In the open innovation management literature, it is widely acknowledged that individuals play a crucial role in collaborative knowledge creation processes. However, the literature tends not to explore the human side of open innovation teams. The present article therefore examines the competencies that professionals need for working in open innovation teams (specific but not necessarily unique to open innovation) and to cope with the challenges they face. A qualitative study consisting of explorative interviews and focus group discussions was conducted, resulting in a competence profile for open innovation professionals. The profile adds a new perspective to the field of open innovation management by focusing on how individuals involved in open innovation teams can enhance open innovation success. It reveals, among other things, how professionals can generate new knowledge, build trust, and deal with low reciprocal commitment in open innovation teams. Especially, brokering solutions and being socially competent seem to be important for open innovation professionals. Companies should focus on these competencies when supporting their professionals in open innovation teams.5 1Combine (c1) Employs integrative (win-win) negotiation strategies rather than distributive (win-lose) strategies. Brokers solutions or outcomes. Thinks in ways that differ from established lines of thought. Agrees to disagree (lose-lose). Considers common goal as most important. Adapts without violating own ideas.

This article builds on a previous 2004 Journal of Vocational Education and Training (JVET) contribution by Biemans et al., in which several possible pitfalls in designing and implementing competence-based education (CBE) were discussed. The present article reports on the results of an extensive research programme on competence development and CBE consisting of four empirical studies carried out in schools for secondary and higher vocational education in the life sciences in the Netherlands in the years 2004 to 2008. Based on the research findings, the article examines how the CBE pitfalls have been dealt with in Dutch VET. The conclusion can be drawn that the various pitfalls have received attention during the design and implementation of CBE, but not all problems have been solved yet. The article provides clues as to how the various pitfalls might be further addressed in the future to improve the quality of competence-based VET.

Moving beyond general personal traits as predictors for success, a growing volume of research acknowledges that entrepreneurial core processes are enabled by specific competencies which can be learned, further refined and developed. The research objective of this article is to develop a framework for entrepreneurial competence in a well-defined small firm sector by elaborating and empirically validating an existing categorization of entrepreneurial competence. The dataset includes 348 small firm owner-managers who participated in an educational programme, established to pursue new business opportunities in the Dutch agri-food sector. Exploratory factor analysis and confirmatory factor analysis revealed that three domains constitute the heart of entrepreneurial competence in this small firm context: 'analysing', 'pursuing' and 'networking'. These three competence domains provide professionals active in sector development, small business support and (vocational) education with an empirically valid framework of clearly discernible elements of entrepreneurial competence. This framework also encompasses insights on education and learning.

In open innovation teams, people from different organizations work together to develop new products, services, or markets. This organizational diversity can positively influence collaborative knowledge creation but can frustrate and obstruct the process as well. To increase the success rates of open innovation, it is vital to learn how individuals create knowledge in open innovation teams and the problems they face. However, HRD research on this topic is still lacking. This article reviews the literature in HRD, organizational, and learning sciences, describing how individuals interact when creating knowledge collaboratively, and gives an overview of the challenges with collaborative knowledge creation in open innovation teams. The article ends with a discussion and conclusion, and implications for further research.

Despite the widely acknowledged importance of entrepreneurial learning, research specifically addressing the question of what fosters this process is still in poor supply. In the present study, entrepreneurial learning was conceptualised as a distinct type of workplace learning, emphasising the role of the work environment in performing entrepreneurial tasks by owner/managers. A qualitative study was conducted among a specific sample of 25 small-business owners in an innovative, successful sector in the Netherlands: greenhouse horticulture. In-depth semi-structured interviews were held focussing on critical incidents as they arose around a pursued business opportunity. Four factors were identified as being crucial in the entrepreneurial learning process, namely: support and guidance, external interaction, internal communication, and task characteristics. Furthermore, the results showed that different types of business opportunities presented different dynamics for entrepreneurial learning. Finally, the results suggested a two-layered interaction between learner and work environment. Entrepreneurial learning is influenced by the work environment, which is in turn shaped and defined by the entrepreneur.

Farmers and horticultural growers are expected by society to increase production to meet the demand for food and other agricultural produce, and, simultaneously, reduce negative effects on the physical and social environment. Whether farmers and horticultural growers choose to develop their businesses this way, is not clear. A market orientation (MO) and entrepreneurial orientation (EO) of farmers and horticultural growers is propagated to increase farm profitability and stimulate the economic vigour of rural areas. An MO is a firm owners’ belief that the best way to achieve the firm's objectives is to satisfy customers more effective and efficient than competitors do. An EO is a firm owners’ willingness to innovate to rejuvenate market offerings, take risks to try out new and uncertain products, services and markets, and be more proactive than competitors towards new marketplace opportunities. However, it is not clear how MO and EO influence farmers’ and horticultural growers’ choices about how to develop their business. In this study a model is developed with hypotheses about the influence of EO and MO on strategic marketing choices of farmers. The model is tested on a sample of 588 Dutch farmers and horticultural growers. Four strategic groups were identified. A strategic group is a group of firms that have made similar choices about how to develop their business. Results show that higher levels of EO and MO are found in strategic groups that emphasise cooperating with buyers, increasing prices, and starting new activities. Lower levels of EO and MO are found in strategic groups that emphasize reducing costs and decreasing debts. EO and MO, however, have different influences on individual elements of strategy.

We thank AHON (i.e. LTO Groeiservice) and the entrepreneurs who participated in this study for their assistance and their openness to share opinions, experiences and ideas about learning and entrepreneurship. Structured abstractPurpose. To study learning of entrepreneurs in authentic learning environments. The research questions are: 1. How do entrepreneurs assess their compentencies, and how do employees and external consultants assess the compentencies of these entrepreneurs? 2. What are the competence strengths and weaknesses of entrepreneurs? 3. What are the learning activities that entrepreneurs perform? Methodology/Approach. Ten small business owners participated in a self-assessment and an assessment by employees and external consultants. Follow-up interviews elicited work-related learning activities. The interviews were transcribed. Descriptive statistics, t-tests and correlation tests, and a qualitative analysis of interview transcriptions were performed. Findings. 1. Competencies are being rated differently. Competence assessment is a potentially powerful learning source. 2. The top competence strength is having a learning orientation. 3. Ninety-nine learning activities were found embedded in the innovative work processes of the entrepreneurs. The top three learning activities were reflection, observation and experimentation. Research limitations/implications. The study is based on only ten entrepreneurs. Research is planned with larger numbers of subjects. Practical implications. Competence assessment needs to be provided for entrepreneurs in the sector as a tool for deeper self-reflection, and further performance improvement. Originality/value of paper. Much research on skills development and workplace learning is about employees in large organisations. However, employers in small and medium-sized companies are also an interesting professional group to study, since they create working and -2 -learning places for employees. Not much is know about their competence development. This study addresses that target group.

No abstract