How On‐the‐Job Embeddedness Influences New Venture Creation and Growth

This study aims to answer why some employees choose to start their own ventures, whereas others choose to seek jobs in other organizations after leaving their current employment. Drawing insights from knowledge‐based view and social capital theory, we examine the impact of on‐the‐job embeddedness on the decision of employee entrepreneurship, industry choice, and new venture growth. We argue that on‐the‐job embeddedness provides key resources for employees to start new ventures and grow them. We test our hypotheses with Panel Study of Entrepreneurial Dynamics (PSED) data. Our results show that on‐the‐job embeddedness increases the probability of employees becoming entrepreneurs. Once they decide to become entrepreneurs, those employees with high on‐the‐job embeddedness are more likely to start new ventures in the industry in which they worked before. Moreover, employees' on‐the‐job embeddedness has a positive impact on new venture growth.     

The ambitious entrepreneur: High growth strategies of women-owned enterprises

During the last two decades, researchers have sought to develop categories of entrepreneurs and their businesses along a variety of dimensions to better comprehend and analyze the entrepreneurial growth process. Some of this research has focused on differences related to industrial sectors, firm size, the geographical region in which a business is located, the use of high-technology or low-technology, and the life-cycle stage of the firm (i.e., start-up vs. more mature, formalized companies). Researchers have also considered ways in which entrepreneurs can be differentiated from small business managers. One of these classifications is based on the entrepreneur's desire to grow the business rapidly. This is the focus of our study.To date, the media have paid considerable attention to rapidly growing new ventures. However, still lacking are large-scale research studies guided by theory through which we can expand our knowledge of the underlying factors supporting ambitious expansion plans. Some research has identified factors that enhance or reduce the willingness of the entrepreneur to grow the business. Factors include the strategic origin of the business (i.e., the methods and paths through which the firm was founded); previous experience of the founder/owner; and the ability of the entrepreneur to set realistic, measurable goals and to manage conflict effectively.Our study attempted to identify the strategic paths chosen by entrepreneurs and the relation of those paths to the growth orientation of the firm. The entrepreneurs sampled in this study are women entrepreneurs across a wide range of industrial sectors. Recent reviews of entrepreneurship research have suggested the need for more studies comparing high-growth firms with slower-growth firms to better delineate their differences in strategic choices and behaviors.Our study sought to answer the following questions: What characterizes a “high growth-oriented entrepreneur?” Is this distinction associated with specific strategic intentions, prior experience, equity held in previous firms, the type of company structure in place, or success factors the entrepreneur perceives are important to the business? Do “high growth” entrepreneurs show greater entrepreneurial “intensity” (i.e., commitment to the firm's success)? Are they willing to “pay the price” for their own and their firm's success? (i.e., the “opportunity costs” associated with business success and growth). Other relationships under investigation included different patterns of financing the business' start-up and early growth. Do “high-growth” entrepreneurs use unique sources of funding compared with “lower-growth” entrepreneurs?Eight hundred thirty-two entrepreneurs responded to a survey in which they were asked to describe their growth intentions along nineteen strategic dimensions, as well as respond to the foregoing questions. Some of the strategic activity measures included adding a new product or service, expanding operations, selling to a new market, and applying for a loan to expand operations. Actual growth rates based on sales revenues were calculated, and average annualized growth rates of the industrial sectors represented in the sample were obtained. This study showed that high-growth-oriented entrepreneurs were clearly different from low-growth-oriented entrepreneurs along several dimensions. The former were much more likely to select strategies for their firms that permitted greater focus on market expansion and new technologies, to exhibit greater intensity towards business ownership (“my business is the most important activity in my life”), and to be willing to incur greater opportunity costs for the success of their firms (“I would rather own my own business than earn a higher salary while employed by someone else”).The high-growth–oriented entrepreneurs tended to have a more structured approach to organizing their businesses, which suggests a more disciplined perception of managing the firm. In summary, results showed the group of high-growth–oriented entrepreneurs, labeled “ambitious,” as having the following distinctions: strategic intentions that emphasize market growth and technological change, stronger commitment to the success of the business, greater willingness to sacrifice on behalf of the business, earlier planning for the growth of the business, utilization of a team-based form of organization design, concern for reputation and quality, adequate capitalization, strong leadership, and utilization of a wider range of financing sources for the expansion of the venture. The purpose in uncovering these differences is to enable entrepreneurs and researchers to identify more clearly the attributes of rapid-growth ventures and their founders and to move closer to a field-based model of the entrepreneurial growth process which will help delineate the alternative paths to venture growth and organizational change.     

