Linking international entrepreneurship to uncertainty,opportunity discovery,and cognition

In this paper, we suggest a model of international entrepreneurship that links cognition, noticing opportunities, absorbing uncertainty, and bearing uncertainty, to international entrepreneurial action, which is important because of the increased interest in international entrepreneurship. The ways in which cognition affects opportunity identification are discussed to show how international entrepreneurs’ cognitive processes work in terms of identifying opportunities. We also explore the role of cultural differences, with respect to tolerance for bearing uncertainty, on international entrepreneurship. Finally, the model is used to identify areas for future international entrepreneurship research.     

Differences in international opportunity identification between native and immigrant entrepreneurs

The aim of this study is to understand more about how identification of international opportunities differs between native and immigrant entrepreneurs. Based on a survey of 116 immigrant and 864 native Norwegian entrepreneurs with newly registered firms, we show that immigrant entrepreneurs are more likely to identify international opportunities than native entrepreneurs are. We reveal important differences in the identification process between native and immigrant entrepreneurs. Whereas general human capital has a significant positive effect on international opportunity identification for native entrepreneurs, we cannot find the same effect among immigrant entrepreneurs. Moreover, although financial capital positively influences international opportunity identification among native entrepreneurs, the same effect is significantly negative among immigrant entrepreneurs. Based on these findings, we conclude that native and immigrant entrepreneurs do not utilise the same resources to identify international opportunities. This study contributes to the literature on international entrepreneurship by documenting significant differences in how native and immigrant entrepreneurs identify international opportunities. It also contributes to immigrant entrepreneurship literature by bringing the opportunity-based view of entrepreneurship into the field.     

Socio-cognitive traits and entrepreneurship: The moderating role of economic institutions

We examine how country-level institutional context moderates the relationship between three socio-cognitive traits—entrepreneurial self-efficacy, alertness to new business opportunities, and fear of failure—and opportunity entrepreneurship. To do this, we blend social cognitive theory (SCT) with institutional theory to develop a multi-level model of entrepreneurial entry. We merge data from the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM) surveys and the Economic Freedom of the World (EFW) index for 45 countries from 2002 to 2012. Our results, which are based on a multi-level fixed-effects model, suggest that entrepreneurs' self-efficacy and alertness to new opportunities promote opportunity entrepreneurship while fear of failure discourages it. However, the strength of these relationships depends on the institutional context, with entrepreneurial self-efficacy and alertness substantially more likely to lead to new opportunity-driven ventures in countries with higher levels of economic freedom. These results provide suggestive evidence that economic freedom not only channels individual effort to productive entrepreneurial activities, but also affects the extent to which individuals' socio-cognitive resources are likely to mobilized and lead to high-growth entrepreneurship.     

Prior-knowledge and opportunity identification

An entrepreneur’s prior knowledge and experience play a critical role in his ability to identify and exploit entrepreneurial opportunities. Although entrepreneurship research has acknowledged the role that prior information and prior knowledge play in opportunity recognition, few studies have explored their role in entrepreneurial discovery. We test the role of a particular prior knowledge in entrepreneurial discovery within a laboratory setting. Participants were randomly assigned to one of two treatment groups. Those in the propitious treatment were given prior knowledge that oriented them toward the arbitrage opportunity within the experiment, and those in the unpropitious treatment were given prior knowledge that oriented them away. As hypothesized, those in the propitious treatment were significantly more likely to discover the arbitrage opportunity.     

International opportunity recognition as a critical component for leveraging Internet capabilities and international market performance

Recent research in the field of international entrepreneurship has emphasized the need for a better conceptualization of international opportunity recognition. Further, with advancements in information and communication technologies, such as the Internet, there has been a profound impact on the way in which international business is conducted, for example, enabling entrepreneurial firms to capitalize on the economic opportunities of an Internet environment. In this study, we propose a model, highlighting the importance of international opportunity recognition, as a critical component for leveraging Internet capabilities and international market performance. Through the lens of a resource capabilities approach, a quantitative, online survey was used to collect data from Australian, international entrepreneurial firms. Structural equation modelling results indicate that international opportunity recognition plays a central role in explaining how resources and Internet capabilities combine for the firm’s realization of international opportunities, and subsequent international performance. The findings enrich current understanding of how international entrepreneurial firms realize opportunities in Internet-based environments.     

