OUTLINE

Understanding the Entrepreneur IB3F70

Modules in Business and Management
for University of Warwick students

2015

Lecturer: Dr Kevin Mole
INTRODUCTION

Small firms are everywhere. Around 99% of firms in developed countries are small firms.  They contribute around a third of GDP and about half of all employment. Moreover, (nearly) all firms start small, whether from the garage (Hewlett Packard) or from the dorm room (Dell). Some of the largest firms (like Microsoft, Google etc) were founded within the past twenty years. So, small firms and entrepreneurship is important. 
  
The module aims to enable you to understand why and how small firms are different in a number of ways from larger businesses. A key focus is on understanding the roles which entrepreneurs play in the economy. It is NOT a module primarily to enable you to run a small business, although it does have some implications for practice

For whom is Understanding the Entrepreneur suitable?

The module is for Warwick Business School and other University of Warwick students in their final year.  We are keen to encourage students from all departments to take a module that develop their knowledge of entrepreneurship, as many at some point in their lives will either be an entrepreneur or at least think about running their own firm There are no pre-requisites for this module. 

Registration, restrictions etc.

The modules target students in faculties other than WBS.  Module materials, important messages, past exams etc. are posted to the WBS internet resource, my.wbs, and to access these you must first be registered for this module with the WBS Undergraduate Office.  You must therefore be registered with the WBS Undergraduate Office, situated in the WBS Building in the faculty of Social Sciences, email ugradsec@wbs.ac.uk.

Learning Goals 
The learning goals for module are to: 
1	Demonstrate an understanding of the role and functions of small firms. 
2	Demonstrate a critical appreciation of the nature of managerial and decision-making tasks facing small firms and how these differ from large firms. 
3	Relate small business issues to broader social science questions surrounding theories of entrepreneurship. 
4	Understand the role of business owner-managers and entrepreneurs and how this links with public policy and others involved in the small business sector (eg consultants, suppliers and customers). 
5	Conduct independent research of set issues using library and electronic sources. 
6	Present reasoned arguments orally and on paper. 
7	Support arguments by reference to appropriate sources. 
8	Analyze texts and make presentations. 
9	Communicate complex ideas effectively

:TEACHING TIMETABLE

Lecturer (NIE)
Dr Kevin Mole, Associate Professor (Reader) of Enterprise, Warwick Business School.  E-mail:  Kevin.mole@wbs.ac.uk  Office:  Third floor Ramphal Building.  Telephone:  (0)24 76 532 918 or x 32918 within the University.

Office hours: Monday 2.30-3.30pm. Questions can also be asked through my.wbs and you can e-mail and we can arrange another mutually convenient time on another day. 

Teaching
There is a one hour lecture. There is a seminar hour where we will discuss a reading. 

Teaching	1 hour lecture per week
1 hour seminar/tutorial per week

Lectures: week1 – week10		
Tuesday 14:00–15:00 	MS.05	
		
Seminars: week2 - week 10		
Monday 11.00-12.00	Wbs 2.003	
Monday 13.00-14.00	Wbs 2.007	
Tuesday 10:00-11:00	Wbs 1.006	

EXPECTATIONS

So, what will it be like for me?
During your studies for this course we will provide you with the necessary support and guidance to help you get the most from your learning experience. However, it is also important that you recognise your responsibilities regarding your learning process.

We expect you to attend. The lectures will present new information which will be interspersed with some practical activities designed to help foster learning. If you do not attend all the lectures you will miss out some topic covered in the exam. Following legal changes, students will be expected to sign into all seminars and tutorials.    

We expect you to contribute to the classes. The seminar sessions are to enable the consolidation of the information presented in the lectures. There are readings for each of the topics. . The objective, after all, is to help you in your learning. We know that discussions are better for learning than listening passively, so the objective is to make these sessions interactive and lively. 

