Alan Carsrud


Published on

Seminario Universidad Emprendimiento

Published in: Education, Technology
1 Comment
1 Like
No Downloads
Total Views
On Slideshare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Alan Carsrud

  1. 1. “ Observations on trends in entrepreneurship research & teaching.” Dr. Alan L. Carsrud Santiago, Chile / August, 2008
  2. 2. Agenda <ul><li>Observations on entrepreneurship research and teaching </li></ul><ul><li>Collaborative & interdisciplinary nature of entrepreneurship research </li></ul><ul><li>Understanding the context Knowledge Intensive (technology) Entrepreneurs </li></ul><ul><li>Overview of studies of entrepreneurial personalities, intentions, cognitions & passion </li></ul><ul><li>Impact of research on informed teaching & firm formation </li></ul>
  3. 3. Presentation is a reflection on: <ul><li>Research on entrepreneurial personality, networks, intentions, and passions. </li></ul><ul><li>Creating & operating The Venture Development and Global Access Programs at UCLA for new technology firms. </li></ul><ul><li>Researching Biotechnology entrepreneurship & innovation systems – internationally. </li></ul><ul><li>Our International Entrepreneurial Intentions and Cognitions Research Group. </li></ul><ul><li>Creating interdisciplinary programs at </li></ul><ul><li>UCLA & at FIU. </li></ul>
  4. 4. Some Observations
  5. 5. Field Changing <ul><li>Teaching more than cases – informed doing </li></ul><ul><li>Journals grew from 3 to over 400 in twenty years </li></ul><ul><li>150+ Entrepreneurship Centers in the US and 1200 colleges offer courses in US </li></ul><ul><li>Support from foundations & entrepreneurs grows </li></ul><ul><li>Over 250 chaired professorships </li></ul><ul><li>Ten years ago no doctoral programs in entrepreneurship, today dozens. </li></ul><ul><li>Entrepreneurship no longer just in business or engineering schools. </li></ul><ul><li>Faculty now tenured in entrepreneurship. </li></ul><ul><li>Global Consortium of Entrepreneurship </li></ul><ul><li> Centers. </li></ul>
  6. 6. Observations on Research <ul><li>At least eight major research areas in the field at both the micro and macro level. </li></ul><ul><li>Researchers come from fields outside of traditional business disciplines as well as within them. </li></ul><ul><li>No unifying theory but lots of useful theories across disciplines. </li></ul><ul><li>Highly collaborative. </li></ul>
  7. 7. But the ugly reality:
  8. 8. Theory & Research Teaching What entrepreneurs need Increasingly Divergent Goals
  9. 9. <ul><li>We typically teach Schumpeter’s frame breaking firms. </li></ul><ul><li>Dismiss Kirzner’s incremental firms as less important even in technology. </li></ul><ul><li>We teach entrepreneurship for the 10% of the firms & ignore the other 90%. </li></ul><ul><li>We focus on past cases rather than focus on doing now or in the future. </li></ul><ul><li>Research rarely enters curriculum. </li></ul>
  10. 10. We need to bring this back to the real world.
  11. 11. Theory & Research Teaching What entrepreneurs need
  12. 12. My own research and teaching covers several of the major themes in entrepreneurship. I hope this will be informative.
  13. 13. Observations on the context for Knowledge Intensive Entrepreneurs (KIE): Entrepreneurial Biotechnology Ventures
  14. 14. <ul><li>While we know the importance of technology, risk capital, and technical institutions in the founding processes of high technology firms </li></ul><ul><li>Technology entrepreneurship has yet to be fully explored (e.g. Shane & Venkataraman, 2003) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Context to the creation </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Cognitive processes </li></ul></ul>
  15. 15. Knowledge Intensive Entrepreneurship (KIE) <ul><ul><li>Stress knowledge (not just technology) as a basis for technological innovation and new firm development </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Industries where rapid advances in knowledge are a key to understanding new venture creation, competitive advantage, and market success </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Cutting edge knowledge “outdated” with ever shortening time horizons </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Small, fast growing, organic, and </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>network-based firms </li></ul></ul>
  16. 16. <ul><li>Interested in the impact of increased knowledge intensity on industry structures and entrepreneurship in biotechnology </li></ul><ul><li>Focus on the drivers of collaboration between firms, universities, and individual entrepreneurs within a Finnish biotechnology context </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Finland: 3.6% of the GDP devoted to R&D in 2001, one of the highest percentages in OECD </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Venture capital became available in the 1990’s  emergence of the Finnish biotechnology start-ups </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Represents 10% of Europe’s biotech firms. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>134 firms in 8 industry segments by end of 2001. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>December 2002: 119 active firms </li></ul></ul>
