No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
Serial-Entrepreneurs in the Business Foundation Process - Insights from a Case-driven Explorative Study
... Knowledge management in organizations means a systematic, integrated approach for identifying, managing, and sharing all informational properties of the organization [Jung et al. (2003); Beckman (1999); Brem (2011); Turban (2006)]. It also manages the activities of knowledge workers through facilitating things, motivating, leading, and supporting knowledge workers so that the creation of an appropriate work place could then be secured [Gao et al. (2008); Brem (2008); Dahou and Hacini (2018); Scandura (1997)]. There has not yet been a universally agreed-on knowledge management model, therefore, it is necessary to create an overall attitude based on a case that is appropriate to the subject, in addition to introducing the proposed models within this¯eld (Table 1). ...
This study proposed a model to examine the impact of various leadership styles on knowledge management. This case study identified the best leadership style, which can affect the key factors of the knowledge management success. The statistical population was composed of all staff of the Pars Khodro Company headquarters in Iran, in which 226 people were accordingly chosen as the sample. The required data for examining research hypotheses were also collected using questionnaire. Results revealed the impact of leadership styles on knowledge management. The transformational leadership style was consequently found to have a positive and significant impact on the knowledge management key success factors, in contrast with other leadership styles including self-management, pragmatic, conservative and structure-based.
Entrepreneurship is the creation of organizations. What dlfterentiates entrepreneurs trom non-entrepreneurs ls that entrepreneuns create organizations, whil-e.non-entre- preneurs dc not. In behavioral approaches to the study of entrepreneurship an entre preneur is seen as a set of activlties involved in organization creation, while in tralt approaches an entrepreneur ls a set of personality traits and characteristics. This gager argues that tralt approaches have been unfrultful and that behavioral ap proaches will be a more productive perspective for future'research in entrepreneur- ship. r
Presents a framework that highlights the differences among entrepreneurs and among their ventures. Building on the work of others, four dimensions are identified for this framework describing new venture creation. These are: individuals, environment, organization, and process. This is the first framework to combine all four of these dimensions. The individual dimension should consider not only the psychological characteristics of the entrepreneur such as need for achievement and locus of control, but must also consider the entrepreneur's background, experience, and attitudes. The process dimension should be viewed in light of six different behaviors including the location of a business opportunity and the accumulation of resources. Twelve factors are identified for the environmental dimension. These twelve factors were chosen based on the review of 17 research papers focused on environmental variables which affect new venture creation. The organization dimension is composed of three generic competitive advantage strategies and 14 competitive entry wedges. This framework allows for the examination and comparison of very different new ventures. Conflicting results in prior research studies may be explained by considering the dimensions used in that work. (SRD)
Although new ventures are commonly started by entrepreneurial teams, relatively little has been written about the process of effectively assembling and maintaining them. Systematic, descriptive research is needed to define the dimensions of entrepreneurial teams, to identify the costs and problems of assembling teams, and to identify successful strategies for resolving the problems.
This paper concentrates on the theory and practice of innovation and entrepreneurship. Indeed, the lessons of history relate to the importance of understanding the importance combining the two. When the two are combined, we can begin to talk seriously about the science of entrepreneurship. Like the Agriculture Agent, we must continually strive to create the knowledge within the academies and translate that knowledge into wealth and jobs. The first part of the paper is a quick overview of the historical data on innovation and entrepreneurship, concentrating on theories as late as the 1800s and as early as 2000 B.C. We then turn to the “do ” spirit or the importance of practice, which has recently developed with school of business in the area of entrepreneurship. The Austin Model is used to enhance our discussion of combining practice with theory so that structures of entrepreneurial enhancement can continually developed and re-invented. Business Schools, like all professional schools, should concentrate on the sifting of best practices to advance practice. In this case, it is the practice of entrepreneurship. Business Schools can no longer afford top simply do case studies, but must combine research with practice in order to create regional and global wealth jobs and prosperity.
There has been a substantial growth in training programmes in the UK over the past decade and particularly in the 1980s, aimed at supporting the business start-up process. In the 1970s, small business training, channelled mainly through the Industry Training Boards, concentrated almost exclusively on the existing small business. That there has been such substantial growth reflects the priorities and influence of the Manpower Services Commission (MSC). Its pioneering work on the New Enterprise Programmes in the late 70s led on to a hierarchy of start-up programmes in the 80s covering a wide variety of client types. Behind this, in turn, lay the political commitment to support of self-help progammes aimed at increasing the rate of starts of small business as a counter to unemployment, and increasing their viability, thus lowering the failure rate. Start-up training has gone much farther in the UK than in the rest of Europe, and several European countries have followed British practice in recent years[1]. The growth in provision can partly be monitored by the Manpower Services Commission's own figures which show 64 starters being helped through training in 1978/79 and 31,000 in 1986/87. The MSC is planning to revise its programme portfolio in this area, in the light of its evaluation, and in an endeavour substantially to increase the through-put of participants with targets of over 45,000 in 1987/88.
