Defining a forum for entrepreneurship scholars

This study defines a forum for entrepreneurship scholars by updating [MacMillan, I.C., 1993. The emerging forum for entrepreneurship scholars. J. Bus. Venturing 8, 377–381]. A three-stage process is used in which entrepreneurship scholars identify and subjectively rate journals as publication outlets for entrepreneurship research. 25 journals were rated “appropriate” or higher, including both generalist and entrepreneurship specialist journals, both academic and practitioner journals, and journals from multiple academic disciplines. Compared to the ten-year earlier survey, there is a strong increase in the ratings of specialist journals.     

Communities at the nexus of entrepreneurship and societal impact: A cross-disciplinary literature review

Although there is wide recognition of the importance of entrepreneurship for generating societal impact, entrepreneurial activities alone rarely achieve a positive impact without the engagement of communities. To date, however, entrepreneurship researchers have tended to overlook the importance of community for creating societal impact through entrepreneurship, and lack a comprehensive understanding of the nature and roles of communities. To address this, we conduct a systematic review of the literature published in 51 journals across the Management and Entrepreneurship, Economic Development/Community Development, Economic Geography and Regional Science, Energy, and Public Administration disciplines that makes three contributions. First, it identifies a new typology of community and proposes a comprehensive framework of roles through which societal impact is created by entrepreneurship for, in, with, enabled by, and driven by communities. Second, it demonstrates that the key to understanding how community relates to societal impact creation is to jointly account for both its type(s) and role(s). By linking community types and roles, the findings also suggest a theoretical contribution based on the relationship between the degree of formalization of a community type, and the degree of agency that a community role enacts. Third, the review underscores that communities are not just static settings but can also be dynamic actors in efforts to use entrepreneurship to create societal impact. Our cross-disciplinary review highlights trends and gaps in the extant literature and provides researchers with an evidence-based research agenda to guide future inquiry on this vital topic.     

Innovations, Stakeholders & Entrepreneurship

In modern societies entrepreneurship and innovation are widely seen as key sources of economic growth and welfare increases. Yet entrepreneurial innovation has also meant losses and hardships for some members of society: it is destructive of some stakeholders’ wellbeing even as it creates new wellbeing among other stakeholders. Both the positive benefits and negative externalities of innovation are problematic because entrepreneurs initiate new ventures before their private profitability and/or social costs can be fully recognized. In this paper we consider three analytical frameworks within which these issues might be examined: pre-commitments, contractarianism, and an entrepreneurial framework. We conclude that the intersection of stakeholder theory and entrepreneurial innovation is a potentially rich arena for research. Nicholas Dew, Ph.D. is an assistant professor at the Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey, CA. He teaches strategic management in private and public sector organizations. His research interests include entrepreneurship, strategy and innovation. He has published in several scholarly journals, including Strategic Management Journal, the Journal of Business Venturing, Industrial and Corporate Change and the Journal of Evolutionary Economics. Saras D. Sarasvathy, Ph.D. is an associate professor at the Darden Graduate School of Business Administration. She teaches courses in entrepreneurship and ethics in Darden's MBA and doctoral programs. Her research focuses on the cognitive basis for high-performance entrepreneurship. She has published in various scholarly journals, including the Academy of Management Review, Strategic Management Journal, the Journal of Businesss Venturing and the Journal of Evolutionary Economics. Her first book Effectuation: Elements of Entrepreneurial Expertise was recently published by Edward Elgar.     

Breaking the “Bamboo Curtain” and the “Glass Ceiling”: The Experience of Women Entrepreneurs in High-Tech Industries in an Emerging Market

Despite the role women play in job creation, economic growth and society revitalization, especially in economies undergoing fundamental transformations, issues emerging from women in entrepreneurship have not received adequate attention in academic research. As a result, our understanding of women entrepreneurship in emerging markets as well as in nontraditional industries is even more limited. In this study, I attempt to partially fill the gap by comparing entrepreneurial orientations and venture performance between men and women entrepreneurs in electronics industry in Chinese transition economy. I offer insights gained from statistical analyses based on a survey as well as case study. Results reveal that while women are influenced by the same factors that affect decision making among men and exhibit some similarities, they differ from men in their willingness to take more risks and make bolder moves in pursuit of greater returns and future competitive advantage. In addition, women entrepreneurs outperform their male counterparts. I compare these findings with existing literature and offer suggestions for future research. Justin Tan is Professor and the Newmont Chair in Business Strategy in the Schulich School of Business at York University in Canada. He is also a Distinguished Visiting Professor in the Guanghua School of Management at Peking University in China. His research has been appeared in academic journals such as Strategic Management Journal, Journal of Management, Journal of Management Studies, among others. He serves as editor, associate editor, guest editor, and reviewer for most leading management journals. His research has been supported by Ford Foundation, Fulbright Foundation, among others.     

