Upload
haris-a
View
220
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
8/10/2019 Wright 2012 ISBJ
1/9
http://isb.sagepub.com/International Small Business Journal
http://isb.sagepub.com/content/30/2/107Theonline version of this article can be found at:
DOI: 10.1177/0266242611432793
2012 30: 107 originally published online 5 January 2012International Small Business JournalMike Wright and Susan Marlow
Entrepreneurial activity in the venture creation and development process
Published by:
http://www.sagepublications.com
can be found at:International Small Business JournalAdditional services and information for
http://isb.sagepub.com/cgi/alertsEmail Alerts:
http://isb.sagepub.com/subscriptionsSubscriptions:
http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navReprints:
http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navPermissions:
http://isb.sagepub.com/content/30/2/107.refs.htmlCitations:
What is This? -Jan 5, 2012OnlineFirst Version of Record
- Mar 8, 2012Version of Record>>
at Curtin University Library on August 11, 2012isb.sagepub.comDownloaded from
http://isb.sagepub.com/http://isb.sagepub.com/http://isb.sagepub.com/content/30/2/107http://isb.sagepub.com/content/30/2/107http://isb.sagepub.com/content/30/2/107http://www.sagepublications.com/http://www.sagepublications.com/http://isb.sagepub.com/cgi/alertshttp://isb.sagepub.com/cgi/alertshttp://isb.sagepub.com/subscriptionshttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navhttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navhttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navhttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navhttp://isb.sagepub.com/content/30/2/107.refs.htmlhttp://isb.sagepub.com/content/30/2/107.refs.htmlhttp://online.sagepub.com/site/sphelp/vorhelp.xhtmlhttp://online.sagepub.com/site/sphelp/vorhelp.xhtmlhttp://isb.sagepub.com/content/early/2012/01/03/0266242611432793.full.pdfhttp://isb.sagepub.com/content/early/2012/01/03/0266242611432793.full.pdfhttp://isb.sagepub.com/content/30/2/107.full.pdfhttp://isb.sagepub.com/http://isb.sagepub.com/http://isb.sagepub.com/http://online.sagepub.com/site/sphelp/vorhelp.xhtmlhttp://isb.sagepub.com/content/early/2012/01/03/0266242611432793.full.pdfhttp://isb.sagepub.com/content/30/2/107.full.pdfhttp://isb.sagepub.com/content/30/2/107.refs.htmlhttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navhttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navhttp://isb.sagepub.com/subscriptionshttp://isb.sagepub.com/cgi/alertshttp://www.sagepublications.com/http://isb.sagepub.com/content/30/2/107http://isb.sagepub.com/8/10/2019 Wright 2012 ISBJ
2/9
International Small Business Journal
30(2) 107114
The Author(s) 2011
Reprints and permission: sagepub.
co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/0266242611432793
isb.sagepub.com
mall Firms
sbj
Corresponding author:
Mike Wright, Centre for Management Buy-out Research, Imperial College Business School, Exhibition Road, London,SW7 2AZ, UK
Email: [email protected]
Entrepreneurial activity in the
venture creation and developmentprocess
Mike WrightImperial College Business School, UK and University of Ghent, Belgium
Susan MarlowUniversity of Birmingham, UK
Abstract
This special edition editorial notes the complex and dynamic nature of the new venture creationprocess. Although the growing body of work which explores discrete elements of this process is
acknowledged, in-depth analyses of the black box of new venture creation remain scarce. Thus,this special edition features articles that recognize and explore how entrepreneurial actors andtheir ventures progress within and between the various phases necessary to establish viable new
firms within differing and uncertain contexts. Three articles are featured offering a diverse rangeof perspectives upon the challenges encountered during new venture creation and the strategiesadopted to address these issues. Drawing from these articles, a more nuanced processual viewof entrepreneurial activity in the venture creation and development process is presented and in
addition, pathways are suggested for future research to develop this debate.
