Search results

Acting entrepreneurially in nascent industries is a complex endeavor characterized by uncertainty and ambiguity. Nevertheless, entirely new industries do emerge, often as a direct result of entrepreneurial behavior. We extend and apply discovery and creation approaches to study entrepreneurial behavior during industry emergence by means of qualitative analysis of a film about the personal computer (PC) industry℉s formative years. We find that discovery and creation behavior are fundamentally interrelated and share a common element: bricolage. Moreover, ideological activism is a major component of entrepreneurial behavior in a new industry℉s formative years during both creation and discovery processes. Implications for research and practice are discussed.

The purpose of this paper is to study different aspects and tensional forces that play a role in the internal and contextual negotiation that takes place within students in the exploration of the possible identity of entrepreneur. It expands the knowledge of how the university context influences student entrepreneurial processes from a multiple identity perspective. The findings are related to discussions of entrepreneurship education.

A conceptual paper that presents a framework on student entrepreneurial identity sense making that is grounded in a multiple identity perspective. The framework is illustrated by ten narrative cases on student entrepreneurship.

The framework suggests four different ways students make sense of identity in the process of exploring the entrepreneurial identity along with their university studies. In this process students negotiate between the two identities of “student” and “entrepreneur”, both demanding in time, effort and commitment, and they in different manners struggle with balancing university belonging and entrepreneurial distinctiveness.

The framework serves as a point of departure for discussing the psychological processes and tensions associated with students’ entrepreneurial identity construction, and what it means to entrepreneurship education. It is suggested that universities to a higher degree have to view themselves as psychological institutional moratoriums and thus as platforms of identity explorations rather than deterministic systems preparing students for certain careers to support students in becoming entrepreneurs.

This study offers empirical evidence from a nationally representative panel dataset of nascent entrepreneurs (PSED-II) regarding when external financing is acquired and how certain factors affect this timing during the cumulative process of nascent entrepreneurs taking actions toward establishing an operational entity. By assessing the relationship between the external financing event and the cumulative set of actions that nascent entrepreneurs undertake to create new businesses, we improve our understanding of how the timing of acquiring external financing affects organizational survival and growth.

We apply nonparametric and semiparametric survival analysis techniques to a nationally representative panel dataset of nascent entrepreneurs. This ascertains the probability of an external financing event at any given moment in time and a set of startup conditions that we hypothesize will affect this timing. First, we use Kaplan–Meier analysis to explore when external financing occurs during new business creation. We then use discrete-time survival analysis to investigate whether certain startup conditions affect when external financing occurs. Finally, we conduct a test of independence to examine the external financing event relative to other startup activities completed during new business creation.

Nascent entrepreneurs tend to acquire external funding relatively late in the new venture startup process – on average, about two-thirds of the way from conceiving of the idea and becoming operational. They tend to take actions that are less resource-demanding early in the startup process to build their organizations to a fundable stage. Net worth tends to speed up the acquisition of external funding as wealthy entrepreneurs tend to ask for funding earlier in the process. Finally, entrepreneurs in capital-intensive industries do not seem to get outside funding before entrepreneurs in other industries.

This study is unique in three ways. First, we investigate the timing of the highly important external financing event. Timing is critical in unpacking and making sense of the very early stages of a new business and in guiding entrepreneurs and students about when to do what. Second, we do so in a subsample of preoperational, nascent, funded entrepreneurs derived from a nationally representative panel dataset of startup attempts. Third, our findings provide a counter-intuitive yet systematic understanding of organizational emergence and very early-stage financing.

This chapter follows two previous chapters on the nature of entrepreneurship and entrepreneurship scholarship that have been presented in this book series (Davidsson, 2003; Venkataraman, 1997). Both of these chapters are key works in the field, and they both provide critical contributions to our understanding of what entrepreneurship is, as a focus of scholarship, and how entrepreneurship should be studied. My intention for this chapter, therefore, is to offer some thoughts that, I believe, are complementary to the insights offered by my colleagues. My approach to considering the questions of “What is entrepreneurship?” and “How might entrepreneurship be studied?” is to offer some thoughts about the “community of practice” (Latour, 1987, 1999; Sargent, 1997; Wenger, 1998) that currently exists in the academic field of entrepreneurship, and to propose some suggestions for how academics might practice different ways of entrepreneurship scholarship. (This will beg the question of whether a “community of practice” can remain a community, if the practice, itself, changes).

