The case for more “subjectivist” research on how entrepreneurs create opportunities

Abstract

Purpose -This paper aims to assess the main sources, key propositions and empirical methods available to researchers taking a "subjectivist" perspective on the creation of opportunities by entrepreneurs. Design/methodology/approach -Subjectivist research is defined behaviourally: it emphasises the internal, mental processes and subjective meanings incorporated in entrepreneurial acts. The alertness literature is accorded special attention; it originally possessed a strong subjectivist orientation and focused on opportunity recognition. Findings -A subjectivist approach has distinct advantages: it requires researchers to observe, analyse and explain entrepreneurial creativity with reference to entrepreneurs' internal, personal interpretations of their environment. Subjectivist approaches ask: how do entrepreneurs create profit opportunities? Subjectivists extend the concept of entrepreneurial alertness to include analysis of knowledge construction processes. Research limitations/implications -Fruitful theoretical and applied subjectivist research de-emphasises entrepreneurs' exploitation of existing opportunities; knowledge construction fundamental to the genesis of creative behaviour becomes central. Practical implications -There are several empirically oriented organising frameworks available in the literature consistent with a subjectivist orientation to entrepreneurial creativity. Originality/value -This is the first attempt to assess and synthesise modern subjectivist work on the creative dimension of entrepreneurial behaviour. It identifies complementary conceptual developments on the interface between economics and psychology. Some promising empirical methods are suggested.

Spirituality and entrepreneurial failure

“…Qualitative research is recommended when a complex phenomenon such as venture failure needs to be explored in detail and the focus is on understanding the meaning that the participants assign to it (Creswell, 2013). Narrative inquiry has been suggested for entrepreneurship research specifically because it captures a sequence of events like venture founding from the point of view of a participant in that sequence (Endres & Woods, 2007;Warren, 2004). Narratives produce "rich, thick data" (Willis, 2006: 272) because they are devices of interpretation (Lawler, 2002) through which people make sense of their experiences and use them to elaborate their opinions and give reasons for their actions and intentions (Shkedi, 2005, Richardson, 1990.…”

Failed, not finished: A narrative approach to understanding venture failure stigmatization

“…Qualitative research provides rich descriptions of micro-level mechanisms and processes (Richards, 2009), facilitates induction of patterns amenable to further quantitative research (Eisenhardt and Graebner, 2007;Yin, 2003), and is recommended for entrepreneurship research (Cope, 2011;Endres & Woods, 2007;Venkataraman et al, 2013). This design enabled us to flesh out the micro-level experience and actions of entrepreneurs that undergird failure stigmatization patterns at the socio-cultural level identified in existing quantitative research.…”

Opportunity or dead end? Rethinking the study of entrepreneurial action without a concept of opportunity

“…Advocates of creation conceive of opportunities as subjectively imagined and enacted by entrepreneurs, through interaction with stakeholders, including investors and customers, rather than caused by changes in what they term exogenous factors such as technology (Bhave 1994;Chiasson and Saunders 2005;Fletcher 2006;Sarason et al 2006;Alvarez and Barney 2007;Dimov 2007;Endres and Woods 2007;Hjorth 2007;Wood and McKinley 2010;Popp and Holt 2013;Tocher et al 2015). In this view, opportunities possess no prior, independent existence separate from entrepreneur/stakeholder interaction (Gartner et al 2003;Dimov 2011).…”