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.     

Scientific Paradigms,Entrepreneurial Opportunities and Cycles in Economic Growth

In this paper I present a model of economic growth that combines insights from endogenous growth theory, the field of entrepreneurship research and the philosophy and economics of science. The model is built on three relatively standard assumptions and a Kuhnian approach to scientific knowledge accumulation. I assume that innovation generates economic growth, that opportunity driven entrepreneurship is an important source of innovation, that entrepreneurial opportunities increasingly arise out of scientific knowledge creation and that science follows Kuhnian paradigm shifting dynamics. The model then generates opportunity driven cycles in entrepreneurial activity that in turn cause waves of innovation and cycles in economic growth. This result is highly relevant and fills a gap in all three literatures as ‚traditional’ endogenous growth models typically generate constant growth rates in the steady state, entrepreneurship research keeps the origin of entrepreneurial opportunity exogenous and the literatures on the philosophy and economics of science ignore the important downstream economic implications of the non-profit driven institutional framework that governs scientific knowledge accumulation. This paper contributes by identifying scientific institutions and entrepreneurial activity as prerequisites for economic growth and it offers a tentative explanation for the rise and fall in the levels of scientific, entrepreneurial and economic activity over the Kondratieff-cycle.      

Creative personality,opportunity recognition and the tendency to start businesses: A study of their genetic predispositions

We explored the effect of having a creative personality on the identification of business opportunities and the tendency to start businesses. Examining a sample of 3242 twins from the United Kingdom, which we surveyed in 2011, we confirmed that people with creative personalities are more likely than others to identify business opportunities and start businesses. We investigated how much of these associations are accounted for by a shared genetic etiology and found that common genetic influences account for a significant fraction of them. We discuss the implications of our findings for research on creative personality, opportunity recognition and entrepreneurship.     

To thine own self be true: Images of self,images of opportunity,and entrepreneurial action

While research in entrepreneurship continues to increase general understanding of the opportunity-recognition process, questions about its nature nonetheless persist. In this study, we seek to complement recent research that relates “the self” to the opportunity-recognition process by deepening understanding of the self vis-à-vis this process. We do this by drawing on the self-representation literature and the decision-making literature to introduce two distinct types of images of self: images of vulnerability and images of capability. In a study of 1936 decisions about hypothetical entrepreneurial opportunities made by 121 executives of technology firms, we then investigate how both types of images of self affect the images of opportunities that underlie opportunity recognition. Our results indicate that both images of self – vulnerability and capability – impact one's images of opportunity.     

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.     

Strategic Entrepreneurs at Work: The Nature,Discovery, and Exploitation of Entrepreneurial Opportunities

What do entrepreneurial opportunities look like? How do firms discover and exploit these opportunities to create value and sustain competitive advantage? This paper reviews the strategic management and entrepreneurship literatures to identify the nature and character of entrepreneurial opportunities and the entrepreneurial strategies that firms employ to seize and commercialize these opportunities. Three emerging schools are identified. The economic school argues that entrepreneurial opportunities exist as a result of the distribution of information about material resources in society. The cultural cognitive school argues that entrepreneurial opportunities exist as a result of environmental ambiguity and the cultural resources available to interpret and define these opportunities. Finally, the sociopolitical school stresses the role of network and political structures in defining entrepreneurial opportunities. We integrate these perspectives to offer a way to improve understanding of the opportunity creation and exploitation process.     

International Opportunity Recognition among Small and Medium‐Sized Family Firms*

Current research in the field of entrepreneurship emphasizes the importance of opportunity recognition as a key element in the entrepreneurial process. It has been recognized that network ties, activeness and alertness, and prior knowledge are related to how entrepreneurs recognize new opportunities. However, it is unclear how important these factors are when a firm explores opportunities for entry into a foreign market. In this exploratory case study, covering the international opportunity recognition of eight family‐owned small and medium‐sized enterprises (SMEs), we found that the firms in question mainly recognized international opportunities by establishing new formal ties rather than using existing informal or family ties. The findings also indicated that due to the small size and the flexibility of the management team in family SMEs, these firms were able to react quickly to new international opportunities. However, there was no direct relationship between the prior knowledge of the firms and their international opportunity recognition. In addition, we found that trade exhibitions formed the primary context for the international opportunity recognition of the SMEs in this study. These findings motivate a set of five propositions that may lead to further studies on this topic.     

