Entrepreneurial Learning---Conceptual Framework for Technology Based Entrpris

8/3/2019 Entrepreneurial Learning---Conceptual Framework for Technology Based Entrpris

1/20

Entrepreneurial Learning: AConceptual Framework for Technology-based Enterprise

DAVID RAE

The Derbyshire Business School, University of Derby, UK

ABSTRACT Entrepreneurial learning has emerged as an important yet insufficiently understoodarea of enquiry. This paper develops new understanding in this area from a social constructionist

perspective by using narratives elicited from technology-based entrepreneurs to explore theirlearning experiences and behaviours. The unit of analysis is the emergent entrepreneur in thetechnology-based enterprise. The paper develops a framework for analysing entrepreneuriallearning through in-depth analysis of entrepreneurial experiences by using discourse analysisbased on a social learning perspective. This conceptual framework includes three major themesof personal and social emergence, contextual learning and the negotiated enterprise, and 11related sub-themes. These demonstrate connections between the emergence of entrepreneurial

identity, learning as a social and contextual process, opportunity recognition, and ventureformation as a negotiated activity.

Introduction and Rationale

Entrepreneurial learning has emerged as an important area of enquiry in relation to both

the academic study of entrepreneurship and the practical development of new entrepre-

neurs, yet it is an area that is not well understood.1 Learning is of increasing importance

in technology-based enterprises, given the growing significance of science and technology

innovation in new venture creation.2 This paper explores the question of how entrepre-

neurial behaviours are learned by formative technology-based entrepreneurs, and aimsto identify significant processes and experiences in their learning. From these it develops

a conceptual framework that can be used to interpret entrepreneurial learning experiences.

The study is undertaken by means of a social constructionist methodology, making use

of narrative and discourse analysis.3 This provides an alternative and equally valid per-

spective to the entitative ontology that has prevailed in entrepreneurship research, yet is

gaining in acceptance for the new insights into the entrepreneurial experience that can

be produced.4 This approach is used to interpret the learning experiences of a group of

Technology Analysis & Strategic Management

Vol. 18, No. 1, 3956, February 2006

Correspondence Address: Dr David Rae, Centre for Entrepreneurial Management, The Derbyshire Business

School, University of Derby, Kedleston Rd., Derby, DE22 1GB, UK; Tel: 44 1332 591400; Fax: 44 1332622741. E-mail: [email protected]

0953 7325 P i =1465 3990 O li =06=010039 18 # 2006 T l & F i


2/20

technology-based entrepreneurs (TBEs) and to develop a conceptual framework of the

significant themes in their learning experiences. The paper offers two propositions. The

first is that entrepreneurial learning is a fundamental and integral part of the development

of the technology-based enterprise, and therefore the human, social and behavioural

aspects of learning are as much of a concern as the economic aspects that are often high-lighted.5 The second proposition is the conceptual framework that sets out three major

themes through which entrepreneurial learning can be understood.

Entrepreneurship is defined for the purpose of this study as the inter-related processes of

creating, recognising and acting on opportunities, which combine innovating, decision-

making and enaction.6 Learning is defined an emergent, sense-making process in which

people develop the ability to act differently, through knowing, doing, and understanding

why.7 By learning, people construct meaning through experience and create new reality

in a context of social interaction.8 The term entrepreneurial learning is defined as learning

to recognise and act on opportunities, through initiating, organising and managing ven-

tures in social and behavioural ways. The paper aims to explore entrepreneurial learning

as dynamic social processes of sensemaking, which are not only cognitive or behavioural

but also affective and holistic.9

The Theoretical Basis for the Study

A summary of the key assumptions and theoretical underpinnings for the study from

relevant literature is set out in this section. The lack of accepted unifying theoretical

assumptions of entrepreneurship, combined with a wide diversity of perspectives and

lack of congruence in the literature, continues to constrain its theoretical development.10

Entrepreneurship theory has traditionally been dominated by economics-based thinking,11

and both Schumpeter12 and Kirzner13 observed the importance of learning in the entrepre-neurial process, but the contribution of economics to understanding the human and social

processes of entrepreneurship and learning is limited,14 while human, sociological and

psychological sciences have started to make important contributions to the understanding

of entrepreneurial behaviour.15

However recent studies of entrepreneurial cognition have been limited by the cognitivist

paradigm of individual (rather than social) and cerebral (rather than behavioural) conceptu-

alisation.16 The cognitive paradigm, which concentrates on the individual acquisition and

comprehension of knowledge, has dominated the study of learning, but has limitations in

using the metaphor of man as computer as a means of understanding the human mind,

the ability to learn, and social interaction.17

The understanding of entrepreneurial learninghas been constrained by the divide between cognitivist methods that propose routinised con-

ceptualisations related to cognitive theory,18 generally from an entitative perspective, and

interpretive methods that aim to create dynamic approaches based on inductive inquiry

into the entrepreneurial experience.19 Approaches based on cognitive science have empha-

sised the role of entrepreneurial knowledge20 and rational decision-making,21 with some

development of learning within a social or team-based context22 and of the contextual appli-

cation of experience.23 Interpretive approaches have sought to understand the situated24

nature of the entrepreneurial experience in a lifeworld25 perspective by using a range of

qualitative research methods within a social and behavioural conception of learning.26

There is a corresponding need to move beyond this divide between entitative and inter-pretive approaches in order to create fresh understanding of what is learned as well as how

40 D. Rae


3/20

this is learned through the human processes of entrepreneurship.27 Beyond cognitivism,

experiential28 and social29 theories of learning have been developed which combine

action, conceptualisation and social practice, while the study of language and discourse30

has also contributed to understanding learning. Wenger31 has developed a comprehensive

social and behavioural theory of learning as a transformational process of identity creation,including dimensions of meaning, practice, identity and community. This provides a con-

ceptual foundation for understanding learning that accommodates social participation and

human action as well as cognition, enabling advanced learning theory to be applied to the

subject of entrepreneurship.