  17. 17. Knowledge networking <ul><li>Proximity allows for repeated interactions </li></ul><ul><ul><li>shared identities and trust </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>geographically localized knowledge spill-overs, shared knowledge, knowledge catalysts (Networks involve universities, technology and science-based firms, larger corporations; collaborating and competing (Boundary crossing) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Knowledge networks are beneficial for small organizations facing the challenge of commercializing technology </li></ul>
  18. 18. Different Network Approaches vc entre B uni A uni entre uni D E vc A vc C vc B cust. Less successful vc Angel tech angel tech F G
  19. 19. Network Layers Knowledge Network Gap Academic Research Community Technology SME’s
  20. 20. <ul><li>What are key characteristics of KIE in the context of European biotechnology industries? </li></ul><ul><li>What characteristics describe networking and collaborative efforts between firms in a national innovation cluster of pharmaceutical firms? </li></ul><ul><li>What drives collaboration and networking between firms, universities, and new entrepreneurs? </li></ul><ul><li>What limits collaboration and networking between firms, universities, new firms and individual entrepreneurs? </li></ul>
  21. 21. <ul><li>Longitudinal study using action research approach in the context of the Finnish Pharma Cluster </li></ul><ul><li>Data set: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>31 in-depth interviews among key persons from business and universities in the Cluster (2000-2001) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>mail survey to population (51% response rate) in 2000 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>electronic survey (28 % responded </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>in 2002) </li></ul></ul>
  22. 22. <ul><li>Formal Venture capital </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Availability of either public (SITRA) or private financers act as triggers for new firm foundation </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Commercially active major research intensive universities (HUT, HU, etc.) </li></ul><ul><li>Dedicated efforts from public institutions like TEKES and regional development groups </li></ul><ul><li>The role of “network facilitators” (e.g. science parks, innovation cluster groups) </li></ul>
  23. 23. <ul><li>Drivers of collaboration </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Reducing uncertainty </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Managing complex knowledge exchanges </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Accessing complementary business assets available (distribution and marketing channels) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Issues limiting collaboration </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Goals and motivations for collaboration vary </li></ul></ul>
  24. 24. <ul><li>Finnish technology firms show the importance of opportunities provided by environmental context and developing national infrastructure for knowledge intensive entrepreneurship </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Facilitating knowledge flows </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Access to Risk Capital </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Share T echnology, </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Manage risk, and </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Enhanced technical institutions </li></ul></ul>
  25. 25. 20 years of research on Entrepreneurial Personality, Motivations, Intentions, Cognitions, & Passion What drives people to create new technology firms.
  26. 26. Entrepreneurial success combines <ul><li>Achievement Oriented Personality </li></ul><ul><li>Entrepreneurial Schema & Passion </li></ul><ul><li>Belief in Self and Ability </li></ul><ul><li>Context </li></ul><ul><li>Precipitation Event </li></ul><ul><li>Intention to Start a Venture </li></ul><ul><li>Opportunity Recognition </li></ul><ul><li>Controlling Resources </li></ul><ul><li>Timing </li></ul>
  27. 27. Entrepreneurial Personality Just like those of successful commercial pilots, research scientists and other professionals
  28. 28. Multidimensional Achievement Motivation <ul><li>Cooperative, a Team Player </li></ul><ul><li>Strong Desire to Work Hard </li></ul><ul><li>Strong Desire to Learn New & Different Things (Mastery) </li></ul><ul><li>Able to Listen to Others (feminine trait) </li></ul><ul><li>Not Competitive </li></ul><ul><li>No more risk prone than other </li></ul><ul><li>professionals </li></ul>
  29. 29. The Intentions Model of Planned Entrepreneurial Behavior
  30. 30. Entrepreneurial Intentions Perceived Feasibility Perceived Desirability Perceived Self- Efficacy Perceived Social Norm Perceived Collective Efficacy Expected Outcome
  31. 31. <ul><li>Intentions research has become a significant part of the entrepreneurship literature yet have we really translated that research into how we teach the field? </li></ul><ul><li>How do we impact individuals’ intentions to start a firm? </li></ul>
  32. 32. Entrepreneurial Passions More complex than expected
  33. 33. Country Specific Gender Entrepreneurial passions Social Norm Self-Efficacy Feasibility Desirability Entrepreneurial Intention
