Portfolio entrepreneurship in the technology industry: An analysis of Crunchbase data towards a conceptual model and propositions

Support is being provided to increase the pool of novice entrepreneurs who have no prior business ownership experience. Policymakers and practitioners are, however, considering whether to allocate resources towards portfolio and serial entrepreneurs who have prior business ownership experience. To inform this policy debate, similarities and differences between novice, serial, and portfolio entrepreneurs in Scotland and their 354 surveyed firms are highlighted. Evidence suggests that portfolio entrepreneurs have more diverse resources than either serial or novice entrepreneurs. On average, portfolio entrepreneurs appear to offer more attractive growth prospects than other entrepreneurs. A case for support tailored to the aspirations and needs of novice, serial, and portfolio entrepreneurs is presented.

“Serial entrepreneurs” run multiple businesses in sequence while “portfolio entrepreneurs” run multiple businesses in parallel; they differ from “novice entrepreneurs” who have so far operated only one venture. The present paper is the first to model occupational choices between all three entrepreneurial types: It goes on to discuss its theoretical predictions in the light of independent evidence about serial and portfolio entrepreneurship from the extant literature.

In recent years, emerging trends in entrepreneurial activity have been changing constantly, and new entrepreneurship types are developing in the global world. Especially, a number of studies have drawn attention to the alternative entrepreneurship approaches. This chapter reviews an alternative entrepreneurship opportunity called portfolio entrepreneurship, also known as multiple business ownership. The main purpose of this chapter is to investigate the importance of strategic decision-making of portfolio entrepreneurs. This chapter also aims to provide a framework that is three-box solution for portfolio entrepreneurs to improve their decision-making performance. The results of the study are expected to be a source for researchers and practitioners in the areas of entrepreneurship and decision making.

This paper seeks to extend our understanding of the growing field of Portfolio Entrepreneurship, the simultaneous ownership and engagement in several business activities (Westhead & Wright 1998; Carter & Ram 2003). Portfolio entrepreneurship has been identified as an important factor in both new venture creation and the economic landscape in general (Rosa & Scott 1996; 1999). We follow Carter and Ram's (2003) call to explore portfolio entrepreneurship within the family context. Specifically we address the why (cause) and how (process) of family portfolio entrepreneurship through comparative qualitative cases.

Serial entrepreneurship refers to the process in which entrepreneurs establish several enterprises one after another. However, at any given moment, the serial entrepreneurs usually focus on the establishment and operation of a single enterprise. As a unique type of entrepreneurial activity, serial entrepreneurship provides an important research scenario in which scholars could explore the root of entrepreneurial success or failure among multiple entrepreneurial activities, the value of a certain entrepreneurial success or failure to subsequent entrepreneurial activities, and how entrepreneurship shapes entrepreneurs’ cognition. Therefore, the study of serial entrepreneurship has great theoretical value and becomes an important direction in entrepreneurship research, because it fills the gap of previous studies which only focus on a certain entrepreneurial process. Foreign scholars have paid much attention to serial entrepreneurship, while domestic researches are relatively backward. Thus, it is urgent to form the research framework and future direction of serial entrepreneurship to promote its development. This paper draws on the idea of grounded theory, codes and refines the literature on serial entrepreneurship, and systematically summarizes the core themes and main conclusions of the existing research. Firstly, this paper systematically summarizes five core themes, including: the characteristics of serial entrepreneurs; the formation of serial entrepreneurial intention; the identification, evaluation and exploitation of serial opportunities; the financing strategies of serial entrepreneurs; and the performance of serial entrepreneurship. Secondly, based on coding results, this paper systematically reviews the literature of each theme and forms the research framework of each theme. Thirdly, based on the five core themes, this paper summarizes the characteristics of serial entrepreneurs from three aspects: the uniqueness of serial entrepreneurs, the continuity of serial entrepreneurial activities, and the adaptability of the serial entrepreneurial context. Finally, this paper proposes six directions for future study, including: explore the formation mechanism of serial entrepreneurial intention; explore the internal mechanism of opportunity recognition behavior of serial entrepreneurs; explore the resource scheduling, utilization and reorganization of serial entrepreneurs; explore the learning mechanism of serial entrepreneurship; explore the decision-making mechanism of serial entrepreneurs in uncertain situations; explore the uniqueness of serial entrepreneurs from the perspective of neuroentrepreneurship. This study deeply analyzes the characteristics, motivations and behavioral laws of serial entrepreneurship, scientifically summarizes the core themes of serial entrepreneurship, systematically constructs the research framework of serial entrepreneurship, and puts forward three characteristics of serial entrepreneurship and future research directions. This paper is of great significance for promoting the research of serial entrepreneurship.