Tutorials will aim to provide more of a workshop format. There will be some work in groups, and it may be useful to form and sit in a study group of your own. Towards the end of the course these tutorial sessions will be where you will make you presentations

How do I succeed on this course?
The WBS marking scheme is given below. The emphasis for higher marks is on being critical rather than descriptive. We will endeavour to make the class discussion critical, in turn that means that everyone’s view should be considered, often meaning there is no right answer. A good answer is one that is well supported by argument. It is an answer that looks for explanations and supported reasons rather than a description. A useful text on critical thinking is Cottrell, S (2005) Critical Thinking Skills, Palgrave, London.   

READING
Recommended & Other Texts
There recommended textbook for the course is Mole, K with Ram M (2012) Perspectives in Entrepreneurship, Palgrave MacMillan Basingstoke. 
Other useful material is contained in Carter, S. and Jones-Evans, D (2006) Enterprise and Small Business: Principles, Practice and Policy 2nd ed FT Prentice Hall, London
David Storey (1994) Understanding the Small Business Sector. Thomson
Bridge, S., O'Neill, K. and Cromie, S., Understanding Enterprise, Entrepreneurship and Small Business. Palgrave MacMillan, Basingstoke,  
Deakins, D. and Freel, M. (2003) Entrepreneurship and Small Firms. McGraw-Hill, London

A useful introduction to some of the wider social science issues is to be found in Marsh D. and Stoker G. eds. (2002) Theory and Methods in Political Science, Palgrave MacMillan, Basingstoke, and Waters, Modern Sociological Theory

Readings for each of the subjects can be seen below.
There will be a number of articles that will be available from the library (mainly book chapters) in downloadable form. 

IB3F70 Individual Perspectives on Entrepreneurship: List of topics

Week 1, Lecture 6th October: Introduction
•	What are the goals of the course?
•	How will we achieve them?
•	What will enable you to do well on the course? 

Week 2, Lecture 13th October: Small businesses and entrepreneurship 
•	What constitutes a small business?
•	What constitutes entrepreneurship? a behaviour? an orientation?
•	How far are these two concepts interconnected? 

Further reading: The distinction between craftsmen and entrepreneurs is in Hornaday et al., (2000) and can be found in Bridge, O’Neill and Cromie (1998). Stevenson (1997) is in Mastering Entrepreneurship (Birley S. and Muzyka D. eds.). The entrepreneurial orientation construct can be found in Lumpken and Dess (1996, 2001) 

Stevenson, H. (1997) in Birley S. and Muzyka D (eds.) Mastering Entrepreneurship Prentice Hall, London
Bridge, S., O'Neill, K. and Cromie, S., Understanding Enterprise, Entrepreneurship and Small Business. Palgrave MacMillan, Basingstoke,  
Lumpkin G.T. and Dess G.G (1996) Clarifying the entrepreneurial orientation construct and linking it to performance, Academy of Management Review 21(1) 135-172.  
Lumpkin G.T. and Dess G.G (2001) Linking two dimensions of entrepreneurial orientation to firm performance: The moderating role of environment and industry life cycle, Journal of Business Venturing 16, 429-451

THEORY

Week 3, Lecture 20th October: Perspectives in entrepreneurship
•	Why do academics disagree on fundamental issues?
•	To what extent do entrepreneurs have free will? 
•	Is the study of entrepreneurship a science? 

Further reading: The essential reading for this is Waters (1998) and the chapter ‘a skin not a sweater’ in Marsh and Stoker (2002). There are a number of sociology text, that take on these points. They will tend to discuss structure and agency. In management, Burrell and Morgan (1979) is a classic and a precis of that may be found in Jennings, P.L., Perren L and Carter S. (2005) However, this approach tends to take the ‘political’ stance to the study of organization that I have shied away from. 