Rigor and Relevance: On the Development of Entrepreneurship Research in China

This study examines the contributions of Chinese entrepreneurship research to academic knowledge and its practical implications. Specifically, we investigate how Chinese entrepreneurship research meets the standards of rigor and relevance based on a review of 64 papers published in five major scholarly journals in the Chinese mainland. Results show that Chinese entrepreneurship research has paid comparatively little attention to the “rigor” dimension, while focusing more heavily on practical relevance than on academic relevance on the “relevance” dimension. Future directions for China’s entrepreneurship research are also discussed.     

International ethnic entrepreneurship: Antecedents, outcomes and environmental context

The paper presents an overview of articles on international ethnic entrepreneurship between 1936 and 2009 from 32 journals published in SSCI using content analysis. The insights gained from the studies are used to make recommendations for future studies on international ethnic entrepreneurship. The most important findings of this study are the crucial effects of transnationalism, mixed-embeddedness and the interaction among social, human and financial capital on ethnic entrepreneurship.     

Switching to self-employment can be good for your health

Relying on theoretical insights from the Job Demand-Control model, which links occupational characteristics to health, this paper provides the first causal evidence of the physical and mental health consequences of self-employment. I utilize German longitudinal data for the period 2002–2014 and difference-in-differences estimations to study switches from unemployment to self-employment (necessity entrepreneurship) and transitions from regular- to self-employment (opportunity entrepreneurship). I find that necessity entrepreneurs experience improvements in their mental but not physical health, while opportunity entrepreneurship leads to both physical and mental health gains. Importantly, the health improvements cannot be explained by changes in income or working conditions and are not driven by personality and risk preferences or the local unemployment conditions. As such, the findings highlight an additional non-monetary benefit of self-employment and have implications for entrepreneurship theory and practice, current and would-be entrepreneurs, as well as policy-makers.     

The role of context in SME internationalization – A review

This article reviews how context has been considered in studies on SME internationalization. It examines 333 articles published during the period 2010–2020 in leading international business, entrepreneurship, strategy and international marketing journals. It identifies their key findings, discusses the theoretical perspectives informing this literature, analyzes conceptual and methodological challenges, and suggests paths for theory development and future research. The review also provides a platform from which to address some of the limitations in international business [IB] theories when applied to SMEs, including organizational size as a boundary condition.     

Variations in University entrepreneurship education: An empirical study of an evolving field

University entrepreneurship education is in the embryonic stage, still a new venture in itself. Recent years have shown unabated growth in the number of universities offering entrepreneurship courses, but the subject is still considered suspect by many faculty and administrators.Effectively meeting university resistance to entrepreneurship course-work first requires an appreciation of the perceptions and misperceptions of the faculty and administration. Once the viewpoints are understood, counteractive communication strategies can be developed. Perceptions may include the following: (a) “small business” (vs. entrepreneurship) is a low-status realm associated with poor-quality research, and small is by connotation less worthwhile than large; (b) sophisticated management practices reside in larger firms and these practices coincide well with the functional organization in business colleges; and (c) entrepreneurship is a fad. More important, however, is the perception that “non-industry, non-stage-of-the-business-life-cycle, non-size truths apply to all,” and that entrepreneurship is therefore too specialized an area for scholarly endeavor. Yet a hard sciences scholar recently pondered, “How could the business discipline ever hope to develop comprehensive theories of business behavior without the equivalent in biology of developmental biology? How do organisms grow and mature into Fortune 500 firms?”With this backdrop an in-depth survey of expert opinion is presented, based on the beliefs and experiences of 15 highly regarded university entrepreneurship educators. These peer-identified respondents reacted to a wide variety of factors that were hypothesized to affect the outcomes of entrepreneurship education efforts. They included (a) educational objectives, (b) administrative and program development issues, and (c) course attributes.Although there were a variety of educational objectives cited by the respondents, most important was to “increase awareness and understanding of the process involving in initiating and managing a new business enterprise.” Other important objectives included attention to entrepreneurship as a career option, contributing to understanding functional business interrelationships, and attention to the characteristics of the entrepreneur. Other objectives concerned building students' selfconfidence, opportunity sensitivity, and analytical skills. Attention to the role of new and smaller firms in the economy was not rated as important.Organizationally, it was viewed as critical to have the support of the college administration. It was not universally agreed that an entrepreneurship major is desirable, with a bimodal response distribution. For universities with multiple courses, there appear to be three conceptual bases, sometimes interspersed, including the business functions, the business plan, and the business life cycle. It was agreed that entrepreneurship coursework should be more experientally oriented than other business school coursework, that the involvement of adjunct faculty should not be minimized, and that faculty research is important to an entrepreneurship education program. There was lukewarm support for business outreach programs and disagreement over the desirability of a student entrepreneurship club.Entrepreneurship course features considered most important were development of a business plan project and entrepreneurs as speakers and role models. Cases ranked next in importance followed by lectures and assigned readings.The future will bring experimentation with various program and course attributes, more research on pedagogy with the measurement of learning outcomes, the increased entree of entrepreneurship Ph.D.'s, and the maturation of this early-stage venture into entrepreneurship education.     