There has been extensive writing on entrepreneurship education,32 from which it can be

concluded that, while such education can provide cultural and personal support, knowl-

edge and skill development about and for entrepreneurship, the art of entrepreneurial

practice is learned mainly in the business environment through inductive, practical and

social experience rather than in the educational environment.33 This must lead to the

exploration of learning as a situated and active experience, rather than as a purely edu-

cational and theoretical process, in which considerations of emergent social identity and

becoming an entrepreneur are included as well as the social and contextual experiences

that shape identity and learning.34 The focus of this study is therefore on work-based learn-

ing in the business environment rather than on educational practice, which has been

thoroughly explored.

Table 1 illustrates the development of theories concerning entrepreneurial learning.

Significant progress has been made recently in developing new theoretical perspectives

Table 1. Conceptualisations of entrepreneurial learning

Author(s) & year Contribution

Schumpeter (1934) Imagination & innovation resulting from natural & sociallearning

Kirzner (1973) Creative discovery learning generating alertness toopportunities

Reuber & Fischer (1993) Value of recent concrete experience related to context of useYoung & Sexton (1997) Acquisition storage & use of entrepreneurial knowledge as

expert resourceDeakins & Freel (1998) Five key learning abilities within the small firmMinitti & Bygrave (2001) Algorithmic model of entrepreneurial decision-making based

on experienceRae & Carswell (2001) Confidence & self-belief connect learning resources with

achievementGibb (2001) Hartshorn (2002) Lifeworld of the small firm as a dynamic entrepreneurial

learning environmentMitchell et al; Shepherd &

Krueger (2002)Rational models of knowledge structures, cognition & decision-

making applied to stages of the entrepreneurial processCope (2005) Dynamic learning process with phases, processes &

characteristicsPolitis (2005) Dynamic framework of career, transformation & knowledge,

distinguishing learning process & knowledge outcomesDutta & Crossan; Lumpkin &

Lichtenstein; Corbett

(2005)

Connections between organisational learning, opportunityrecognition, creativity and entrepreneurial learning processes

Entrepreneurial Learning 41


4/20

on entrepreneurial learning, which can be summarised in the following five observations.35

Entrepreneurial learning is a dynamic process of awareness, reflection, association and

application that involves transforming experience and knowledge into functional learning

outcomes. It comprises knowledge, behaviour and affective or emotional learning.36 It is

affected by the context in which learning occurs and it includes the content of what islearned as well as the processes through which learning takes place.37 It is both individual,

with personal differences in ability producing different learning outcomes, as well as

social and organisational.38 Finally there are close connections between the processes

of entrepreneurial learning with those of opportunity recognition,39 exploitation, creativity

and innovation.40 These conceptualisations provide a basis for the further development of

a framework through which entrepreneurial learning can be understood, both generally

and in relation to the technology-based enterprise. This will be demonstrated after

providing a summary of the methodology used in this study.

Methodology

The methodology used in this study is social constructionist,41 narrative42 and interpre-

tive.43 Social constructionism affirms that we construct our selves and worlds through dis-

course, the linguistic resources and concepts with which we frame reality,44 and therefore

analysis of the discourse people use affords interpretation of their world-making and learn-

ing. This study aims to explore the entrepreneurial learning process in the lifeworld45 of

the entrepreneur, by interpreting their narrative accounts of their personal and business

venturing in their social and contextual environment and interactions with others. This

position argues that the voice of the entrepreneur, together with the interpretation of

the researcher, are vital aspects of understanding the entrepreneurial experience in ways

that enable this to be shared with the reader.The study takes as its unit of analysis entrepreneurs who were in the first five years of

establishing a technology-based business venture and who had varying degrees of prior

experience. The criteria for selection were emerging entrepreneurs who aimed to

achieve significant business growth, and whose business ventures were developing or

applying new technologies to business opportunities in innovative ways. The study fol-

lowed their personal and business development over a two year period, and conducted a

series of in-depth life story interviews in which the researcher acted as co-author with

each participant to create an account of their experiences. A range of related information

on the entrepreneur and the business was also gathered from other sources in order to

confirm supplementary and corroborative detail. Table 2 lists the entrepreneurs andtypes of business selected.

Each interview was transcribed and coded against a set of 29 categories generated from

consideration of the literature previously cited and through discourse analysis procedures,

and which are shown in Appendix 1.46 This allowed the comparison of similarly coded

speech extracts from the same account and from other accounts. The narratives were ana-

lysed using the coding structure and the number of significant categories was reduced by

further analysis by eliminating overlapping and redundant categories to establish a total of

three dominant themes that were derived from sociological concepts in the literature and

11 subsidiary themes that were derived from discourse analysis and are also supported by

theoretical literature. The material from each narrative was interpreted and edited into adraft case study by using this structure.

