Search results

Although the literature addressing entrepreneurial networking is reaching a fairly high degree of sophistication and scope, there are certain critical areas where important questions remain unanswered. Specifically, research into the processes of entrepreneurial networking has been hindered by a paucity of longitudinal studies. Thus, the consideration of change over time is de facto limited. Moreover, accounts of how individuals actually use networks to learn about entrepreneurship, its practices and processes remain sparse. Yet, we know that learning is a social process, so the research gap lies in relating networks, as social contexts to the entrepreneurial learning process. Furthermore, since social relations are fundamental to everyone's life, and emerge, develop and change throughout their life course, people are embedded in social situations that put them in touch with others (Kim & Aldrich, 2005). Consequently, learning is often “located in the relations among actors” (Uzzi & Lancaster, 2003, p. 398). As well as direct learning through network contacts, network transitivity also facilitates learning by one embedded network member, through the knowledge held by a second member, about a third, as shown in Uzzi and Gillespie's (2002) study. Accordingly, in many ways how entrepreneurs go about using their networks and with whom they network may be critical for entrepreneurship and thus warrants investigation. It is to this end that we now consider the shape, content and process of entrepreneurial networking.

There is a growing interest on how critical perspectives can help us understand family businesses. Current literature suggests that critical reflection is needed in aspects such as conflict, fear, and emotions. In this chapter, we argue that the use of a critical perspective illuminates the intricate complexities of family business behavior and that a critical discussion around fear, which is conceptualized as both an inhibitor and a motivator for business, plays a significant role in the dark side of family business. To advance understanding, we review recent conversations that can help us understand better the role of fear; how does this impact on resilience? And, how do feelings and emotions impact family firms? In our review, we argue that perspectives that focus on specific tangible resources (e.g. financial) are limited to explain how families in business may deal with fear. A critical perspective suggests that three areas merit further attention: fear of failure, effects of failure, and the intersection between entrepreneurial learning and the effects of fear in the dark side of family businesses. By contextualizing critical approaches, we provide insight for researchers, policymakers, and those operating family businesses alike.

This article reviews research published in secular management journals that examines what the world’s largest religions (Buddhism, Christianity, Confucianism, Hinduism, and Islam) say about management. In terms of how religion informs management, the literature identifies two basic means: (1) written scriptures (e.g., Analects, Bible, Quran) and (2) experiential spiritual practices (e.g., prayer, mindfulness). In terms of what religion says about management, the emphasis tends to be either on (1) enhancing, or (2) liberating mainstream management. Studies based on scriptures typically either enhance or liberate management, whereas empirical research based on spiritual disciplines consistently point to liberation. Implications are discussed.