Digital sport entrepreneurial ecosystems

The entrepreneurial ecosystems literature has increasingly explored network relationships between different stakeholders, as well as the role of context. This article addresses the challenge of including a sport context in the entrepreneurial ecosystem literature thereby contributing to the sport entrepreneurship literature by bringing insights from entrepreneurship ecosystem research. In‐depth interviews of football stakeholders in the sport entrepreneurship ecosystem are conducted in terms of understanding the emergence of digital sport start‐ups. The issues raised help explore the changing nature of digital entrepreneurial ecosystems to take into account new sport technological advances. Mixed embeddedness theory is used as the conceptual foundation to understand sport digital entrepreneurial ecosystems. Key management practices are identified in terms of sport start‐ups participating in entrepreneurial ecosystems. The article concludes by making suggestions for future research.     

Entrepreneurial ecosystems

International business fundamentally is about creating an ecosystem environment conducive to entrepreneurship. This means fostering actions and behavior that provide a systemic interaction with multiple entities. In this editorial for the special journal issue, the historical background and origins of the entrepreneurial ecosystem concept is discussed with the view to connected different strands of literature. This provides an optimal way to understand the way entrepreneurship develops through an ecosystem logic. The theoretical perspectives for understanding entrepreneurial ecosystems are discussed that lead to a discussion on each of the articles included in the special journal issue. Themes emerging from these articles are then stated that include a focus on value co‐creation, stakeholder collaboration and entrepreneurial networks. This enables a holistic way to understand the linkages international business has with entrepreneurial ecosystems.     

How entrepreneurship ecosystem influences the development of frugal innovation and informal entrepreneurship

This article critically analyses how the entrepreneurial ecosystem and institutional environment influences the development of frugal innovation and informal entrepreneurship. There is a dearth of empirical research on African entrepreneurship ecosystems and complementors that produce innovations in the informal sector. We address this gap, by examining why and how informal businesses operate and evolve. Based on a qualitative approach, interviewing 20 business owners in Nigeria, two focus groups meeting with 5 and 7 business associations leaders, respectively, we examine the role of institutional environments, how entrepreneurs operate and overcome the barriers to entrepreneurship. The results reveal a model of determinants of frugal innovation and informal entrepreneurship ecosystem comprising formal/informal rules, access to market, and family as important elements that act as a means to effective knowledge flows, networking, capital, and resources sharing.     

The paradox of new venture legitimation within an entrepreneurial ecosystem

The current rise in research on entrepreneurial ecosystems notes that many questions are still unanswered. We, therefore, theorize about a unique paradox for entrepreneurs trying to establish legitimacy for their new ventures within and beyond an entrepreneurial ecosystem; that is, when pursuing opportunities with high levels of technological or market newness, entrepreneurs confront a significant challenge in legitimizing their venture within an entrepreneurial ecosystem, while those entrepreneurs pursuing ventures using existing technologies or pursuing existing markets have a much easier path to garnering legitimacy within that ecosystem. However, the diffusion of that legitimacy beyond the ecosystem will be wider and more far-reaching for those pursuing the newer elements compared to those using existing technologies or pursuing existing markets, thus, creating a paradox of venture legitimation. Prior research outlines approaches for new venture legitimacy but it is unclear when these approaches should be applied within and beyond an entrepreneurial ecosystem. To address this paradox, we integrate ideas from the entrepreneurship and innovation literature with insights from the legitimacy literature to describe how different types of venture newness employ different legitimation strategies which results in different levels of legitimacy diffusion beyond an ecosystem. We conclude with a discussion of our concepts and offer suggestions for future research efforts.     

Coronavirus and international business: An entrepreneurial ecosystem perspective

Covid‐19 (Coronavirus) is a health pandemic that has significantly affected the global economy and fundamentally changed society. The impacts of coronavirus are most apparent at the international business level due to the restrictions on travel and mobility of labor. This has necessitated an entrepreneurial outlook for businesses in order to survive in the current market environment. The aim of this article is to discuss the implications of the coronavirus for international business by taking an entrepreneurial ecosystem point of view. This enables a reflection on how the pandemic has impacted various entities of the ecosystem in terms of stakeholder engagement. Suggestions for acting in a more dynamic and innovative manner are provided that highlight the importance of utilizing entrepreneurial ecosystems in times of crises.     

