Research Methods In Entrepreneurship Research Articles

Strengthening for Entrepreneurship Program of Sorghum Base as Food Alternative During the Pandemic Recovery Covid-19

The purpose of this research was to find a solution during the pandemic recovery covid-19 with the strengthening of alternative food entrepreneurship sorghum. The research method uses qualitative research methods in entrepreneurship, descriptive qualitative action research with data collection techniques in the form of observation and documentation, after the data collected is then analyzed statistically descriptive. The results showed that sorghum can be used as a national food stock facing a crisis and pandemic covid-19, sorghum food stock in the form of grains, rice, flour, soft brand sorghum, and various processed sorghum. National sorghum food stock strategy includes strengthening clusters and production centers, silo utilization cooperation, socialization of various sorghum products, and strengthening Center of Sorghum Entrepreneur (CSE) and Sorghum Entrepreneurship Unit (SEU).

Navigating the validity tradeoffs of entrepreneurship research experiments: A systematic review and best-practice suggestions

Experimental methods provide important advantages for advancing academic understanding of entrepreneurship. Yet, the complex and comingled relationships between some of entrepreneurship's key characteristics pose thorny methodological challenges to entrepreneurship researchers – notably to negotiate important tradeoffs between the ideals of external and construct validity. To facilitate the sound mobilization of experimental methods in entrepreneurship research, we present an overview of critical validity challenges plaguing entrepreneurship research experiments and assess the validation practices mobilized in 144 studies using such methods. Building on these findings, we develop a practical guide of actionable validation strategies to help experimenters navigate the above tradeoffs and conduct entrepreneurship research experiments that are realistic, theoretically meaningful, and that help establish the causal effects of their focal variables. By doing so, we contribute a set of pragmatic means to support the mobilization of experimental methods for advancing entrepreneurship research. Executive summaryExperimental methods hold important advantages for advancing the theoretical and practical understanding of entrepreneurial action. The power of research experiments lies in their ability to yield convincing evidence supporting the causal effects of the factors they investigate.Unfortunately, entrepreneurship research experiments are often criticized for offering pale copies of both the realities they attempt to model and the theoretical constructs they aim to study. The entrepreneurial process and its related activities count many intertwined characteristics – such as radical uncertainty, temporal dynamics, high personal stakes and other constraints – that can prove difficult to integrate in experimental studies. Moreover, these characteristics' comingled relationships raise important tensions with experimental methods' core principle of surgically focusing on the causal effects of a few manipulated variables. As a result, entrepreneurship research must overcome a number of validity challenges and tradeoffs in order to successfully leverage experimental methods and offer findings that convincingly support the causality of their theoretical developments.Compounding these difficulties, the guidance typically offered in research methods textbooks tends to focus on generic issues that are altogether separate from the specific challenges of conducting valid entrepreneurship research experiments. Because of this, many research manuscripts mobilizing experimental methods arrive at the review process with important shortcomings. This threatens the field's knowledge accumulation and typically calls for authors to refine their work and collect additional data.To help researchers face these challenges, we offer a three-part compendium focused on bolstering the validity of entrepreneurship research experiments. First, we complement the generic observations of research methods monographs by presenting an overview of the validity tradeoffs inherent to mobilizing experimental methods in entrepreneurship research – and of strategies for addressing these.Second, and to demonstrate that overcoming these challenges is not a trivial task, we conduct a structured literature review of the external and construct validation strategies deployed in a comprehensive corpus of 144 relevant articles published in both entrepreneurship-focused journals and broader generalist journals from the applied behavioral and social sciences. Among the most positive elements emerging from our analyses, we note upward trends in the mobilization of pilot tests, in the conduct of multiple experiments within single papers as well as in the use of parallel studies using different data collection methods. We also observe increased efforts to explain the practical relevance of experimental findings. To our surprise, however, our analyses uncover downward trends in the mobilization of pre-tests to examine the research material's external validity and representativeness, as well as the continued publication of studies that do not report empirical evidence regarding their focal manipulations' construct validity. This is concerning. Such practices undermine these experiments' abilities to yield convincing evidence in support of their theorized causal effects – and for what these imply for fostering entrepreneurial action.Third, and in light of the results obtained, we develop a practical guide of actionable strategies for navigating the validity tradeoffs of entrepreneurship research experiments. Grouping these strategies together allows us to systematize recommendations typically found across various methods monographs, thereby offering an overall scheme to help entrepreneurship researchers navigate the validity tradeoffs inherent to conducting realistic and theoretically meaningful experiments. To make our recommendations as actionable as possible, we develop an extensive step-by-step guide of design and assessment strategies relevant to entrepreneurship research experiments. The guide spans the entire research process – from conceiving an experimental study to collecting, analyzing and reporting the results. The guide also includes a number of relevant exemplars from many different studies we analyzed.By discussing these entrepreneurship-specific validity tradeoffs and combining that with an overview of strategies for addressing them, our study offers an entrepreneurship-centered synthesis that equips entrepreneurship researchers with the necessary tools for conducting experimental research that advances understanding of the causal effects supporting entrepreneurial action and its related phenomena.