42 D. Rae


5/20

Findings

The conceptual framework for entrepreneurial learning was developed from the themes

identified through discourse analysis. This comprises three major themes of personal

and social emergence of the entrepreneur, contextual learning and the negotiated enter-

prise. Together these three related concepts constitute the triadic model of entrepreneurial

learning that is shown diagrammatically in Figure 1.

It is proposed that entrepreneurial learning occurs and can be interpreted by reference to

these themes. Within each of these major themes, a number of subsidiary themes, in total

11, were identified and are described in the following section. Table 3 demonstrates the

connections between the themes with reference to relevant theoretical literature from

the domains of entrepreneurship, management and social sciences. Each of the major

themes is illustrated in the following section by extracts from one of the case studies

that provides a description and narrative evidence of the sub-themes. Personal and

Table 2. Case studies and types of business

Case Name Type of business Prior experience

A Mark Aluminium building systems Employee in family business

B Guy Online news service Founder of trade journalC Mike FM & DAB radio stations Radio station managerD Tony Design & internet marketing Marketing executiveE Rob IT security services GraduateF Ed Prenatal medical product Corporate executiveG Alan IT metrological systems Graduate in family businessH Derek Industrial cryogenics Manager of engineering firmI George Turbine heat exchangers Engineer

j Greg Nanotechnology Founder of technology based firm

Figure 1. Triadic model of entrepreneurial learning



6/20

social emergence is illustrated by case A (Mark); the negotiated enterprise by case B

(Guy); and the negotiated enterprise by case C (Mike). Salient issues regarding theapplication to technology-based enterprises are identified in relation to each theme.

Personal and Social Emergence

The first concept is the personal and social emergence of entrepreneurial identity. The

development of entrepreneurial identity is the outcome of a process of personal and

social emergence, which generally includes the narrative construction of identity; identity

as practice; the entrepreneurs role in relation to family; and tension between current and

future identity. As people become entrepreneurs, their identity47 of how they see them-

selves and how others see them changes through a process of personal learning and emer-gence,48 including the sense of self and of future aspirations. Simply acquiring

Table 3. Theoretical connections of the entrepreneurial learning framework

Concept Theoretical links

Personal and social emergence Social identity theory - Abrams & Hogg

Emergence in management learningWatson & HarrisNarrative construction of identity Identity expressed through narrativeBruner

Entrepreneurial narrativesHjorth & Steyaert

Identity shaped by familybackground & experiences

Interaction between family & enterpriseFletcherEntrepreneurial learning in family businessHamilton

Identity is shaped by practicelearned from experience

Identity through social participationWengerExperiential & entrepreneurial learningCope

Entrepreneurial action arises fromtension between experiencedcurrent & desired future identity

Cognitive dissonanceFestingerCritical events in entrepreneurial learningCope

Contextual learning Entrepreneurial lifeworld learningHartshorn

SME as a learning environmentGibb

Learning through experience &immersion within an industrycontext

Assimilate contextual experienceDeakins & FreelContextual experience in industryReuber & Fischer

Opportunity recognition &innovation through participation

Contextual opportunity recognitionLumpkin &LichtensteinInnovation arising from contextual knowledgeCorbett

Development of practical theories ofentrepreneurial action

Entrepreneurial theories of actionPittSensemaking - Weick

Negotiated enterprise Negotiated enterpriseWenger

Participation and joint enterprise Entrepreneurial teams social cognitionShepherd &Krueger

Negotiated meaning, structures andpractices

Negotiated orders in organisationsWatsonAbilities of the entrepreneurial team Deakins & Freel

Changing roles over time Development of managers in SMEsDevins & Gold

Engagement in external networks Entrepreneurship through social networksAldrich &Zimmer

Networking in the industry sectorDeakins & Freel

44 D. Rae


7/20


8/20

identity, website and brochures projecting a strong, corporate image, and an inclusive

approach to managing people which aims to instil the feelgood factor at work. As

Mark says:

they work with you, not for you, they need to shine in their own roles.

Identity as practice is developed from the activities and roles that people develop in

social interactions. People discover from experience their natural talents and abilities

and learn how these can be of value and be applied, finding out the interface between

their abilities and negotiated applications within networks of social relationships. Practice

is developed by discovery and experience, from education, hobbies or interests, and from

developing and gaining confidence in abilities in early employment. Identity based on

practice is both personal and social, often situated within social or industry contexts.

The abilities, skills and know-how are often applied in the core activity of the new

enterprise which practitioners form.

Tension between Current and Future Identity

Mark left employment in the family business, frustrated by the lack of innovation and

development, and started his own venture as a career move. He had realised that there

was a growing demand for architectural fabrications but existing manufacturers had not

kept pace with designers and he saw the opportunity to bridge this gap, realising his

modest but realistic ambition to start his own company in 1999.

