No abstract

Despite its many achievements, scholarship at the intersection of entrepreneurship and cognition has focused primarily on the consequences of what happens when an entrepreneur benefits from various cognitive characteristics, resources, or other dispositions. As such, cognitive research in entrepreneurship continues to suffer from narrow theoretical articulations and weak conceptual foundations that lessen its contribution to the managerial sciences. To address these issues, we draw from extant work on the nature and practice of cognitive research to develop a systematic approach to study entrepreneurship cognition. To further articulate this agenda, we assess the state of the field by content-analysing entrepreneurship cognition articles published between 1976 and 2008. We find that, although it has investigated many relevant variables, research on entrepreneurship cognition has failed to fully articulate key conceptual features of the cognitive perspective. Building on these observations, we propose concrete strategies and research questions to augment the contribution of entrepreneurship cognition research, and advance this research beyond its current focus on 'cognitive consequences'. In particular, we illustrate the scholarly potential of disentangling the various antecedents of entrepreneurship cognition, of studying the process interactions between cognitive resources and mental representations, and of exploring the operation of entrepreneurship cognition across levels of analysis.

No abstract

S ubstantial gains can be made by individuals and organizations adept at detecting new opportunities. But how do business leaders do that concretely? Organization research shows that managers are more inclined to identify threats than opportunities, but it is still not clear why this is the case. Likewise, research points to several factors that may facilitate the recognition of opportunities. Yet empirical observations have been limited by retrospective biases and other conceptual challenges. As a result, key questions remain not only about what factors facilitate the recognition of opportunities, but also about why these factors play such a role. To further understanding of these issues, we study the reasoning strategies that individuals mobilize for recognizing opportunities. We develop a model of opportunity recognition as a cognitive process of structural alignment, and analyze the think-aloud verbalizations of executive entrepreneurs as they try to recognize opportunities for new technologies. In contrast to prior research, the qualitative and quantitative data do not provide evidence that individuals use prototypes to recognize opportunities. Instead, we find that different kinds of mental connections play different roles in the process of recognizing opportunities, with different consequences. We also document why and how prior knowledge may facilitate this process. By drawing attention to the cognitive underpinnings of opportunity recognition, we cast light on why it constitutes such a challenging task for individuals and organizations. In turn, this provides a useful basis for exploring the factors that explain why some individuals/organizations are able to recognize opportunities that others simply fail to see.

Conceptual convergence is often seen as a holy grail in entrepreneurship research. Yet little empirical research has focused specifically on the extent and nature of this convergence. We address this issue by content-analyzing the networks of co-citation emerging from the 20,184 references listed in the 960 full-length articles published in the Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research series between 1981 and 2004. Our results provide evidence for the varying levels of convergence that have characterized entrepreneurship research over the years, as well as the evolution of the conceptual themes that have attracted scholars' attention in different periods. In addition, we provide evidence that the field relies increasingly on its own literature, something that points toward the unique contribution that it makes to the management sciences.