Longitudinal panel studies of large, random samples of business start-ups captured at the pre-operational stage allow researchers to address core issues for entrepreneurship research, namely, the processes of creation of new business ventures as well as their antecedents and outcomes. Here, we perform a methods-orientated review of all 83 journal articles that have used this type of data set, our purpose being to assist users of current data sets as well as designers of new projects in making the best use of this innovative research approach. Our review reveals a number of methods issues that are largely particular to this type of research. We conclude that amidst exemplary contributions, much of the reviewed research has not adequately managed these methods challenges, nor has it made use of the full potential of this new research approach. Specifically, we identify and suggest remedies for context-specific and interrelated methods challenges relating to sample definition, choice of level of analysis, operationalization and conceptualization, use of longitudinal data and dealing with various types of problematic heterogeneity. In addition, we note that future research can make further strides towards full utilization of the advantages of the research approach through better matching (from either direction) between theories and the phenomena captured in the data, and by addressing some under-explored research questions for which the approach may be particularly fruitful.

/pdf/panel-studies-of-new-venture-creation-a-methods-focused-24aqvg7ffu.pdf

Panel studies of new venture creation: a methods-focused review and suggestions for future research

The literature has been enriched by studies examining the effect of entrepreneurship education on entrepreneurial or goal intention. Yet, few articles have considered how entrepreneurship education...

/pdf/the-effect-of-entrepreneurship-education-on-nascent-6dy75o7lkx.pdf

The effect of entrepreneurship education on nascent entrepreneurship

A study of competencies that influence entrepreneur performance in retail business ventures in Malaysia

In the past 15 years, two international observatories have been intensively studying entrepreneurship using empirical studies with different methodologies: Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM) and Panel Study of Entrepreneurial Dynamics (PSED). Both projects have generated a considerable volume of scientific production, and their intellectual structures are worth analyzing. The current work is an exploratory study of the knowledge base of the articles generated by each of these two observatories and published in prestigious journals. The main difference found is that the predominant theoretical frameworks used are the economic approach and institutional theory in GEM, and the demographic and cognitive approaches in PSED. The value added of this work lies in its novel characterization of the intellectual structure of entrepreneurship according to the academic production of these two initiatives. The results may be of interest to the managers and members of these observatories, as well as to academics, researchers, sponsors and policymakers interested in entrepreneurship.

Global entrepreneurship monitor versus panel study of entrepreneurial dynamics: comparing their intellectual structures

This research examines the entrepreneurship phenomenon, and the question: Why are some venture attempts more successful than others? This question is not a new one. Prior research has answered this by describing those that engage in nascent entrepreneurship. Yet, this approach yielded little consensus and offers little comfort for those newly considering venture creation (Gartner, 1988). Rather, this research considers the process of venture creation, by focusing on the actions of nascent entrepreneurs. However, the venture creation process is complex (Liao, Welsch, & Tan, 2005), and multi-dimensional (Davidsson, 2004). The process can vary in the amount of action engaged by the entrepreneur; the temporal dynamics of how action is enacted (Lichtenstein, Carter, Dooley, and Gartner 2007); or the sequence in which actions are undertaken. And little is known about whether any, or all three, of these dimensions matter. Further, there exists scant general knowledge about how the venture creation process influences venture creation outcomes (Gartner & Shaver, 2011). Therefore, this research conducts a systematic study of what entrepreneurs do as they create a new venture. The primary goal is to develop general principles so that advice may be offered on how to ‘proceed’, rather than how to ‘be’. Three integrated empirical studies were conducted that separately focus on each of the interrelated dimensions. The basis for this was a randomly sampled, longitudinal panel, of nascent ventures. Upon recruitment these ventures were in the process of being created, but yet to be established as new businesses. The ventures were tracked one year latter to follow up on outcomes. Accordingly, this research makes the following original contributions to knowledge. First, the findings suggest that all three of the dimensions play an important role: action, dynamics, and sequence. This implies that future research should take a multi-dimensional view of the venture creation process. Failing to do so can only result in a limited understanding of a complex phenomenon. Second, action is the fundamental means through which venture creation is achieved. Simply put, more active venture creation efforts are more likely more successful. Further, action is the medium which allows resource endowments their effect upon venture outcomes. Third, the dynamics of how venture creation plays out over time is also influential. Here, a process with a high rate of action which increases in intensity will more likely achieve positive outcomes. Forth, sequence analysis, suggests that the order in which actions are taken will also drive outcomes. Although venture creation generally flows in sequence from discovery toward exploitation (Shane & Venkataraman, 2000; Eckhardt & Shane, 2003; Shane, 2003), processes that actually proceed in this way are less likely to be realized. Instead, processes which specifically intertwine discovery and exploitation action together in symbiosis more likely achieve better outcomes (Sarasvathy, 2001; Baker, Miner, & Eesley, 2003). Further, an optimal venture creation order exists somewhere between these sequential and symbiotic process archetypes. A process which starts out as symbiotic discovery and exploitation, but switches to focus exclusively on exploitation later on is most likely to achieve venture creation. These sequence findings are unique, and suggest future integration between opposing theories for order in venture creation.

/pdf/dimensions-of-the-venture-creation-process-amount-dynamics-307aixpbpa.pdf

Dimensions of the venture creation process : amount, dynamics, and sequences of action in nascent entrepreneurship (Thesis)

Purpose – The promoting effects of entrepreneurship on economic development, innovation, and employment has been explained in the literature. However, research on micro‐level entrepreneurial activity, falls far behind practice. The purpose of this paper is to analyze the general laws of Chinese entrepreneurial activities at the micro level.Design/methodology/approach – The paper takes a combination of stratified and random digital dialing sampling, and conducts a longitudinal survey on nascent entrepreneurs. In total, 293 nascent entrepreneurs were interviewed by telephone.Findings – Preliminary analysis results of the first‐wave survey show that nascent entrepreneurs are featured as young, educated, and experienced. Most entrepreneurial activities are opportunity oriented, which is primarily sought via systematic searching. Most entrepreneurs start their businesses by making full use of available resources or abilities. Saving funds, collecting information of target customers and markets, and analyzing a...

Jun Yang

Papers

Anatomy of nascent entrepreneurship in China