The point at which the person becomes an entrepreneur is significant. The cases show

critical episodes during which each participant changed their existing social identity

through entrepreneurial action. These episodes include unsatisfactory or unfulfillingemployment, conflict with personal values, or more positively the recognition of opportu-

nities or ambition to innovate. The dissatisfaction with existing reality is often connected

with the initiation of a new venture and with it a changed identity. There can be an

emotional recognition that the experienced reality did not feel right, which is not only

a cognitive dissonance but also conative and affective.52

It is clear that such decisions to create new ventures may, in some cases, be connected

with the rejection of an unsatisfactory present, the urge to create a new reality and

changed identity. This represents a move from being dissatisfied employees, in work

roles where practices and identities are defined socially by others and are increasingly

at odds with what feels right, to create a new reality in constructing new businessventures, enabling people to work in ways more consistent with their personal

values and practices. Faced with similar circumstances, people will respond differently

as their individual and social construction of present and future reality affects their

actions.

In terms of identity, the entrepreneurial act is creating what could be and translating

imagined possibilities into enacted reality, taking responsibility for shaping future events.

It is a move from assuming an identity defined by others, such as through work and family

roles, into creating, changing and renegotiating a new identity. This can involve

experiencing emotional uncertainties, which require resources of self-belief and

personal confidence to accomplish the shift from being an employee to becoming anentrepreneur.

46 D. Rae


9/20

The implications for technology-based entrepreneurs are to recognise that personal

and social emergence is an inherent aspect of becoming an entrepreneur and

involves social as well as cognitive learning. Finding practical ways of learning

entrepreneurial skills in early life, family and education, through projects, personal

interests, and work experience, in formative years is likely to be influential andhelpful.

Contextual Learning

The second concept is contextual learning. The recognition and enaction of opportunities

in specialised situations is an outcome of a process of contextual learning, which includes

learning through immersion within an industry, opportunity recognition and innovation

through participation, and the formation of practical theories of entrepreneurial action.

There is strong support for the view that entrepreneurial learning is formed through the

social, environmental and economic context in which it takes place, and that contextgoverns what is learned as people become entrepreneurs, how this learning takes

place and how it is used.53 Contextual learning includes social participation in

community, industry and other networks through which individual experiences are

related, compared and shared meaning is constructed. Through situated experience and

social relationships people learn intuitively and may develop the ability to recognise

opportunities. Such learning connects personal emergence with the negotiation of the

enterprise; people are in process of learning in their social context who they can

become and how to work with others to achieve their ends as well as the realism of

what can and cannot be.

This theme is demonstrated by Guy who developed an online news service from careerexperience in news media.

Learning through Immersion within the Industry

Guy used his skills and experience gained in industry journalism and public relations to

start a new type of media service that he termed press marketing for corporate organis-

ations. This innovated by applying leading edge technology to match company news with

interest from trade press:

I made an applied process out of a black art. We used technology, skill and expertiseto manage this and made it measurable, so businesses could see the return they got

for their media spend.

Contextual learning includes the development of skills, expert knowledge and social

contacts from employment, experience and know-how in industry.54 This learning is

social and relational, gained from interpersonal participation.55 Much of the learning is

functional, technical and problem-solving, finding out by discovery and experiential learn-

ing how things are done, and establishing routines and practices that work in given situ-

ations. It occurs through intuitive practice, often providing the skills and insights people

use in creating their own businesses.

56

The influence of contextual career experience onentrepreneurial formation is often profound.57



10/20

Opportunity Recognition and Innovation through Social Participation

In the early 1990s the company started to lose customers and turnover. Guy realised that

the Internet would revolutionise the media industry:

I wanted to innovate where nobody had been before. I was intrigued by how

technology could impact on my sector of the market.

We carried out a survey to find out the demand for an online news service. This

showed a very clear requirement for a service which was not available then and

which personalised news as its broken to meet journalists requirements.

I knew I had to get into the market quickly, and re-engineered my business because

technology was moving so fast. I realised that the business was chicken and egg

you had to attract both the journalists and the companies to put news onto the

network to get the other party.

Guys opportunity recognition arose from fear of loss of business combined with curi-

osity about technical innovation. Opportunities are apparent to those who learn to recog-

nise them, using knowledge, cognition and behaviour.58 By being active within industry

and social networks, people can recognise future possibilities, identify and act on an oppor-

tunity to create a new venture by drawing on their deep knowledge of an industry context;

this goes beyond both Kirznerian alertness and rational information search.59 Creative

imagination, or prospective sensemaking, is necessary to envisage the future and

imagine how the venture can be created, before all the necessary knowledge, circumstances

or conditions exist. This is a creative process of associative learning and innovation, ofputting ideas, opportunities, technologies and resources together in new ways, and acting

at a time when the market opportunity and the other extrinsic factors such as regulation

and the absence of competition provide advantage.60 It involves converging resources

people and their expertise, finance, technologyto develop the business idea into reality.

Practical Theories of Entrepreneurial Action

The business was complex because it meant balancing the revenue-generating part

of the business with the non-earning part of the community, how does that all work?

No-one knew. We figured it out and gave the journalists what they wanted.

We had to sell this new service to the key movers and shakers in the market, so we

went to the big early adopters at the top of the pyramid and got IBM, Hewlett

Packard, Microsoft interested in using us. Once you get those signed up they

bring in the whole market.

We demonstrated our online service on the trade show floor at the big IT network

trade shows and demonstrated to journalists how it worked. We put a modem into

a laptop and walked round remotely accessing news on the internet without any

connection. We were changing the paradigm of the industry, eliminating the needto distribute news in hard-copy format.