Women business owners in traditional and non-traditional industries

Small businesses continue to grow in importance to the national economy. According to the Small Business Administration, America's 22 million small businesses generate more than half of the nation's Gross Domestic Product and are the principal source of new jobs. The National Foundation for Women Business Owners reported that between 1987 and 1994, the number of women-owned businesses grew by 78% and women-owned firms accounted for 36% of all firms. Although the growth in the number of women-owned businesses is encouraging, the size of such businesses remains small in terms of both revenues and number of employees, especially in comparison to male-owned businesses. One explanation for this disparity is that female business ownership is concentrated primarily in the retail and service industries where businesses are relatively smaller in terms of employment and revenue as opposed to high technology, construction, and manufacturing.One of the most fruitful streams of research in women's occupational choice has been based on social learning theory. Specifically, self-efficacy has been found to relate to both type and number of occupations considered by college men and women, and with regard to traditional and non-traditional occupations. Entrepreneurship researchers have also used social learning theory to study entrepreneurial intentions. This study builds on that background of women's career development and entrepreneurial intentions to examine differences between traditional and non-traditional women business owners. We examine 170 women business owners in various traditional and non-traditional businesses in Utah and Illinois. Questionnaires were the primary method of collecting data, in addition to 11 in-depth interviews from a sample of the survey respondents. Using a careers perspective, based on social learning theory, we hypothesized that women in these two different categories of industries would differ on levels of self-efficacy toward entrepreneurship or venture efficacy, their career expectations and their perceived social support. A second analysis was also done that explored the relationship between the same independent variables and success or performance of the business. The results offer support for using this integrative model to understand differences between women in traditional and non-traditional industries. The first analysis revealed that significant differences exist between the two groups on several of the independent variables. Traditional business owners had higher venture efficacy for opportunity recognition, higher career expectations of life balance and security and they reported that the financial support received from others was more important to them than those in non-traditional businesses. On the other hand, the non-traditional owners had higher venture efficacy for planning and higher career expectations for money or wealth than the traditional group.The second analysis explored whether success, as measured by sales, was affected by differences in venture efficacies, career expectations, or perceived support received by women in traditional businesses as compared to those in non-traditional ones. This analysis revealed that traditional women business owners might have different factors that contribute to their success than non-traditional owners. Specifically, for the traditional owners, venture efficacies for opportunity recognition and economic management as well as the career expectation of autonomy and money (or wealth) were positively related to sales. For the same group efficacy toward planning and the need for security were negatively related to sales. For the non-traditional women, venture efficacy toward planning and the career expectation of autonomy were positively related to sales while the expectation of money or wealth was negatively related. Also for the same group, the perceived importance of the emotional and financial support was negatively related to sales.In the past, most of the entrepreneurial research has used predominantly male samples of entrepreneurs. Those that include women entrepreneurs generally are comparative, between men and women. This study's comparison of two groups of women entrepreneurs offers a unique contribution to the field.Future research is recommended to further understand how venture efficacy and career expectations affect the decision to start a new business in a particular industry. It would be particularly beneficial to study venture efficacy and career expectations of prospective women entrepreneurs prior to the start of the business. Similarly, greater attention should be given to understanding how venture efficacy develops in different individuals.     

