CCSBE 2013 neuroentrepreneurship

721 views

Published on

Published in: Business, Technology
  • We're (entrepreneurs) flooded with input (you ought to see my LinkedIn wall-it's saturated with 'He Says to...' and 'She Says to...'). This is getting too complex for guys like me to keep a grasp of! Provocative concepts, sir!
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here

CCSBE 2013 neuroentrepreneurship

  1. 1. Presented at CCSBE,Victora BC, May 2013byNorris Krueger, Max Planck Institute & Entrepreneurship Northwest(thanks to great colleagues, Mellani Day,Angela Stanton, IsabellWelpeand so many more)Neuroentrepreneurship:What Can Entrepreneurship Scholars& Educators (& Practitioners) Learnfrom Neuroscience?
  2. 2. Example: Libet, et.al.(1983): Experimenter can detect intent almost 500milliseconds before subject perceives it Suggests neurological antecedents to: Intentions Behavior What does this mean with regards toantecedents of entrepreneurial intent?
  3. 3. Why Neuro-entrepreneurship? Behavior starts at the “neuro” level Current methods don’t reach this deep Opportunity to ask questions: That we could not answer before That we couldn’t think to ask before In a better way To get better answers then ever before
  4. 4. Latest Work such as... Entrepreneurship becoming focus? Sahakian team – hot cognitions Wald team - dopamine
  5. 5. Nemmers Prize talk May 7, 2005Activation in cingulate cortex & spindle cell density
  6. 6. Ultimatum games:This is your brain on unfairness
  7. 7. Herb Simon’s (1963) Levels
  8. 8. Economically-important regions of the human brain
  9. 9. Cingulate (yellow), orbitofrontal (pink),amygdala (orange), somatosensory(green), insula (purple)
  10. 10. Neuroeconomics has shown usthat Experimental Methods Can: Reveal gaps in current theory Lead to better specified hypotheses andpropositions (Dolan 2008). Identify and analyze antecedent states andtheir effects upon decision-making Identify reflexive versus reflective behaviorsand effects
  11. 11. What can neuroscienceoffer? Look into the “ultimate black box” Rigorous experimental methodologies Can allow us to: Understand deeper structures of entrepreneurialcognition Map pre-decisional dynamics Conceptualize and measure entrepreneurialdecision-making Overcome “retrospective bias” and theinteractions among independent variables
  12. 12. Domains of neuroentrepreneurshipand experimental entrepreneurshipDomain of ExperimentalEntrepreneurshipNeuroentrepreneurship
  13. 13. Limitations of Neuroscience What about group behaviors of entrepreneursas versus the individual? Complex behaviors and systems of the brain –what are we seeing/measuring… really? How to control for the influence of external orextraneous stimuli – are we measuring whatwe think we are measuring? Learning to use the tools, methods andprocedures – a new way of thinking about theissues (steep learning curve... turf?)
  14. 14. Interesting and relevantdiscoveries thus far… Pre-entrepreneurial processes: affective &cognitive reasoning Automatic versus Intentional Processing(reflexive versus reflective) Mental prototypes – deeply held assumptions forthe good or for the bad Fluid intelligence – ability to solve new problems Change blindness – focus on the little ball…
  15. 15. Relevant issues in currententrepreneurship research? Common variance bias – attributes ofentrepreneurs may indeed be correlated withattributes of the perceived opportunities Dynamism of entrepreneurial processes Conflicting effects of independent variables Perceived value of opportunities
  16. 16. Neuroscience Designs asSolutions? Design not just methodology proposed Allows for current analysis of entrepreneurial decisionprocess, but also… …controls for situational specifics of entrepreneurialopportunities Researchers must develop hypotheses and testexplanations before the fact Modeling dynamics and causes can reveal gapsin current theory; map dynamics of pre-entrepreneurial decision processes
  17. 17. Where to begin? What questionsmight we start with? Deeper cognitive structures (Mitchell, 2000) E.g. Detect entrepreneurial scripts and switches(on/off)? When does the idea become an opportunity? When is that opportunity triggered as something toact upon? Detecting discontinuous changes – “Aha!”
  18. 18. Potential topics for research? Behavioral DecisionTheory: Framing Effects and Paradoxes Preferences Utilities GameTheory Perceptions Emotions & Affect Affect Passion & Fear Trust Much, much more – applications in your areaof research
  19. 19. Conclusion Neuroscience methodologies and designshave much to offer Could substantially advance the field ofentrepreneurship Exciting new world to explore and apply We will undoubtedly be surprised and mayvery well have to change some current beliefsand assumptions
  20. 20. Thank you!Norris.krueger@gmail.com@entrep_thinking (also FB, L-In)
  21. 21. Insula and low strategic IQ Strategic IQ (x-axis):How much you earnfrom choices &beliefs Correlated (-) withactivity in L insula inchoice task  Are overly self-focussed people poorstrategic thinkers?
  22. 22. Overview of fMRI
  23. 23. Example: Entrepreneurial Opportunity Various issues in current research: Dependent and independent variables notspecified or confounding variables not recognizedor controlled for (Shane, 2000, 2004;Venkataraman, 1997) Static versus dynamic perspective Opportunity characteristics not recognized ormatched with entrepreneur Absence of experimental approaches

×