  34. 34. Conclusions <ul><li>Entrepreneurial Passion is a complex construct </li></ul><ul><li>Passion in Entrepreneurs is: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>combination of obsessive passion and harmonious passion </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Where does passion fits in the entrepreneurial process? </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Passion may play a significant role later; </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Passion does not turn intentions into action </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Normative concerns: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Where should an entrepreneur focus her/his passion? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Can one focus one’s passion? Isn’t passion partially spontaneous </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Is cognitive style a moderator of passion? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>If so, how? </li></ul></ul>
  35. 35. Cognitive Maps of Technology Entrepreneurs
  36. 36. <ul><li>Cognitive Maps or schema </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Prototypes of what a business concept is – cognitive templates </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Repeat entrepreneurs have more clearly defined prototypes – and richer prototypes </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Repeat entrepreneurs show greater business acumen as their cognitive maps also include possible business and revenue models </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Experience allows entrepreneurs to organization information differently </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>from managers </li></ul></ul>
  37. 37. <ul><li>How is growth perceived: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>by technology entrepreneurs? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>by technology managers? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>by students? </li></ul></ul><ul><li>How are growth strategies conceptualized in terms of critical success factors? </li></ul><ul><ul><li>What factors are perceived by entrepreneurs as critical to achive growth vs managers? </li></ul></ul>
  38. 38. <ul><li>Growth is a complex cognitive framework based on many factors </li></ul><ul><li>Growth strategies can take several forms </li></ul><ul><li>Dynamic – perceived to be closely related to the life cycle (LC) concept </li></ul><ul><li>Growth is resource dependent and the resources change as the firm transcends different stages in the LC </li></ul><ul><li>Corporate vs. entrepreneurial </li></ul><ul><li>growth </li></ul>
  39. 39. Controlled experiment <ul><li>A quasi- experimental design </li></ul><ul><ul><li>control growth strategy </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>control the product </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>control the CSFs </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>looked at students, technology managers and technology entrepreneurs </li></ul></ul>
  40. 40. Results <ul><li>Significant differences in CSFs across phases </li></ul><ul><li>Significant difference in CSF depending on growth strategy </li></ul><ul><li>Significant differences between technology entrepreneurs, managers and students </li></ul><ul><li>Significant differences in CSFs depending on product (technology vs non-tech) </li></ul><ul><li>Reinforces assumption that CSFs are </li></ul><ul><li>different due to experience </li></ul>
  41. 41. Implications <ul><li>Students had problems conceptualizing technology product attributes </li></ul><ul><li>CSFs differ with strategy and stage </li></ul><ul><li>Manager’s better in envisioning growth strategies </li></ul><ul><li>Entrepreneurs better at envisioning start-up strategies </li></ul><ul><li>Growth strategies like open-ended possibilities with no anchor for students (the notion of context-dependency) </li></ul><ul><li>Perception of growth seems to be linked to prior experience </li></ul><ul><li>Education alone does not make a master </li></ul><ul><li>Managerial and entrepreneurial </li></ul><ul><li>become meaningful when practiced </li></ul>
  42. 42. Issues for future <ul><li>How do start-up entrepreneurs perceive growth? </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Understanding difference between revenue-based and profit-based growth </li></ul></ul><ul><li>How is rapid growth envisioned? </li></ul><ul><ul><li>How do start-up entrepreneurs envision growth? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>How do policy makers envision rapid growth? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Is it understood what drives growth? </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Entrepreneurial education. </li></ul><ul><ul><li>students appear to be equipped with theory </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>that does not connect with practice. </li></ul></ul>
  43. 43. Most Entrepreneurship Centers do not see the synergies in research, teaching, outreach or endowment funding.
  44. 44. The structure at Florida International University
  45. 46. Questions?
  1. A particular slide catching your eye?

    Clipping is a handy way to collect important slides you want to go back to later.