Competing models of entrepreneurial intentions

Why are intentions interesting to those who care about new venture formation? Entrepreneurship is a way of thinking, a way of thinking that emphasizes opportunities over threats. The opportunity identification process is clearly an intentional process, and, therefore, entrepreneurial intentions clearly merit our attention. Equally important, they offer a means to better explain—and predict—entrepreneurship.We don't start a business as a reflex, do we? We may respond to the conditions around us, such as an intriguing market niche, by starting a new venture. Yet, we think about it first; we process the cues from the environment around us and set about constructing the perceived opportunity into a viable business proposition.In the psychological literature, intentions have proven the best predictor of planned behavior, particularly when that behavior is rare, hard to observe, or involves unpredictable time lags. New businesses emerge over time and involve considerable planning. Thus, entrepreneurship is exactly the type of planned behavior Bird 1988, Katz and Gartner 1988 for which intention models are ideally suited. If intention models prove useful in understanding business venture formation intentions, they offer a coherent, parsimonious, highly-generalizable, and robust theoretical framework for understanding and prediction.Empirically, we have learned that situational (for example, employment status or informational cues) or individual (for example, demographic characteristics or personality traits) variables are poor predictors. That is, predicting entrepreneurial activities by modeling only situational or personal factors usually resulted in disappointingly small explanatory power and even smaller predictive validity. Intentions models offer us a significant opportunity to increase our ability to understand and predict entrepreneurial activity.The current study compares two intention-based models in terms of their ability to predict entrepreneurial intentions: Ajzen's theory of planned behavior (TPB) and Shapero's model of the entrepreneurial event (SEE). Ajzen argues that intentions in general depend on perceptions of personal attractiveness, social norms, and feasibility. Shapero argues that entrepreneurial intentions depend on perceptions of personal desirability, feasibility, and propensity to act. We employed a competing models approach, comparing regression analyses results for the two models. We tested for overall statistical fit and how well the results supported each component of the models. The sample consisted of student subjects facing imminent career decisions. Results offered strong statistical support for both models.(1) Intentions are the single best predictor of any planned behavior, including entrepreneurship. Understanding the antecedents of intentions increases our understanding of the intended behavior. Attitudes influence behavior by their impact on intentions. Intentions and attitudes depend on the situation and person. Accordingly, intentions models will predict behavior better than either individual (for example, personality) or situational (for example, employment status) variables. Predictive power is critical to better post hoc explanations of entrepreneurial behavior; intentions models provide superior predictive validity. (2) Personal and situational variables typically have an indirect influence on entrepreneurship through influencing key attitudes and general motivation to act. For instance, role models will affect entrepreneurial intentions only if they change attitudes and beliefs such as perceived self-efficacy. Intention-based models describe how exogenous influences (for eample, perceptions of resource availability) change intentions and, ultimately, venture creation. (3) The versatility and robustness of intention models support the broader use of comprehensive, theory-driven, testable process models in entrepreneurship research (MacMillan and Katz 1992). Intentional behavior helps explain and model why many entrepreneurs decide to start a business long before they scan for opportunities.Understanding intentions helps researchers and theoreticians to understand related phenomena. These include: what triggers opportunity scanning, the sources of ideas for a business venture, and how the venture ultimately becomes a reality. Intention models can describe how entrepreneurial training molds intentions in subsequent venture creation (for example, how does training in business plan writing change attitudes and intentions?). Past research has extensively explored aspects of new venture plans once written. Intentionality argues instead that we study the planning process itself for determinants of venturing behavior. We can apply intentions models to other strategic decisions such as the decision to grow or exit a business. Researchers can model the intentions of critical stakeholders in the venture, such as venture capitalists' intentions toward investing in a given company. Finally, management researchers can explore the overlaps between venture formation intentions and venture opportunity identification.Entrepreneurs themselves (and those who teach and train them) should benefit from a better understanding of their own motives. The lens provided by intentions affords them the opportunity to understand why they made certain choices in their vision of the new venture.Intentions-based models provide practical insight to any planned behavior. This allows us to better encourage the identification of personally-viable, personally-credible opportunities. Teachers, consultants, advisors, and entrepreneurs should benefit from a better general understanding of how intentions are formed, as well as a specific understanding of how founders' beliefs, perceptions, and motives coalesce into the intent to start a business. This understanding offers sizable diagnostic power, thus entrepreneurship educators can use this model to better understand the motivations and intentions of students and trainees and to help students and trainees understand their own motivations and intentions.Carefully targeted training becomes possible. For example, ethnic and gender differences in career choice are largely explained by self-efficacy differences. Applied work in psychology and sociology tells us that we already know how to remediate self-efficacy differences. Raising entrepreneurial efficacies will raise perceptions of venture feasibility, thus increasing the perception of opportunity.Economic and community development hinges not on chasing smokestacks, but on growing new businesses. To encourage economic development in the form of new enterprises we must first increase perceptions of feasibility and desirability. Policy initiatives will increase business formations if those initiatives positively influence attitudes and thus influence intentions. The growing trends of downsizing and outsourcing make this more than a sterile academic exercise. Even if we successfully increase the quantity and quality of potential entrepreneurs, we must also promote such perceptions among critical stakeholders including suppliers, financiers, neighbors, government officials, and the larger community.The findings of this study argue that promoting entrepreneurial intentions by promoting public perceptions of feasibility and desirability is not just desirable; promoting entrepreneurial intentions is also thoroughly feasible.     

