Content uploaded by William Gartner
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by William Gartner on Oct 02, 2018
Content may be subject to copyright.
What are we talking about when we talk about entrepreneurship? The Journal of Business Venturing, 5, 15-25
Abstract
The purpose of this research was to explore the underlying meanings researchers and practitioners have about entrepreneurship and to outline some themes that characterize the major issues and concerns that constitute the debate about entrepreneurship as a field of study.The process used to identify the themes that characterize entrepreneurship took the form of a policy Delphi. This Delphi was constructed as a series of three questionnaires to elicit definitions of entrepreneurship that were then analyzed and evaluated. In the first phase, a one-page questionnaire asking for a definition of entrepreneurship was sent to leading academic researchers in entrepreneurship, to business leaders and to politicians. The first questionnaire asked individuals: What is your definition of entrepreneurship? We received 44 responses (36 from academics, 8 from business leaders and none from politicians) from the 280 individuals whom we invited to participate (a 16% response rate).In phase 2, all of the entrepreneurship definitions from the first questionnaire were typed and sent back with a second questionnaire to the 44 respondents. The second questionnaire was generated through a content analysis of the entrepreneurship definitions. Ninety attributes were identified from the entrepreneurship definitions. The second questionnaire asked participants: How important is each attribute to your definition of entrepreneurship? Participants ranked the attributes from very important to unimportant. Of the 44 participants in phase 2, 41 responded to the second questionnaire (93% response rate). The responses from the second questionnaire were then evaluated and factor analyzed. The factor analysis sought to cluster the 90 attributes into a smaller set of factors (themes). The eight-factor solution was selected. The debate about what constitutes the nature of entrepreneurship can be characterized by these eight themes.The Entrepreneur. The entrepreneur theme is the idea that entrepreneurship involves individuals with unique personality characteristics and abilities. Innovation. The innovation theme is characterized as doing something new as an idea, product, service, market, or technology in a new or established organization. Organization Creation. The organization creation theme described the behaviors involved in creating organizations. Creating Value. This theme articulated the idea that entrepreneurship creates value. Profit or Nonprofit. The profit/nonprofit theme is concerned with whether entrepreneurship involves profit-making organizations only. Growth. At issue in this theme is the importance of growth as a characteristic of entrepreneurship. Uniqueness. This theme suggested that entrepreneurship must involve uniqueness. The Owner-Manager. This theme suggested that entrepreneurship involves individuals who are owners and managers of their businesses.The third phase of the Delphi asked the 41 participants to evaluate and comment on the eight factors generated in the second phase. Of the 41 participants in phase 3, 34 responded to the third questionnaire (83% response rate). Since no one agreed-upon definition of entrepreneurship appeared to emerge from the Delphi process, the researcher undertook a cluster analysis of the responses to the third questionnaire to uncover whether any similarities in viewpoints existed among the participants. The data was cluster analyzed using both hierarchical (complete linkage and single linkage) and K-means clustering techniques. Results from these analyses revealed two distinct clusters. The majority (79%) of the participants were clustered in group 1. The focus of this group seems to be on the characteristics of entrepreneurship. Group 1 looked at what happened in the situation. This group indicated that a situation was entrepreneurial if they could answer “yes” to these questions: Is there an entrepreneur involved? Is there innovation? Is there growth? Is there uniqueness? The other group, group 2, focused on the outcomes of entrepreneurship. Group 2 saw a situation as entrepreneurial only if value was created or if someone gained.
... A partir de teóricos como Cantillon, Schumpeter e outros, diferentes autores têm procurado compreender as especificidades associadas a esse fenômeno (PAIVA JR; CORDEIRO, 2002). Gartner (1990) apresenta aqueles que considerou como os principais domínios de estudo do campo: indivíduo empreendedor, inovação, criação de organizações, criação de valor, organizações lucrativas e não-lucrativas, crescimento e proprietário-gerente. Desse modo, observa-se a existência de um conjunto de elementos acerca do fenômeno do empreendedorismo, que surgiram a partir da exploração e desenvolvimento de diferentes explicações sobre o fenômeno empreendedor. Essas explicações se referem a eventos como a inovação, a criação de novos negócios, características individuais de empreendedores e de organizações empreendedoras (ANTONCIC; HISRICH, 2003). ...
