Within the social sciences narrative approaches have become more popular. In recent years ithas also been suggested that entrepreneurship research would benefit from the use of a narrative approach. Interest in this direction is now emerging. The purpose of this article is to illustrate and reflect upon how narrative approaches can contribute to entrepreneurship research. The article is focused on three areas: (1) The construction of entrepreneurial identities, (2) Entrepreneurial learning, (3) (Re)conceptualizing entrepreneurship. It is argued that a narrativeapproach contributes to the literature by enriching the understanding of what motivates individual entrepreneurs and the way they run their businesses. Storytelling is closely related to entrepreneurial learning and complements other approaches. Furthermore, storytelling and story-making serve as potential metaphors for conceptualizing and reconceptualizing entrepreneurship.
Public advisory service to SMEs is a multibillion pound activity throughout the industrialized world. Yet very little research has been done on the theoretical basis for this field. This paper proposes some elements in a theoretical understanding of the rationale behind public measures.The authors argue that public intervention should be considered at two levels, as a public market intervention and as a consultant-client relation at the micro level. At the market intervention level, public advisory service is seen in the perspective of economic theory, comparing neo-classical and neo-Austrian theory. Two different kinds of services are identified and discussed: operational and strategic.At a micro level, the concepts of client identity and clientifying power relations serve to understand the small business manager's way of responding to services. In combining both levels -the market perspective and the micro level -it is argued that the neo-classical theory is connected to operational/expert services and objectifying power technologies. The neoAustrian theory corresponds with the empirical findings at the micro level showing strategic services embedded in a subjectifying power technology. With the neo-Austrian perspective the rather symmetrical relations between client and consultant at the micro level is comprehensible.
PurposeThe purpose of this research paper is to investigate opposing versions of entrepreneurship and to introduce a metaphor to stimulate a dialogue about the diversity and complexity of enterprising communities.Design/methodology/approachA discourse framework is developed in order to describe dominating – and even new and challenging – versions of entrepreneurship. The discourse analysis is presented in three steps: the introductory text to a handbook of entrepreneurship is deconstructed to expose some basic assumptions of entrepreneurship; drawing on several research articles, some dominating versions of entrepreneurship are analysed; drawing on research articles which have recently been published in two special issues in entrepreneurship journals, alternative versions of entrepreneurship are analysed.FindingsThis paper compares three dominating and three alternative versions of entrepreneurship. All the versions are related to the idea of entrepreneurship as a story of creation for our times, where it is implied that entrepreneurship appears to be something inherently good for society and for people. The versions share a common denominator but are also distinguished by different ontological and epistemological assumptions that make a dialogue between the versions problematic.Research limitations/implicationsThe results of this research paper have obvious limitations because of the methodology employed and due to the limited number of texts analysed.Originality/valueThe concept of a discursive web to analyse the world of entrepreneurship is introduced.
In this article a distinction between a pragmatic and a critical orientation of action research is made. These orientations can be considered, implicitly or explicitly, to be the main alternatives in AR today. What are the assumptions behind, and practical implications for, AR projects with different orientations? A number of themes are introduced where a tension between the two are identified and illustrated in the form of a dialogue and friendly quarrel between proponents from each side. It is argued that the two orientations suit different research contexts and cannot easily be combined. The pragmatic orientation is well suited for contexts where concerted and immediate action is needed, whereas the critical is preferable where transformative action needs to be preceded by critical thinking and reflection. In the former, power to act is a desired outcome, and in the latter, unequal and invisible power relations need to be unveiled before they can be transformed. The responsibility of the researcher, as well as the form of knowledge developed, differs between the two orientations. Action Research
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.