After the cash arrives: A comparative study of venture capital and private investor involvement in entrepreneurial firms

Equity investments in entrepreneurial firms continue to grow in number and dollar amount from both venture capital and private investment sources. Increasingly, these two sources of capital play an important role in the development of new and existing entrepreneurial ventures. Due to the sometimes hurried attempt to turn their dream into reality, entrepreneurs may fail to consider similarities and differences in the value-added benefits supplied by venture capital firms (VCs) and private investors (PIs).Accordingly, the purpose of this study was to determine how initial relationships are established and maintained between entrepreneurs and their primary investors. Specifically, we asked entrepreneurs to assess characteristics of the relationship with their primary investor. We then contrasted the results between entrepreneurial firms that had received venture capital funding versus private investor funding. Differences were examined along the following lines:

• 1.• Levels of investor involvement in entrepreneurial firms
• 2.• Reporting and operational controls placed on the firm
• 3.• Types of expertise sought by the entrepreneur

     

Does one size fit all? exploring the relationship between attitudes towards growth,gender, and business size

To help explain the typically smaller size of businesses headed by women, this study examines a relatively unexplored dimension on which male and female entrepreneurs are expected to differ: their attitudes towards growth. An increasing number of scholars believe that the growth of a venture is at least partially determined by the entrepreneur’s motivations and intentions, yet very few have investigated whether gender differences exist. Quantitative and qualitative analyses of data collected through personal interviews with 229 small business owners in the Greater Vancouver area of British Columbia, Canada, provide novel insights into the factors affecting an entrepreneur’s growth decision and desired pace of expansion.     

Novice,portfolio, and serial founders: are they different?

There is growing interest in entrepreneurs who have been involved in more than one venture, yet to date there has been relatively little theoretical development and systematic empirical examination of the topic. In particular, there has been little attention to the potential heterogeneity of habitual entrepreneurship. This study aims to contribute to this emerging area in two ways. First, it outlines a conceptual typology of habitual entrepreneurs who have founded, purchased, or inherited businesses. Second, the empirical part of the study focuses on owner-managers, providing an exploratory analysis of the characteristics and effects of independent business ownership by novice, portfolio, and serial founders. Novice founders are those that have no prior entrepreneurial experience as either a founder, an inheritor, or a purchaser of a business. Portfolio founders retain their original business and inherit, establish, and/or purchase another business. Serial founders are those who sell their original business but at a later date inherit, establish, and/or purchase another business.The study derives propositions suggesting differences among the three types of founders. At the individual founder level of analysis, similarities as well as differences in the personal background, work experiences, reasons leading to the start-up of businesses, and personal attitudes to entrepreneurship of these three types of entrepreneurs are explored. At the organizational level of analysis, finance, employment and performance differences among the businesses owned by the three types of entrepreneurs are presented.The issues are examined using a sample of entrepreneurs who were the principal owner-managers of independent businesses in Great Britain. The sample included 389 novice founders (62.6%), 75 portfolio founders (12.1%), and 157 serial founders (25.3%). No statistically significant differences were found among the three groups of entrepreneurs with regard to the main industrial activity, geographical location, and the age of their businesses. Univariate and multivariate tests were used to examine potential differences between the groups.The results of the study show significant differences between portfolio and serial founders with regard to their parental background, work experience, and their age when they started their first business. Differences were also found with respect to reasons leading to start-up, personal attitudes to entrepreneurship, and sources of funds used during the launch period of the surveyed business. These findings suggest that habitual entrepreneurs cannot be treated as a homogeneous group. The analysis, however, failed to find any significant differences between the performance of the surveyed firms owned by habitual founders and novice founders and between the two types of habitual founders.The findings of the study indicate for researchers that there is a need to carefully define the unit of analysis in any examination of entrepreneurs. In particular, there is a need to take note of the heterogeneity of types of entrepreneur and to consider the entrepreneur as the appropriate unit of analysis rather than simply the firm. Although this study focused on habitual founders of businesses, the theoretical section of the study also identified other types of habitual entrepreneurs, such as serial corporate entrepreneurs and serial management buy-out and buy-in cases. These other types of habitual entrepreneurs would appear to warrant further analysis.The findings of this study have a number of implications for practitioners, especially venture capitalists. The absence of significant performance differences between novice and habitual entrepreneurs, which is consistent with the results from other studies, emphasizes the need for venture capitalists screening potential investees not to rely solely on previous experience.The study also has implications for policy-makers, especially with respect to decisions concerning the allocation of resources to assist nascent entrepreneurs, novice entrepreneurs, and habitual entrepreneurs. The similarities in business performance among novice, serial, and portfolio entrepreneurs suggests that policy-makers need to be careful in targeting scarce resources. Most notably, targeting resources to encourage talented nascent entrepreneurs to become novice entrepreneurs may offer returns which are at least as good as targeting resources to more experienced entrepreneurs.     