... A criação de valor consiste em outro elemento central para a configuração do fenômeno do intraempreendedorismo. Essa criação de valor seria caracterizada por meio da criação de um novo negócio e/ou da transformação de um negócio já existente, da geração de mudanças no âmbito organizacional e de mercado, do rompimento com o status quo, da geração de lucros, e do desenvolvimento de um negócio já existente (GARTNER, 1990). ...
... O ato de transformação e/ou criação de um novo negócio, gerar mudanças, criar e crescer uma empresa, criar lucros, e romper com o status quo (GARTNER, 1990). ...
Este trabalho fundamenta-se em uma interação teórica entre o campo de pesquisas sobre empreendedorismo e de empresas familiares, visualizada por meio da preocupação com a sucessão. Ao analisar tal interação, verifica-se a possibilidade de construção de um processo de sucessão empreendedora, processo este socialmente construído a partir da interação entre predecessores e sucessores no âmbito de uma empresa familiar e que envolve a manifestação de um conjunto de elementos associados à sucessão e ao intraempreendedorismo. Elementos tais como a aceitabilidade, credibilidade e legitimidade contribuem para que os sucessores construam sua própria liderança, passando a atuar de forma estratégica na organização. Ao assumir essa postura de liderança, os sucessores começam a agir de forma intraempreendedora, na medida em que começam a inovar, a criar valor, contribuindo para o crescimento e competitividade da empresa. Assim, verifica-se a construção de um processo de sucessão empreendedora, fundamentado na perspectiva da ação intraempreendedora de sucessores, a qual contribui para a renovação e continuidade futura da empresa familiar. Com isso, abrem-se perspectivas para novos estudos tanto no campo mais amplo do empreendedorismo, como no campo mais específico das empresas familiares. 1 Introdução Nesse artigo, busca-se construir uma vertente diferenciada para a apreensão do processo de sucessão em empresas familiares. Na medida em que se visualiza analiticamente o campo de estudos sobres empresas familiares, é possível perceber que a sucessão tem sido a temática mais estudada ao longo dos últimos anos (SHARMA, 2006; BROCKHAUS, 2004; DAVEL; COLBARI, 2003; DAVEL; COLBARI, 2000). A sucessão vem sendo pesquisada mediante abordagens variadas, a partir de um quadro caracterizado pela coexistência de diversos campos de análise. Não obstante a amplitude temática das pesquisas, existem muitos tópicos que ainda não foram adequadamente estudados, revelando falhas de diferentes construtos ao abordar o processo sucessório em empresas familiares (BROCKHAUS, 2004). Assim, apesar de ser o principal foco de estudos e pesquisas sobre empresas familiares, a sucessão ainda representa um desafio no campo da interpretação (BORGES et al., 2008). Nesse sentido, há uma necessidade de se ampliar os horizontes teóricos em relação às empresas familiares em geral, e sobre o processo de sucessão em particular. Ao analisar as possibilidades de interação existentes entre os campos do empreendedorismo e de empresas familiares, verifica-se a possibilidade de construção de um processo diferenciado, aqui denominado como sucessão empreendedora, processo este socialmente construído a partir da interação entre predecessores e sucessores no âmbito de uma empresa familiar e que envolve a manifestação de um conjunto de elementos associados à sucessão e ao intraempreendedorismo. Com efeito, a manifestação de elementos associados ao fenômeno do empreendedorismo no decorrer de processos sucessórios se apresenta, em muitos casos, como fator que pode sustentar a sobrevivência e a continuidade de empresas familiares ao longo de suas gerações futuras (KELLERMANNS; EDDLESTON, 2006). A exploração dessa relação entre sucessão e empreendedorismo, por sua vez, representa um potencial científico, na
... Tais aspectos impactam diretamente no aproveitamento das oportunidades e nas possibilidades de manutenção e crescimento da organização (Lousã & Gomes, 2016). Contudo, verifica-se que as empresas familiares são mais resistentes à transformações e a inovação -as quais poderão resultar na criação de um novo produto, serviço, tecnologia e/ou atividade em uma empresa já estabelecida (Gartner, 1990), além de envolver novos processos, formas de organização, mercados, bem como o desenvolvimento de novas habilidades (Zhao, 2005). ...