48 D. Rae


11/20

Entrepreneurs, through their experience and contextual learning within the industry,

develop routines and ways of working that they find are effective. The knowledge,

gained from experience, intuition and sense-making61 of what works, why, how and

with whom, constitute practical theories.62 These practical theories enable people to

reduce risk through using prior experience because they know what they are doing.Practitioners produce practical theories in their own words from their own experience,

observation and social exchanges with other practitioners.63 These theories, developed

from experience, remain tacit and intuitive unless they are verbalised and shared.

Shotter64 described practical theories of action as analytical tools that enable people

to see connections and create meaning between aspects of their lives and practices, and

to account for their actions. He proposed that the manager is a practical author who

develops knowledge in practice, resulting in special, contextualized forms of

knowing and practical theories of action.

Guys case demonstrates that contextual learning has important implications for tech-

nology-based entrepreneurship, because innovations, opportunities and entrepreneurial

skills are developed through contextual learning and this cannot occur without partici-

pation. The value of prior work and career experience provides a richness of experience

in research and innovation, production and customer-facing roles, in both corporate and

small business contexts.

The Negotiated Enterprise

The third concept is the negotiated enterprise.65 The enaction and growth of a business

venture is an outcome of negotiated enterprise, which includes processes of participation

and joint enterprise; negotiated meaning, structures and practices; changing roles overtime; and engagement in networks of external relationships. The notion of the negotiated

enterprise is that a business venture is not enacted by one person alone, but is dependent on

the outcome of negotiated relationships with other parties.66 The ideas and aspirations of

individuals are realised through interactive processes of exchange with others within and

around the enterprise, including customers, investors and co-actors such as employees or

partners. This theme is illustrated by the case of Mike, founder of a group of independent

radio stations.

Participation and Joint Enterprise

Where Id grown up there was no commercial radio station. I was working for

another radio station and I was getting increasingly frustrated and agreed to leave

because I found there was too much contradiction to what I believed.

Along with one of the directors I put in an application for a licence when the Radio

Authority offered it. He came in as a backer, I found the shareholders and I

persuaded them that they wanted to invest 500,000 in the operation.

In radio you start big time, you have to win an audience, they dont pay you a penny

to listen and its only when you can say to advertisers all these people listen andthey will listen to you if you advertise.



12/20

As illustrated here, the actors involved in creating the enterprise are joint participants,

in which the founder(s) could not achieve the outcome of creating the venture unaided.

A vital aspect of the learning process of entrepreneurship is the ability to engage others

constructively towards creating the venture. It is necessary for the entrepreneur to

convey a shared belief in the new reality of the venture, and for this to become ameans of realising personal dreams and aspirations through collective action. There is a

sublimation of individual identity to the collective identity of the enterprise as a project

of shared significance. This is accompanied by a social learning process in which

people learn to work together.67 Shared interest, for example wealth creation, economic

survival or the desire to enact a particular activity, is a necessary condition for joint

enterprise.

Negotiated Meaning, Structures and Practices

In this business, like so many, it is about people, you dont own them, but while

theyre working for you, you owe them something. They owe you something and

its getting that balance right, in everything we do. I think that if we dont enjoy

what were doing then its very much like hard work. Its the responsibility to the

staff, responsibility to the listeners, that drives me.

This sub-theme considers the emergence of a distinctive culture within the business. As

described, people develop practical theories. In the joint enterprise, these theories, prac-

tices and routines become a shared repertoire of what works within the business; as in

a community of practice, what is learned does not belong to any single person, but

rather is dispersed among the community.68

The enterprise is dependent on these negotiated ways of working that reflect both thefounders style, language, ambitions and ways of working, and those of the employees.

The lives, interests and aspirations of people within the business must be recognised by

the founders who hold formal power and ownership of the business, yet this requires

the participation of the employees. Conflict and disagreement are from time to time

inevitable and should be seen as an integral aspect of this negotiation.

In a successful enterprise, there is an emotional, affective engagement between the

people and the business, in which its distinctive culture is expressed through the style,

language, behaviours, and feeling between people. Terms such as passion, buzz,

excitement and fun are used to describe the emotional life and energy of the enterprise

that goes beyond rationality, for people are expressing themselves, their identities andtheir abilities, in the production of the business.

Changing Roles over Time

This station, right down to the last dot of the i in the prospectus was me. I was the

finance director, the company secretary, it really was me and to a certain extent it

still is but its grown a lot and that has necessitated changes.

I sit down with the senior managers once a week. At that meeting we review sales,

expenditure, we talk about the overall strategy. My role has become more ChiefExecutive than ever before and I have to resist getting involved too directly in the

50 D. Rae


13/20

individual station operations, that was right at the launch but now Ive had to step

back from being involved in meetings with individual stations.

This sub-theme is a process of ongoing learning and negotiation while the business

evolves and, if successful, grows, becoming larger and more complex in operation andstructure, and employing more people. There is a transition or series of transitions from

informal to formal roles of the founder(s) and management team, their relationships and

structures that accompany this process, as in staged theories of business growth.69

Significant changes in the founders and other roles are inevitable over time for the

business to develop. Growth can be seen in terms of human and social behaviour and as

the outcome of productive interpersonal negotiations around the enterprise, rather than

simply as an economic process.