The entrepreneurial literature traditionally considers risk taking an important distinguishing element in entrepreneurship. This study examines the risk taking propensity of the founders or managers of new ventures. Upon examination of competing definitions of the entrepreneur, this analysis defines an entrepreneur as "a major owner and manager of a business venture who is not employed elsewhere." Risk taking is considered "the perceived probability of receiving the rewards associated with success of a proposed situation" required before embarking on a venture. Three levels of risk taking (low, intermediate or moderate, and high) could affect the decision to start a business venture. Risk taking was measured using the Wallach and Kogan choice dilemmas questionnaire (CDQ). Studied were entrepreneurs, promoted managers, and new (or transferred) managers of firms located in St. Louis in 1975; 31 questionnaires were used for each group. The results are not statistically different. Entrepreneurs and managers are found to have the same risk taking propensity. Because previous studies of risk preferences examined limited samples, CDQ scores were also compared against a sample representing the general population. Found that risk taking propensity of entrepreneurs is same as that for the general population. Results also show that entrepreneurs, managers, and the general population all have a propensity for moderate risk. Overall, general risk taking does not distinguish entrepreneurs from non-entrepreneurs. (TNM)
This study attempts to identify an objective test to understand the psychological nature of the successful entrepreneur. Successful entrepreneurs are defined as those who started a business, where none before existed, established for at least five years with at least eight employees. Previous research into the personal characteristics that predict entrepreneurial success is claimed to be unsatisfactory because the projective tests have laborious procedures, require technical training to interpret, and focus on the individual's need for achievement. The present study is based on the assumptions that (1) an objective system of evaluation structured so non-psychologists could administer it was needed, and (2) many other factors than need for achievement could be measured. Five tests were identified that appeared to fit the need for an objective, valid test in a simple format with ease of administration and interpretation. The assessment program utilized these established tests and structured interviews. These were administered to sixty individuals, equally divided by race into blacks and whites, of which all but four were men. Five hypotheses are investigated. Found that racial differences for entrepreneurs were not evident, and that (compared to men in general) entrepreneurs score higher on need for achievement, independence, and effectiveness of leadership, and are low on scales reflecting need for support. Concludes that the Kuder Occupational Interest Survey, the Gordon Survey of Interpersonal Values and the Edwards Personal Preference Schedule successfully differentiated entrepreneurs from others, could therefore serve as objective indicators of entrepreneurship, and should be tested in further research studies. (TNM)
Überlegungen und Vorschläge zur Abgrenzung und Strukturierung des Objektbereichs der Gründungsforschung
- H Klandt
Klandt H. 1984. Überlegungen und Vorschläge zur Abgrenzung und Strukturierung des Objektbereichs der Gründungsforschung. In Unternehmungsgründung: Konfrontation von Forschung und Praxis, Nathusius K, Klandt H, Kirschbaum G (Hrsg.). Bergisch Gladbach; 37-64
Wirtschaftsdidaktische Förderung der Handlungskompetenz von Unternehmensgründerinnen und –gründern
- U Braukmann
Braukmann U. 2001. Wirtschaftsdidaktische Förderung der Handlungskompetenz von Unternehmensgründerinnen und –gründern. In Gründungsmanagement: mit Aufgaben und Lösungen, Koch LT, Zacharias C (Hrsg.). München; 79-94
Zdrowomyslaw N Von der Gründung zur Pleite: Unternehmens-Lebenszyklus und Management der Unternehmensentwicklung Private Equity - Eine Finanzierungsalternative für Gründungsunternehmen Münster
- München
München; 37-48. Zdrowomyslaw N. 2005. Von der Gründung zur Pleite: Unternehmens-Lebenszyklus und Management der Unternehmensentwicklung. Gernsbach. Züchner P. 2005. Private Equity - Eine Finanzierungsalternative für Gründungsunternehmen. In Aspekte erfolgreicher Unternehmensgründungen: Hinweise – Vorgehen – Empfehlungen, Konrad ED (Hrsg.). Münster; 153-167.