Objetivo: Identificar se existe diferença significativa entre as dimensões da cultura organizacional praticada por indústrias familiares e não familiares. Método/abordagem: Empregou-se uma pesquisa quantitativa e descritiva mediante uma survey com corte transversal. A amostra foi do tipo não probabilística composta por 44 indústrias do município de Flores da Cunha, Rio Grande do Sul, Brasil. Os dados foram coletados por meio de uma adaptação do Denison Organizational Culture Survey e analisados pelo teste não paramétrico de Mann-Whitney para comparação entre grupos. Principais Resultados: Observou-se que os grupos não diferem quanto às dimensões Envolvimento e Consistência, mas em metade das variáveis concernentes à Adaptabilidade houve diferença. Nesse conjunto de variáveis, a maior significância refere-se à capacidade de mudanças rápidas e fáceis diante de alterações do macro ambiente (p=0,027), demonstrando que as empresas familiares são mais resistentes às transformações e a adoção de inovação. O incentivo e as recompensas aos indivíduos que inovam também se mostraram menos comuns em empresas familiares (p=0,032). Quanto à dimensão Missão, constatou-se que empresas não familiares tendem a identificar de maneira mais clara seu propósito e missão (p=0,005). Contribuições teóricas/práticas/sociais: A pesquisa contribui para a área gerencial por abordar uma temática que, apesar de consolidada, ainda é precariamente explorada no âmbito dos negócios familiares. Ademais, o estudo proporciona subsídios para o desenvolvimento e a implementação de estratégias organizacionais orientadas à melhoria dos processos e da eficácia gerencial. Originalidade/relevância: Justifica-se pela aplicação de um questionário universalmente empregado para a verificação da cultura organizacional direcionando-o ao contexto dos negócios familiares, contribuindo para o ineditismo e a pertinência da investigação.
... Further studies have considered the legitimacy of entrepreneurship as a field of research/study (e.g. Gartner, 1990;Thrane et al., 2016). ...
Purpose
This study offers insights into how the entrepreneurship educator (EE) is legitimised in higher education.
Design/methodology/approach
This exploratory study is based on content analysis of 73 university programme specifications, 61 university strategies and 35 job advertisements. The study uses Suchman’s (1995) conceptualisation of organisational legitimacy to assist in categorising the results according to type of legitimacy.
Findings
Connections are made between the legitimacy of the EE and wider societal discourses surrounding the legitimacy of enterprise/entrepreneurship as expressed in university strategies. Attempts to legitimise the EE specifically, as opposed to “the educator” more broadly understood, are quite limited. Programme specifications mainly offer a cognitive form of legitimacy relating to teaching, with elements of pragmatic legitimacy arising from educators’ links to industry and research prowess. Job descriptions are more focused on the educator’s research as a form of legitimation.
Research limitations/implications
The study creates a baseline of knowledge surrounding the legitimacy of the EE, which raises important questions as to how the educator is supposed to add value in relation to different stakeholders.
Originality/value
The concept of legitimacy, despite widespread application in other disciplines, has found very limited application in the study of EE. Using three sources of data, the paper offers a first application of Suchman’s (1995) conceptualisation of legitimacy to entrepreneurship education. It thereby offers a critical perspective on the role of the EE as shaped by institutional norms.