Is your organization conducive to the continuous creation of social value? Toward a social corporate entrepreneurship scale

Over the last decade, explicit emphasis on the creation of social value has grown in profit-seeking firms as well as nonprofits and has even led to the emergence of a new legal organizational classification known as for-benefit corporations. Like financial value, social value is dynamic and therefore subject to perpetual changes in the firm’s external environment, changes that yield opportunities and threats for the firm. Although social entrepreneurship researchers have begun to study the identification and exploitation of opportunities to create social value, this research has taken place primarily within the context of startup organizations. In contrast, corporate entrepreneurship research has emphasized value creation within existing firms, but focused primarily on the identification and exploitation of opportunities to create financial value. Combining the two, we examine the creation of social value within the firm by proposing the social corporate entrepreneurship scale (SCES), a new instrument that measures organizational antecedents for social corporate entrepreneurship and offers managers an opportunity to analyze whether the perceived environment is supportive of corporate entrepreneurial behaviors intended to create social as well as financial value. The article concludes with a discussion of the instrument’s potential contribution to managerial practice.     

Calling Baumol: What telephones can tell us about the allocation of entrepreneurial talent in the face of radical institutional changes

In his seminal contribution, Baumol (1990) proposes that the direction of entrepreneurial effort towards its productive (e.g., start-up activity) or unproductive (e.g., rent-seeking) use in a society depends on institutions or the “rules of the game”. We focus on an important micro-foundation of Baumol's theory namely that certain individuals change the direction of entrepreneurial efforts with institutional change. Our research contrasts with previous work on the role of institutions, which mostly focuses on the aggregate macro-level, while not observing individual behavior. We analyze who decides to start a venture in East Germany after the fall of the Berlin Wall and find that many individuals who demonstrated commitment to the anti-entrepreneurial communist regime in the GDR were active in launching new ventures soon after German re-unification. We argue that commitment to communism among post-communist entrepreneurs reflects rent-seeking. Once institutions change radically, entrepreneurial efforts are directed towards start-up activity. We rely on the German Socio-Economic Panel Study (SOEP) that includes information on whether East German respondents had a telephone before German re-unification, which was one of the most sought-after rewards for commitment to the regime. We find that telephone owners had a higher propensity of becoming successful firm founders. Telephone owners were also more likely to have an entrepreneurship-prone personality profile and value orientation. Our results confirm Baumol's theory and suggest that alertness to entrepreneurial arbitrage opportunities is guiding the redirection of entrepreneurial effort in the face of drastic institutional change.Executive summaryThere is a large body of literature on the effect of institutions on entrepreneurship. A good share of this literature is rooted in the seminal contribution by Baumol (1990) who argues that the shape of institutions determines whether people direct entrepreneurial effort to productive, unproductive or destructive entrepreneurial activities. Despite the fact that Baumol‘s main argument is at the individual micro-level, most of the literature focuses only on the macro-level implications of his theory. In contrast to most previous studies, we are not focusing on the aggregate level of entrepreneurship but explore the micro-foundations of Baumol's theory and analyze how (drastic) institutional change affects the entrepreneurial choice at the individual level.In our discussion of Baumol's work, we also introduce Kirzner's concept of individual alertness