Literature on crowdfunding has highlighted the role of social capital developed within the platform (internal social capital) in determining the success of a funding campaign. However, to date, prior studies have neglected to determine whether industry specificity may influence this effect. In this chapter, the authors aim to fill this gap by investigating how social capital influences the funding of products belonging to different industries. Using a dataset of 34,121 project launched on Kickstarter during 2014, they found that the internal social capital effect varies by industry and is stronger in magnitude when the industry is characterized by high demand uncertainty and task complexity. Overall, these findings contribute to a better understanding of the role of social capital in early stage financing.
Browse by title
Vincenzo Butticè and Massimo G. Colombo
Considering the current state of knowledge in entrepreneurship education, we call for a pragmatic and critical approach in the development of future perspectives on entrepreneurship education research. We highlight the need to develop research focusing on the three main dimensions: target, connect and reflect. Target refers to building theoretical foundations. Connect and reflect refer to bridging disciplines and communities (research and practice) and increasing the critical thinking perspective respectively. In this line of thoughts, this chapter presents the different contributions of the Research Agenda in Entrepreneurship Education book. This collective work is an attempt to promote innovative and to a certain extent provocative contributions aiming at producing knowledge on the three dimensions above. Our intention is to bring a significant value to entrepreneurship education researchers, policy-makers and practitioners.
Sharon Alvarez, Elias G. Carayannis, Giovanni Battista Dagnino and Rosario Faraci
In the introductory chapter, the authors spell out the contributions that the book advances to the emerging debate on entrepreneurial ecosystems and the diffusion of startups, and illustrate the reasons that led them to gather nine relevant conceptual and empirical contributions written by 21 leading scholars from various parts of the world in the field of entrepreneurship and strategy. They define the target audience of the book as entrepreneurship and strategy students, academics and a wide array of practitioners, such as entrepreneurs, executives, consultants and policy makers. The structure of the book is outlined and an overview of the chapters provided.
A growing number of innovations in entrepreneurship education enable teaching without using the case-study method. We argue that some of these innovations not only address recurrent criticism made against business schools but also form a new pedagogical model. We propose to describe this model as the impact-based method. It refers to the ways in which learning is developed by taking steps to change practices and habits existing outside the academic arena. In this chapter, we describe how this approach transforms the traditional business school: the students from heteronomous become autonomous, the knowledge from abstract becomes grounded, the culture from homogeneous becomes heterogeneous and the institution from global becomes local. Implications for the organizational model of the business schools are discussed.
Process philosophy has drawn attention to the world as ambiguous and ever changing, however, also enactable. This makes entrepreneurship a processual phenomenon, rightly addressed as ‘entrepreneuring’. Recognizing not only their cognitive, yet also affective and conative capabilities, makes it possible for human actors to mobilize forces that bring the world to a standstill long enough to create a venture for value creation. This, however, calls for insight that is different to universal scientific knowledge – episteme and techne – namely situated insights addressed as m_tis and phronesis. M_tis then concerns alertness and shrewdness and phronesis is about prudence in the context of action. Academic education can only provide the latter competencies able to train for entrepreneuring by letting the students travel across the boundaries of the university. In addition, the dominance of management as an ideology must be pro-actively dealt with in order to create space for entrepreneurial practices. Three cases in academic training for entrepreneuring, all in the Swedish context, which show radically different ways of dealing with these challenges, are presented in a comparative analysis. The lessons are summarized as general conditions for providing training that advances entrepreneurship students’ situated and actionable insights.
Llewellyn D.W. Thomas, Dmitry Sharapov and Erkko Autio
This chapter contributes to the recent line of work examining entrepreneurs who participate in multiple ecosystems simultaneously by investigating the mechanisms and outcomes of AppCampus. The AppCampus initiative was a three-year project seeking to leverage and enhance both the entrepreneurial ecosystem around Aalto University and the Windows Phone innovation ecosystem. The authors briefly review the characteristics of both innovation and entrepreneurial ecosystems, followed by an analysis of the Windows Phone ecosystem and the Aalto entrepreneurial ecosystem. They then describe the AppCampus initiative, explaining each of its components and how these linked both the Windows Phone innovation and Aalto University entrepreneurial ecosystems, before discussing the effects that AppCampus had on these ecosystems. The chapter concludes with lessons for both entrepreneurial and innovation ecosystem leaders.
Giovanni Battista Dagnino and Elias G. Carayannis
In this concluding chapter, the authors delve into the key conditions that typically epitomize a healthy ecosystem and the provision that entrepreneurial ecosystems can be observed as complex adaptive systems, where each element cannot be considered in isolation from the others. This lays the groundwork to design and formulate a cumulative knowledge and value-based theory of entrepreneurial ecosystems, which may in turn allow an appreciation of entrepreneurial ecosystems’ evolutionary paths, developing life cyles and evolving governance systems. While the chapter in this volume have collectively marked the path towards this direction, we look forward to seeing empirically grounded inquiries and case-based studies that are able to shape a more compelling and advanced dynamic understanding of entrepreneurial ecosystems.
Anna Minà and Giovanni Battista Dagnino
The attention given to business ecosystems and the intellectual ferment it has generated in the last decade underscore the value to develop a systematic overview of the literature so as to systematize the state of the art on entrepreneurial ecosystems. In this chapter, the authors develop a content analysis of existing studies on ecosystems to understand the main features and key elements epitomizing an ecosystem and to unravel under what boundary conditions firms can develop their entrepreneurial insights coupled with strategic thinking within the ecosystem. The authors advance a map that offers an overview of the ecosystem literature, underscore the main gaps in ecosystems research and single out the key challenges for future inquiry.
Antonio Bernal and Francisco Liñán
This chapter focuses on the concept of entrepreneurial competence and how it may be developed within the educational system. In particular, a tri-partite model of entrepreneurial competence is defined. Nevertheless, in order for this competence to be effectively developed through entrepreneurship education, the concept of entrepreneurial identity is introduced. The entrepreneurial identity is considered as a mechanism to building the individual’s entrepreneurial self-concept. A case study of one entrepreneurship education experience is used to illustrate the key role of this entrepreneurial identity in the construction of entrepreneurial personalities.
Entrepreneurship education is growing worldwide, but key educational and didactical issues remain. What are we talking about when we talk about entrepreneurship education? What are we really doing when we teach or educate people in entrepreneurship, in terms of the nature and the impact of our interventions? What do we know about the appropriateness, the relevancy, the coherency, the social usefulness and the efficiency of our initiatives and practices in entrepreneurship education? Addressing these issues and challenges, this chapter suggests that at least two major evolutions might reinforce the future of entrepreneurship education. First, we need strong intellectual and conceptual foundations, drawing from the fields of entrepreneurship and education, to strengthen our entrepreneurship courses. And finally, we also need to deeply reflect on our practices, as researchers and educators, taking a more critical stance toward a too often adopted ‘taken for granted’ position.