bluuebunny/crossref_metadata_2025_split huggingface dataset:
Teams
Authors: Phillips Robert A. 
Published: January 2015

Abstract
A team refers to a special subclass of cooperative scheme characterized by a particularly high degree of interdependence and often focused on a single goal. A good, nonathletic example may be a project team within a manufacturing firm. Members spend many hours a day together, they share a common goal, they are more likely to go out of their way to assist teammates, and they depend upon one another more than the organization at large. The concept of a team indicates a higher level of commitment than other similar cooperative schemes and therefore will contain a higher level of ethical content. As the “principle of fairness” comes into play, one of the greatest problems with using teams is that there are often members who don't do their share. The principle provides a moral foundation for the obligations of individuals within a cooperative scheme as well as the obligations of the scheme to the individual. Some possible areas of controversy may help frame the issues. For example, can the majority (ethically) force their will on the minority or an individual for the sake of the team goal or purpose? Should the individual voluntarily yield to the team for the sake of the goal? Other possible ethical pitfalls exist, especially in a business context.
Business Angel Network
Authors: Sarasvathy Saras D. , Wiltbank Robert 
Published: January 2015

AbstractBusiness angel “networks,” such as the Band of Angels in Silicon Valley and the Alliance of Angels in the Pacific Northwest have been forming at a rapid pace. It is estimated that there are over 150 business angel networks in the United States and several in European and Asian countries. Books and web sites on business angels continue to proliferate. From a research standpoint, however, in spite of the considerably larger magnitude of business angels when compared to VCs, we know less about the former than the latter.
Competitive Advantage
Authors: Miles Morgan P. , Darroch Jenny 
Published: January 2015

AbstractThis article defines the term competitive advantage and identifies pathways for creating a competitive advantage along with advantages such as superior performance, enhanced customer satisfaction, strong customer relationships and market leadership. In addition, the paper outlines challenges organizations face when trying to maintain a competitive advantage in the market segments within which it competes. The article also applies the term competitive advantage to different contexts: profit vs. no profit, and free vs. controlled markets.
Corporate Entrepreneurial Project Failure
Authors: Kuratko Donald F. , Shepherd Dean A. 
Published: January 2015

AbstractThe success of corporate entrepreneurial project depends on the commitment of management, the project leader, and the rest of the project team to the innovation effort. Commitment toward innovation typically stems from intrinsic motivation and while innovations often begin with creative ideas, individuals are typically most creative when they are passionate about what they are doing. Yet, despite considerable commitment by organizational members and given the increase in corporate innovative activity, entrepreneurial projects that are created to pursue new and unique opportunities can still fail – or “die” – due to the uncertain environment within which they develop. Regardless of the reasons behind a project's failure, those committed to the project will likely feel they have lost something important when the project fails. Although failure can be an important source of information for learning, this learning is not automatic or instantaneous. The emotions generated by failure (e.g., grief) can interfere with the learning process. This article explains the grief process, how it can be managed by individuals and organizations to enhance learning, and proposes a dual process model for recovering from grief, so that innovators can learn more from their project failures and remain committed to future innovative endeavors.
Corporate Entrepreneurship Assessment Instrument
Authors: Holt Daniel T. 
Published: January 2015

Abstract

The corporate entrepreneurship assessment instrument (
CEAI
) measures the key internal organizational factors that influence a firm's entrepreneurial activities and outcomes. These include: (i)
top management support
, the willingness of top‐level managers to facilitate and promote entrepreneurial behavior; (ii)
work discretion
, the top‐level managers' commitment to tolerate failure, provide managers decision‐making latitude, and freedom from excessive oversight; (iii)
rewards
/
reinforcement
, the use systems that reward significant achievements and encourage pursuit of challenging work; and (iv)
time availability
, the evaluation of workloads to ensure that individuals and group. Along with the scale's description, the evidence that has accumulated regarding the CEAI's reliability and validity is summarized.
Forms of Corporate Entrepreneurship
Authors: Kuratko Donald F. , Covin Jeffrey G. 
Published: January 2015

Abstract
The domain of corporate entrepreneurship is comprised of two categories of phenomena: corporate venturing and strategic entrepreneurship. Corporate venturing consists of entrepreneurial phenomena through which new businesses are created by, added to, or invested in by an existing organization. Its forms include internal, cooperative, and external corporate venturing. By contrast, strategic entrepreneurship consists of a broad array of entrepreneurial initiatives that do not necessarily involve new businesses being added to the firm. Strategic entrepreneurship involves the exhibition of organizationally consequential innovations that are adopted in pursuit of competitive advantage. The forms of strategic entrepreneurship include strategic renewal, sustained regeneration, domain redefinition, organizational rejuvenation, and business model reconstruction.
Corporate Ventures and Knowledge
Authors: Bogner William C. , Petricevic Olga 
Published: January 2015

