Schumpeter's Legacy? Interaction and Emotions in the Sociology of Entrepreneurship

Goss, David

doi:10.1111/j.1540-6520.2005.00077.x

Cited by 127 publications

(113 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Social constructionist ideas sensitise us to a set of assumptions about social reality and the ways in which we relate to and construct understandings of that reality. Social constructionist ideas have a lot in common with structuration theory (Giddens, 1979;1994) -a point which is also made by Bouchikhi (1993), Jack and Anderson (2002) and Goss (2005) in relation to entrepreneurship. But where structuration theory is concerned with the duality-of-structure (or, in entrepreneurship terms, the selection, modification and use of structure-guided scripts to effect entrepreneurial opportunity, Chiasson and Saunders, 2005), social construction work is more concerned with the representation systems (language, concepts, images, objects, social processes, relational processes) that are produced in explaining the duality of structure (Hall, 1997).…”

Section: Processes Of Opportunity Recognitionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In social constructionist efforts (drawing primarily upon Berger andLuckmann, 1966 andGiddens, 1984) there is a closer examination of the interplay between agency and structure linking individual constructions of sense-making and enactment to the societal level through processes of structuration (Bouchiki, 1993;Zafirovski, 1999;Bruyat and Julien, 2001;Goss, 2005). Within this emphasis, some promote the 'embeddedness' of entrepreneurial practices (Zafirovski, 1999;Jack and Anderson, 2002).…”

Section: The Social Construction Of Reality: Ideas and Assumptionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Entrepreneurial processes and the social construction of opportunity

Fletcher

2006

Entrepreneurship & Regional Development

259

240

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In contrast to structurally-determinist and cognitive/agency oriented views of opportunity recognition, it is argued that opportunity formation is relationally and communally constituted -an insight that is not recognised in descriptive or linear process models of opportunity recognition. To arrive at this claim, use is made of social constructionist ideas.These ideas have been frequently applied in entrepreneurship studies but less attention has been given to the relational aspects of social constructionist thinking particularly with regard to opportunity formation processes. To aid this line of inquiry an analysis is undertaken of a siblingautobiographical account of a high profile business venture, Coffee Republic. This account has been crafted by the sibling partnership with a particular audience in mind (the would-be entrepreneur) with guidelines and principles on how 'anyone can do it'. However, it is not utilised here as a good specimen of business venturing to be probed for particular (hidden) meanings. Instead, the account is evaluated in order to illustrate how individualistic statements about opportunity discovery can be reconceptualised as relationally and communally constituted -an emphasis which is important for widening our theoretical understanding of the activities we label entrepreneurship.

show abstract

Section: Processes Of Opportunity Recognitionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Social Construction Of Reality: Ideas and Assumptionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Entrepreneurial processes and the social construction of opportunity

Fletcher

2006

Entrepreneurship & Regional Development

259

240

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For a novice scholar in the discipline it may be worth to learn about Schumpeter's legacy in other works (e.g., Hagedoorn, 1996;Backhaus, 2003;Goss, 2005;Ahuja et al, 2008;Ohyama et al, 2009;Nelson, 2012). However, this is also probably the audience we aim at, junior faculty that has only recently joined the debate and doctoral students that are defining their domain of research and are still unaware of how Schumpeter's ideas have been employed.…”

Section: Discussion and Final Remarksmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Schumpeter's work has permeated many disciplines from entrepreneurship to sociology, from economics to management and such analyses are too huge to fit in a single paper. Readers with limited familiarity with Schumpeter's work may find it useful to refer back to previous works such as those by Hagedoorn (1996), Backhaus (2003), Goss (2005), da Costa (2006) and Nelson (2012) and, specifically on Schumpeter's impact on management research, to Ahuja et al (2008). Neither it is our purpose to extensively review the extant literature on entrepreneurship, which may be found in other articles (e.g., Low & Macmillan, 1988;Cooper, 2003;Cornelius et al, 2006;Busenitz et al, 2003;Teixeira, 2011;Landström et al, 2012).…”

Section: Schumpeter's Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Schumpeter’s (1934) Influence on Entrepreneurship (and Management) Research