Mole, K (2011) ‘Introduction’ in Mole, K. and Ram, M. (2011) Perspectives in Entrepreneurship, Palgrave MacMillan Basingstoke. 
Burrell and Morgan (1979) Sociological Paradigms and Organisational Analysis Elements of the Sociology of Corporate Life, Ashgate
Jennings, P.L., Perren L and Carter S. (2005) Guest editors introduction: Alternative perspectives on entrepreneurship research, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 29 (2): 145-152
Marsh D. and Stoker G. eds. (2002) Theory and Methods in Political Science, Palgrave MacMillan, Basingstoke,
Waters, M. (1994) Modern Sociological Theory, Sage, London

Week 4, Lecture 27th October: The Rational Choice Approach
•	Can we explain people’s actions by the situation that they find themselves in? 
•	How do we choose what to do? 
•	Are we really rational?  

Further reading: the chapter by Ward (2002) is a very good exposition of rational choice albeit within the discipline of politics rather than entrepreneurship. Within the same book is the chapter by Bevir and Rhodes (2002) on the basic interpretist position but again not within entrepreneurship.  Kahneman, Slovic and Tversky (1982) develops the psychological biases that affect all of us.

Mole, K and Roper, S. (2011) ‘Rational choice and Entrepreneiurship’ in Mole, K. and Ram, M. (2011) Perspectives in Entrepreneurship, Palgrave MacMillan Basingstoke. 
Baumol W.J. (1990) Entrepreneurship: Productive, Unproductive and Destructive, Journal of Political Economy, 98: 893-921
Ariely, D (2008) Predictably Irrational HarperCollins, London
Ward, H. (2002) Rational Choice, in Marsh D. and Stoker G. (eds.) Theory and Methods in Political Science, Palgrave MacMillan, Basingstoke, pp.65-89
Kahneman, Slovic, and Tversky (1982) Judgement under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases, Cambridge University Press.

Week 5, Lecture 3rd November 
The Psychological Approach: From traits to self-efficacy
•	Do entrepreneurs have different personalities from most of us?
•	Are there more entrepreneurial personalities?
•	Do the attitudes and beliefs we have help or hinder entrepreneurship?  

Further reading: The best chapter to read on this is Delmar’s chapter in Carter and Jones-Evans (2006) There is also a little on psychology in Bridge, O’Neill and  Cromie

Delmar, F. (2006) Psychology and Entrepreneurship, in Carter S and Jones-Evans D Enterprise and Small Business: principles, Practice and Policy, 2nd ed. Prentice Hall, Harlow 176-191 
Bridge, S., O'Neill, K. and Cromie, S., Understanding Enterprise, Entrepreneurship and Small Business. Palgrave MacMillan, Basingstoke,  
Chen, C.C., Greene, P.G. and Crick, A. (1998) Does entrepreneurial self-efficacy distinguish entrepreneurs from managers? Journal of Business Venturing 13 (4): 295-316 
McClelland D.C. (1961) The Achieving Society, Van Nostrand, New Jersey.
Baron, R.A. (1998) Cognitive mechanisms in entrepreneurship: Why and when entrepreneurs 	think differently from other people, Journal of Business Venturing 13 (4): 275-294

Week 6, Lecture 10th November: The Interpretist View: Tales of Entrepreneurs
•	Does the situation that we find ourselves in determine our actions? 
•	How might we investigate the lifeworld of the entrepreneur? 
•	What is place for ideas in the stusy of entrepreneurship?

Further reading: The case for anyone being able to be an entrepreneur was made by Hashemi and Hashemi, although there are many biographies of entrepreneurs that are available. Most of the textbooks will also have sections on the ‘entrepreneurial personality’ or other discussions about what is needed to be an entrepreneur. Bhide (2000) has a chapter on the sorts of people who are well suited to start promising businesses. It is well worth a read anyway. The reading was on the silicon valley entrepreneur (Bronson, 2000). 