Location decisions of new ‘Knowledge Intensive Service Activity’ firms: the rural–urban divide

This paper analyses the variables that influence the decision to locate knowledge-intensive service activity firms (KISA firms, hereafter) in a rural or an urban area in Spain. The results indicate that the location decision of entrepreneurs choosing to start their KISA firms in a rural area is mainly driven by personal and location-related motivations, whereas the local economic framework is the main motivation of those entrepreneurs who have chosen an urban location for their KISA firms. This allows for important policy-making recommendations, but it also offers significant contributions for entrepreneurship and regional development researchers.     

Social ties and venture creation by returnee entrepreneurs

Recent years have witnessed the return of individuals of Indian or Chinese origin from developed markets to their home countries to start new ventures. Returnee Entrepreneurs (REs) facilitate both direct technology transfer and indirect technology spillovers to local firms, thus contributing to the technological development of emerging economies. Much previous work is based on the integration of ethnic entrepreneurs in their host countries or business activities of transnational entrepreneurs that traverse their host and home countries. This study explores the role of social ties in venture creation by REs. Based on twenty case studies in India, the findings show that (1) local ties are indispensable for venture creation, and (2) the heterogeneity in the way REs leverage social ties across the host and home countries is contingent on the location of their intention to start up and generation of idea for their venture. The implications of these findings are discussed.     

The Influence of Funding Approaches,Growth Expectations,and Industry Gender Distribution on High‐Growth Women Entrepreneurs

This study examines three key aspects of entrepreneurship associated with women business owners and their ability to achieve high growth: debt versus equity financing, growth expectations, and industry gender distribution. We present a number of theoretical lenses spanning disciplines such as gender studies, entrepreneurship, social psychology, and finance. Using longitudinal data from U.S. startups over an eight‐year period, our research reveals a number of interesting findings. We find that, proportionally, high‐growth women entrepreneurs are more likely to finance their growth with personal and business equity funding. Additionally, women‐owned firms in “feminine industries” are more likely to achieve high growth than women‐owned firms in “non‐feminine industries.”     

The “why” of international entrepreneurship: uncovering entrepreneurs’ personal values

Previous studies investigating the “why” of entrepreneurial internationalization have focused on firm-level motivations, overlooking the relationships between firm-level and individual-level motivations and why entrepreneurs differ in the goals they intend to achieve. We investigate the role of personal values as desirable end states that motivate international entrepreneurship by functioning as superordinate cognitive structures that underlie the practical internationalization goals set by entrepreneurs. By adopting an idiographic approach based on a laddering methodology in a sample of 140 new domestic technology-based firms located in Northern Italy, we uncover and map the hierarchies of goals that motivate entrepreneurs’ internationalization intentions, which are anchored in five personal values: achievement, power, self-direction, benevolence, and security. We discuss our theoretical and methodological contributions and the policy implications of our findings.     

