The workshop proposal for the 2011 ICSB conference focuses on translating research about fostering entrepreneurial activity into practical policy recommendations for economic development. It identifies three key predictors of entrepreneurial activity: the preparedness of potential entrepreneurs, cultural support for entrepreneurship, and the ease of growing a business. The workshop aims to convene experts to discuss comprehensive strategies and necessary changes in policy to create more supportive entrepreneurial ecosystems.

1. Workshop Proposal: 2011 ICSB
How do you REALLY grow an entrepreneurial ecosystem?
In the past year, evidence has exploded that entrepreneurial activity is absolutely critical to a
strong economy. We have also seen steadily increasing research into the predictors and
correlates of an increasingly entrepreneurial economy.
But if entrepreneurial activity is so important and we are learning so much more about what
supports entrepreneurial activity, why is it that we have seen such little work that translates our
research findings into practical advice?
The Good News
Policy-makers are finally asking us how we can grow a more entrepreneurial economy.
Are we finally making the case that entrepreneurial activity is vital to a healthy economy?
The Bad News
Too often, our answers to policymakers fall short. For example, we have long known
gazelle high-growth ventures are important but have we successfully explained specific policy
implications?
Government officials are beginning to be receptive to our research. We need to do a better job of
persuasively translating what we know into practical recommendations.
One Irony: Consider the “knowledge filter” (Audretsch et al): New, potentially useful knowledge
does not evolve into practical value because it gets filtered. While this typically is used to look at
innovation, our knowledge of what drives entrepreneurial activity is too often stuck behind our
own knowledge filter. This workshop will identify remedies for that.
Another indicator: Consider the curricula of economic development programs. Most economic
development training programs’ few “entrepreneurship” offerings to their members mostly fail to
reflect what we now know to be true (e.g., IEDC’s course list).

2. Cutting Edge Data
Ten years of data from the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (Reynolds 2010) reinforces that
there are three key predictors of entrepreneurial activity, consistent across countries and over
time. (Global Entrepreneurship & Development Index (GEDI; Acs 2010) yields almost identical
results.)
What a million respondents over 10 years and dozens of countries tell us is that entrepreneurial
activity has three very clear predictors that we need to recognize and translate into policy
recommendations.
#1) Entrepreneurial Potential is a Function of Potential Entrepreneurs.
The strongest predictor of entrepreneurial activity is the prevalence of adults who are
prepared for entrepreneurial activity - who have the entrepreneurial mindset?
#2) Is Growing a Business Highly-Regarded?
Cultural support for entrepreneurship - Do people believe they'll be encouraged if they
try, does the media "get it" Is entrepreneurship generally considered a good career option? Is
entrepreneurial success rewarded by the community? All this requires an entrepreneurial
ecosystem that is perceived as highly supportive. Is the regional innovation system effective?
#3) Is It Getting Easier or Harder to Grow a Business? (& Entrepreneurial Organizations)
How hard is it to start new business in terms of bureaucratic hurdles? Note that this
applies equally for organizations. Are existing businesses supportive of generating novel
economic activity?
Another key finding: ‘Best practices’ are insufficient for successful entrepreneurial economies.
Flora (2010), WK Kellogg Foundation (2008) & Kauffman Foundation (e.g., Doss 2010) argue
that comprehensive strategies are imperative to grow an entrepreneurial economy. Improving
every ‘piece’ of the ‘puzzle’ generates synergistic effects.

3. When we discuss state of the art policy recommendations for local and regional economies, we
need a multi-faceted approach. Delightfully, the GEM findings give us exactly that direction.
The “entrepreneurial potential” finding argues that we need to look at the
microfoundations of entrepreneurial activity (how do we teach entrepreneurial thinking?).
The “cultural/ecosystem” finding argues that we also need a macro focus on
entrepreneurial ecosystems (how do we design effective innovation systems?)
Finally, the third “barriers to growth” finding implies we also need a meso focus on
entrepreneurial organizations (how do we promote creativity and innovation within existing
organizations?)
In short, we need micro, macro and meso:
• Entrepreneurial people,
• Entrepreneurial communities/ecosystems, AND
• Entrepreneurial organizations.
This workshop brings together leading experts who are already working to translate our
entrepreneurship expertise into policy prescriptions for economic development that is truly
entrepreneurial.
This group is uniquely qualified to champion translational research in entrepreneurship. Top
scholars deeply immersed in their respective communities.
The venue is also uniquely potent. ICSB has long taken the lead on policy recommendations
(e.g., recent global conference on business creation research). ICSB members offer fertile ground
to jumpstart further discussions during the workshop and afterward.
The 2011 ICSB conference even includes a “Policy Day” segment of the conference. We support
the conference theme, “Changes of Perspectives in Global Entrepreneurship & Innovation” by
addressing “changes” in by (1) what has changed in the newest, state of the art knowledge on
growing entrepreneurship and (2) what are the changes we want to see in policy makers.