Keywords
entrepreneurship, new venture creation and development
IntroductionAn important feature of economic change is the diffusion of entrepreneurship across cultures,
economies and continents. The entrepreneurial process is essential to this diffusion: this includes
the personal, sociological and organizational factors that influence the birth of enterprises and their
ensuing development. It encompasses a number of key stages including pre-start, start up, reorien-
tation, establishment of legitimacy, professionalization, growth, initial public offering, etc. Despite
discrete elements of this process being subject to theoretical and empirical scrutiny (see for
example, work by De Clercq and Voronov (2009) on entrepreneurial legitimacy), models of the
Article
at Curtin University Library on August 11, 2012isb.sagepub.comDownloaded from
http://isb.sagepub.com/http://isb.sagepub.com/http://isb.sagepub.com/http://isb.sagepub.com/8/10/2019 Wright 2012 ISBJ
3/9
108 International Small Business Journal30(2)
entrepreneurial process remain fragmented (Moroz and Hindle, 2011) and often lack explicit theo-
retical and empirical underpinnings (Ucbasaran et al., 2001). While there may be calls to harmo-
nize models of the entrepreneurial process rather than attempt a universalistic synthesis (Moroz
and Hindle, 2011), there remains a need to develop coherent understanding of the heterogeneity of
the entrepreneurial process and the context in which it occurs.
Entrepreneurial processes are likely to differ across the various phases of development, with major
challenges to be addressed when moving across and between these phases (e.g. Vohora et al., 2004);
failure to recognize and address this complex and dynamic process may frustrate and constrain sub-
sequent development. In addition, it is becoming apparent that entrepreneurial ventures may grow in
different ways. Some firms seek to build revenue, some may seek first to develop their technological
capability before introducing products to the market which may only occur after initial public offer-
ing or strategic sale, and others may adopt hybrid strategies (Clarysse et al., 2011). Although there has
been some attention focused on different measures of entrepreneurial firm growth and performance,
and on the economic impact of different types of support programmes or initiatives (Davidsson et al.,
2009; Delmar et al., 2003), theorizing and exploration of the processes behind these different growth
paths is lacking. Entrepreneurial activities may take place in both new firms and established firms,
such as those recently listed on a stock market, private equity-backed leveraged buy-outs, mature
corporations and social enterprises. Finally, the contexts in which entrepreneurial activities take place
are heterogeneous (Zahra and Wright, 2011), differing in the manner in which they facilitate or con-
strain entrepreneurship; for example, there are variations across both developed and emerging econo-
mies in the nature and extent of entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurs may need to adopt different processes
to deal with these institutional contingencies which are, as yet, little understood.
This special issue centres on the entrepreneurial process with a particular focus upon contributing
to the understanding of various dimensions of the heterogeneity of entrepreneurial activity in ven-
ture creation and development. We commence by providing an overview of the contribution of each
article to the special issue, then outline suggestions for a future research agenda aimed at better
understanding the role of entrepreneurial activity in the venture creation and development process.
Articles in this special issue
Following a general call, 22 submissions were received and seven authors were invited to revise
and resubmit their work; from these, three papers were accepted for publication. Each submission
was reviewed according to standard ISBJprocedures; Table 1 summarizes those which success-
fully negotiated this process.
The articles each encompass a particular aspect of the role of entrepreneurs in the venture cre-
ation and development process, adopting a variety of theoretical perspectives. For example, Corner
and Wu draw upon the notion of dynamic capabilities and Perks and Medway utilize a resource-
based perspective. These approaches contribute to an emerging literature that considers the origins
of resources and in addition, how they are assembled (Barney et al., 2011; Sirmon et al., 2011). In
contrast, Greenman adopts a pragmatist perspective on entrepreneurial activity, exploring how
founders use occupational resources to support their legitimacy.
In their recent review of the entrepreneurship field, Blackburn and Kovalainen (2009) note the
need for greater methodological pluralism and longitudinal work to generate greater insight into
how processes unfold over time and within specific contexts. These articles offer a valuable con-
tribution to addressing this particular gap in the contemporary research agenda as they adopt a
variety of methodological approaches to enhance our understanding of the venture creationand development process. Importantly for process research, there is a prevalence of longitudinal
at Curtin University Library on August 11, 2012isb.sagepub.comDownloaded from
http://isb.sagepub.com/http://isb.sagepub.com/http://isb.sagepub.com/8/10/2019 Wright 2012 ISBJ
4/9
Wright and Marlow 109
Table
1.
Summary
Aut
hor(s)
Researc
hquestions
Theoretica
l
perspect
ive
Dataan
dmet
hods
Key
findings
Greenman
How
doesexperience
derive
dfrom
occupat
ionsenab
lean
d
constrainentrepreneurial
activities
?
