Search results

The task of this paper is to critique the ethics of an university entrepreneurship curriculum. For what purpose is entrepreneurship curriculum designed? Who decides what is to be included in an entrepreneurship curriculum? Ethics has a plurality and implies moral judgment informed by any individual’s values. In applying entrepreneurship education the rationale and justification of what is offered and why should be clear. The paper provides a synthesis conducted on an extant literature review on the ethics of an entrepreneurship curriculum, entrepreneurship education stakeholders, and stakeholder rights and obligations. An ethics enquiry framework is concluded that entrepreneurship education curriculum designers can apply to surface the assumptions underpinning the curriculum and assist educators to be clear and explicit about the intent and ambitions for an entrepreneurship education curriculum design. While this paper develops a framework, it has yet to be tested. Further research can examine specific sets of stakeholder expectations, variations in obligations among regulatory or institutional settings, explicitly examine the range of effects of an entrepreneurship curriculum, and report the usability and practical relevance of such an evaluative framework. Ethics in entrepreneurship education is under-researched and more particularly the ethics of the entrepreneurship curriculum appears to have rarely been questioned. Entrepreneurship education lays the foundation for the future actions of those who shape and socially structure entrepreneurship. Therefore, as educators, there is a greater responsibility for ensuring that the education provided meets certain expectations of and obligations to various stakeholder groups.

This paper aims to explore stakeholder involvement in, and expectation of, entrepreneurship education in UK higher education institutions (HEIs).

Longitudinal telephone surveys were conducted annually over an eight‐year period (2000 to 2007) to document and analyse 336 respondents' involvement in, and expectation of, entrepreneurship education in UK HEIs.

The results indicate that stakeholder involvement in entrepreneurship education is explicit, widespread and linked to ongoing educational developments that have radically transformed management structures and accountability at all levels of the UK educational system. Stakeholders' expectations are equally complex and varied, reflecting a heterogeneous range of individual, group and community needs.

The findings provide valuable insights into entrepreneurship education for students, university staff, policy makers and other stakeholders. Government could use the results of this research study to ensure that relevant policies and initiatives reach the targeted sector in a focused and cost‐efficient manner.

This study provides an original and empirically rigorous insight into stakeholder involvement in, and expectation of, entrepreneurship education in UK HEIs. It provides valuable longitudinal data for a wide range of stakeholders involved in entrepreneurship education in the UK.

This paper aims to explore the influence of primary, secondary and tertiary stakeholders on developing enterprising graduates in UK higher education institutions (HEIs).

Longitudinal telephone surveys were conducted annually over a ten‐year period (2000 to 2009) to document and analyse a total of 331 stakeholders' influence on developing enterprising graduates in UK HEIs.

The findings highlighted a number of interesting trends relating to their involvement in, and impact on, entrepreneurship education provision in UK HEIs. A wide range of stakeholders can influence the development of enterprising graduates. Primary stakeholders, such as students, teaching and research staff, managers and administrators emerged as most influential in the development of enterprising graduates. Their influence, representing both the demand and supply sides of entrepreneurship education, was significant and directly relevant to the development of enterprising graduates in UK HEIs.

The results emerging from this longitudinal research study provide valuable stakeholder perspectives into the development of enterprising graduates in UK HEIs. Policy makers should use these findings to inform relevant entrepreneurship education policies and initiatives, focus them on the specific needs of UK students and ensure that scarce resources are targeted efficiently to develop successful graduate entrepreneurs.

This study provides an empirically rigorous insight into stakeholder involvement in developing enterprising graduates in the UK. It provides valuable longitudinal data relating to the influence of a wide range of stakeholders on the development of enterprising graduates in UK HEIs.

The paper aims to contributes on the debates about University Idea Incubation by investigating the role and the engagement of different University's stakeholders in the process of opportunity recognition in an entrepreneurship education program targeted at students with an interdisciplinary background.

Through a longitudinal case study methodology, the Contamination Lab at University of Salento (Lecce, Italy), the learning approaches and the knowledge process to create an entrepreneurial awareness, mindset and capability in students with different educational background are presented.

The findings demonstrates the crucial role of stakeholders' engagement for business idea presentation, open innovation challenge, contamination workshop on specialized topics, enterprise projects are important vehicle for effective students' business ideas and innovative projects development in a multidisciplinary environment. The close interaction among students, academia, companies and institutions creates a favourable environment that enables opportunity identification, idea generation through a deep contamination of knowledge, skills and experiences.

Limitations include the need to generalise the results even if this limitation is typical of the case study methodology. Other research is necessary for an in-depth analysis in deep of the other Contamination Lab in Italy and to derive the “invariance traits” of this environment according to the features of the local entrepreneurial ecosystems.

Implications for practices include recommendations for designing innovative programs where the interactions between University-Institutions-Industry are realized.

A conceptual framework is proposed by defining all the entrepreneurial knowledge process and knowledge creation within the Contamination Lab, highlighting the contribution of the stakeholders in each phase and learning initiative of the program.

This paper sets out to critically evaluate contemporary entrepreneurship education initiatives in the UK. The authors seek to compare and contrast various entrepreneurship education methods, approaches and curricula as well as relevant outcomes, in the UK context.

Longitudinal case studies were used, over a ten‐year period (1995‐2004), to analyse in‐depth qualitative data relating to the development and implementation of various approaches to entrepreneurship education, in a sample of 40 new and established universities in the UK.