Perceived risks and choices in entrepreneurs' new venture decisions

Though risk plays a central role in most entrepreneurial decision making, little empirical research has explicitly examined how the elements of risk, risk perceptions, and entrepreneurs' propensities to take risks influence choices among potentially risky entrepreneurial ventures. This experimental study asked a sample of entrepreneurs leading America's fastest growing firms to make choices among a series of hypothetical new ventures. The results indicate that such choices are influenced by the risks inherent in the new ventures, as evidenced by the pattern of outcomes anticipated in each venture, the entrepreneurs' differing perceptions of those risks, and differences in their personal propensities to take risks.The subjects in our sample of entrepreneurs tended not to choose ventures having a high degree of variability in their pattern of anticipated outcomes. This avoidance of outcome variability suggests that the sensitivity analyses commonly prescribed for examining new venture attractiveness may inhibit risk taking, and may deter potential investors from investing in their firms. New approaches to assessing and presenting new venture risk, other than the traditional best case/expected case/worst case approach, may be advisable, as well as sufficiently through market research to provide evidence of the degree to which market acceptance is likely for the venture's products or services.We also found an effect of differences in risk propensities among entrepreneurs on their new venture choices. This effect suggests not only that entrepreneurs should be wary of any biases they bring to their new venture decisions, but that prospective investors should consider the degree to which entrepreneurs in whom they choose to invest are well-matched to the investors' own risk-taking propensities.Finally, while our sample of entrepreneurs tended to shun high levels of variability in their new venture choices, they appeared willing to accept a considerable degree of hazard, or possible downside, in their new venture choices, presumably in pursuit of potentially significant gains. Entrepreneurs are advised to seek a clear understanding of the downside entailed in their proposed ventures, and develop strategies to mitigate the likelihood of adverse outcomes. Thus they will not jeopardize chances for near term success and attracting support of investors and others in later stages of the venture or in subsequent ventures.Our research did not attempt to examine how our subjects' choices would have played out in terms of performance, but the apparent biases which entrepreneurs' risk propensities bring to their assessment of proposed new ventures is a potentially important issue that merits further scrutiny. On one hand, such biases may lead to patterns of suboptimal decisions. On the other hand, our results suggest that investors should entrust their new venture investments to entrepreneurs whose risk propensities (and perhaps other personal characteristics) best match the needs of both the opportunity at hand and the investor's objectives. As many venture capitalists attest, the management of a proposed new venture should lie at the heart of their investment decision.     

Female Entrepreneurs,Work–Family Conflict,and Venture Performance: New Insights into the Work–Family Interface*

Existing theory is extended to predict the effectiveness of strategies for structurally reducing work–family conflict by manipulating roles, given the salience of work and family roles and resources available to the female entrepreneur. A conceptual framework based on the constructs of role involvement and role conflict is used to examine whether high‐growth female entrepreneurs choose more appropriate strategies for reducing work–family conflict than their less successful counterparts. Three basic strategies for manipulating roles are discussed: (1) role elimination; (2) role reduction; and (3) role‐sharing. The following propositions are advanced: (1) work–family management strategies are a significant determinant of venture growth; (2) women who develop high‐growth businesses more effectively reduce work–family conflict by choosing strategies better matched with their internal needs and access to external resources than less successful women; and (3) role‐sharing strategies are preferred because they allow women to enjoy the enhancement of both work and family roles while reducing the level of inter‐role conflict. As a result, the high prevalence of team‐building and participative management practices observed in women‐owned businesses may be driven by the need for female entrepreneurs to manage work–family conflicts as well as genetics or socialization.     

企业家行为与企业社会资本

本文基于对海尔、宝洁(中国)、新希望三家企业网站的内容的分析,研究了企业家行为在企业社会资本积累过程中扮演的角色。研究结果表明,企业家频繁参与非市场活动是企业积累社会资本的普遍做法。特别地,在企业积累社会资本的过程中,民营企业对企业家个人的依赖程度最大,而外资企业依赖的是包含企业家个人、职能部门、员工在内的企业平台,国有企业则介于两者之间。     

