War and conflict brings about adverse changes for those who are displaced. How do entrepreneurial individuals respond to such adversity to either setup , or continue with their existing entrepreneurial endeavours that would improve their own livelihood or that of others who have been affected? Whilst previous studies have found local knowledge, networks and resources to be crucial in the development of ventures in the war and conflict context, alienation from mainstream society within the host location often means that to succeed, those who are displaced require alternative strategies and approaches. Through examining the entrepreneurship ventures of six internally displaced entrepreneurs in Pakistan, our study identifies that entrepreneurial individuals find different ways to adapt to the new order, with both internal and external bricolage becoming the key strategies deployed to either re-establish their previous business(es) or to develop new endeavour(s) in the host location. To compensate for lack of local knowledge, networks and resources, we found that entrepreneurs followed closely their previous paths in their bricolage attempts, relying on reconfigurations of their preexisting competencies, as well as utilising pre-established and clandestine networks.

The modern globalised economy is prone to periods of change and uncertainty as experienced in the economic downturn following 2007. Others have noted that this has led to the shortening of product life cycles (Tassey, 2000), and the greater importance of innovation in order to retain competitiveness (Smith, 2002; Huggins and Izushi, 2007). These are the environments where entrepreneurs are traditionally felt to thrive, be this in starting their own firms, working within larger corporations, or in their lives in general (Gibb, 2002b; Rae, 2010). This ensures that the need for entrepreneurial skills is greater than ever (Taatila, 2010), with higher education seen as having a key role in providing the necessary entrepreneurial and employability skills (Crayford et al., 2012; Thompson et al., 2010; 2012). There is, however, no consensus on the best way to develop these skills, if it is possible at all (Jack and Anderson, 1999). Although the traditional classroom environment may be effective in providing students with basic business skills that constitute the ‘science’ component of entrepreneurship it is often felt to be unsuitable for teaching the ‘art’ component associated with innovation and creativity (Jack and Anderson, 1999; Pretorius et al., 2005). Rae (2006) notes the personal and social emergence of an individual forming their own identity and mindset as an entrepreneur as part of this learning experience. With traits such as self-confidence and willingness to tolerate uncertainty found by studies such as Baron (2000) and van Praag and Cramer (2001) to be positively associated with successful entrepreneurs, authors such as johannisson (1991) and Jones and English (2004) see the creation of these traits as being the primary purpose of entrepreneurship education. Gibb's (2002a) notion of conductive entrepreneurial environment points to the importance of providing an all-round student entrepreneurship learning experience that meets the rigours of academia, while keeping an experientially-based approach that enhances creativity and innovation (Gibb, 2002a; Porter and McKibbin, 1988). Pretorius et al. (2005) and Löbler (2006), however, suggest that the everyday pressures associated with the classroom environment and behaviourist forms of teaching make it difficult for students to shift into a more creative, less constrained way of thinking. This exploratory study examines the potential benefits of an entrepreneurship boot camp at the end of an academic year aimed at allowing students the opportunity to participate in multidimensional entrepreneurship activities and discussions in a less formal environment. Although all of the students will have been exposed to similar activities as part of their courses and extra curricular activities, without the appropriate environment, it is possible that fewer benefits will be received (Taatila, 2010). Taatila and Vyakarnam (2008) note the important role the mentor plays in creating this environment, but others (e.g. Heap, 1996; West, 2004; Pretorius et al., 2005) note the rol...