Pragmat
istviewo
f
entrepreneursh
ip
Ethnograp
hica
l
studyo
fowner-
foun
derso
f
micro-an
dsmal
l
businesses
inthe
cultural
industries
overtwoyears
Thesearch
foroccupat
iona
lautonomy,occupat
iona
lcentral
ityan
d
buildingcomm
itmentthroug
hlegitimacyan
daccounting
forthe
deve
lopmento
focc
upat
iona
lresources
Demonstrat
ingabil
ityto
deve
lopanorgan
izat
ion
fro
moccupat
iona
l
boun
daryworkthat
influencesentrepreneur
ialactiv
ities
Corner
andW
u
Whatsu
b-processes
areusedtoensurenew
venturesurv
ivalan
d
enab
leentrepreneursto
reapthe
bene
fitso
ftheir
innovations
?
Dynam
ic
entrepreneur
ial
capa
bilities
Long
itudina
l,
qual
itative
multiple
case
studyin
China,1
8
conversations
withpractitioners,
emai
ls,arch
ival
dataand
theory-
building
Importanceo
fthec
apac
ityto
identi
fypro
blems
inin
dustrial
sett
ingsthatacommercial
lyuntr
iedtechno
logymigh
tso
lve
before
deve
lopingpro
ducts
Revea
lingtechno
logy
invo
lvedopenlyshar
ingthetec
hno
logy
s
featuresw
ithprosp
ectivecustomers
inorderto
join
tly
design
prototypepro
ducts
Revea
lingtechno
logy
helpedensurenewventuresurv
ival,i
n
contrastw
ithconventiona
lwisdom,t
hat
linksfirmsurviva
lto
insu
latingan
dprote
ctingtechno
logy
Perksan
d
Medway
What
isthenatureo
f
resource-b
asedprocesses
inthe
deve
lopmento
f
newventures,i
nthe
contexto
fbusiness
duality
whereanewventure
is
deve
lope
dalongsi
dean
existing
business
?
Resource-b
ased
perspect
ive
Multiple
case
study(1
0cases),
withmu
ltiple
part
icipantsan
d
somelo
ngitud
inal
aspect,
farm
ing,
theory-
building
Resourceties,a
ssem
blyan
ddeploymentan
dtheircore
dimensions
andsu
b-dimensions
varyoverthe
fourstageso
fthe
newventure
deve
lopmentproce
ss
Consciousexploitationo
fex
istingtiescanprovi
deim
med
iate
accesstocr
iticalresources,
but
later-stageexplo
itationmust
be
accompanied
bypla
nnedan
dcare
fuladaptat
iono
fbo
thbusinesses
toenab
leef
fect
iveresource
deployment
Rat
herthanexpand
ingnetworks
inanad
hoc
fash
ion
,attention
shoul
dbepa
idtoc
hoosingse
lectednetworks
from
bothex
isting
andnew
ly-d
evelope
dnetworkcommun
ities.
Therea
rethree
genericapproac
hes
tomanag
ingresource-b
asedprocesses
in
the
deve
lopmento
fnewventures
inthe
farm
ingsector:
holistic
innovators,r
eactive
innovatorsan
dcaut
ious
innovators
at Curtin University Library on August 11, 2012isb.sagepub.comDownloaded from
http://isb.sagepub.com/http://isb.sagepub.com/http://isb.sagepub.com/http://isb.sagepub.com/8/10/2019 Wright 2012 ISBJ
5/9
110 International Small Business Journal30(2)
studies with multiple respondents in each case. Greenman presents rich insights using an ethno-
graphical approach over a two-year period and Corner and Wu and Perks and Medway adopt a
multiple case study design, with Corner and Wu employing a longitudinal perspective.
Themes for a future research agendaIn Table 2, we offer an overview of potential themes for a future research agenda. In compiling
these suggestions, we note how discrete thematic pathways might be articulated through specific
approaches which acknowledge differing contexts and units of analyses (the firm, the entrepre-
neur). In addition, we outline particular issues underpinning entrepreneurial opportunities which
might be pursued and developed through the exploration of these themes.
Contexts
The context in which entrepreneurial ideas, activities and ambitions are formulated is heteroge-
neous (Zahra and Wright, 2011), and is critical in shaping the venture and laying the foundationsfor future sustainability and growth. For example, as Welter (2011) argues, the institutional context
that prevails in transitional economies is fundamental to shaping entrepreneurial orientation and
new venture creation. Indeed, in order to illustrate this argument, Welter goes further in developing
an intersectional analysis, drawing upon the influence of gender on womens entrepreneurial activ-
ities within a context of relative subordination within Uzbekistan. Thus, context as a boundary
made recognizable through institutional norms is vital in shaping the entrepreneurial process.