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to focus on large-scale portfolio entrepreneurship and its impact on the creation of stable wage employment in African economies.Design/methodology/approachThe three studies focussed on Egypt, Uganda, and Malawi were all exploratory, inductive, and qualitative studies, which involved semi-structured interviews with 65 entrepreneurial founders of some of these countries’ most prominent business portfolios between 2009 and 2012. The data were collected through face-to-face interviews, which lasted between one and four hours, with the founders of each of these portfolios.FindingsThis inductive and qualitative study finds a connection between the creation of stable wage-paying jobs and portfolio entrepreneurship in three countries, representing three of the four different archetypal African economies. It also finds a strong connection between the development of new industries and portfolio entrepreneurship.Practical implicationsThe practical and societal implications of these findings are incredibly important. The current and looming shortage of stable wage employment in Africa is reaching calamitous proportions. The growth in religion-affiliated terrorism and high-risk economic migration to Europe can be directly related to the lack of employment opportunities in African nations. The findings indicate that portfolio entrepreneurs are major players in the creation of such employment opportunities and government policies focussing on this area, as compared to focussing solely on SMEs, may be more effective in mitigating some of the drivers for emigration and terrorism.Originality/valueThis is the only study of its kind that investigates the role of large-scale portfolio entrepreneurship in the growth of employment opportunities in Africa.

PurposePrevious research has predominantly focused on the meaning of prior entrepreneurial experience in the context of habitual entrepreneurship. To date, however, little is known about how previous experience affects the way in which several firms can be managed simultaneously. The purpose of this study is to examine entrepreneurial learning in the context of portfolio entrepreneurship and clarify how it is possible to manage several firms at the same time.Design/methodology/approachAn exploratory study using a case method was conducted (Eisenhardt; Yin) by focusing on one portfolio entrepreneur. In this study, the case can be considered as unusual thus being suitable for a single‐case study. Data were collected through interviews and the entrepreneur also provided the researchers with a written description of the development and present situation of his entrepreneurial career.FindingsThis study proposes that failures may develop entrepreneurial knowledge as well as founding experiences. Development of entrepreneurial knowledge is viewed as leading to new ways of organizing and managing start‐up firms. Learning through previous experiences has strengthened entrepreneurial knowledge and contributed to the formation of the management team (MT). Without cooperation, delegation and sharing responsibilities, successful portfolio entrepreneurship would not have been realized. However, the results suggest that learning from failure is dependent on the entrepreneur's personal background.Originality/valueThis study seeks to bring new insight to portfolio entrepreneurship by concentrating on the entrepreneurial career of a well‐known Finnish entrepreneur by following the framework of Politis. In this case, a MT in each firm enabled effective control and management of the current firm portfolio. The study shows that in addition to the entrepreneurial team, the management teams can also have a significant role in the context of portfolio entrepreneurship although they have largely been ignored.

