Exponential growth of entrepreneurship courses…

300 universities in the 1980s  over 1,050 institutions in the 1990s

(Solomon et al. 1994)

by 2005, over 2,200 courses in entrepreneurship at over 1,600 universities throughout the United States (Kuratko 2005; Katz 2003)

Concomitant increase in the number of academic institution-based entrepreneurship centers

(Kuratko 2005)

Despite this growth, Katz (2008) and Kuratko (2005) maintain that complete academic legitimacy of entrepreneurship has not yet been reached.

While funds continue to flow to develop and promote entrepreneurship education, outcome objectives for the use of these dollars are often poorly defined (Cope et al. 2005).

Opportunity for new entrepreneurial programs to paint a clear picture from their inception.

Opportunity to learn from entrepreneurship programs, both at small colleges and large universities, that have already sprouted up and experienced growth, challenges, failures and ultimate successes.

An  Insider’s  Perspec.ve        on  Entrepreneurial  Program  Development              at  a  Small  and  a  Large  Ins.tu.on  

 Michael  S.  Lehman,  MD,  MBA  

 Published  in:    Annals  of  Biomedical  Engineering    The  Journal  of  the  Biomedical  Engineering  Society    ISSN  0090-­‐6964        Ann  Biomed  Eng    DOI  10.1007/s10439-­‐013-­‐0778-­‐6    hRp://www.springerlink.com/openurl.asp?genre=ar.cle&id=doi:10.1007/s10439-­‐013-­‐0778-­‐6    

4-year undergraduate private liberal arts

1,400 students and 14,000 alumni

Sill Business Incubator

Academic Services

Student Seed Capital Fund

Economic Development

The  University  of  PiRsburgh  

15  schools  

25,000  undergraduates  (2,000  in  business)    

10,000  graduate  students  (900  in  business)    

quiet  culture  of  entrepreneurship  

no  formal  student  degree  program  

emerging  entrepreneurial  ini4a4ves  

Lessons Learned

I

Institutional Champions

When change in higher education is not the result of a major crisis or outside pressure, a vigorous and farsighted leader not only gets the ball rolling, but also helps to provide momentum as the team is built (Rosser and Penrod 1991).

The champion considers the resource pipeline to pay for any new programs or programmatic changes (Rowley et al. 1997).

Faculty champions appear to be more successful when resources are stable or expanding and issues are seated in one department with little connection across other academic units or outside the university setting.

Administrative champions are key when resource building is in the growth phase and issues cut across departments or are not related to one primary unit. (Shmidtlein 1990)

Education Economic Development

Secure a triad of institutional champions: •  a political champion •  a course champion •  an administrative champion (Hills 1988)

II

Supply Chain

A key part of implanting the new entrepreneurship program on campus is integration with the ‘student supply chain’.

A key part of implanting the new entrepreneurship program on campus is integration with the ‘student supply chain’.

?

A key part of implanting the new entrepreneurship program on campus is integration with the ‘student supply chain’.

Supply chain…set of three or more entities directly involved in flows of services to a customer (Mentzer et al. 2001).

The management of this supply chain should include integrated behavior (Bowersox and Closs 1996) and cooperation among its members, mutually sharing information (Mentzer et al. 2001).

Supply chain:  admissions  academic

advising  career

services  alumni office  development

office

The findings of Petersen et al. (2005) suggest the value of seeking and utilizing input from select suppliers during the development of new products; the result is not only a better final product design but also improved financial performance.

Supply chain members should work together on new product development (Drozdowski 1986), recognizing that a “supply chain succeeds if all the members of the supply chain have the same goal and the same focus on serving customers.” (LaLonde and Masters 1994, in Mentzer et al. 2001, p.9).

Develop a formal organizational structure or mechanism for communication with enrollment, advising, career services and alumni development.

Involve key members in the supply chain during the planning and implementation phases when looking to create new programs, or even refine existing ones.

Develop a formal organizational structure or mechanism for communication with enrollment, advising, career services and alumni development.

Involve key members in the supply chain during the planning and implementation phases when looking to create new programs, or even refine existing ones.

III Diverse

Non-Credit, Experience-Based

Opportunities

Participation in experience-based activities has a low barrier to entry, affording students with opportunities to sample the entrepreneurial culture.

These activities increase awareness of entrepreneurial career opportunities through practical, real-life scenarios, provide an opportunity to facilitate interdisciplinary teams, and often increases confidence and interest in starting a business (Collins and Robertson 2003).

Finally, these activities serve as an entrée to deciding to enroll in a more formal course of entrepreneurial study.

Leverage the excitement generated by students participating in these non-credit, experience-based activities

Schedule interviews upon the completion of these activities for print or

video pieces can capture strong, powerful messaging for use along the supply chain.

