Search results

At its essence, entrepreneurship has the potential to empower and to transform. The key to both individual and organizational prosperity in a dynamic, threatening and complex world is the ability to think and act in more entrepreneurial ways. A new wave of economic development is sweeping the world, with entrepreneurship and innovation as the primary catalysts. Within the world of education, it can be argued that the at-risk student is the one not prepared for this entrepreneurial age. While every student has the potential, most lack the knowledge, attitudes, skills, and capabilities that define entrepreneurial competence. Over these past four decades, entrepreneurship has grown within universities faster than virtually any other area of intellectual pursuit. And it appears that the pace is accelerating with more universities seeking to develop programs and centers focused on entrepreneurship. Yet, understanding how to build entrepreneurship programs that empower and transform has remained challenging for some institutions. In this chapter, we investigate the development of entrepreneurship programs in universities. More specifically we contend that they should be created for empowerment and transformation across the campus. We describe some of the most common structural forms, outline the different degree programs, and emphasize the empowering and transforming effects of these programs for all the stakeholders of a university.

The aim of this chapter is to present and analyze the role of public entrepreneurship programs in fostering technology-based entrepreneurship in Turkey. More precisely, the authors of the chapter present and analyze the public policy programs aimed at entrepreneurship that have been put into action in Turkey in the last 20 years. The particular focus is on the type of programs that have been introduced, what have they achieved so far, and their contribution to the economy in terms of technology-based entrepreneurship. Together with the statistics about the output of the programs, data are also provided by a series of interviews with technology-based entrepreneurs to develop a deeper understanding of the effectiveness of those programs. Recommendations and ideas are derived from the research to improve these programs.

Despite a growing body of literature in the field, there is still considerable uncertainty as to whether entrepreneurs are born are made, which has led to an ongoing debate in the entrepreneurship academy about whether we can actually teach individuals to be entrepreneurs. With this in mind, this two‐part paper aims to address the question of whether or not entrepreneurship can be taught.

Part I of the paper dealt with the importance of entrepreneurship in a modern and constantly changing environment; the various ways in which entrepreneurship programmes and courses can be categorised, and the objectives, content and delivery of programmes. The second part of the paper, which is presented in this issue, deals with the topic of determining and measuring programme effectiveness.

Despite the growth in entrepreneurship education and training programmes, the paper reports that little uniformity can be found. Attention is drawn to the art and the science of entrepreneurship, with the consensus that at least some aspects of entrepreneurship can successfully be taught.

The authors highlight the need for evaluating programmes, and for educators and trainers to have a fuller understanding of what they wish to achieve from their programme from the outset, in order to ensure a more accurate assessment of the outcomes.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate a second round of intensive green community entrepreneurship, a form of social entrepreneurship, by a set of environmental service organizations (ESOs) facing the loss of their largest revenue source (the ecoENERGY program), to see if it differed from responses to a similar funding cut five years earlier. In particular, the study compared green community entrepreneurship rates and types to those of the previous program (EnerGuide for Houses) cancellation and examined the perceived importance of various factors, including a social entrepreneurship training program offered by the national association.

Interviews were held with executive directors who had led their organization through both periods of financial crisis. Information was collected on changes in revenue, staffing, residential energy evaluations conducted, service creation, and the perceived importance of organizational factors. The adaptation strategy undertaken by each ESO was classified as resilience, transition, or transformation focussed.

First, green community entrepreneurship is accelerated when needs are heightened, such as when ESOs face funding cuts. Second, only some of the new services or activities launched were financially successful and remained viable over a five-year period. Third, green community entrepreneurship is an important initiative for ESOs to implement their adaptation strategy (resilient, transition, or transformation strategy). Fourth, a higher perceived difficulty of adaptation to funding cuts is associated with the launch of more new services by the ESO.

The original contributions of the paper include the verification of repeated increases to the rate of entrepreneurship undertaken in response to sudden funding cuts, as compared to the rate of entrepreneurship during a stable funding period. This accelerated creation of new services can be directed to achieve various adaptation strategies from creating new services in the established area of energy expertise, to initiatives in new areas of sustainability services, such as water, food, or finance. The importance of collective innovation is highlighted with the use of both local and national networks.