to arbitrage opportunities which he originally formulated for market economies. We extend Kirzner's insights on the role of alertness to other institutional contexts (e.g., socialism) and forms of arbitrage (e.g., engagement in socialist organizations) other than start-up activity, and highlight the role of institutional change in shaping processes of opportunity formation.It is important to understand how individuals allocate their entrepreneurial effort in times of major historical shocks and institutional changes for several reasons. First, since entrepreneurship is an important driver of economic growth and development, it is crucial to understand how institutional change affects entrepreneurial behavior at the individual level for designing policy measures targeted at increasing the entrepreneurial propensity of people. Second, the share of people with an entrepreneurial talent in a society is an enormous resource to cope with socio-economic change. Third, it is also important to understand the micro-foundations of Baumol's work as vast empirical evidence on the impact of institutions on entrepreneurial activities that is available at the macro-level relies on the validity of the micro-foundations.We find that people who demonstrated commitment to one of the most anti-entrepreneurial institutional regimes in history—communism—were more likely to start a firm after transition to a market economy. Our analysis is based on the case of East Germany that saw a sudden shift from an anti-entrepreneurial communist regime that did not reward start-up activities towards an entrepreneurship-facilitating market economy after the fall of the Berlin Wall. Those people who were actively committed to the regime as evidenced by material rewards obtained in the GDR were more likely to become (successful) self-employed after the fall of the Berlin Wall. We also observe that people with an entrepreneurship-prone personality profile and those who put a strong emphasis on entrepreneurial values were more likely to have obtained material rewards in communism that indicate a strong commitment to the system.We argue that applying and extending Baumol's and also Kirzner's ideas helps understanding this puzzling phenomenon. In essence, regime commitment can be seen as a form of rent-seeking activity, which is a classic example of unproductive entrepreneurial activity discussed by Baumol. Rent-seeking in the context of communism could be expressed, for example, in enthusiastic engagement in public organizations (e.g., party councils, youth organizations, state-owned enterprises) in exchange for specific material rewards. Their pronounced alertness to new arbitrage opportunities may have enabled these same individuals to switch to start-up activity once this option became available to them and if it was more profitable than rent-seeking.We contribute to the literature by supporting the idea that the institutional framework conditions determine the type of entrepreneurial activity to which entrepreneurially talented people devote their efforts. So far, this claim found support mainly in aggregated macro-level data. Another important insight from our analysis is that entrepreneurs are flexible and agile economic agents who are alert to arbitrage opportunities and able to promptly adapt themselves to even radical changes, such as the shock transition from a socialist command economy to a market economy. Alertness to opportunities in a market economy context could hardly be learned in an anti-entrepreneurial context. Hence, an immediate re-allocation of entrepreneurial efforts indicates that alertness to arbitrage opportunities emerging in a market economy does not necessarily require experience in a market economy context.Our assessment also suggests that institutional change is shaping subjective processes of opportunity formation. Hence, the debate on whether opportunities are ‘out there’ or they have to be created should take into consideration how institutions and institutional change set the boundaries for opportunities. In particular, identifying and pursuing new opportunities brought about by institutional change could represent a specific form of “entrepreneurship talent.”     