A Positive Theory of Social Entrepreneurship

I propose a theory aimed at advancing scholarly research in social entrepreneurship. By highlighting the key trade-off between value creation and value capture and explaining when situations of simultaneous market and government failure may arise, I suggest that social entrepreneurship is the pursuit of sustainable solutions to neglected problems with positive externalities. I further discuss the situations in which problems with externalities are likely to be neglected and derive the central goal and logic of action of social entrepreneurs, in contrast to commercial entrepreneurs. Overall, this article provides a conceptual framework that allows understanding the growing phenomena of social entrepreneurship and its role in the functioning of modern society.     

The influence of people on the performance of IPO firms

Until the mid-1990s, the study of initial public offerings (IPOs) fell mainly under the purview of the finance literature. Within the last 10 years, however, management and entrepreneurship scholars have delved more into this subject area, as well. This article summarizes research examining IPO firms that has appeared in management and entrepreneurship journals, highlighting in particular the influence of individuals (namely executives and boards of directors) on IPO firm outcomes.     

The development of an infrastructure for entrepreneurship

This paper takes a macroperspective of entrepreneurship, and focuses on the issues and events involved in constructing an industrial infrastructure that facilitates and constrains entrepreneurship. This infrastructure includes: (1) institutional arrangements to legitimate, regulate, and standardize a new technology, (2) public resource endowments of basic scientific knowledge, financing mechanisms, and a pool of competent labor, as well as (3) proprietary R&D, manufacturing, marketing, and distribution functions by private entrepreneurial firms to commercialize the innovation for profit. Although extensive research substantiates the importance of these infrastructure components, they have been treated as externalities to entrepreneurship. By incorporating these components within a single framework, one can systematically examine how various actors and functions interact to facilitate and constrain entrepreneurship.The paper makes three contributions to understanding entrepreneurship. First, I believe that the study of entrepreneurship is deficient if it focuses exclusively on the characteristics and behaviors of individual entrepreneurs, on the one hand, and if it treats the social, economic, and political factors influencing entrepreneurship as external demographic statistics, on the other hand. Popular folklore notwithstanding, the process of entrepreneurship is a collective achievement requiring key roles from numerous entrepreneurs in both the public and private sectors.Second, the paper examines how and why this infrastructure for entrepreneurship emerges. I argue that while this infrastructure facilitates and constrains individual entrepreneurs, it is the latter who construct and change the industrial infrastructure. This infrastructure does not emerge and change all at once by the actions of one or even a few key entrepreneurs. Instead, it emerges through the accretion of numerous institutional, resource, and proprietary events that co-produce each other over an extended period. Moreover, the very institutional arrangements and resource endowments created to facilitate industry emergence can become inertial forces that hinder subsequent technological development and adaptation by proprietary firms. This generative process has a dynamic history that is itself important to study systematically if one is to understand how novel forms of technologies, organizations, and institutions emerge.Finally, the paper emphasizes that the process of entrepreneurship is not limited to the for-profit sector; numerous entrepreneurial actors in the public and not-for-profit sectors play crucial roles. It motivates one to examine the different roles played by these actors, and how their joint contributions interact to develop and commercialize a new technology. This in turn makes it possible to understand how the risk, time, and cost to an individual entrepreneur are significantly influenced by developments in the overall Infrastructure for entrepreneurship. It also explains why the entrepreneurs who run in packs will be more successful than those that go it alone to develop their innovations.     

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.     

