Differentiating Entrepreneurs from Small Business Owners: A Conceptualization

Carland, James W.; Hoy, Frank; Boulton, William R.; Carland, Jo Ann C.

doi:10.1007/3-540-48543-0_3

Cited by 58 publications

(75 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…My analysis of 143 surveys conducted across 24 countries makes an important departure from prior work because, rather than investigating a singular aspect of entrepreneurial activity, it attends to the multidimensional nature of gender inequality in entrepreneurship: it persists regardless of whether “entrepreneurship” is defined by organizational creation (Thornton, 1999; Aldrich and Ruef, 2006) or by an orientation toward economic growth, profit, and innovation (Schumpeter, 1961, Kanter, 1983; Carland et al, 1984). This approach enabled me not only to address how institutional arrangements may have differing implications for inequality depending on how entrepreneurship is measured but also to discern how gendered institutional incentives link different forms of gender stratification in entrepreneurship to one another.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Business as Plan B

Thébaud

2015

Administrative Science Quarterly

318

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article develops and empirically evaluates an institutional theory of gender inequalities in business start-up, ownership, and growth orientation. I argue that in contexts in which institutional arrangements such as paid leave, subsidized childcare, and part-time employment opportunities mitigate work-family conflict, women are less likely to opt for business ownership as a fallback employment strategy. As a result, women in these contexts may be relatively less well represented among entrepreneurs as a whole but more well represented in growth-oriented forms of entrepreneurship. To evaluate this claim, I analyze survey data from 24 countries over the span of eight years. Multilevel analyses show that supportive work-family institutions are associated with larger gender gaps in the odds of early-stage and established business ownership but smaller gender gaps among business owners in terms of their business size, growth aspirations, and propensity to innovate or use new technology. Consistent with my theoretical argument, women business owners are also less likely to report pursuing entrepreneurship because they lacked attractive employment options in contexts in which supportive institutions are in place. Findings suggest that institutional contexts characterized by salient work-family conflict may fuel women's aggregate representation in business activity but reinforce their segregation into less growth-oriented (and thus lower-status) ventures.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Business as Plan B

Thébaud

2015

Administrative Science Quarterly

318

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Entrepreneurship research has grown tremendously over the past three decades, and the field’s focus has changed substantially over time. Early research in the 1980s was dominated by a phenomenological tradition that put strong emphasis on understanding the role of entrepreneurs and gaining empirical evidence concerning the context in which entrepreneurship phenomena happen, such as the differences in the type and rate of new firm creation among different countries, regions, and industries (e.g., Carland, Hoy, Boulton, & Carland, 1984; Gartner, 1985; Venkataraman, 1997). Such emphasis on context fueled criticisms revolving around the question of whether entrepreneurship is a more applied research area or a distinct and legitimate field of research.…”

Section: Redefining Sector In Entrepreneurship Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sector-Based Entrepreneurial Capabilities and the Promise of Sector Studies in Entrepreneurship

Massis

Kotlar

Wright

et al. 2017

Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The influence of the industrial sector is a long-standing assumption in entrepreneurship studies, yet the mechanisms through which the industrial sector shapes entrepreneurial phenomena and the processes through which entrepreneurial actors interact with sectors to prospect, develop, and exploit entrepreneurial opportunities remain largely under-theorized and little understood. We critically reexamine the notion of ''sector'' in entrepreneurship research, advancing a more dynamic view of the industrial sectors captured by the concept of sector fluidity and identifying three approaches to move the sector more prominently onto the ''front seat'' of entrepreneurship theory and research. Defining sector-based entrepreneurial capabilities and examining their importance to advance current understanding of industry-specific determinants, processes, and outcomes of entrepreneurship, we set out an agenda for further research aimed at advancing sector studies in entrepreneurship.

show abstract

“…Much of the literature concerns formal individual learning, and supports the hypothesis that high individual learning enhances organisational performance (Mitra, 2000; Carlson, Upton, & Seaman, 2006; Rhee, Park, & Lee, 2010). In a survey of family-owned SMEs, Carlson, Upton, and Seaman (2006) found poorly trained employees to constitute a significant barrier to growth. They also reported that learning in entrepreneurial firms often occurs on-the-job and through mistakes.…”

Section: Literature Review: Markers Of Hgfsmentioning

confidence: 88%

“…Coad, Daunfelt, Johansson, and Wennberg (2014) also found that early in their evolution, HGFs are prone to head hunt scarce human capital from other firms. Hayton (2003), Carlson, Upton, and Seaman (2006) and Wennberg (2009) reported that HGFs widely use methodically planned recruitment practices designed to attract and retain high performing managers and executives. These include: written job descriptions, generous incentive-based compensation, formal and regular employee reviews and pay for work-related technical training.…”

Section: Literature Review: Markers Of Hgfsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Identifying high growth firms: Where are we?

Dwyer¹,

Kotey

2015

Journal of Management & Organization

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The article reviews the literature for the key markers of high growth firms, which create the majority of new jobs. From the review, a template is developed comprising the key markers. They include: training and experience in entrepreneurship and management; and strategies that emphasise innovation, marketing and employee and organisational learning. High growth firm owners take steps to access management skills that complement theirs through employment of a management team, outsourcing management tasks or making decisions with oversight from an informal board. Good reward structures, which may include ownership interests, are essential to performance of the management team. Access to resources, especially finance and human capital is critical to growth but abundant resources could compromise efficiency. The article finds that personality characteristics of owners and postgraduate education in management are not effective identifiers of high growth firms. Some of the barriers to identifying high growth firms are presented and suggestions made to overcome them.

show abstract

Differentiating Entrepreneurs from Small Business Owners: A Conceptualization

Cited by 58 publications

References 31 publications

Business as Plan B

Business as Plan B

Sector-Based Entrepreneurial Capabilities and the Promise of Sector Studies in Entrepreneurship

Identifying high growth firms: Where are we?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About