This negotiated change in roles can be viewed as a process of entrepreneurial man-

agement, in which enterprising skills are applied as normal practices in managing the

business, becoming self-sustaining management capabilities which are enacted through

people other than the founders progressively taking responsibility for managing the

business, as we see with the managers in the radio broadcaster.70 Developing man-

agers, teams and functional experts are mutual learning activities integral to the

growth process and depend on managing employee relationships effectively, changing

past expectations, sharing practices, and resolving the tensions and conflicts in relation-

ships. As people are employed by the business, they become socialised into it and

adopt its cultural norms of participation, behaviour and language. This is a learning

process of cultural integration and identification by individuals as employees in the

business.

Engagement in Networks of External Relationships

Enterprises such as the radio stations have to interact effectively with a diverse range of

different constituents, including regulators, investors and lenders, commercial adverti-

sers and listeners. This business has learned to be successful in playing the game

of applying for and gaining radio licences, while building up advertising and listening

figures, and selectively engaging with networks of businesses, customers and the

community:

We have a tried and tested way of contacting MPs, councillors, the great and good,people on the street, saying this is what were proposing to do, do you like it? and

getting people to say yes they like us because were different.

The enterprise exists reflexively within its environment, and relationships must be

developed and maintained with networks of people through whom resources can be

accessed, including customers, suppliers, investors, lenders, and others such as technology

experts and opinion formers.71 Social capital and the access to resources that it affords in

entrepreneurial working importance has an important role in this.72 Entrepreneurs seek to

influence certain groups while choosing not to participate in other groups. This selectivity

in developing the social network and perceptions around the business is an integral aspectof entrepreneurial learning.



14/20

It is necessary to engage the customer as an active participant, not simply as a passive

consumer, and to recognise that symbolic as well as economic value is being generated in

the interchange; just as the producer is giving something of themselves, so the customer is,

by their participation, identifying themselves with the enterprise. Relationships and

rapport with certain customers and suppliers are more productive than with others. Theskills of listening, understanding the other partys position, negotiating and storytelling

are essential in maintaining effective relationships. The identity of the enterprise is

formed and enacted through the interactions between it and these external groups. The

enterprise depends on its identity, practices and the credibility of its messageits

storybeing accepted and understood within its chosen networks.

The implications of the negotiated enterprise for technology-based entrepreneurs are

to recognise their own distinctive skills, expertise and limitations, understanding the

need to interact with people who have complementary skills to optimise their contri-

bution to a venture by forming and working effectively within an entrepreneurial

team that has capabilities beyond those of the founder. If skills of interaction, team for-

mation and participation can be developed early, these can be used to advantage. The

lone wolf innovator is increasingly disadvantaged, as the ability to develop effective

relationships with investors, corporate partners, suppliers and major customers through

presentation, negotiation and trust building is essential. An essential activity for potential

technology-based entrepreneurs is to be an active member of industry, professional or tech-

nical networks, and to develop a wide range of contacts. They will need to participate

actively in selected external networks to represent the business and develop new

opportunities.

ConclusionsIt is proposed that entrepreneurial learning is a fundamental activity within the develop-

ment of the technology-based enterprise in its human and social context, and the frame-

work set out in this article may be helpful in understanding this. The framework builds

on Wengers social theory of learning,73 emphasising the creation, recognition and devel-

opment of opportunities and proposes a framework for entrepreneurial learning that is

based on social constructionist,74 narrative and antecedent theories such as pragmatism.75

Until now, no theory of entrepreneurial learning based on social constructionist thinking

has been proposed. Therefore this framework is proposed as an original and distinctive

concept that advances understanding of entrepreneurial learning, using the conceptual

tools of narrative and social construction.The framework includes three propositions. First, that the development of entrepreneur-

ial identity is the outcome of personal and social emergence, which generally includes the

narrative construction of identity; identity as practice; the entrepreneurs role in relation to

family; and tension between current and future identity. Second, that the recognition and

enaction of opportunities in specialised situations is an outcome of a process of contextual

learning, which includes learning through immersion within an industry, opportunity rec-

ognition and innovation through participation, and the formation of practical theories of

entrepreneurial action. Third, that the enaction and growth of a business venture is an

outcome of negotiated enterprise, which includes processes of participation and joint

enterprise; negotiated meaning, structures and practices; changing roles over time; andengagement in networks of external relationships.

52 D. Rae


15/20

The methodology adopted in this study has featured the collection and interpretation of

entrepreneurial narratives. This has the advantage of gaining in-depth and authentic field

material that uses the voice of the entrepreneur, while having the disadvantages of limiting

the scale of the study through the need for in-depth treatment of a small number of

narratives; the requirement to analyse the narratives as stories and not as objectivetruths; and the subjective issues of selecting and managing relationships with subjects

in the research process. However the method adopted does permit the development of

in-depth inductive case studies that provide considerable insights into the learning

experiences of technology-based entrepreneurs.

Further research is envisaged in order to validate and apply the framework. One

important aspect is the relationship between entrepreneurial learning and career stages,

in particular the role of mid-career change and learning that has been observed during

this study. Second, it is appreciated that because the concept of technology-based enter-

prise is very broad, there may well be value in studying certain types of TBE in greater

depth, including those using specific technologies and those operating at particular

stages of the innovation process.