A number of interesting findings have emerged from this longitudinal study. It appears that conceptual and contextual as well as design and delivery factors can impact significantly upon entrepreneurship education courses developed in UK HEIs. Furthermore, a number of actual and perceived barriers needed to be overcome or mitigated in order to facilitate a better understanding of stakeholder needs and contributions.

Measuring the outcomes of entrepreneurship education in the UK is still proving ellusive. This study provides a longitudinal overview of current entrepreneurship education initiatives in order to gain a better understanding of the scope and limitations of this type of educational programme.

This paper presents an empirically rigorous, longitudinal case study approach to a rapidly growing aspect of higher education in the UK. The richness of the emergent data offers a valuable insight into pertinent aspects of entrepreneurship education and stakeholder needs and contributions.

The creation of start-ups using knowledge provided by universities has been identified as an important source of knowledge spillover and regional economic development. Entrepreneurship ecosystems in education have become the most important and efficient mechanism of business community engagement and knowledge transfer within university-industry-government framework creating value to society and regional economy. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

This study undertakes in-depth synthesis of eclectic literature on entrepreneurship ecosystems and knowledge spillover of entrepreneurship, examining the critical success factors and enablers of entrepreneurship ecosystems in education.

This study proposes entrepreneurship education ecosystems as an alternative unit of analysis when it comes to considering the role of university-industry-government collaboration in knowledge commercialization. The authors recommend key entrepreneurship education ecosystem enablers for knowledge commercialization and engagement with entrepreneurial communities.

The authors propose a framework for the creation of an entrepreneurship education ecosystem as a unit of analysis when considering the role of university-industry-government collaboration. It requires different approaches to teaching, research and business outreach, some of which have not yet been discovered or yet need to be created.

Entrepreneurship involves the skills and competencies needed to identify, develop, and exploit opportunities in new or existing ventures. Studies have demonstrated that entrepreneurship can be learned and taught; for this reason, universities and educational institutions have increased the number of courses, concentrations, master programs, majors, and PhD programs, seeking a better impact on their students, graduates, and communities. As the knowledge of entrepreneurship has increased, one of the emerging areas of study is the analysis of the methodologies to accomplish better teaching and learning of entrepreneurship.

This chapter introduces entrepreneurship as a discipline and presents its theoretical evolution and impact on education through different educational approaches: the first approach is related to the entrepreneur; the second to the process; the third focuses on cognition; and the fourth approach, determines the education of entrepreneurship as a method, involving new educational techniques for developing skills through practice, action, and reflection. Then, there is an analysis of how three universities in Mexico, Chile, and Colombia use these teaching approaches in their entrepreneurship programs. Finally, there is a reflection on the new perspectives of entrepreneurship education, the stakeholders involved, and the role that universities, educational institutions, and government play in the transformation of entrepreneurship education.

This chapter explores the concept of an entrepreneurship education ecosystem. The concept of ecosystem comes from the natural sciences, but is increasingly applied to regional development, or clusters, which focus on firm inter-organizational relationships. Building on the idea of the university is a key player in a local entrepreneurship ecosystem, this chapter provides a framework for examining a school’s role in this process. A typology is presented that articulates roles that schools may pursue in developing their own internal entrepreneurship education ecosystem.

The purpose of this paper is to identify the elements of education and training intervention that facilitate occupational transition intentions of undergraduates and encourage them to opt for entrepreneurial pursuit.

The study, conducted in India, employed the nominal group technique (NGT) – A systems science technique – which considers that users are experts and they must participate in the decision-making process. The application of NGT involved a workshop format; 15 domain experts participated in the workshop. Throughout the process, a democratic process was followed to avoid individual dominance and premature focusing on a single idea.

The study obtained 63 responses from experts for effective entrepreneurship education in India. The responses were reduced to seven elements after a few thematic iterations. These elements were then segregated into content (knowledge, skills and attitude) and learning interaction on the basis of experts’ responses. An initial draft of the course based upon the elements identified through NGT is presented in this paper.

This study is unique and different from previous research on entrepreneurship education in several ways: It takes cognizance of multiple stakeholders; It provides a theoretical framework along with empirical groundwork; It suggests curriculum contents that have contextual as well as universal relevance. This paper contributes to the emerging dimensions of entrepreneurship literature, which implies a shift from understanding a well-established Western context of entrepreneurship research to transitional societies from the East.

In entrepreneurship education there are different interpretations of entrepreneurship which leads to considerable confusion. The purpose of this paper is to consider whether it is the word entrepreneurship itself which is the source of this problem.

This paper seeks, not to examine the different meanings of entrepreneurship in an education context, but instead to explore the confusion those different meanings can cause.

The word entrepreneurship is used as a label for what sometimes are essentially different things. But, even when a difference is acknowledged, the application of the same label implies a misleading commonality. A result is that false parallels can be drawn and differences among the requirements of funders, providers and consumers of entrepreneurship education can go unrecognised and not addressed. Attempts to restrict the label “entrepreneurship” to some uses and to use the label “enterprise” for others fail because it is only partially done and the two words are still often used interchangeably. Therefore, because the label “entrepreneurship” is the source of this problem, it is suggested that its use should be dropped.

Dropping the word entrepreneurship would force the various stakeholders in entrepreneurship education to specify more clearly what they want and/or expect to get from it. That could lead to clearer debate and better resolution of misunderstandings.

Possibly because we are accustomed to using the word entrepreneurship in different ways we fail to see and address the confusion that causes. This paper suggests a change.