Bevir M. and Rhodes, R.A.W. (2002) Interpretive Theory, in Marsh D. and Stoker G. (eds.) Theory and Methods in Political Science, Palgrave MacMillan, Basingstoke, pp.131-152
Bhide, A.V. 2000 The origin and evolution of new businesses, Oxford University Press
Bronson, P. 2000 The nudist on the late shift and other tales of Silicon Valley, Vintage, London
Hashemi, S. and Hashemi, B., 2002 Anyone can do it: Building Coffee Republic from our kitchen table, Capstone, Chichester
Collins, J.C. and Porras, J.I. 2002 Built to last: successful habits of visionary companies, Paperback edition, Collins, New York
Cope, J. 2003 Entrepreneurial learning and critical reflection: Discontinuous events as triggers for ‘higher-level’ learning, Management Learning, 34(4) 429-450

ISSUES

Week 7, Lecture 17th November: Who wants to be an entrepreneur? 
•	Where do entrepreneurs come from? 
•	Do potential entrepreneurs make rational labour market choices?
•	Are your beliefs critical?  

Further reading: there is a section on the labour market approach within the firm births chapter in Storey (1994). The diagram comes from Evans and Jovanovic (1989) – this is very mathematical. Blanchflower and Oswald (1998) was one of the readings. Hashemi and Hashemi (2002) argue for the entrepreneurial bug catching anyone. 

Blanchflower D.G. and Oswald A.J. (1998) What makes an entrepreneur? Journal of Labor Economics, 16:1, 26-60.
Hashemi, S. and Hashemi, B., 2002 Anyone can do it: Building Coffee Republic from our kitchen table, Capstone, Chichester
Storey D.J. (1994) Understanding the Small Business Sector, Thomson, London
Evans, D.S. and Jovanovic, B. (1989) ‘An estimated model of entrepreneurial choice under liquidity constraints’, Journal of Political Economy, 97(4): 808-827.

Week 8, Lecture 24th November: Reading Week

Week 9, Lecture 1st December: Entrepreneurial Ability, Opportunity Recognition, Entrepreneurial Learning 
•	How do we know whether someone can succeed in business? 
•	How do entrepreneurs search for opportunities? 
•	Do entrepreneurs learn? How? 

Further reading: Gaglio. and Katz (2001) talk about the opportunity identification and alertness. There is a section in Katz and Green (2007). On the type of opportunities is Drucker (1985) which is a thoroughly good book on the whole subject of innovation and entrepreneurship. There is a section 15-17 in Deakins and Freel (2006). For the four types of knowledge see Chrisman and McMullan (2004). 

Gaglio, C.M. and Katz, J. 2001 The psychological basis of opportunity identification: entrepreneurial alertness, Small Business Economics, 16 (1) 95-111 
Katz, J.A. and Green R.P. 2007, Entrepreneurial Small Business, International Ed. McGraw-Hill, London    
Deakins, D. and Freel, M. 2006. Entrepreneurship and Small Firms, 4th ed. McGraw-Hill, Maidenhead.
Drucker, P.F. (1985) Innovation and Entrepreneurship, Elsevier, London. 
Chrisman, J.J., McMullan, W.E., 2004 Outsider assistance as a knowledge resource for new venture survival Journal of Small Business Management 42 (3): 229-244 

Week 10, Lecture 8th December: Success and the Small Firm 
•	Where do entrepreneurs come from? 
•	Do potential entrepreneurs make rational labour market choices?
•	Are your beliefs critical?  

Further reading: There are chapters on growth and the small firm in most entrepreneurship texts. Deakins and Freel (2006) tends to the same problem-based lecture as the one presented. Storey (1994) made his name with the three intersecting rings approach found in that chapter.

Deakins, D. and Freel, M. 2006. Entrepreneurship and Small Firms, 4th ed. McGraw-Hill, Maidenhead.
Storey D.J. (1994) Understanding the Small Business Sector, Thomson, London
Penrose E. (1959) The Theory of the Growth of the Firm, Basil Blackwell, London. 
Pope R.A. (2002) Why small firms export: Another look, Journal of Small Business Management, 40 (1), 17-26
Burpitt W.J. and Rondinelli (2000) Small firms’ motivations for exporting: to earn and learn? Journal of Small Business Management, 38 (4) 1-14
Chaganti R. and Greene P.G. (2002) Who are Ethnic Entrepreneurs? A study of entrepreneurs’ ethnic involvement and business characteristics, Journal of Small Business Management, 40(2): 126-143

ASSESSMENT

For 12 CATS:
Group presentations (30%)
2000 word assignment (70%)
For 15 CATS:
Group presentations (30%)
2000 word assignment and a 500 word reflection on what you learned on the course (70%)

Here are some notes concerning the assessment of IB3F70 Individual Perspectives in Entrepreneurship. The 'end of term' assignment accounts for 70% of the marks and the group presentation accounts for 30% of the marks. There is no exam. 