“Hands-on” vs “arm’s length” entrepreneurship research

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to advocate for greater use of ethnographic research methods in entrepreneurship studies to produce more contextualized research. An argument for getting “up-close” and “hands-on” is presented to better understand how context shapes action in entrepreneurship than is presently achieved under the present entrepreneurship research orthodoxy. The need for contextualized research is particularly acute in the domain of social innovation. For its maturation as a field of research, it also requires stronger critical perspectives into the agendas and impacts of practitioners and other field-shaping actors. Ethnographic approaches are potentially powerful methods for revealing truths of this nature. Ethnographic methods are, however, problematic for professional researchers. The challenges of conducting such research are discussed.Design/methodology/approachConceptual paper regarding research methods in social innovation and social entrepreneurship studies.FindingsSocial entrepreneurship that happens within established organizations is a hybrid social innovation activity that is informed, constrained, and compelled by idiosyncratic social contexts which are fashioned by institutional logics, identities, organizational culture, and history. With its contestable conceptualizations, priorities, models, purposes, and approaches, it arguably defies researchers’ ability to build a deep understanding, from arm’s length, of how the activity is undertaken for theory building purposes. Ethnographic methods enable deeper insight than traditional entrepreneurship research methods, and this research illustrates the differences between the espoused intentions, beliefs, and attitudes of managers and the lived experience of staff.Originality/valueSocial entrepreneurship is a micro-level, hybrid social innovation activity that challenges embedded social, structural, and cultural norms when undertaken within established organizations. Ethnographic methods are under-utilized in exploring this and other forms of entrepreneurial action. This paper illustrates the value of ethnography for contextualizing social innovation research and that eschewing “arm’s length” objectivity for “hands-on” insight is a powerful approach to empirically contextualizing social innovation and contributing to more critical perspectives and sophisticated theory building.

Experimental methods in entrepreneurship research: the status quo

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to evaluate the emerging field of experimental research on entrepreneurship to better understand its development and potential.Design/methodology/approachA systematic, evidence-based literature review was applied, resulting in a sample of 47 articles having used experiments in entrepreneurship research so far. The papers are analyzed according to their topic, methods, and research design, revealing insight into their limitations and prospective contributions.FindingsThe paper discusses the potential and disadvantages of experimental methods while arguing for experiments as the method of choice for answering causality questions. This study finds a persistent increase in experimental entrepreneurship research since its introduction in 1990.Research limitations/implicationsThe study provides research from the field of entrepreneurship with future directions, with potential research areas and an orientation for those interested in conducting experiments.Originality/valueExperiments are employed in a variety of research areas and have become more and more popular in the field of entrepreneurship. No study has analyzed the experimental studies in entrepreneurship. This paper contributes by providing an overview of the field, reflecting and discussing the outcomes while characterizing the methods employed.

A review of research methods in entrepreneurship 1985-2013

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to address the research questions: which methodologies and data gathering methods are employed by researchers publishing in top entrepreneurship journals, and how has this changed over time? Design/methodology/approach – The data gathering methods of research published in five top entrepreneurship journals between 1985 and 2013, a period of nearly three decades, were recorded. Findings – The data demonstrate that entrepreneurship research is dominated by positivist approaches and data gathering methods, but that this picture is changing over time. The data also reveal differences in methods used in research published in North American and European journals. Research limitations/implications – It is argued that increased discussion of the limitations, benefits and implications of research methods is needed across the field as a whole. It is concluded that although there is some methodological reflexivity in the field of a macro, abstract nature, there is little at the micro level of individual research designs. Originality/value – There is a number of existing reviews of methods in the field but none over such a long time period that include such a large corpus of papers. Of particular value to scholars engaged in debates about the proportions and merits of different research methods is the identification of long-term trends away from primary data gathering in general and survey approaches in particular. Debates surrounding the existence of different regional “schools” of entrepreneurship will be informed by the differing patterns of methods found in the five outlets included in the study.