AbstractThe role of knowledge, the different types of knowledge, and the processes of searching for and learning new knowledge are all critical components in understanding successful corporate venturing (CV). This article examines some of the recent insights into each of these areas and how they tie to the entrepreneurial activities of established firms. In particular, it links the firm's knowledge base to dynamic capabilities. This approach highlights the following key relationships between knowledge and dynamic capabilities: (i) new knowledge is one of the key outcomes of a firm's dynamic capabilities; (ii) firms produce new knowledge in part through specific dynamic capabilities for external knowledge search and selection, and (iii) firms produce new knowledge in part through specific dynamic capabilities for internal knowledge deployment and knowledge reconfigurations.
Entrepreneurial Action
Authors: McMullen Jeffery S. 
Published: January 2015

Abstract
Entrepreneurial action refers to “behavior in response to a judgmental decision under uncertainty about a possible opportunity for profit” (McMullen and Shepherd, 2006, p. 134). This view tends to conceive of entrepreneurs as change agents who catalyze the economy. Although motivated by self‐interest, entrepreneurial action is only rewarded to the extent that it creates a perceived contribution over existing solutions to current problems. Therefore, to become an entrepreneur, individuals must escape ignorance – discover, create, or imagine a solution that could be, but currently is not – and overcome uncertainty (doubt) that can delay or prevent them from introducing their innovation to the market. This involves assessments of a situation as both a third‐person opportunity – belief that a situation is an opportunity for someone – and a first‐person opportunity assessment – belief that a situation is an opportunity for the entrepreneur. For entrepreneurial action to occur, the individual must believe that a situation represents a first‐person opportunity. Profit is often validation of the veracity of this belief. The defining characteristic of the entrepreneurial action approach, therefore, is new value creation and the institutional change that it creates as a consequence of its occurrence.
Entrepreneurial Grief
Authors: Shepherd Dean A. , Wolfe Marcus T. 
Published: January 2015

AbstractFailure is a way of life for entrepreneurs, and experiencing failure can lead to varying degrees of grief. In this chapter, we explore the reasons entrepreneurs experience grief as a result of project failure. We then detail why certain projects elicit greater or lesser levels of grief, as a function of the project's role in satisfying the entrepreneur's individual need for competence, autonomy, and relatedness. Next, we examine the phenomenon of anticipatory grief, and the potential advantages and disadvantages it provides for entrepreneurs facing an imminent failure event. Finally, we introduce an instrument developed to measure entrepreneurial grief as a result of project failure, as a tool meant to aid future research on this topic.
Entrepreneurial Exit
Authors: DeTienne Dawn R. 
Published: January 2015

AbstractEntrepreneurial exit is a critical component of the entrepreneurial process and one that is critical to the practicing entrepreneur. This article examines differences between failure and deliberate closure, how founders of privately held ventures make exit decisions, how they develop exit strategies, and the impact of those decisions. I begin by clarifying the different types of exit based on two dimensions – firm exit and founder exit. Both firm exit and founder exit as entrepreneurial culmination that occur when the firm fails and also through deliberate closure is refered here. Entrepreneurial departure occurs when the founder exits from the firm (e.g., forced exit, succession, harvest), but the firm remains in the market. Entrepreneurial recycling occurs when the firm exits, but the founder remains engaged in entrepreneurial activity (e.g., portfolio or serial entrepreneurs). In addition, a list of potential research questions, guiding theoretical perspectives, and critical references for researchers interested in each of these different types of exit is provided.
Family Business Emotions
Authors: M. Madden Timothy , Kellermanns Franz W. , A. Eddleston Kimberly 
Published: January 2015

Abstract
Family‐based social capital is a distinct resource for family firms because relationships with external stakeholders can be maintained from one generation to the next and family firms often participate in positive social exchanges with other family firms, building a community network of family firms. Given the kinship, loyalty, and trust that differentiate family firms from other forms of governance, research often highlights the benefits of positive emotions within family firms, such as reciprocal altruism and the maintenance of family harmony.
Harvesting the Entrepreneurial Venture
Authors: Petty William J. 
Published: January 2015

Abstract

Harvesting (or exiting) is the method owners and investors use to get out of a business and, ideally, reap the value of their investment in the firm. Many entrepreneurs successfully grow their businesses but fail to develop effective harvest plans. As a result, they are unable to capture the full value of the business they have worked so hard to create. Harvesting encompasses more than merely selling and leaving a business; it involves capturing value (cash flows), reducing risk, and creating future options – the reason we prefer the term
harvest
over
exit
.
Entrepreneurial Identity
Authors: Hoang Ha , Gimeno Javier 
Published: January 2015