Ferreira

Reis

Pinto

2017

REGEPE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Entrepreneurship research has flourished since de 1980s, following the institutional development that created schools and courses, research centers and dedicated journals. This paper examines the impact of Joseph Schumpeter, one of the main "knowledge producers" whose concepts and ideas on the entrepreneur, entrepreneurship and innovation have shaped the discipline and much of the research on entrepreneurship, and has influenced the thought on other areas of management. Methodologically, we conducted a bibliometric study of the articles published in 16 high stature international journals, over a period of 30 years, between 1981 and 2010. On a sample of 412 articles citing Schumpeter, we analyzed and mapped citations, cocitations and research themes. We further establish distinctions between entrepreneurship and management research. This study presents a manner to examine the influence of a scholar, and a set of conceptualizations he has introduced, on a discipline. Schumpeter has had an imprint in the multidisciplinary and wealth of research themes that entrepreneurship scholars have delved upon but also in other management disciplines, where his perspectives on entrepreneurship, the entrepreneur and innovation have contributed to much of the research conducted to date. Although entrepreneurship has remained largely multidisciplinary and drawing from the main management theories there is a growing body of entrepreneurshipspecific literature. Keywords:Entrepreneurship Este estudo apresenta uma forma de examinar a influência de um pesquisador, e um conjunto de conceitualizações que introduziu na disciplina. Schumpeter tem sido uma marca na multidisciplinaridade e riqueza dos temas analisados pelos pesquisadores em empreendedorismo, mas também em outras disciplinas de administração, onde as suas perspectivas sobre empreendedorismo, o empreendedor e inovação têm contribuído para muita da pesquisa realizada até a data. Apesar de empreendedorismo permanecer fortemente multidisciplinar e utilizando das principais teorias em administração, há um corpo de conhecimento crescente e específico na literatura de empreendedorismo.

show abstract

“…Comme observé par Goss (2005), Schumpeter, dans son livre The Theory of Economic Development, avait déjà proposé trois manières de décrire le processus entrepreneurial : 1) le comportement entrepreneurial (un nouveau produit, une nouvelle méthode de production, l'ouverture des nouveaux marchés, une nouvelle source de matières premières et la réorganisation de l'industrie) ; 2) la motivation entrepreneuriale (le désir de vaincre, de se battre pour créer une entreprise, la satisfaction de réaliser quelque chose) et 3) les facteurs qui limitent l'action entrepreneuriale (la difficulté à innover, l'inertie, la peur de la réprobation sociale).…”

Section: Introductionunclassified

Perceptions culturelles et intention d’entreprendre

Barbosa

Oliveira

Fayolle

et al. 2011

ipme

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Résumé de l'article Dans cette étude, nous complétons les travaux existants qui s'intéressent à l'influence de la culture nationale sur l'entrepreneuriat. Plus précisément, nous présentons une recherche empirique visant à cerner l'impact de différentes dimensions de la culture sur l'intention d'entreprendre. Différemment des recherches antérieures, nous utilisons un instrument de mesure créé spécialement pour appréhender la culture entrepreneuriale d'une région ou d'un pays, le questionnaire C-ENT (Culture of Entrepreneurship), développé par Stephan (2007). Nous proposons ainsi un modèle théorique qui détaille des dimensions de la culture beaucoup plus proches du comportement entrepreneurial que celles examinées dans les recherches antérieures, et nous présentons un premier test empirique de ce modèle en nous focalisant sur deux pays assez particuliers en ce qui concerne leurs niveaux d'intention entrepreneuriale, à savoir le Brésil et la France. Nos résultats sont cohérents avec les rapports du Global Entrepreneurship Monitor, dans le sens où les étudiants brésiliens de notre échantillon présentent globalement un niveau d'intention entrepreneuriale supérieur à la moyenne des étudiants français. Cela dit, nos résultats indiquent aussi une absence relative d'effets directs de la culture sur l'intention d'entreprendre, ce qui ouvre plusieurs voies de recherche pour l'avenir. Nous suggérons et discutons ces différentes pistes de recherche, en relevant aussi les dimensions de la culture entrepreneuriale à retenir et les construits psychologiques auxquels elles semblent être reliées.

show abstract

Schumpeter's Legacy? Interaction and Emotions in the Sociology of Entrepreneurship

Cited by 127 publications

References 15 publications

Entrepreneurial processes and the social construction of opportunity

Entrepreneurial processes and the social construction of opportunity

Schumpeter’s (1934) Influence on Entrepreneurship (and Management) Research

Perceptions culturelles et intention d’entreprendre

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About