Entrepreneurship through a qualitative lens: Insights on the construction and/or discovery of entrepreneurial opportunity

This article applies inductive analytic techniques to identify and elaborate on two recurring themes that underpin the core puzzle of entrepreneurship research — where entrepreneurial opportunities come from. The first theme is the unique role of imprinting, or the profound influence of social and historical context in constraining the perceptual apparatus of entrepreneurs and delimiting the range of opportunities for innovation available to them. Second, our analysis offers insight into the counterbalancing role of reflexivity, operating at both individual and collective levels of analysis, in generating the ability of entrepreneurs to overcome the constraints of imprinting. These insights are based on a thematic review of the nine studies that comprise this special issue on qualitative research. The nine studies, individually and each in their own way, offer key insights into how we might better understand the emergence of entrepreneurial opportunity.     

Machines augmenting entrepreneurs: Opportunities (and threats) at the Nexus of artificial intelligence and entrepreneurship

Artificial intelligence (AI) refers to machines that are trained to perform tasks associated with human intelligence, interpret external data, learn from that external data, and use that learning to flexibly adapt to tasks to achieve specific outcomes. This paper briefly explains AI and looks into the future to highlight some of AI's broader and longer-term societal implications. We propose that AI can be combined with entrepreneurship to represent a super tool. Scholars can research the nexus of AI and entrepreneurship to explore the possibilities of this potential AI-entrepreneurship super tool and hopefully direct its use to productive processes and outcomes. We focus on specific entrepreneurship topics that benefit from AI's augmentation potential and acknowledge implications for entrepreneurship's dark side. We hope this paper stimulates future research at the AI-entrepreneurship nexus.Executive summaryArtificial intelligence (AI) refers to machines that are trained to perform tasks associated with human intelligence, interpret external data, learn from that external data, and use that learning to flexibly adapt to tasks to achieve specific outcomes. Machine learning is the most common form of AI and largely relies on supervised learning—when the machine (i.e., AI) is trained with labels applied by humans. Deep learning and adversarial learning involve training on unlabeled data, or when the machine (via its algorithms) clusters data to reveal underlying patterns.AI is simply a tool. Entrepreneurship is also simply a tool. How they are combined and used will determine their impact on humanity. While researchers have independently developed a greater understanding of entrepreneurship and AI, these two streams of research have primarily run in parallel. To indicate the scope of current and future AI, we provide examples of AI (at different levels of development) for four sectors—customer service, financial, healthcare, and tertiary education. Indeed, experts from industry research and consulting firms suggest many AI-related business opportunities for entrepreneurs to pursue.Further, we elaborate on several of these opportunities, including opportunities to (1) capitalize on the “feeling economy,” (2) redistribute occupational skills in the economy, (3) develop and use new governance mechanisms, (4) keep humans in the loop (i.e., humans as part of the decision making process), (5) expand the role of humans in developing AI systems, and (6) expand the purposes of AI as a tool. After discussing the range of business opportunities that experts suggest will prevail in the economy with AI, we discuss how entrepreneurs can use AI as a tool to help them increase their chances of entrepreneurial success. We focus on four up-and-coming areas for entrepreneurship research: a more interaction-based perspective of (potential) entrepreneurial opportunities, a more activities-based micro-foundation approach to entrepreneurial action, a more cognitively hot perspective of entrepreneurial decision making and action, and a more compassionate and prosocial role of entrepreneurial action. As we discuss each topic, we also suggest opportunities to design an AI system (i.e., entrepreneurs as potential AI designers) to help entrepreneurs (i.e., entrepreneurs as AI users).AI is an exciting development in the technology world. How it transforms markets and societies depends in large part on entrepreneurs. Entrepreneurs can use AI to augment their decisions and actions in pursuing potential opportunities for productive gains. Thus, we discuss entrepreneurs' most critical tasks in developing and managing AI and explore some of the dark-side aspects of AI. Scholars also have a role to play in how entrepreneurs use AI, but this role requires the hard work of theory building, theory elaboration, theory testing, and empirical theorizing. We offer some AI topics that we hope future entrepreneurship research will explore. We hope this paper encourages scholars to consider research at the nexus of AI and entrepreneurship.     

Imprinting with purpose: Prosocial opportunities and B Corp certification

Certified B Corporations are ventures that have chosen to embrace third party voluntary social and environmental audits conducted by an entrepreneurial non-profit enterprise called B Lab. In this special issue, we focus on the lifecycle of Certified B Corporations and its relation to the entrepreneurial journey. We highlight research at the intersection of opportunities and prosocial certification to identify patterns and processes which add significant value to ongoing conversations in the field of entrepreneurship while charting new research pathways. We develop a framework of prosocial venturing and certification that pinpoints several elements of likely consequence and curiosity. This offers new insights about the entrepreneurial process that hint at the importance of opportunity, identity metamorphosis and sedimentation/superseding work. We thereby interpret how the exploration of prosociality may add to conversations on how and why ventures resist or embrace change over time, to what effect and ultimately, how opportunities may be reBorn.     

Intrapreneurial intentions versus entrepreneurial intentions: distinct constructs with different antecedents

We posit that entrepreneurship and intrapreneurship are distinct entrepreneurial behaviors that differ in terms of their salient outcomes for the individual. Since individuals are likely to differ in their attitudes to these salient outcomes, and in their entrepreneurial self-efficacy, we hypothesize that a different strength of intention for entrepreneurship versus intrapreneurship will be due to individual differences in self-efficacy and in their attitudes to the outcomes from entrepreneurial, as compared to intrapreneurial, behavior. We find that while self-efficacy is significantly related to both entrepreneurial and intrapreneurial intentions, attitudes to income, ownership, and autonomy relate only to entrepreneurial intentions, while attitude to risk relates only to intrapreneurial intentions.     