Gender Characterizations in Entrepreneurship: A Multi‐Level Investigation of Sex‐Role Stereotypes about High‐Growth,Commercial, and Social Entrepreneurs

The purpose of this study is to cast new light on possible gender biases in implicit theories people hold about various forms of entrepreneurial activity. Using social role theory, we delve into sex‐role stereotypes associated with high‐ and low‐growth entrepreneurship and commercial and social entrepreneurship. Predictions were tested with an experimental design using both a between‐subject design to capture group‐level stereotypes and a within‐subject design to capture individual‐level stereotypes. Findings reveal that commercial and high‐growth entrepreneurs are perceived as more similar to men than to women and higher on agency than communality. Conversely, low‐growth entrepreneurs are perceived as more similar to women than men, and higher on communality than agency. Social entrepreneurs are uniquely perceived as similar to both men and women, though they are also considered higher on agency than communality. Interestingly, female, but not male respondents, perceive some overlap between the feminine gender role and high‐growth and commercial entrepreneurship. Notably, those higher on modern sexism perceive less overlap between entrepreneurship and femininity. Taken together, our results suggest that commercial high‐growth entrepreneurship is most strongly male‐typed, which is likely to be problematic for women (and non‐traditional men) wanting to start growth‐oriented ventures. Implications and directions for future research are discussed.     

The Scientometrics of Social Entrepreneurship and Its Establishment as an Academic Field

This paper provides an overview of the state of art of research on social entrepreneurship and the establishment of this topic in the academic world. It uses scientometric methods in measuring the maturity of social entrepreneurship research. The empirical part reveals the exponentially growing number of papers, the institutionalization of social entrepreneurship in seven dimensions, the emergence of thematic clusters, and methodological issues. The paper makes concrete suggestions on how to overcome methodological challenges. Furthermore, we provide a ranking of the 22 most cited academic contributions in social entrepreneurship. Surprisingly, almost half of the most cited papers have not been published in journals but in books, raising doubts about the current (over‐)rating of journal publications.     

Individualism,collectivism, and entrepreneurship: A framework for international comparative research

This article presents a theoretical framework and seven related propositions linking national culture—specifically individualist and collectivist orientations—to entrepreneurship. The framework identifies how both orientations affect the functions of entrepreneurship. This perspective casts new light on cross-cultural research that, while generally confirming individualism-entrepreneurship ties, has had less success accounting for the entrepreneurial vitality of largely “collectivist” nations—especially Japan.There are two main streams of research on the effects of individualism and collectivism on entrepreneurship. The micro-level stream finds that those who generate variety—founders and corporate entrepreneurs—tend to be individualistic. This work does not identify proclivities for the other entrepreneurial function, leveraging resources. The macro-stream associates both individualism and collectivism with national levels of economic growth and innovation.The framework comprises two dimensions depicting (1) levels of individualism and collectivism, and (2) the entrepreneurial functions. I conceive of individualism and collectivism as two characteristic orientations distributed in varying proportions within and between cultures and individuals. These characteristic are not polar ends of a continuum, as commonly described. The second dimension recognizes that entrepreneurship requires two activities: generating variety through innovation or new ventures, and leveraging resources internally or by establishing external ties.This paper's main contribution comes from the recognition that two entrepreneurial functions are very different processes. Variety generation requires mostly individual creativity and initiative; resource leverage depends on efficient relationships that thrive under collectivism, but can be induced contractually between individualists. These differences reveal that individualism and collectivism neither categorically encourage nor discourage entrepreneurship; rather they influence how its functions are accomplished.The propositions outlined in this paper can sharpen future research on individualism, collectivism, and entrepreneurship. In short, the paper claims individualists produce breakthroughs that collectivists implement and improve. Individualists show proclivities for new venture formation and making major innovations. They tend to leverage their resources through contract-based relations. For example, resources are stretched internally using contingent, performance-based incentives, and outside funds can be acquired through venture-capital agreements. In contrast, collectivists generate variety through group-based, incremental improvements and changes. Collectivists leverage their own resources by harnessing “clanlike” affiliations, and securing the use of the resources of other firms by building close relational ties, like keiretsu. Theory acknowledging that individualism and collectivism are not negatively related allows us to recognize that both orientations can contribute to entrepreneurship.The framework has key implications for entrepreneur/managers and policymakers. Recognizing that individualism and collectivism both contribute to entrepreneurship can guide decision-makers to examine the inventory of these orientations in their firms or regions, and implement policies to address shortfalls. For example, Americans can concentrate more on building close network ties while Japanese can focus on encouraging individual innovations.     