Digital entrepreneurship ecosystem as a new form of organizing: the case of Zhongguancun

Digital innovation is becoming increasingly important in today’s economy. Many digital innovations are developed not within organizations, but in innovation-driven entrepreneurial ecosystems, where various entrepreneurship related stakeholders collaborate and cooperate. Despite its significance, studies on digital entrepreneurship ecosystems (DEEs) are limited and the concept is largely undertheorized. This study intends to fill that gap by studying how a DEE organizes. This organizing issue is challenging, because stakeholders of a DEE are self-organizing and are not governed by any formal authority. To answer that question, we adopt forms of organizing as a theoretical lens, which provides structure to examine organizing issues. Through an in-depth case study of Zhongguancun, the Silicon Valley of China, we unveil eight processes around the themes of division of labor and integration of efforts. We further show that the forms of organizing feature a balance of centralized design and de-centralized emergence. This balanced view extends the forms of organizing literature, which takes an either/or perspective. Ecosystem architects and policy makers who intend to build entrepreneurship ecosystems to promote local economies can derive practical implications from our findings.     

A new innovation paradigm: European cohesion policy and the retreat of public science in countries in Europe's scientific periphery

This article seeks to undertake a critical assessment of the changing position of public science in the entrepreneurial ecosystem of the countries on the periphery of European research. These countries are driven by new innovation paradigm based on entrepreneurship, which are implemented within the European Smart specialization strategy (S3). This article argues that S3 is widely implemented in the cohesion countries and, while it provides substantial resources for science, technology, and innovation, it fails to provide sustainability in the public research sector. This has direct implications for policies concerning innovation and entrepreneurial ecosystems. In order to prove the thesis, the article provides theoretical argumentation for emergence of a new innovation paradigm, driven by the rise of the entrepreneurial ecosystem, its incorporation into S3, and a consequent retreat of science policy in favor of entrepreneurial policy. The empirical analysis is focused on the funding trends seen in the business and public research sectors over the last decade (2008–2017), which have clearly shown that S3 has not contributed, despite expectations, to an increase in public expenditure for science. This signifies S3's neglect of public research within entrepreneurial ecosystems and challenges the ability of S3 to reduce wide disparities in research and innovation performance across the European Union. This ultimately endangers the innovation potential of the entrepreneurial ecosystem itself.     

Discovering the entrepreneurial micro‐ecosystem: The case of a corporate accelerator

Faced with a proliferation of initiatives like corporate accelerators, entrepreneurial ecosystems see emerge new spaces that we can call entrepreneurial micro‐ecosystems. A micro‐ecosystem is a local open system interacting with the entrepreneurial ecosystem and driven by an actor or group of actors capable of fostering dynamics of innovation and entrepreneurship. The literature has tended to focus on the macro and meso levels leaving behind the microlevel and the strategies implemented by the actors that could lead to the creation of micro‐ecosystems. In this study, we consider corporate accelerators, still little studied, as entrepreneurial micro‐ecosystems. We propose to take a structural and strategic approach in order to better understand the attributes and the strategies put in place by these actors from a multilevel approach. A qualitative study was conducted on a corporate accelerator and the results reveal the importance of strategic attributes in terms of legitimacy, coopetition, and business model.     

The digital entrepreneurial ecosystem

A significant gap exists in the conceptualization of entrepreneurship in the digital age. This paper introduces a conceptual framework for studying entrepreneurship in the digital age by integrating two well-established concepts: the digital ecosystem and the entrepreneurial ecosystem. The integration of these two ecosystems helps us better understand the interactions of agents and users that incorporate insights of consumers’ individual and social behavior. The Digital Entrepreneurial Ecosystem framework consists of four concepts: digital infrastructure governance, digital user citizenship, digital entrepreneurship, and digital marketplace. The paper develops propositions for each of the four concepts and provides a theoretical framework of multisided platforms to better understand the digital entrepreneurial ecosystem. Finally, it outlines a new research agenda to fill the gap in our understanding of entrepreneurship in the digital age.     