Exposure of students to entrepreneurship stimulates a desire to start one’s own business, according to Peterman and Kennedy (2003), this exposure does not necessarily impact the participants’ perceptions of the feasibility of starting a business.

This supports the model of launching experience-based opportunities to stimulate initial interest, while offering for-credit courses to provide the rigorous academic exercises necessary to evaluate feasibility as the next step in the process.

IV

Dynamic For-Credit Courses

Entrepreneurs relish independence, flexibility and innovative ways of doing things.

Students in entrepreneurial classes are no different.

They thrive on learning followed by immediate application to either their own ventures or a live case study.

Gartner and Vesper (1994) presented a summary of successes and failures in entrepreneurship courses (survey of entrepreneurship faculty teaching 445 entrepreneurship courses at 177 institutions)

+ bringing to class former students and other alumni with a proven track record in entrepreneurship

- bringing in guest speakers without providing an outline of assigned topics and goals for the

visit

+ early feedback on a business plan to allow for refocusing and refining

+ dynamic teaching methods, such as ‘living cases’ followed by networking dinners + having students present their own entrepreneurial experiences + creating in-class ‘right-brained’ exercises to

examine barriers to creativity

-  simply using films, videos, and straight lecturing by the instructor

(Gartner and Vesper 1994)

Include a guest lecture from an entrepreneur whose business failed and a third party such as an accountant or lawyer who witnessed the entrepreneur’s distress (Shepherd 2004).

A contingency-based model for teaching entrepreneurship is also useful, whereby students either implement solutions from either actual business activities they may be involved in or assist firms they are consulting (Honig 2004).

Many smaller schools have one faculty member teaching all of the entrepreneurship courses

+ coordination among the syllabi and course content as the students progress through course sequence - limited perspective on the field

leverage a rich variety of coordinated live case studies and guest lecturers

arrange for periodic external reviews by entrepreneurial faculty from peer and aspirant schools

At a large university a number of faculty members may teach different entrepreneurship courses:

+ breadth of styles and research experience -  lacks a coordinated effort to provide progression

from course to course with little redundancy

identify a faculty member to lead the charge

in coordination of content, particularly during periods of new course and curriculum

development

V

Faculty Partnerships

Leverage the liberal arts environment to tailor and deliver mini-curricula on entrepreneurship in non-business classes.

Cross-list courses across different schools.

Develop advisory boards for student ventures with faculty experts from business and non-business.

VI

Designated Advisory Boards

Inclusion of trustees, faculty, students and a robust contingency of regional and alumni entrepreneurs provides an effective balance of theory and practice.

A focus on student entrepreneurship in the context of regional economic development provides specific financial resources and connections for the student entrepreneurs.

Tap into university-developed technologies by faculty, even in the absence of an office of technology management.

Connect to alumni with venture-backed, scalable companies, even if it appears that the local portfolio of companies is adequate.

Encourage interdisciplinary team formation.

VII

Bootstrapping Skills

Bootstrapping, a necessary process for most start-ups, can bridge the gap until the venture develops a market-valued product or service (Auken 2004; Windborg and Lanstrom 2000).

Much like the new business venture, new entrepreneurship programs go through a bootstrapping phase in the start-up and growth stages.

Ensure accrued interest from seed capital funds or capital project accounts is reinvested back into the student entrepreneurship program.

Designate gift and pledge payments specifically to student entrepreneurship activities.

Hills  (1988)  countered  an  argument  made  by  naysayers  that  

entrepreneurship  educa4on  was  a  passing  fad;  

this  ‘fad’  not  only  has  become  a  mainstay  in  business  educa4on  but  also  a  driving  factor  for  job  crea4on  

and  economic  growth.  

I.  Institutional Champions

II.  Supply Chain

III.  Diverse Non-Credit,

Experience-Based Opportunities

IV.  Dynamic For-Credit Courses

V.  Faculty Partnerships

VI.  Designated Advisory Boards

VII. Bootstrapping Skills

Lehigh.edu/innovate

An  Insider’s  Perspec.ve        on  Entrepreneurial  Program  Development              at  a  Small  and  a  Large  Ins.tu.on  

 Michael  S.  Lehman  

 Published  in:    Annals  of  Biomedical  Engineering    The  Journal  of  the  Biomedical  Engineering  Society    ISSN  0090-­‐6964        Ann  Biomed  Eng    DOI  10.1007/s10439-­‐013-­‐0778-­‐6    hRp://www.springerlink.com/openurl.asp?genre=ar.cle&id=doi:10.1007/s10439-­‐013-­‐0778-­‐6