There is much scope here for future research, particularly in developing work that challenges the
US/Eurocentric assumptions which underpin much of mainstream theorizing. The growing influ-
ence of China and emerging Middle East economies offer new and challenging opportunities to
evaluate dominant assumptions concerning the processes necessary to frame, exploit and commer-cialize entrepreneurial opportunities (Greene et al., 2011).
Related to institutional context, we have identified the influence of the market environment as
crucial in shaping the entrepreneurial process. Clearly, the market reflects broader contextual influ-
ences; however, in the current volatile climate there are both many opportunities and serious chal-
lenges to positioning new ventures. In addition, perceptions of and propensity towards risk within
such volatile markets are of considerable importance in critically analysing the future potential for,
and opportunities available to, new ventures. This is of particular interest in an era when the pre-
vailing neo-liberal perspective suggests that entrepreneurship holds many solutions to creating a
more innovative and vibrant economy, but at the same time, market volatility represents an increas-
ing threat to entrepreneurs engaged with new venture creation (Harvey, 2010). Thus, how opportu-nities are perceived, learning to exploit these opportunities and understanding the risks attached
within diverse and dynamic market environments, offer much potential for future work.
Of perennial interest within the venture creation and growth process is the temporal context
associated with the analysis of business life cycles (Phelps et al., 2007). Consequently, while high-
lighting this issue is not a new departure, we do suggest that clearer acknowledgement of the
diversity of entrepreneurial activities must be recognized, in order to gain a more robust and
informed picture of dynamic life cycles (Storey, 2011).
Firms
A number of important areas need to be developed in understanding the heterogeneity of the new
venture creation process at the firm level. Increasing recognition is now given to the notion that
at Curtin University Library on August 11, 2012isb.sagepub.comDownloaded from
http://isb.sagepub.com/http://isb.sagepub.com/http://isb.sagepub.com/8/10/2019 Wright 2012 ISBJ
6/9
Wright and Marlow 111
market entry may relate not only to generating revenue in the product market, but also that firms
may enter the market for technology (Clarysse et al., forthcoming, 2011). Similarly, firms may
engage in exploration or exploitation activities. Over time, it is evident that firms may pursue one
Table 2. Suggested themes for a research agenda on the venture creation and development process
Context Firm Individual Entrepreneurialopportunity
How do
entrepreneurialactivities in theventure creation anddevelopment processvary according to theinstitutional context?
How do entrepreneurial
activities vary betweenthe process of explorationand of exploitation?
How do entrepreneurs
build legitimacy for theirventures? To what extentis this heterogeneousaccording to sector, phaseof development, etc.?
What processes are
involved in the stages offraming and exploitingopportunities tocommercialize technology?
How doentrepreneurialactivities in theventure creation anddevelopment process
vary according to thenature of competitionin the market, thepower of incumbentsand the maturity of themarket?
How do entrepreneurialfirms develop their marketentry strategies andattract customers andsuppliers?
What factors influencewhether entrepreneursdevelop their own skillsin the venture creationprocess or acquire them,
by either bringing in teammembers, recruiting staffor obtaining consultancyadvice?
How does entrepreneuriallearning influence theprocess of opportunityidentification andexploitation?
What challenges arisein evolving the venturecreation process overthe different phases ofthe venture life-cycleover time, and howand to what extent arethese overcome?
What processes areadopted to developorganisational structures,culture and humanresource management?
How does the processof venture creationand development differbetween portfolio, serial,novice and nascententrepreneurs?
How does the ownershipof formal intellectualproperty rights versusinformal affect the processof framing and exploitationof opportunities?
How does the venturecreation process differbetween differentownership andsectoral and spatialcontexts (e.g. family vsnon-family firms)?
How does the processof venture creation differwith respect to socialventures and sustainableventures?
What processes doentrepreneurs adopt toleverage resources inthe venture creation anddevelopment process?How are they affected bythe cognitive attributes ofentrepreneurs?
How is the process offraming opportunitiesfor domestic versusinternational marketslinked to the developmentof relevant capabilities?
How do entrepreneurial
firms develop theirmarket orientation anddecide whether this is themarket for technologyor products, and howdo they change betweenthese different markets?