Personalizing Entrepreneurial Learning: A Pedagogy for Facilitating the Know Why

As the global diffusion of entrepreneurship education continues, along with increasing investment in, and expectations of, educational initiatives, it has become important to articulate what we are teaching and why, along with the specifics of where, how, and to whom. Yet, despite a growing consensus about what constitute the entrepreneurial activities and competencies required to start a new venture, there has been little agreement regarding the content of entrepreneurship education, or how learning should be delivered (Bygrave 2007, TheHandbook of Qualitative Research Methods in Entrepreneurship , 17–48. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited; Edelman, Manolova, and Brush 2008, Entrepreneurship Education: Correspondence Between Practices of Nascent Entrepreneurs and Textbook Prescriptions for Success. Academy of Management Learning and Education 7(1):56–70; Honig, Davidsson, and Karlsson 2005, Learning strategies of nascent entrepreneurs. Journal of Competence-based Management 1(3):67–88; Mwasalwiba 2010, Entrepreneurship Education: A Review of Its Objectives, Teaching Methods, and Impact Indicators. Education+Training 52(1):20–47). Clearly, the purpose of any education, the “why” for the teacher, shapes the content, the “what”, and the method, the “how”. But what about the personal “how” and “why” for the learner? Sarasvathy’s theory of effectuation (Sarasvathy 2001, Causation and effectuation: Toward a theoretical shift from economic inevitability to entrepreneurial contingency. Academy of Management Review 26(2):243–63; 2008, New Horizons in Entrepreneurship , Cheltenham: Edward Elgar) has led educators to consider how an entrepreneur’s personal resources and resourcefulness can and should alter their how. Scholars are now sharing pedagogical approaches for motivating that type of learning (Fletcher and Watson 2007, Entrepreneurship, Management Learning and Negotiated Narratives: ‘Making it Otherwise for Us – Otherwise for Them’. Management Learning 38(1):9–26; Gibb 2011, Concepts into practice: meeting the challenge of development of entrepreneurship educators around an innovative paradigm – the case of the International Entrepreneurship Educators’ Programme (IEEP). International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research 17(2):146–165; Kyrö2008, A Theoretical Framework for Teaching and Learning Entrepreneurship. International Journal of Business and Globalisation 2(1):39–55; Ollila and Williams Middleton 2011, The Venture Creation Approach: Integrating Entrepreneurial Education and Incubation at the University. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management 13(2):161–78). However, little research has addressed the personal why for the entrepreneurial learner (Rae 2005, Entrepreneurial Learning: A Narrative-Based Conceptual Model. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development 12(3):323–35; Rigg and O’Dwyer 2012, Becoming an entrepreneur: researching the role of mentors in identity construction. Education + Training 54(4):319–329). In this paper, we seek to fill this gap by exploring how entrepreneurship educators can facilitate the personalized learning to develop the Know Why for nascent entrepreneurs in the process of becoming entrepreneurial. We combine theories of entrepreneurship practice, education, and learning to propose a model for entrepreneurial Know Why. We utilize a case study of an entrepreneurship program applying a learning-through-venture-creation approach to identify a pedagogical approach in which learning entrepreneurial Know Why is facilitated. Thus, the purpose of this paper is twofold: to contribute to the theory of entrepreneurial learning and to contribute to the pedagogy for entrepreneurship, by explaining the meaning and significance of the entrepreneurial Know Why and by describing an educational approach that facilitates its development.

Handbook of Qualitative Research Methods in Entrepreneurship

Handbook of Qualitative Research Methods in Entrepreneurship

Handbook of Qualitative Research Methods in Entrepreneurship

Handbook of Qualitative Research Methods in Entrepreneurship

Research Methods in Entrepreneurship

Entrepreneurship is a relatively young field; nonetheless, the research in this domain has been growing at an impressive rate in recent decades. As is commonly the case with emerging fields, entrepreneurship research currently faces a number of opportunities and challenges. Overall, entrepreneurship has an opportunity to establish itself as a field whose methodological rigor matches that of neighboring fields such as organizational behavior and strategic management, but some key challenges stand in the way of completing this endeavor. Herein, we outline the challenges that emerged from an informal survey of editorial board members of Organizational Research Methods (ORM) about the state of entrepreneurship research methods. We then discuss how the articles included in the feature topic on research methods in entrepreneurship hold great promises for resolving these challenges.