Entrepreneurial ecosystems in Poland: panacea, paper tiger or Pandora’s box?

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to critically examine the role of public policy in the formation of entrepreneurial ecosystems in Poland. Design/methodology/approach The paper assumes a qualitative approach to researching and analysing how public policy enables and constrains the formation of entrepreneurial ecosystems. The authors conducted a series of focus groups with regional and national policy makers, enterprises and intermediaries in three Polish voivodeships (regions) – Malopolska, Mazowieckie and Pomorskie. Findings The paper finds that applying the entrepreneurial ecosystems approach is a challenging prospect for public policy characterised by a theory-practice gap. Despite the attraction of entrepreneurial ecosystems as a heuristic to foster entrepreneurial activity, the cases highlight the complexity of implementing the framework conditions in practice. As the Polish case demonstrates, there are aspects of entrepreneurial ecosystems that are beyond the immediate scope of public policy. Research limitations/implications The results challenge the view that the entrepreneurial ecosystems framework represents a readily implementable public policy solution to stimulate entrepreneurship and entrepreneurial growth. Insights are drawn from three regions, although by their nature these are predominantly city centric, highlighting the bounded geography of entrepreneurial ecosystems. Originality/value This paper poses new questions regarding the capacity of public policy to establish and extend entrepreneurial ecosystems. While public policy can shape the framework and system conditions, the paper argues that these interventions are often based on superficial or incomplete interpretations of the entrepreneurial ecosystems literature and tend to ignore or underestimate informal institutions that can undermine these efforts. As such, by viewing the ecosystems approach as a panacea for growth policy makers risk opening Pandora’s box.

Online and blended entrepreneurship education: a systematic review of applied educational technologies

“…Based on the demand for innovation and experiential entrepreneurial competencies (Constanţa-Nicoleta et al, 2015 ), game designers simulate a real business environment for learners to run a virtual business (Mennecke et al, 2008 , 2008 ) and avoid risks in the real world so that the cost and uncertainty of being entrepreneurs decrease. Except for general effectiveness (Tasnim, 2013 ), scholars focused on the entrepreneurial mindset, entrepreneurial intention and motivation (Buzady & Almeida, 2019 ; Ruiz-Alba et al, 2019 ), entrepreneurial behavior (Fellnhofer, 2015 ) and entrepreneurial competencies (Williams, 2015 ). Mayer et al ( 2014 ) narrowed the research subjects into engineering students, which showed gaming experience could significantly influence EE.…”

“…Furthermore, Bellotti et al ( 2014 ) analyzed the entrepreneurial mindset of engineering students. In general, the relationship between SGs and entrepreneurship intention and skills is positive (Almeida, 2017 ; Bellotti et al, 2014 ; Buzady & Almeida, 2019 ; Fellnhofer, 2015 ; Ruiz-Alba et al, 2019 ), even long-term positive effectiveness (Kriz & Auchter, 2016 ). However, the study of Newbery et al ( 2016 ) found a significant negative impact for the authentic learning method, perhaps because students understood the complexity of starting a business (Protopsaltis et al, 2013 ).…”

“…The performance of EE presented a similar distribution. Commonly, EE originated from the USA and become a mainstream discipline in business schools as well as other schools in higher education institutes (HEIs), partly because innovation is the most consequential characteristic in American culture, education and society, which meets the requirements of EE (Brooks et al, 2019 ). Due to various existing welfare systems and cultures, entrepreneurship and EE in Europe lag behind those of the USA (Potter et al, 2008 ; Karimi & Chizari, 2010 ).…”

“…Furthermore, a large number of applications applied to EE are produced and updated (e.g., Second Life, Facebook and online forums), because developers customize certain education technology to meet the needs of stakeholders, while studies of entrepreneurial educational technologies are scattered and systematic reviews on this topic are lacking. Due to time and resource constraints, developers of educational technology focus on one or two technologies, develop and experiment with one system or application (Buzady & Almeida, 2019 ). Researchers do not tend to compare the effectiveness of two or three technologies.…”

A manifesto for researching entrepreneurial ecosystems

“…Existing studies on governance point out that large-scale social change comes from better cross-sector coordination rather than from the isolated intervention of individual organizations (Kania and Kramer, 2011). The ecosystem approach needs to include experimental governance from a systemic point of view – with goals, metrics, and decision making that involve a widening circle of actors (Brooks et al., 2019). Balancing policy measures for both short-term growth (i.e.…”