Entrepreneurship ecosystems and women entrepreneurs: a social capital and network approach

This study investigates the effects of venture typology, race, ethnicity, and past venture experience on the social capital distribution of women entrepreneurs in entrepreneurial ecosystems. Social network data from two municipal ecosystems in Florida, USA (Gainesville and Jacksonville), suggest that network connectivity and the distribution of social capital are significantly different for men and women entrepreneurs. This difference is contingent on the venture type. Male entrepreneurs show higher comparative scores of bridging social capital in aggressive- and managed-growth venture networks, while women entrepreneurs surpass their male counterparts’ bridging capital scores in lifestyle and survival venture networks. Lastly, experienced women entrepreneurs that self-identified as white showed a higher degree of network connectivity and bridging social capital in the entrepreneurial ecosystem than less experienced non-white female entrepreneurs. Implications for entrepreneurship practice and new research paths are discussed.

     

Financial and Institutional Reforms for an Entrepreneurial Society

In this paper, we introduce the special issue on Financial and Institutional Reforms for an Entrepreneurial Society in Europe. There are many reasons for Europe to want to make the transition to a more Entrepreneurial Society. And for decades now, policy makers are trying to bring that transition about with variations on the “educate, deregulate and finance” approach to entrepreneurship. We argue that more fundamental reforms are required to improve the entrepreneurial ecosystem and bring about this transition. We then discuss the 12 contributions that pertain to five different facets of the entrepreneurial ecosystem. The first two papers address the most fundamental institutional foundations of the ecosystem. The next three papers discuss the (lack of) access to knowledge and incentives to start innovative entrepreneurial ventures. That is followed by three papers that focus on the institutions that (fail to) channel financial resources to such ventures and two papers that analyze the relevance of labor market institutions. The special issue concludes with two papers investigating how the interplay of institutions and productive entrepreneurship results in economic growth.     

The campus as entrepreneurial ecosystem: the University of Chicago

This paper employs Frederick Jackson Turner’s Frontier Thesis of American democracy to construct a framework for understanding the U.S. university campus as an entrepreneurial ecosystem. One question that immediately comes to mind when studying ecosystem performance is what the proper unit of analysis is: the country, the state, the city, the region, or something smaller, like an incubator or accelerator? This paper suggests that the open, innovative American frontier that closed at the end of the twentieth century has reemerged in the entrepreneurial economy on the U.S. campus. The contemporary campus entrepreneurial ecosystem offers the characteristics of Turner’s frontier: available assets, liberty, and diversity while creating opportunity, and fostering entrepreneurship and innovation. A case study of the University of Chicago explores governance of the campus as an entrepreneurial ecosystem and the output produced by that campus ecosystem.     

Entrepreneurship and well-being: Past,present, and future

Entrepreneurship research typically emphasizes firm-level outcomes such as growth and performance. However, people pursue entrepreneurship for deeply personal, idiosyncratic reasons. Therefore, as in other self-organized human pursuits, how entrepreneurship relates to fulfillment and well-being is of utmost importance. In this paper, we provide an overview of the well-being concept, related research, and its connection to entrepreneurship. We define entrepreneurial well-being as the experience of satisfaction, positive affect, infrequent negative affect, and psychological functioning in relation to developing, starting, growing, and running an entrepreneurial venture. We explain this definition of entrepreneurial well-being and review significant developments in our field and the broader field of well-being. Highlights of social, technological and institutional trends illustrate key areas for future research that can enhance our understanding of these phenomena. The eight papers in this special issue focus on entrepreneurial well-being each offering a specific perspective on how scholars can theorize and study the antecedents and consequences of entrepreneurship related to well-being.     

Looking inside the spiky bits: a critical review and conceptualisation of entrepreneurial ecosystems

The concept of entrepreneurial ecosystems has quickly established itself as one of the latest ‘fads’ in entrepreneurship research. At face value, this kind of systemic approach to entrepreneurship offers a new and distinctive path for scholars and policy makers to help understand and foster growth-oriented entrepreneurship. However, its lack of specification and conceptual limitations has undoubtedly hindered our understanding of these complex organisms. Indeed, the rapid adoption of the concept has tended to overlook the heterogeneous nature of ecosystems. This paper provides a critical review and conceptualisation of the ecosystems concept: it unpacks the dynamics of the concept; outlines its theoretical limitations; measurement approaches and use in policy-making. It sets out a preliminary taxonomy of different archetypal ecosystems. The paper concludes that entrepreneurial ecosystems are a highly variegated, multi-actor and multi-scalar phenomenon, requiring bespoke policy interventions.     