The aim of this paper is to explore the components of entrepreneurship education programs (EEPs) and their interrelationships to develop a conceptual framework through which entrepreneurship education may be contextually evaluated and developed.

The paper presents an extensive literature review of the entrepreneurship education literature which is used to inform a comprehensive framework for entrepreneurial education; based upon contextualisation, outcomes, objectives, audience, assessment, content and pedagogy.

The paper develops a comprehensive and parsimonious framework for understanding and evaluating entrepreneurship education programs based on and adapted from the extended conceptualisations and contextualisation of previous research on entrepreneurship education programs.

This paper presents preliminary conceptualisation and as such requires subsequent testing in various entrepreneurship contexts.

The framework elaborated upon can provide a comprehensive view of entrepreneurship education programs by examining and describing the relationships between the components. In so doing, the paper illuminates for educators and researchers a comprehensive view of an entrepreneurship education program which can be used by contextualising the components of outcomes, objectives, assessment and pedagogy.

The value of this work lies in its responsiveness to the calls in the academic literature for more appropriate evaluations of entrepreneurship programs and greater contextualisation of the programs to facilitate research into the effectiveness of such programs. The paper proposes that EEPs have to be developed, not only with objectives in mind, but in the context within which they operate.

There has been an ongoing debate regarding where a university should house entrepreneurship programs. Should they be in the business school, at the central administration level, or housed in another college such as engineering? Many argue that the entrepreneurship programs should be housed where the best ideas come from (i.e., engineering, computer science, or biosciences). Others strongly argue on traditional lines that entrepreneurship involves essential business tools so the programs need to be housed there. This chapter asserts that the debate over location is moot in regards to how to more effectively launch start-ups and create entrepreneurial talent. For a university to be effective, it needs to build an ecosystem that integrates programs, people, and ideas from across the campus and avoid the traditional silos that schools and colleges create. A model for this from the University of Missouri-Kansas City is used to illustrate an effective university entrepreneurial ecosystem.

Entrepreneurship is one of the fastest growing disciplines at colleges and universities today. Programs span campuses offering traditional coursework and a variety of experiential learning options for students from all majors. While most agree that as much learning, if not more, occurs outside of the classroom, there has not been a model for integrating curricular and cocurricular components in entrepreneurship programs. Moreover, there has not been clear agreement on how to assess value from these programs.

To resolve this, we used a five-phase competency development process to create a customized learning model that engages the learner, the educator, and the community volunteer in the learning and assessment process at both the individual and program levels. This chapter presents a case study in a private, metropolitan university of 8200 students. The case study presents the problem and rationale, a history and overview of the application of competency-based education, and a five-stage process used to develop the model and apply the model to achieve a customized learning path for students in entrepreneurship.

The five-stage model of competency-based education can be applied to develop a customized learning approach and assessment path for students who study entrepreneurship. The use of a technology support platform can extend and simplify the use of this model and allow for the integration of curricular and cocurricular components of an experiential education.

This is a unique approach to integrating curricular and cocurricular education to provide a holistic experiential education for learners. The value of this program extends to faculty who assess learning and volunteers who participate in the learning experience. Specific attention is given to the challenges and process for curriculum mapping and the use of this model for assessment.

In 2004 and 2007, the Kauffman Foundation awarded 18 universities and colleges $3–5 million dollars each to develop radiant model entrepreneurship education programs and campus-wide entrepreneurial ecosystems. Grant recipients were required to have a senior level administrator to oversee the program who reported to the Provost, President, or Chancellor. Award recipients included Syracuse University (2007) and the University of Rochester (2004). Cornell was not a Kauffman campus. This chapter explores three case studies in the radiant model of university-wide entrepreneurship education as deployed at Cornell University, The University of Rochester, and Syracuse University. The authors examine the history, accelerators, and challenges of the radiant model of university-wide entrepreneurship education.

This chapter examines the key characteristics of success of the university-wide entrepreneurial ecosystem at Syracuse University. From 2007 to 2012, Syracuse University developed an academic signature in entrepreneurship, innovation, and community engagement resulting from 165 programs that linked the campus and the community. Nine critical factors of success for individual programs were observed. This chapter provides recommendations for establishing an experientially focused university-wide entrepreneurship education program and suggestions on mistakes to avoid.