... [15] În ultimele două decenii tipologia antreprenorului devine un element definiţional semnificativ. Astfel, antreprenorul se defineşte prin contrast cu non-antreprenorul, prin profit şi non-profit (William Gartner), antreprenorul extrem în raport cu cel normal prin optimismul său în procesul de luare a deciziilor (Woo, C., Cooper, A., Dunkelberg W.), antreprenorul demersului inovativ, preocupat mai mult de călătoria în sine şi mai puţin de destinaţie (Tom O'Malia), antreprenorul coordonator de resurse de producţie, antreprenorul axat pe decizia în condiţii de mare incertitudine, antreprenorul caracterizat prin inovaţia continuă (Nafziger Wayne), macroantreprenorii ce deţin abilitatea "de a vedea şi ceea ce nu se vede" (Ensley M.D., Carland W.,Carland J), antreprenorul corporativ care asigură reînnoirea strategică (Katz J.A., Shepherd D.A.,), antreprenorul self-made (Lopes da Silva T.,Casson M.) antreprenorul social care aduce cu sine schimbarea instituţională şi socială (Ashoka), [16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30]. Care ar putea fi principala caracteristică a antreprenorului contemporan, în timpul acestei crize globalizate? ...
Conceptul de antreprenor are multiple semnificaţii, la origine însemnând persoană care întreprinde ceva cu totul nou. Antreprenorul reprezintă motorul creşterii economice, cheia de dezvoltare şi supravieţuire a firmelor. Eugeniu Carada, un vizionar al secolului XIX, a sesizat rolul central pe care îl deţine antreprenorul în economie şi a văzut în dezvoltarea sistemului bancar românesc o modalitate de sprijinire a antreprenorilor. Înfiinţarea Băncii Naţionale a României pe suport majoritar privat a reprezentat un pas uriaş în crearea condiţiilor pentru dezvoltarea economică a ţării.
Cuvinte cheie: antreprenor, gândire antreprenorială, Banca Naţională a Romaniei (BNR), Eugeniu Carada.
... Tenure of Entrepreneurs Versus Hired CEOs. Following established literature, we define an entrepreneur as a person who performs work for personal profit rather than for wages paid by others (Shane, 2003) and holds a leading managerial position with ownership (Gartner, 1990). In contrast, a hired CEO is hired to manage a firm owned by someone else. ...
We examine the physical health consequences to entrepreneurs of firm growth and decline. Using register-based panel data (2000–2021), we find that entrepreneurs and hired CEOs are, on average, healthier and live longer than individuals from a socio-economically similar random sample from the general population. However, our findings also reveal that entrepreneurs are more likely to fall ill during their tenure and die younger than hired CEOs. Importantly, our findings demonstrate that both cumulative exposure to growth and episodic, rapid declines in sales and in the number of employees are equally taxing for entrepreneurs and hired CEOs.
... Box no. 2 Modern entrepreneurs are the lifeblood of the business world because they have the ability to spot business opportunities and come up with new ideas. William Gartner (1990): eight themes constitute the difference between entrepreneur and non-entrepreneur: the entrepreneur, innovation, organization creation, creating value, profit or non-profit, growth, uniqueness, and the owner-manager; [ [27] What could the major characteristics of the contemporary entrepreneur be, during this global crisis ? ...
Under the contemporary crisis circumstances, it seems natural for the entrepreneurship and management sciences not only to multiply their significance but even to become somehow contradictory or to oppose to one another. The paper's introduction consists of a short description of the paradigm's concept and a detail of both paradigms used in economics and management thinking. Thus, the first part of this article provides an overview of the classical or modern definitions of entrepreneurship and management sciences, and of their new meanings, during the contemporary crisis. The consequences are important for improving the understanding of the importance of these two sciences in the higher education system. The third part of the paper formulates a hypothesis in an attempt to justify and identify to what the contemporary sciences attribute the similarities and differences between entrepreneurship and management. One can include in the category of the new conceptualizations the most recent entrepreneurial and managerial concepts, instruments, methods and solutions that exist on a globalized or international market, be it either an extended entrepreneurial thinking type, or a prohibitive selective one of the managerial thinking type, but without being able to define them as the crisis' panacea, but which gradually insinuate themselves in such functions, in more and more companies present on the international market. A higher degree of intensity and impact of the global crisis will emphasize the inadequacy between contemporary entrepreneurs and managers. Must the new financial crisis change the connection between entrepreneur and manager and the natural hierarchy that globalizes a new world of economy? Is this new relation, caused by crisis, a modern mixture of entrepreneurship and management? Does the crisis meaning refer only to the management aberrations or does it not, does it include the entrepreneur errors or does it not? These could be questions for the next decades too, and the diversity of entrepreneurship and management significance are not enough to answer these questions. So, the conclusion is relative, similarly to the truth itself, somewhere midway. The final remark is that when we try to pick up anything by itself from a paradigm of entrepreneurship and a management one, we find out that these are "attached" and "opposed" to everything else in the universe (not only "attached" as John Muir's opinion is).