The aim of this study was to empirically validate selected demographic and psychological factors from Shane’s model in the context of serial and portfolio entrepreneurship. The analysis involved 326 entrepreneurs, including 110 serial entrepreneurs, 105 portfolio entrepreneurs, and 111 novice entrepreneurs (control group). The study employed a survey questionnaire combined with five validated psychological instruments, administered in a manner that enabled control for common method bias. The analysis revealed that two demographic factors—education and having entrepreneurial parents—were statistically significant for distinguishing serial and portfolio entrepreneurs. In terms of personality traits, differences were observed in the levels of psychological capital, suchas: hopefulness, resilience, and also risk-taking propensity, conformity-nonconformity behaviour, with the portfolio entrepreneurs scoring the highest in these areas. This study successfully validates Shane’s model in relation to micro and small-scale entrepreneurship, contributing to a deeper understanding of entrepreneurial behaviour.

With the purpose of advancing our understanding of portfolio entrepreneurship, we separate the act of entrepreneurship (new entry) from its mode or organizing (internal vs. independent organization). Analyzing a cohort of 2,253 novice and habitual business founders, we find that portfolio entrepreneurship is a common phenomenon and that the majority of portfolio entrepreneurs use the internal mode of organizing. Whether or not business founders subsequently pursue portfolio entrepreneurship is explained by their human capital (education and start–up experience) and social capital (business networks and links with government support agencies). Further, novice entrepreneurs are more likely to organize portfolio entrepreneurship within their existing firms while habitual entrepreneurs more often organize subsequent acts of portfolio entrepreneurship by creating another new independent organization. Implications for entrepreneurship research are discussed.

Experimental methods can manipulate key factors of interest and tease out confounding factors in entrepreneurial activities, allowing researchers to better identify causal relationships. Combined with field research, they can help to balance the internal and external validity of causal relationships. Studies have focused on only a limited range of topics, such as the early stages of entrepreneurship and entrepreneurial decision-making at a micro level, with little attention been paid to the factors in the entrepreneurial process as well as the factors at an industrial or macro level. Moreover, previous reviews have mainly focused on the normative use of experimental methods in entrepreneurship research; few have discussed how to further integrate experimental methods into the research questions pertinent to entrepreneurship, let alone articulate how to use experimental methods to investigate the unique contexts and principles of entrepreneurship. To bridge this research gap, the study reviews 65 papers published in 14 authoritative journals in the disciplines of management and entrepreneurship. It identifies research trends, research topics, research paradigms, and experimental manipulations. Research topics include entrepreneurs/entrepreneurial teams, entrepreneurial opportunities, venture capital, entrepreneurial decision-making, entrepreneurial education and training, entrepreneurial failure, gender differences, and rural entrepreneurship. Two categories of the research paradigm are identified: entrepreneurship experiments （which include scenario-based entrepreneurship experiments and the application of psychology and decision science experiments in entrepreneurship） and studies that combine multiple methods. Experimental manipulations include active participation, passive participation, active role-playing, and passive role-playing. Finally, we propose future research directions from three perspectives. First, we suggest extending the research contexts and research levels of experimental studies in entrepreneurship. Specifically, future research may: （1） extend to specific entrepreneurship contexts, such as family entrepreneurship and social entrepreneurship; and focus on the whole process of entrepreneurship, including entrepreneurial activities in the growth, stabilization, decline, failure, and innovation stages; （2） apply experimental methods to advance indigenous entrepreneurship research; （3） extend the application of experimental methods in entrepreneurship research to team or firm level research. Second, future research may combine experimental methods with new technologies. Specifically, future research may: （1） combine experimental research with neuroscience and pay attention to the emerging field of neuro-entrepreneurship; （2） apply web-based technologies to entrepreneurship research. Third, future research may improve the normative use of experimental methods in entrepreneurship research by paying attention to: （1） research topics and the applicability of experimental manipulation; （2） subject selection.

The ability to leverage existing resources across various business initiatives can significantly impact local development of enterprises especially in emerging economy. Hence, the study investigated the effect of portfolio entrepreneurship on development of enterprise in an emerging economy. Specifically, it examined the effect of market diversification, venture synergy and revenue stream on enterprise development. Survey research design was adopted with a population of 500 purposively selected registered portfolio entrepreneurs in Ilorin, Kwara state, Nigeria. 222 sample size were administered structured questionnaire. Data collected was analyzed using PLS-SEM. Findings revealed that Revenue Stream has the strongest effect on Enterprise Development. It concluded that portfolio entrepreneurship is significantly vital for enterprise development in emerging economy. It therefore strongly recommended that portfolio entrepreneurs in emerging economies prioritize market diversification strategies and venture synergy as a key pillar of their enterprise development efforts. Additionally, it is recommended that portfolio entrepreneurs in emerging economies implement robust financial management and revenue diversification strategies across their venture portfolio.