Expressions of Relationship Networking in International Entrepreneurship

The role of networks is a major factor in the internationalization process for entrepreneurs. In this article, we analyze the influence of social networks in international entrepreneurship. We developed a multiple case study based on a qualitative perspective, selecting four fruit exporters from the Brazil’s semi-arid region and used a qualitative and longitudinal design. These firms are among the largest fruit exporters in Brazil. Content analysis was derived by examining organizational documents, bibliographical material, and semi-structured interviews with 30 managers and consultants. We used ATLAS.ti software to analyze the collected material. The major networks were formed with buyers and competitors, affording benefits such as trust and information; relationships were therefore formed in both vertical and horizontal directions. Consequently, and due to their influence on the internationalization process, social networks are considered a relevant subject in international entrepreneurship. Moreover, the expressions of social networking have interfaces with both the exploration of international opportunities and attitude towards risk, as well as the development of competitive features that are the fundamental dimensions of international entrepreneurship. The results reveal that social networks are fundamental to entrepreneurs’ businesses and are strategic for their development and maintenance. Recognition of such role of these networks in international entrepreneurship is the main contribution of this paper.     

Trends in the market for entrepreneurship faculty, 1989–1998

The last decade has seen a dramatic rise in the number and status of entrepreneurship programs in schools of business and management. The popularity of entrepreneurship courses has increased dramatically among both graduate and undergraduate students. Alumni and external constituencies of schools of business have generally been supportive of the development of entrepreneurship programs, and in fact in many instances it has been the demands of these constituencies that have led to the creation or expansion of entrepreneurship programs within these schools. The growth in entrepreneurship programs has been fostered by an increase in the popularity of entrepreneurship, an increase in the status accorded entrepreneurs, as well as an increase in the recognition by the business press of the importance of entrepreneurship in the larger economy. Despite the increase in popularity within the field, there has also been considerable resistance from within the faculties of many institutions to the expansion of entrepreneurship programs. Faculty outside the field have been, and many remain, very skeptical about the validity of entrepreneurship as an academic field, the quality and rigor of entrepreneurship research and the need to hire academic faculty to teach and research in the field. The last decade has seen the confluence of these opposing forces.This disparity has created the question of whether the external forces supporting entrepreneurship are overcoming the inertia inherent in academic institutions and succeeding in institutionalizing the study of entrepreneurship within schools of business and management. This study hopes to shed some light on which of these forces is winning by addressing the question of whether the field of entrepreneurship is moving toward or has been institutionalized as part of the curriculum and research within schools of business and management. It also examines the institutionalization of the field by analyzing the change in the number and level of entrepreneurship positions, the quality of the recruiting institutions as well as the number, level and training of entrepreneurship candidates during the years 1989–1998. Data was obtained from the Academy of Management Placement Roster and The Chronicle of Higher Education for the years 1989–1998. Previous entrepreneurship education researchers have examined the number of endowed chairs and professorships, conferences, journals, programs and various centers for entrepreneurial education, however sparse research, if any, has been performed on the trends and characteristics of candidates and positions in the field of entrepreneurship.The results of this study are very encouraging. Both the demand for and the supply of entrepreneurship faculty have increased spectacularly during the last nine years. Between 1989/90 and 1997/98 the number of entrepreneurship positions increased 253% while the number of candidates increased by 94%. During this period the number of positions that list entrepreneurship as the primary field has increased ten-fold from 5 to 50 and the number of candidates that list entrepreneurship as their primary field has increased four-fold from 5 to 20. During the same period the number of secondary and tertiary positions have increased 116% and 78%, respectively, and the number of secondary and tertiary candidates have increased by 67% and 53%. The percentage of entrepreneurship positions listing entrepreneurship as the primary field has increased from 19% in 89/90 to 54% in 1997/98. Overall, the growth in the number of primary entrepreneurship positions is very encouraging.In the end, the results of this study are very encouraging. Both the demand and the supply of entrepreneurship faculty have increased spectacularly during the last nine years. The field has clearly made significant progress toward being institutionalized. However, it is still too soon to conclude that the commitment to entrepreneurship by schools of business and management is irreversible. One clear indication of the tenuous status is that, unlike strategy and international business, there has been no mandate from the American Assembly of Collegiate Schools of Business that entrepreneurship be incorporated into the curriculum of all accredited schools. Entrepreneurship remains an elective subject in most schools and therefore depends on student interest. The field has made great strides during the 1990s, but a couple of hurdles remain.