (more than one) ethics article.