Notes and References

1. D. Deakins, Entrepreneurship and Small Firms (London, McGraw-Hill, 2000; first published 1996).

2. Department of Trade and Industry, Innovation report: competing in the global economy: the innovation

challenge, DTI, London, 2003.

3. K. Gergen, An Invitation to Social Construction (Newbury Park, CA, Sage, 1999).

4. S. Hjorth & C. Steyaert, Narrative and Discursive Approaches in Entrepreneurship (Cheltenham, UK,

Edward Elgar, 2004).

5. J. Hill & P. McGowan, Small business and enterprise development: questions about research

methodology, International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour and Research, 5(1), 1999, pp. 518.

6. S. Shane & S. Venkataraman, The promise of entrepreneurship as a field of research, Academy of

Management Review, 25(1), 2000, pp. 217226.

7. A. Mumford, Effective Learning (London, Institute of Personnel & Development, 1995).

8. K. Weick, Sensemaking in Organizations (Newbury Park, CA, Sage, 1995).

9. A. Gibb, Creating conducive environments for learning and entrepreneurship, Address to the Conference

of the Entrepreneurship Forum, Naples, 2124 June 2001.

10. Shane & Venkataraman, op. cit., Ref. 6.

11. P. Davidsson, M. Low & M. Wright, Editors introduction: Low and MacMillan ten years on: achieve-

ments and future directions for entrepreneurship research, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 25(4),

2001, pp. 515.

12. J. Schumpeter, The Theory of Economic Development(Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press, 1934).

13. I. Kirzner, Competition and Entrepreneurship (Chicago, IL, University of Chicago Press, 1973).14. M. Binks & P. Vale, Entrepreneurship and Economic Change (Maidenhead, UK, McGraw-Hill, 1990).

15. R. Mitchell, L. Busenitz, T. Lant, P. McDougall, E. Morse & J. Brock Smith, Towards a theory of

entrepreneurial cognition, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 27(2), 2002, pp. 93104.

16. M. Minniti & W. Bygrave, A dynamic model of entrepreneurial learning,Entrepreneurship Theory and

Practice, 25(3), 2001, pp. 516.

17. Bandura, A., (1986). Social Foundations of Thought & Action: A social cognitive theory. Prentice-Hall,

New Jersey

18. Minniti & Bygrave, op. cit., Ref. 16.

19. R. Harrison & C. Leitch, Entrepreneurial learning: researching the interface between learning and the

entrepreneurial context, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 29(4), 2005, p. 351.

20. J. Young & D. Sexton, Entrepreneurial learning: a conceptual framework, Journal of Enterprising

Culture, 5(3), 1997, pp. 223248.21. Mitchell et al., op. cit., Ref. 15.



16/20

22. D. Shepherd & N. Krueger, An intentions-based model of entrepreneurial teams social cognition,

Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 27(2), 2002, p. 167.

23. R. Reuber & E. Fischer, The learning experiences of entrepreneurs, in: Frontiers of Entrepreneurship

Research (Mass., Babson, 1993), pp. 234245.

24. D. Deakins & M. Freel, Entrepreneurial learning and the growth process in SMEs, The Learning

Organization, 5(3), 1998, pp. 144155.25. Gibb, op. cit., Ref. 9.

26. D. Rae & M. Carswell, Towards a conceptual understanding of entrepreneurial learning,Small Business

and Enterprise Development, 8(2), 2001, pp. 150158.

27. C. Spinosa, F. Flores & H. Dreyfus, Entrepreneurship, Democratic Action and the Cultivation of

Solidarity (Cambridge, MA, MIT Press, 1997).

28. D. Kolb, Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development (Englewood

Cliffs, NJ, Prentice-Hall, 1984).

29. Mumford, op. cit., Ref. 7.

30. R. Harre, Language Games and Texts of Identity (London, Sage, 1989).

31. E. Wenger, Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning and Identity (Cambridge, Cambridge

University Press, 1998).

32. A. Gibb, The enterprise culture and education, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 11(3), 1993, pp.

1134.

33. G. Gorman, D. Hanlon & W. King, Some research perspectives on entrepreneurship education, enter-

prise education and education for small business management: a ten-year literature review,International

Small Business Journal, 15(3), 1997, pp. 5677.

34. S. Jack & A. Anderson, Entrepreneurship education within the enterprise culture,International Journal

of Entrepreneurial Behaviour and Research, 5(3), 1999, pp. 110125.

35. Harrison & Leitch, op. cit., Ref. 19.

36. J. Cope, Toward a dynamic learning perspective of entrepreneurship, Entrepreneurship: Theory and

Practice, 29(4), 2005, p. 373.

37. D. Politis, The process of entrepreneurial learning: a conceptual framework,Entrepreneurship: Theory

and Practice, 29(4), 2005, p. 399.

38. A. Corbett, Experiential learning within the process of opportunity identification and exploitation,

Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 29(4), 2005, p. 473.

39. D. Dutta & M. Crossan, The nature of entrepreneurial opportunities: understanding the process using the

4I organizational learning framework, Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 29(4), 2005, p. 425.

40. G. Lumpkin & B. Lichtenstein, The role of organizational learning in the opportunity-recognition

process, Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 29(4), 2005, p. 451.