In this article, we analyse the role that entrepreneurs and entrepreneurship have played in the construction and consolidation of capitalism in Poland. We question the line conventionally drawn between entrepreneurs and the working class, arguing that the vast majority of so-called entrepreneurs in Poland are disguised workers who were rejected from the labour market during the transition to capitalism or forced into self-employment as Poland’s precariat labour market crystallised. We outline a critical historical analysis of the origin of these disguised workers to provide space for a discussion of the specific ‘labour problem’ that Poland has faced during its transition to capitalism. A central argument of our study is that the top-down creation of entrepreneurship is a partial and often contradictory response to this ‘labour problem’. We then illustrate these contradictions, showing how those commonly defined as entrepreneurs have performed relatively poorly in their designated roles of creating employment and innovation, while their living standards and wellbeing have deteriorated. We historically frame how this group of disguised workers in Poland embody the tension between the normative and actual aspects of capitalist development in Poland since 1989.
The contributions and shortcomings of past entrepreneurship research can be viewed within the context of six research design specifications: purpose, theoretical perspective, focus, level of analysis, time frame and methodology. The authors suggest a unifying definition of the field of entrepreneurship. The recent trend toward theory driven research that is contextual and process oriented is encouraging. It is time for entrepreneurship researchers to pursue causality more aggressively. Exploratory studies that are not theory driven should be discouraged unless the topic is highly original. Implications for practicing entrepreneurs are discussed.
Cluster analysis is a collective term covering a wide variety of techniques for delineating natural groups or clusters in data sets. This book integrates the necessary elements of data analysis, cluster analysis, and computer implementation to cover the complete sequence of steps from raw data to the finished analysis. The author develops a conceptual and philosophical basis for using cluster analysis as a tool of discovery and applies it systematically throughout the book. He provides a comprehensive discussion of variables, scales, and measures of association that establishes a sound basis for constructing an operational definition of similarity tailored to the needs of any particular operational definition of similarity tailored to the needs of any particular problem, and devotes special attention to the problems of analyzing data sets containing mixtures of nominal, ordinal, and interval variables. (Author)
This chapter surveys the psychological literature on entrepreneurs, published prior to 1982, including research on their personal characteristics and previous personal and business experiences. There is no well-defined population of entrepreneurs (due to lack of consensus on definition), so comparisons and generalizations are dangerous; however, there is some consistency in psychological characteristics. Three categories of research are discussed. (1) Psychological characteristics. A causal link between high need for achievement and small business ownership is not found; an internal locus-of-control belief does not distinguish entrepreneurs, but may identify successful ones; propensity for risk-taking may not be related to either entrepreneurship decision or success; personal values (need for achievement, independence, and effective leadership) may effectively distinguish successful entrepreneurs from the general population. (2) Effects of previous experience. Dissatisfaction with previous jobs (except pay) characterizes entrepreneurs; an unemployed person is more likely to start a business; and a large percentage of entrepreneurs had role models who were entrepreneurs. (3) Personal characteristics associated with entrepreneurs. Entrepreneurial decisions are most likely made between ages 25 and 40; entrepreneurs are better educated than the general population; and entrepreneurs are likely to remain in their home area. The research is synthesized into a tentative model of the entrepreneur. Future research subjects and methods are proposed. (TNM)
Entrepreneurial folklore
- R H Brockhaus
Brockhaus, R.H. 1987. Entrepreneurial folklore. Journal of Small Business Management 25(3):1-6.
The social dimensions of entrepreneurship
- Shapiro
A unified framework, research typologies and research prospects for the interface between entrepreneurship and small business
- Wortman
Entrepreneurship: Research in Quest of a paradigm
- Carsrud