Abstract
Entrepreneurial identity refers to a person's set of meanings, including attitudes and beliefs, attributes, and subjective evaluations of behavior, that define him or herself in an entrepreneurial role. The construct of entrepreneurial identity encompasses how a person defines the entrepreneurial role, and whether he or she identifies with that role. By viewing firm founding as involving a role transition, we explore how entrepreneurial identity can influence successful founding behavior. We posit that when transition to the founder role involves high role novelty and role conflict that can lead to negative feedback, holding a complex and central entrepreneurial identity can facilitate the transition to the founder role by facilitating persistence while emphasizing role experimentation. In contrast, we posit that individuals with high identity centrality and low complexity would probably engage in limited search activities and ultimately become inactive but with an expectation of returning to entrepreneurial activity in the future. Overall, entrepreneurial identity is a dynamic construct whose development is influenced by network contacts that can in turn shed light on why some, and not others, become entrepreneurs.
Incubators
Authors: Neubaum Donald O. 
Published: January 2015

Abstract
Incubators are economic development tools and programs designed to promote and accelerate the growth of entrepreneurial companies through the provision of services and resources. Incubators offer start‐up firms many benefits, including low‐cost office or lab space, access to capital and other business and support services. As of 2011, the National Business Incubation Association (NBIA) estimates there are 7000 incubators worldwide, with about 25% of them occurring outside the United States. Technology incubators commercialize new technologies or create new innovation opportunities. Mixed‐use incubators foster new businesses of all kinds and might focus on specific industries or niches, such as biotechnology, information technology, or the Internet startups. Empowerment or microenterprise incubators are created by governments to address socioeconomic issues, such as creating jobs or revitalizing neighborhoods. The success of incubators is subject to debate, especially given their relatively high costs. High‐performing incubators generally have either a strong relationship with a research university, or a medical or research laboratory, or are located in a metropolitan area with high‐quality or technology‐based companies. Integrating incubator clients into the local technology development system, fostering relationship between incubator management and outside experts, and providing clients with access to critical resources are three keys for incubator effectiveness.
International Entrepreneurship
Authors: Oviatt Benjamin M. , McDougall‐Covin Patricia 
Published: January 2015

AbstractThe authors define international entrepreneurship as the discovery, enactment, evaluation, and exploitation of opportunities – across national borders – to create future goods and service (McDougall and Oviatt, 2005). The article traces the academic evolution of international entrepreneurship from its genesis in 1989, when it was narrowly focused on international new ventures to its broader boundaries that are the subject of scholarly inquiry today. The domain of international entrepreneurship includes two branches of study – the study of entrepreneurial activity that crosses national borders and the comparison of domestic entrepreneurship in multiple countries. Examples of well‐conducted research from each of the two branches are discussed in the article. Intriguing research questions for each branch are presented. The authors predict that researchers of the adolescent discipline of international entrepreneurship will continue to explore the boundaries of the domain.
Knowledge‐Based Assets in Entrepreneurial Ventures
Authors: Bakhru Anjali , Grant Robert M. 
Published: January 2015

AbstractKnowledge has an intimate relationship with entrepreneurship. Knowledge is a critical input into the creation of new business ventures and a major area of entrepreneurship research addresses the sources of such knowledge, including the educational backgrounds of entrepreneurs, the origins of creativity, and role of established enterprises in supplying the knowhow used by new enterprises. Different types of knowledge are required at different stages of the entrepreneur process – a key distinction is between identifying entrepreneurial opportunities and building the capabilities of the new enterprise.
Minority Entrepreneurship
Authors: Greene Patricia G. 
Published: January 2015

Abstract
The topic of minority entrepreneurship is of ever‐increasing importance as more and more frequent questions and concerns about the legitimacy and accuracy of racial and ethnic categorizations are raised. Minority entrepreneurship remains a broad concept, the use of which is largely dependent on situation. The topic is also often intertwined with questions on immigrant entrepreneurship. There are a variety of national data sources available through the US government to understand the size and scope of minority owned businesses and an additional set of research projects that focus on tracking the startup practices of minority business owners. Theoretical work in this area is more limited and largely based in the field of sociology. The two primary research questions are: i) why are minority‐owned businesses underrepresented in the overall population of small businesses? and ii) why do existing minority‐owned businesses tend to stay smaller than their majority‐owned counterparts? Means of exploring these issues include research questions on demographics and resources of the owner(s) and the business(es), the startup process, business outcomes, economic development, labor market issues, and opportunity structures. Results from these studies will be useful to entrepreneurs, resource providers, educators, and policy makers.
National Culture and Entrepreneurial Orientation
Authors: Kreiser Patrick M. 
Published: January 2015