How do entrepreneurs
build communication tokey stakeholders in orderto signal their legitimacy?
at Curtin University Library on August 11, 2012isb.sagepub.comDownloaded from
http://isb.sagepub.com/http://isb.sagepub.com/http://isb.sagepub.com/8/10/2019 Wright 2012 ISBJ
7/9
112 International Small Business Journal30(2)
strategy initially, but then change to another or indeed adopt a dual strategy approach. The process
by which strategy choice is made, and how changes in such occur over time as the venture identifies
and adopts a viable configuration, are little understood and so, are worthy of further analysis.
Growing debate is focusing upon the complementarities and contrasts between social and profit-
focused enterprises. The former are attracting much greater attention, particularly in the light of politi-
cal optimism that during times of economic recession, they will deliver many services previously
provided by the public sector (Thompson, 2011). Yet, relatively little attention has been afforded to the
processes underpinning the creation and growth of social enterprise and, indeed, to what extent they
may or may not differ from their commercially focused counterparts (Westhead et al., 2011). Again,
there is much scope here for future research to explore and critically evaluate any such differences.
Individuals
Further research that focuses on the role of individuals in the venture creation process has the
potential for further development as the cognition and behaviour of individuals drives opportunity
recognition, as well as the accumulation and configuration of resources to exploit such opportuni-
ties. These microfoundations of entrepreneurship are being recognized now (Abell et al., 2008),
but there is considerable scope for further analysis. The processes adopted by entrepreneurs in the
venture creation process to leverage their resources and skills and to build legitimacy are little
understood. In addition, integrating the recognition of differing cognitive approaches adopted by
diverse groups entrepreneurs may help to highlight variations in these processes. When exploring
the confidence levels of portfolio, serial and novice entrepreneurship, Ucbasaran et al. (2010) dem-
onstrate how different ownership profiles critically influence entrepreneurial ambitions and activi-
ties. Consequently, future work needs to recognize how ownership structures profoundly affect the
development of the venture. As noted by Westhead and Wright (2011), the majority of new firms
are started by partners, families or teams, so much greater exploration of the dynamics and tensions
that inform these relationships, and their impact on both venture creation and development, is
required.
Opportunities
Opportunity recognition and framing is central to venture creation yet, the process through which
this occurs in different contexts warrants further analysis. In addition, as we have noted already,
entrepreneurs may have created previous ventures an important consequence of this being that
they may have learnt how to recognize and frame opportunities. Future studies could shed light on
this process but also identify how biases in learning may affect whether and how subsequent efforts
display adaptation in the process, in light of prior experience. Further sources of variety concern
whether the opportunity is based upon formal or informal intellectual property, and whether the
opportunity relates to a domestic or foreign venture. The extent to which these factors influence dif-
ferences in the process of framing opportunities warrants additional research.
Data and method
Our suggestions here represent but a few pathways that will progress the diverse and encompassing
field of new venture creation and development. In addition to such substantive issues, we would
suggest that there is considerable scope to adopt a range of methodological approaches to illustrateand analyse the complexity and volatility of new venture creation and growth. Within this special
at Curtin University Library on August 11, 2012isb.sagepub.comDownloaded from
http://isb.sagepub.com/http://isb.sagepub.com/http://isb.sagepub.com/8/10/2019 Wright 2012 ISBJ
8/9
Wright and Marlow 113
edition, we have included articles using longitudinal work and ethnographic approaches; we would
suggest that research drawing upon methodologies that facilitate a more detailed and nuanced
exploration of the processual nature of creation and growth are essential to progress understanding.
For example, Rasmussen et al. (2011) provide a longitudinal study of the venture emergence pro-
cess in the context of academic spin-offs. Equally, comprehensive datasets that offer accurate and
detailed accounts of creation and growth over time and within specific contexts are essential to
inform future work. Of course, compiling such datasets is challenging but would enable the empiri-
cal testing of conceptual insights.
In conclusion, this special edition focuses on an issue of fundamental importance to the realiza-
tion of entrepreneurial ambitions to create and develop new ventures. Axiomatically, this process
is subject to considerable volatility and a myriad of uncertainties, but at the same time it is critical
to future economic wealth creation, innovation and social development. Accordingly, developing
robust evidence and generating sound theoretical insights to analyse this process is essential to
inform future understanding of how entrepreneurial opportunities are translated into new ventures
which, in turn, become sustainable enterprises.
Funding
This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit
sectors.
References
Abell P, Felin T and Foss NJ (2008) Building microfoundations for the routines, capabilities, and performance
links.Managerial and Decision Economics29(3): 489502.
Barney JB, Ketchen D and Wright M (2011) The future of resource-based theory: Revitalization or decline?