From Rational to Wise Action: Recasting Our Theories of Entrepreneurship

In this article, I argue that if we challenge some tacit assumptions of narrow rationality that endure in much of entrepreneurial studies, we can elevate entrepreneurial ethics beyond mere external constraints on rational action, and move toward fuller integration of ethics as an intrinsic part of the process of value creation itself. To this end, I propose the concept of practical wisdom as a framework for exploring entrepreneurial decision making and action that can broaden the scope of our research to recognize entrepreneurship as an inherently normative enterprise. Specifically, I suggest that a framework built upon a concept of practical wisdom enables us to adopt a richer and more complex view of entrepreneurial decision making that is well suited to the dynamic and uncertain context of entrepreneurship. Further, this framework enriches our view of entrepreneurial ethics to include consideration of the personal character, values, and purpose of the entrepreneur. By examining entrepreneurship through a lens of practical wisdom, we can open up new avenues of fruitful inquiry for scholars of entrepreneurship.     

The Impact of Entrepreneurship Education on Entrepreneurial Attitudes and Intention: Hysteresis and Persistence

Do entrepreneurship education programs (EEPs) really influence participants’ attitudes and intention toward entrepreneurship? How is this influence related to past experience and how does it persist? Researchers and entrepreneurship education stakeholders alike have been looking into this question for quite a while, with a view to validating the efficacy of such programs. The authors of this paper propose to operationalize the concept of entrepreneurial intention and its antecedents in an attempt to address those issues. In particular, we propose an original research design where (1) we measure the initial state and persistence of the impact and not only short‐term effects; (2) we deal with a compulsory program, allowing to avoid self‐selection biases; and (3) we deal with an homogeneous “compact” program rather than programs combining multiple teaching components whose effects cannot be disentangled. Our main research results show that the positive effects of an EEP are all the more marked when previous entrepreneurial exposure has been weak or inexistent. Conversely, for those students who had previously significantly been exposed to entrepreneurship, the results highlight significant countereffects of the EEP on those participants.     

政府规制下众创空间创业生态系统发展的演化博弈分析

为应对经济转型与大众创业难的重大挑战，发展众创空间创业生态系统以推动大众创业、万众创新已成为我国政府当务之急，而政府扶持是促进众创空间创业生态系统健康发展的重要手段。运用MATLAB仿真分析和演化博弈理论，研究众创空间创业生态系统发展过程中三方参与者，政府、众创空间及创业企业的初始意愿以及政府规制对三方参与者行为策略演化的影响。研究发现：（1）相较于政府对创业企业直接补贴模式，政府对众创空间进行补贴更有利于众创空间向提供优质创业服务和创业企业向接受孵化方向演化。（2）众创空间创业生态系统发展初期，政府行为策略向积极规制方向演化，待众创空间创业生态系统发展成熟后，政府行为策略向消极规制方向演化。（3）相较于政府规制，众创空间创业生态系统发展中三方参与主体的初始意愿对三方行为策略演化的方向和速度影响更加显著。政府积极规制初始意愿、众创空间提供优质创业服务初始意愿以及创业企业接受孵化初始意愿较低时，政府规制对众创空间和创业企业行为演化的影响微弱，但当各主体相应初始意愿较高时，较低的政府规制水平即可实现较高的预期目标。     

Exploring the role played by entrepreneurial self-efficacy among women entrepreneurs in tourism sector

This study aimed to explore how entrepreneurial self-efficacy impacts firms' performance among women entrepreneurs in developing countries in tourism and hospitality industry. Survey data collected from women entrepreneurs in Sri Lanka confirmed entrepreneurial self-efficacy is influenced by social media, entrepreneurial passion and entrepreneurial role models, whereas education and work experience had no influence over entrepreneurial self-efficacy. The mediating behavior of entrepreneurial persistence behavior is confirmed. For entrepreneurship stakeholders, this research revealed a critical factor that entrepreneurial self-efficacy is influenced by social media in digital world of technologies. Moreover, this research provided a validated model of entrepreneurial self-efficacy, enhancing its usage during the adversity or growth stages of business while producing valuable insights to policy makers in developing countries, enhancing women entrepreneurs’ contribution to the economy.