Abstract
This article examines the current research trends and future research directions related to national culture and firm‐level entrepreneurial orientation. The key current research trends explored are (i) the impact of national culture on the individual dimensions of EO and (ii) the impact of institutions that are reflective of national culture on EO. The directions for future research highlight (i) the need for further research assessing the impact of cultural differences on the measurement of EO and (ii) The need for research assessing the impact of national culture and institutions on the relationship between EO and performance. Taken together, future research studies should examine possible cross‐cultural measurement issues related to EO, as well as the impact of national culture and institutions on the relationship between EO and other organizational variables, in order to further refine our understanding of the EO construct.
Opportunity Identification
Authors: Grégoire Denis A. , Shepherd Dean A. 
Published: January 2015

AbstractIn this article, we summarize the bases and achievements of extant research on the identification, recognition, discovery, imagining and/or creation of entrepreneurial opportunities. After situating this topic's emergence within contemporary entrepreneurship research, we discuss a series of theoretical and methodological challenges inherent to studying opportunity identification. We then describe key empirical findings, and suggest avenues for future investigation.
Patent Protection
Authors: Santoro Michael D. 
Published: January 2015

Abstract
Patents are often essential to entrepreneurs and entrepreneurial ventures in protecting new technologies, new products, and intellectual property necessary to gain first‐mover advantages against larger, more established firms. However, obtaining patents can be a daunting task as many entrepreneurs and entrepreneurial ventures cannot afford the time and money to procure patent protection. Paradoxically, large, more established firms are often better equipped to procure patent protection, as they often have more resources, including patent attorneys, who are knowledgeable in patent procurement and who can handle the complex administrative issues surrounding securing a patent. We discuss these issues and offer thoughts on ways entrepreneurs and entrepreneurial ventures can combine property‐based resources in the way of patents, trademarks, and copyrights along with knowledge‐based resources, in the way of unique tacit knowledge and capabilities, to achieve sustainable competitive advantage.
Real Options
Authors: McGrath Rita G. 
Published: January 2015

AbstractReal options reasoning has attracted significant attention for its challenge to conventional investment heuristics such as the net present value rule. Because options style investments can contain losses, offer access to attractive upside gains, and break monolithic decisions into sequential ones, the use of options has been seen as particularly attractive under high uncertainty conditions. Options logic has been seen as one way in which to combat under‐investment in innovation and entrepreneurial behavior. Debates include whether the logic of options is implementable in actuality and whether couching an investment in options terms leads to excessive optimism and over‐investment. Nonetheless, real options theory continues to be of particular interest to scholars seeking to understand the logic of investment in entrepreneurial ventures. Path‐dependent and sequential discoveries have long featured in explanations of the outcomes of entrepreneurial activities and options reasoning provides a financial complement to such discussions.
Social Status in Entrepreneurship
Authors: Milanov Hana 
Published: January 2015

Abstract
Drawing on a rich stream of sociological research, scholars of status have made important contributions to understanding of entrepreneurial phenomena. This article summarizes the extant thinking on status and introduces its definition, in order to discuss the relevance of the concept for scholars of entrepreneurship as well as, ways to operationalize the construct in empirical research. The article concludes with several considerations for future research.
Entrepreneurial Stories and Legitimacy
Authors: Lounsbury Michael , Glynn Mary A. 
Published: January 2015

Abstract
Entrepreneurial stories are crucial to how entrepreneurs construct and situate their identity within a particular institutional field in order to legitimate themselves and their novel products or practices. Such communications are at the core of what Lounsbury and Glynn refer to as cultural entrepreneurship which more generally refers to the processes by which entrepreneurs draw upon various cultural resources (e.g., stories) to construct their identities, gain legitimacy with key audiences, and access resources.
Strategic Entrepreneurship
Authors: Hitt Michael A. , Ireland R. Duane 
Published: January 2015

AbstractMost firms throughout the world today face challenging and complex environments, making it difficult for them to achieve competitive success. Being able to identify and exploit opportunities across time and events is foundational to organizations' efforts to develop and exploit competitive advantages when facing these types of environments. After identifying or recognizing opportunities, firms must be able to innovate in ways that allow them to create unique value for customers. In turn, value creation is the source of a firm's ability to outperform rivals and earn above‐average returns as a result of doing so. Thus, competitive success is a function of a firm's ability to innovate and then find ways to exploit its innovations in the marketplace. This means that entrepreneurship, which is concerned primarily with identifying and exploiting opportunities as well as strategic management, which is concerned primarily with creating and sustaining a competitive advantage are both required for a firm's competitive success. The integration of entrepreneurship's focal activities with strategic management's focal activities is called strategic entrepreneurship. Herein, we describe strategic entrepreneurship and its central importance to a firm's ability to consistently outperform its rivals.