41. Gergen, op. cit., Ref. 3.

42. D. Polkinghorne, Narrative Knowing and the Human Sciences(New York, State University of New York

Press, 1988).

43. T. Schwandt, Constructivist, interpretivist approaches to human inquiry, in: N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln

(Eds) The Landscape of Qualitative Research (Newbury Park, CA, Sage, 1998).

44. T. J. Watson, In Search of Management: Culture Chaos and Control in Managerial Work (London,

Routledge, 1994).

45. C. Hartshorn, Learning from the life-world of the entrepreneur, Paper presented at the Cambridge-MITInstitute Innovative Learning Methods Workshop, University of Durham, March 2002.

46. J. Potter & M. Weatherall, Discourse and Social Psychology (London, Sage, 1987).

47. D. Abrams & M. Hogg, Social Identity Theory: Constructive and Critical Advances (New York,

Harvester, 1990).

48. T. J. Watson & P. Harris, The Emergent Manager (London, Sage, 1999).

49. J. Bruner, Actual Minds, Possible Worlds (Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press, 1986).

50. D. Fletcher, Understanding the Small Family Business (London, Routledge, 2002).

51. E. Hamilton, Socially situated entrepreneurial learning in family business, Paper presented at Institute

for Small Business Affairs National Conference, Newcastle, 24 November 2004.

52. L. Festinger, A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance (Stanford, CA, Stanford University Press, 1957).

53. A. Gibb, Small firms training and competitiveness. Building on the small business as a learning

organisation, International Small Business Journal, 15(3), 1996, p. 13.

54. Reuber & Fischer, op. cit., Ref. 23,

54 D. Rae


17/20

55. Deakins and Freel, op. cit., Ref. 24.

56. A. Gibb, Entrepreneurship and small business management: can we afford to neglect them in the twenty-

first century business school, British Journal of Management, 7, 1996, pp. 309321.

57. W. Gibb Dyer, Jr, Toward a theory of entrepreneurial careers, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice,

19(2), pp. 721.

58. Kirzner, op. cit., Ref. 13.59. Lumpkin & Lichtenstein, op. cit., Ref. 40.

60. Corbett, op. cit., Ref. 38.

61. Weick, op. cit., Ref. 8.

62. D. Rae, Practical theories from entrepreneurs stories: discursive approaches to entrepreneurial learning,

Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 11(2), 2004, pp. 195202.

63. M. Pitt, A tale of two gladiators: reading entrepreneurs as texts, Organization Studies, 19(3), 1998,

pp. 3874I4.

64. J. Shotter, The manager as a practical author: a rhetorical-responsive, social constructionist approach to

socialorganizational problems, in: D.-M. Hosking, H. P. Dachler & K. J. Gergen (Eds) Management

and Organisation: Relational Alternatives to Individualism (Aldershot, UK, Avebury, 1995).

65. Wenger, op. cit., Ref. 31.

66. T. J. Watson, Negotiated orders in organisations,International Encyclopaedia of Social and Behavioural

Science (Amsterdam, Elsevier, 2001).

67. Shepherd & Krueger, op. cit., Ref. 22.

68. D. Devins & J. Gold, Social constructionism: a theoretical framework to underpin support for the

development of managers in SMEs? Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 9(2),

2002, pp. 111119.

69. L. Greiner, Evolution and revolution as organisations grow, Harvard Business Review, 78(72), 1972.

70. H. Stevenson & C. Jarillo, A paradigm of entrepreneurship: entrepreneurial management, Strategic

Management Journal, 11, 1990, pp. 1727.

71. H. Aldrich & C. Zimmer, Entrepreneurship through social networks, in: D. S. Sexton & R. W. Smilor

(Eds), The Art and Science of Entrepreneurship (MA, Ballinger, 1986), pp. 323.

72. D. Gregoire, R. Dery & J-P. Bechard, Evolving conversations: a look at the convergence in entrepreneur-

ship research, Paper presented at the Babson/Kaufman Entrepreneurship Research Conference,

Wellesley, MA, 2001.

73. Wenger, op. cit., Ref. 31.

74. Gergen, op. cit., Ref. 3.

75. J. Dewey, Logic: The Theory Of Enquiry, in: J. A. Boydston (Ed) The Collected Works of John Dewey

(Carbondale, IL, Southern Illinois University Press, 1991).

Appendix I: Table of discursive categories used in narrative analysis

Theme Code Meaning

Personal & social emergence EL Early life

FB Family of birthED Educational

EC Early career

FR Familial relationshipown family

SC Self confidence

FG Future goals/directionPI Personal identity

EXC Excitement, emotion

FAIL Failing

PW Post working

(Table continued)



18/20

Theme Code Meaning

Contextual learning SL Social learning

PT Personal theory/what worksOR Opportunity recognition

DM Decision making

CL Contextual learning

AL Associative learning/ creativityPS Problem solving

TL Technical learning

EM Emergent learning/sensemakingMR Managing relationships

INN Innovating

LE Learning episodeNegotiated enterprise BPS Business pre start

BS Business start

BR Business running/managingMR Managing relationships

ETH Ethical considerations

BE Business exiting

Table A1. Continued

56 D. Rae


19/20


20/20

Documents

Entrepreneurial Learning---Conceptual Framework for Technology Based Entrpris