Exploring start-up event sequences

This research analyzed new venture start-up activities undertaken by 71 nascent entrepreneurs. Nascent entrepreneurs are individuals who were identified as taking steps to found a new business but who had not yet succeeded in making the transition to new business ownership. Longitudinal data for the study comes from a secondary data analysis of two representative samples, one of 683 adult residents in Wisconsin (Reynolds and White 1993) and the other of 1016 adult residents of the United States (Curtin 1982). These surveys were conducted between 1992 and 1993, and the nascent entrepreneurs were reinterviewed six to 18 months after their initial interview.Three broad questions were addressed: (1) What activities do nascent entrepreneurs initiate in attempting to establish a new business? (2) How many activities do nascent entrepreneurs initiate during the gestation of the start-up? and (3) When are particular activities initiated or completed?Between the first and second interview, 48% of the nascent entrepreneurs reported they had set up a business in operation. Over 20% had given up and were no longer actively trying to establish a business. Almost a third of the respondents reported they were still trying to establish a firm.As a way to summarize the results and as a springboard toward some insights into the implications of this research for practice and future research, we developed the following activity profiles of the three types of nascent entrepreneurs studied. These profiles are offered as a combination of both fact and some intuition about the findings.STARTED A BUSINESS. Nascent entrepreneurs who were able to start a business were more aggressive in making their businesses real. They undertook activities that made their businesses tangible to others: they looked for facilities and equipment, sought and got financial support, formed a legal entity, organized a team, bought facilities and equipment, and devoted full time to the business. Individuals who started businesses seemed to act with a greater level of intensity. They undertook more activities than those individuals who did not start a business. The pattern of activities seem to indicate that individuals who started firms put themselves into the day-to-day process of running an ongoing business as quickly as they could and that these activities resulted in starting firms that generated sales (94% of the entrepreneurs) and positive cash flow (50% of the entrepreneurs). What is not known is how successful or profitable these new firms will be over time. For example, 50% of the firms that were started had not reached positive cash flow and these firms may have been started by individuals who were foolhardy and rushed into operation of a business that would not be sustainable.GAVE UP. The pattern of activities for the group of entrepreneurs who gave up seem to indicate that these entrepreneurs discovered that their initial idea for their businesses would not lead to success. The finding that the activity of developing a model or prototype differentiated individuals who gave up from those who were still trying would suggest that those who gave up had “tested” their ideas out and found that they would not work according to their expectations. Nascent entrepreneurs who gave up seemed to be similar in their activity patterns compared with those who started their firms, that is, individuals who gave up pursued the activities of creating a business in an aggressive manner at the beginning of the process. But as the business unfolded over time, these entrepreneurs decreased their activities and then ceased start-up activities. This group of individuals might be seen as either having the wisdom to test their ideas out before jumping into something that might lead to failure or lacking the flexibility to find more creative ways to solve the problems that they were confronted with.STILL TRYING. It would seem that those who are still trying are not putting enough effort into the start-up process in order to find out whether they should start the business or give up. Those still trying had undertaken fewer activities than individuals in the other two groups. The still trying entrepreneurs were devoting their short-term efforts toward activities internal to the start-up process (e.g., saving money and preparing a plan) and less effort toward activities that would make the business real to others. The still trying entrepreneurs may be all talk and little action. Or these still trying entrepreneurs might be involved in developing businesses that take longer for these particular opportunities to unfold. (It should be noted that there was no industry effect across the three groups.)Our advice to individuals considering business start-up is that the results seem to provide evidence that nascent entrepreneurs should aggressively pursue opportunities in the short-term, because they will quickly learn that these opportunities will either reveal themselves as worthy of start-up or as poor choices that should be abandoned. Individuals who do not devote the time and effort to undertaking the activities necessary for starting a business may find themselves perennially still trying, rather than succeeding or failing.What entrepreneurs do in their day-to-day activities matters. The kinds of activities that nascent entrepreneurs undertake, the number of activities, and the sequence of these activities have a significant influence on the ability of nascent entrepreneurs to successfully create new ventures. This study suggests that the behaviors of nascent entrepreneurs who have successfully started a new venture can be identified and differentiated from the behaviors of nascent entrepreneurs who failed. We believe that future studies will more precisely identify the kinds of behaviors appropriate for certain new venture conditions. If such contingency information can be generated, entrepreneurship research is likely to have significant benefits for entrepreneurship practice, education, and public policy.     