This study explores the decision-making processes of portfolio entrepreneurs (PEs) regarding their exploration and exploitation strategies. It investigates how PEs’ expectations and eventual realizations affect their intentions and actions in forming portfolio ventures. In addition, this research highlights the dynamic nature of entrepreneurial decision-making in the context of portfolio formation to understand how intentions for portfolio formation are related to exploration and exploitation strategies. It presents evidence from in-depth interviews with 21 PEs (collectively owning 132 companies). This study classifies the structures of the venture portfolios held by the interviewed entrepreneurs into five novel categories to identify the nuanced interplay between intentionality and external influences in shaping PEs’ decisions. It introduces the concept of “emerging bounded agency” to characterize the complex nature of decision-making in portfolio entrepreneurship, challenging traditional notions of intentionality. This research advances the categorization of emerging portfolio structures and supports future research on entrepreneurial decision-making in venture portfolio development.

This research note explores the differences between habitual entrepreneurs (serial and portfolio entrepreneurs) and novices in terms of their passion for entrepreneurial activities. Using the Dualistic Model of Passion as a conceptual framework, the hypotheses were tested using a random sample of entrepreneurs that registered a limited company in 2008. Results of logistic regression analyses showed that habitual entrepreneurs experience extra high passion for entrepreneurial activity. However, of the two passion dimensions proposed in the Dualistic Model of Passion – harmonious passion and obsessive passion – the obsessive component is particularly evident among habitual entrepreneurs. A closer analysis, comparing novice, serial and portfolio entrepreneurship, suggests that portfolio entrepreneurs score highest on the harmonious dimension of passion.

This file codes split portfolios into their separate occupations with workforce numbers by gender etc. as recorded in the 1881 census. All codes to ID and occupations are for the 1881 census from transcripts by the Genealogical Society of Utah (GSU), after BBCE cleaning and correcting codes by Bennett, Newton and Radicic, from the data deposit by: Schurer, Kevin and Woollard, Matthew (University of Essex) (2000) 1881 Census for England and Wales, the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man (Enhanced Version) [computer file] UKDA, SN-4177. GSU ID and Occodes can be recoded to I-CeM via look-up tables. This dataset is associated with the following publication: Radicic, D., Bennett, R.J. and Newton, G., 2017. Portfolio entrepreneurship in farming: Empirical evidence from the 1881 census for England and Wales. Journal of Rural Studies, 55, 289-302.

The successful identification and exploitation of commercial activities in a market place is demanding and subject to several potential pitfalls. However, some entrepreneurs choose to do so effectively on even more than one premise simultaneously. Prior research found evidence that many entrepreneurs deploy portfolio activities (Westhead et al. 2003), and that new high-growth ventures frequently arise through portfolio activities of portfolio entrepreneurs (Rosa and Scott 1999a). Furthermore, those portfolio ventures are more likely than both nascent and serial entrepreneurs to report high levels of exporting activities (Robson et al. 2012a), and innovation (Robson et al. 2012b). As a consequence, we need to understand what enables portfolio entrepreneurship (henceforth PE) to succeed. The literature has shown that PE is characterized by unique challenges related to the founding, growth and management of multiple ventures simultaneously (Carter and Ram, 2003). Therefore, it is critical to integrate existing knowledge on these challenges and ways that PE reconcile these challenges. However, prior work has most often focused on contrasting PE with other forms of entrepreneurship (Westhead et al. 2003). What we need is a dedicated review of the PE field that provides an understanding of antecedents, mechanisms and outcomes across the multiple levels within portfolio entrepreneurship.