Journal of Management37(5): 12991315.
Blackburn R and Kovalainen A (2009) Researching small firms and entrepreneurship: Past, present and
future.International Journal of Management Reviews11(1) 127148.
Clarysse B, Bruneel J and Wright M (2011) Explaining growth paths of young technology-based firms: Struc-
turing resource portfolios in different competitive environments. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal
48(6): 14201442.
Davidsson P, Steffens P and Fitzsimmons J (2009) Growing profitable or growing from profits: Putting the
horse in front of the cart?Journal of Business Venturing24(4): 388406.
De Clercq D and Voronov M (2009) Toward a practice perspective entrepreneurship: Entrepreneurial legiti-
macy as habitus.International Small Business Journal27(4): 395419.
Delmar F, Davidsson P and Gartner WB (2003) Arriving at the high-growth firm.Journal of Business Ventur-
ing18(2): 189216.
Greene F, Han L and Marlow S (2011) The influence of maternal stereotypes upon daughters entrepreneurial
propensity.Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice35(6): 652669.
Harvey C (2010) The Enigma of Capital and the Crisis of Capitalism. London: Profile Books.
Moroz P and Hindle K (in press, 2011) Entrepreneurship as a process: Toward harmonizing multiple perspec-
tives.Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice.
Phelps R, Adams R and Bessant J (2007) Life cycles of growing organizations: A review with implications for
knowledge and learning.International Journal of Management Reviews9(1): 130.
Rasmussen E, Mosey S and Wright M (2011) The evolution of entrepreneurial competencies: A longitudinal
study of university spin-off venture emergence.Journal of Management Studies48(6): 13141346.
at Curtin University Library on August 11, 2012isb.sagepub.comDownloaded from
http://isb.sagepub.com/http://isb.sagepub.com/http://isb.sagepub.com/http://isb.sagepub.com/8/10/2019 Wright 2012 ISBJ
9/9
114 International Small Business Journal30(2)
Sirmon D, Hitt MA, Ireland RD et al. (2011) Resource orchestration to create competitive advantage: Breadth,
depth and life cycle effects.Journal of Management37(5): 13901412.
Storey DJ (2011) Optimism and chance: The elephants in the entrepreneurship room. International Small
Business Journal29(4): 303321.
Thompson J (2011) Reflections on social enterprise and the Big Society. Social Enterprise Journal 7(3):
219223.
Ucbasaran D, Westhead P and Wright M (2001) The focus of entrepreneurial research: Contextual and process
issues.Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice25(1): 5780.
Ucbasaran D, Westhead P and Wright M (2010) The nature of entrepreneurial experience business failure and
comparative optimism.Journal of Business Venturing25(6): 541555.
Vohora A, Wright M and Lockett A (2004) Critical junctures in spin-outs from universities. Research Policy
33(1): 147175.
Welter F (2011) Contextualising entrepreneurship: Conceptual challenges and ways forward. Entrepreneur-
ship Theory and Practice35(1): 165184.
Westhead P and Wright M (2011) David Storeys optimism and chance perspective: A case of the Emperors
New Clothes?International Small Business Journal.
Westhead P, Wright M and McElwee G (2011)Entrepreneurship: Perspective and Cases. London: Pearson.
Zahra S and Wright M (2011) Entrepreneurships next act.Academy of Management Perspectives.
Mike Wrightis Professor of Entrepreneurship and Director of the Centre for Management Buy-out Research
at Imperial College Business School, Visiting Professor at the University of Ghent, editor of Strategic
Entrepreneurshipjournal and Chair of the Academy of Management Entrepreneurship Division. His publica-
tions on various aspects of entrepreneurial mobility have appeared in leading journals such as Academy of
Management Review, Academy of Management Journal, Strategic Management Journal, Journal of
Management Studies, etc. His most recent book is Entrepreneurship: Perspectives and Cases (with Paul
Westhead and Ged McElwee, Financial Times/Prentice Hall, 2011).
Susan Marlow is Professor of Entrepreneurship at the University of Birmingham, Visiting Professor at the
University of Leeds, Editor of theInternational Small Business Journaland Vice President for Research at
the Institute for Small Business and Entrepreneurship. Her research interests focus on the diverse range of
issues influencing entrepreneurial behaviours and small firm management; she has published extensively in
US and UK journals and is the co-editor, along with Colette Henry of the Routledge series of Mastertexts in
Entrepreneurship and the Emerald/ISBE series of entrepreneurship texts.