Venture Creation Speed and Subsequent Growth: Evidence from South America

Though time is an important dimension of the venture creation process, our understanding of why some entrepreneurs are able to act more quickly than others is limited. Equally, not much is known about the relationship between venture creation speed and the subsequent venture growth. In this paper, we use a resource‐based perspective to provide insights into the factors that quicken or retard venture creation and to explore how speed impacts on subsequent growth. This is important because the topic remains generally underresearched and because even less is understood about venture creation speed in the context of South American economies. Data were collected from face‐to‐face interviews with 647 entrepreneurs in Argentina, Brazil, Chile, and Peru. Using a multivariate regression framework, we find that entrepreneurs make use of their human and social capital resources to shape the speed by which their venture is created. Moreover, their perceptions of unfavorable environmental conditions seem to retard venture creation. Findings also suggest that entrepreneurs who take more time to create a more solid resource base tend to receive better growth outcomes. Implications from the findings are discussed.     

Understanding the Dynamics of Nascent Entrepreneurship—Prestart‐Up Experience,Intentions, and Entrepreneurial Success

Understanding the factors driving the successful founding of new firms is a subject of ongoing interest. We link prestart‐up experience and intentions of nascent entrepreneurs to the shape of the entrepreneurial gestation process and eventually to successful founding. By experience, we mean previous entrepreneurial activities, labor market experience, and formal education, and by intentions, we mean commitment and ability expectations. We test our predictions on a longitudinal data set that tracks nascent entrepreneurs' venture creation efforts over a five‐year time span and find evidence supporting them. Against this background, our findings also show that when controlling for the possible endogeneity of the activities carried out, a later temporal concentration of organizing activities enhances the probability of successfully founding. Our research contributes to a better understanding of contextual antecedents of the shape of gestation process and the way experience and intentions affect the successful creation of new ventures. Implications for theory and practice are discussed.     

National culture,effectuation, and new venture performance: global evidence from student entrepreneurs

Studies examining the relationship between national culture and entrepreneurial activity have largely ignored the influence of culture on individual decision-making. Recent years have witnessed considerable interest in cognitive logics employed by entrepreneurs. A growing body of literature examines factors contributing to the relative reliance on causal and effectual reasoning as entrepreneurs attempt to launch and grow new ventures, with evidence suggesting expert entrepreneurs engage more heavily in effectual reasoning than do novice entrepreneurs. The present study examines the mediating role of cognitive logic in explaining venture performance in differing cultural contexts. A series of hypotheses are tested using a sample of 3411 new ventures started by student entrepreneurs from 24 countries based on the Global University Entrepreneurial Spirit Students’ Survey. The findings indicate that both venture cognitive logics have positive effects on new venture performance and serve as mediators in the culture-performance relationship. Based on these findings, we conclude entrepreneurial reasoning is shaped not only by personal characteristics of entrepreneurs but also by aspects of the cultural context.     

Reconstructing entrepreneurial intentions to identify predisposition for growth

The entrepreneurial-intentions literature implicitly assumes that all intending entrepreneurs have similar growth aspirations, despite the observed dichotomy of growth- and independence-oriented new ventures. We integrate the ‘individual-opportunity nexus’ with heterogeneous opportunities into the entrepreneurial intentions model such that intending entrepreneurs may exhibit different growth intentions which drives their choice between growth- or independence-oriented new ventures. The individual's predisposition for growth (or not) will depend on the interaction of the salient outcomes offered by the opportunity with the attitudes of the individual towards those outcomes, and by differences in entrepreneurial self-efficacy. We find that the attitudinal antecedents differ for growth compared to independence intentions, and suggest a way to identify intending entrepreneurs who are predisposed to growth.     

Novice,Serial and Portfolio Entrepreneur Behaviour and Contributions

Policy-makers and practitioners are considering whether to allocate resources towards portfolio and serial entrepreneurs, as well as the provision of additional initiatives to increase the pool of novice entrepreneurs. To inform this policy debate, univariate statistical tests were used to test for differences between 354 firms owned by novice, serial and portfolio entrepreneurs in Scotland. Also, univariate tests were conducted to compare responses made by pairwise groups of entrepreneurs. No significant differences were detected between the three types of entrepreneurs with regard to several entrepreneur and firm demographic characteristics. Additional analysis revealed that portfolio entrepreneurs have more diverse experiences, and more resources than serial or novice entrepreneurs. On average, portfolio entrepreneurs appear to offer more attractive growth prospects than other entrepreneurs.