The community dynamics of entrepreneurship: The birth of the american film industry, 1895–1929

This paper provides insight for practitioners by exploring the collective process of entrepreneurship in the context of the formation of new industries. In contrast to the popular notions of entrepreneurship, with their emphasis on individual traits, we argue that successful entrepreneurship is often not solely the result of solitary individuals acting in isolation. In many respects, entrepreneurs exist as part of larger collectives. First and foremost, there is the population of organizations engaging in activities similar to those of the entrepreneurial firm, which constitute a social system that can affect entrepreneurial success. In addition, there is also a community of populations of organizations characterized by interdependence of outcomes. Individual entrepreneurs may be more successful in the venturing process if they recognize some of the ways in which their success may depend on the actions of entrepreneurs throughout this community. Thus, we urge practitioners and theorists alike to include a community perspective in their approach to entrepreneurship. We also suggest that one way of conceptualizing the community of relevance might be in terms of populations of organizations that constitute the value chain. For example, in the early film industry a simple value chain with three functions—production, distribution, and exhibition—is a convenient heuristic for considering what populations of organizations might be relevant. As we show in our case study of that industry, a community model offers insights into the collective nature of entrepreneurship and the emergence of new industries.Our basic thesis is that the role of entrepreneurship in the creation of new industries can be conceptualized in terms of the dynamics of a community of organizational populations. At least three implications of this view may be important for practitioners. First, the kind of widespread and fundamental economic and social change that has often been linked with entrepreneurship requires a variety of behaviors. While most definitions of entrepreneurship have recognized that entrepreneurship requires the introduction of innovation, they have tended to ignore the importance of behaviors that subsequently support that innovation. To encompass these important behaviors, we believe that a broad definition of entrepreneurial behaviors is justified. To capture this, the framework of entrepreneurial behaviors that we develop includes the variety of behaviors that are important to the success of a collective process of entrepreneurship. We believe that recognition of a variety of different behaviors that are important to the success of the entrepreneurial process can help practicing entrepreneurs to understand more fully the complex dynamics of new industry creation. In terms of our framework, the range of behaviors of potential importance to entrepreneurship includes all of the following: creating a firm that innovates, creating a new business that imitates the practices of others, innovating within an existing business, and imitating by creating change in an existing business. In addition, we recognize that the kinds of innovative change that support entrepreneurship in the context of new industry creation are not narrowly technological; other kinds of product and service changes as well as administrative innovations may also be relevant.Second, entrepreneurship in one part of the community often creates the opportunity for entrepreneurial activity elsewhere in the community. For example, the founding of movie palaces did not begin until feature length films appeared. The challenge for entrepreneurs is to recognize these opportunities and act on them. Third, and related, the long-term success of entrepreneurial behaviors in one population of the community frequently requires that supportive entrepreneurial behaviors occur in other populations in the community. For example, the success of feature length films was hastened by the development of distribution organizations to replace traveling shows and localized markets. Their success was also hastened by the movement away from nickelodeons towards larger, more comfortable exhibition outlets, such as theaters and show palaces. When the interdependence among populations in the community is stated this way, another challenge to entrepreneurs becomes clear: the facilitation and encouragement of supportive behaviors in other populations.We are not the first to propose that the community is important, but we contribute to this idea by showing in a specific context how various types of behaviors interact and ultimately promote entrepreneurship throughout the community. Our contribution for practitioners is twofold. We would urge practitioners to consider the variety of behaviors necessary to create, reinforce, and maintain fundamental and widespread change. Further, we would suggest that practitioners consider how activities in a broad community of organizations can set the stage for entrepreneurship and have a high impact on its ultimate success or failure. Thus, we would suggest that practitioners who seek to innovate should search broadly for opportunities and understand the importance of relations with businesses elsewhere in the community. The success of their entrepreneurial efforts may depend on the occurrence of supportive entrepreneurial changes in those businesses as well. Their ability to do this will be enhanced by a broad understanding of entrepreneurial behaviors and sensitivity to the opportunities that their entrepreneurial behaviors may create for others.     

Advancing societal grand challenge research at the interface of entrepreneurship and international business: A review and research agenda

Societal grand challenges are increasingly attracting the attention of both entrepreneurship and international business scholars. While entrepreneurship focuses on the opportunities that emerge and need for bold and innovative solutions, international business research emphasizes the global reach of the challenges and role of multinational enterprises. Although both conversations are insightful, we argue that examining one without the other gives an incomplete picture on how to address grand challenges. In this paper, we conduct a systematic review of the conversation on grand challenges in the international business and entrepreneurship literature. Upon synthesizing the results, we create an integrated framework and research agenda for viewing grand challenges through an international entrepreneurial lens.