The authors explore the relationship between adolescent behavior and subsequent entrepreneurial persistence by drawing on scholarship from clinical psychology and criminology to examine different subtypes of antisocial behavior (nonaggressive antisocial behavior and aggressive antisocial behavior) that underlie adolescent rule breaking. The intersection of gender and socioeconomic status on these types of antisocial behavior and entrepreneurial persistence is also studied.

Using a longitudinal research design, this study draws from a national representative survey of USA adolescents, the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth (1997) (NLSY97). Nonaggressive antisocial behavior was assessed with a composite scale that measured economic self-interest and with a second measure that focused on substance abuse. Aggressive antisocial behavior was assessed as a measure of aggressive, destructive behaviors, such as fighting and property destruction. Entrepreneurial persistence was operationalized as years of self-employment experience, which is based on the number of years a respondent reported any self-employment.

Aggressive antisocial behavior is positively related to entrepreneurial persistence but nonaggressive antisocial behavior is not. This relationship is moderated by gender and socioeconomic status.

These findings contribute to research on the relationship between adolescent behavior and entrepreneurship in adulthood, the effect of antisocial behavior, and demographic intersectionality (by gender and socioeconomic status) in entrepreneurship. The authors surmise that the finding that self-employment for men from lower socioeconomic backgrounds involved in aggressive antisocial behavior was significantly higher compared to others may indicate that necessity entrepreneurship may be the primary driver of entrepreneurial activity for these individuals.

The purpose of this paper commentary is to explore the intersection of project management and entrepreneurship through a poetic exploration of Flannery O’Connor’s short story: “A Good Man is Hard to Find.” Through the use of the Japanese Haiku format, this commentary probes the nature and meaning of “projects,” the importance of goals and their limitations, the influence of context across time, and the role of agency and circumstance in entrepreneurship as denoted by the idea of serendipity.

Poesis.

Imagination steers the course. Vision sees the possibility; But the mind’s eye sees through a distorted lens that is always misfit. So the unplanned path becomes the project. Always; Accidents happen.

Project Management: Goals with temporary; Collective action; Entrepreneurship: “Organizing collective Action.” Compromise?

The objective of this chapter is to understand innovative processes of resource redeployment taking place during consumption. We label this as consumer entrepreneurship. We define consumer entrepreneurship as the process of sharing and recombining resources innovatively to seek opportunities for self-creating user value. Through the illustration of heterogeneous forms of consumer peer-to-peer sharing, we argue that consumer entrepreneurship: (1) differs ontologically from a view of entrepreneurship as creation of exchange value; (2) bridges the notion, established in marketing studies, of consumers as value creators with the field of entrepreneurship; (3) develops mostly when the process of sharing is regulated informally, based on trust relationships; and (4) thrives as groups of sharing consumers discover and enact their values through the experimentation of multiple forms of product and service procurement. On the basis of these points, consumer entrepreneurship contributes to provide a novel perspective on hybrid organizations, that is, a view of hybrid organizations as everyday spaces where consumers create heterogeneous forms of (utilitarian, social, or environmental) value that they personally use as opposed to reward exchanges. Relative to the current definition of hybrid organizations (Pache & Santos, 2013) and organizing (Battilana & Lee, 2014), we argue that consumer entrepreneurship helps better explain “why, when, and how” consumers increasingly engage in peer-to-peer sharing organizations – a fledging and still underexplored way of organizing consumption worldwide.

Attempts to consider how a founder has reduced equivocality in relation to support networks and reducing risks, especially in an international environment. Presents the case studies of five Danish and Australian born global companies. Considers different global models and their limitations. Presents the findings of recent surveys in this area. Concludes that internationalization has not been the primary objective in the founding process and gives direction for further research.