Presentation 

Students are expected to make a group presentation in the course. Presentations will be in the tutorial session and the rest of the tutor group plus the lecturer will make up the audience. Groups will be expected to present for up to fifteen minutes and marks will be awarded for content, (including structure, analysis), timing presentation style, evidence of group interaction and discussion. The group presentations will be towards the end of the course. Presentations represent 30% of the course marks. Groups will be a maximum of three students. The subject for the presentation will be drawn from a combination of the topics and the perspectives. The chosen topic might be entry to self-employment and the perspective might be the psychological approach for example. The groups and topics will be chosen part-way through the course.  

Deadlines
The group presentations will occur in the seminars for weeks 9 and 10. 
A pdf of the slides should be received electronically at the ugrad office by 4th January 2014 

Assignment
The assignment represents 70% of the overall marks in IB3F70 Individual Perspectives in Entrepreneurship. I am suggesting that students have a choice of two questions: 

To what extent does entrepreneurship require special abilities? Use the arguments developed from all three perspectives to set out the arguments for and against the proposition that becoming an entrepreneur requires special abilities. Then explain and justify your personal opinion. 
or 
How do we understand entrepreneurial learning? Compare and contrast the approach of all three perspectives to explain how each approaches the issue of entrepreneurial learning. How satisfactory do you find each? 

Deadline: Noon 1st February 2015 – electronic submission – so that means it does not matter where you are in the world, as long as you have internet access you can submit! 

What I expect to see
Three perspectives: interpretism (biography), psychology and economics (rational choice).

Word count: between 1,500 - 2,000 words. This probably means that 2,000 words is both the maximum and minimum. So try to make the essay follow an argument across the three perspectives. 

For the first choice of essay: 
Biography – Hashemi’s coffee republic argues that anyone can do it. We can take positions concerning whether the entrepreneur was lucky or special. Examples of entrepreneurs who are special argues for not everyone can do it. 

Psychology – taking the personality traits approach suggests that you need the entrepreneurial personality. The attitudes to entrepreneurship element is more ambiguous. Attitudes may change 

Rational choice (economic) – the choice to become an entrepreneur depends on the utility of being an entrepreneur. Jovanovic (1982) one learns whether you have the ‘right stuff’ is part of the against case. 

For the alternative choice of essay:
Biography - David Rae's work and Jason Cope's is within the interpretist tradition

Psychology - Look at the way entrepreneurs' learning styles make a difference (Corbett, 2007)

Rational Choice - entrepreneurial learning is passive from Jovanovic (1982) and then also where's the evidence from Storey (working paper)  

Whichever their choices, students must submit the requisite number of assignments for their chosen modules online by Noon on the date stated above. Failure to submit assessed work by the specified deadline will result in a penalty unless a formal extension has been granted beforehand.  Regardless of the reason for lateness (this includes PC-related and computer network-related problems), late work will incur a penalty of 5% per day.  Each piece of work must be identified by your library card number, NOT your name.  

All assignments carry a word limit. If you write in excess of that word limit, you may find words written in excess of the word limit will not be taken account of in assigning a final mark.  Please indicate, on a cover sheet, the total number of words written in the body of the assignment (excluding title page, list of references and appendices) and please mark each assessment with the module name and the subject title.
To guarantee that assessed work problems do not occur, we urge all students to retain a copy of assessed work and to complete their work well before the deadline.

Note that work not accepted and then submitted after the deadline will incur the late submission penalty as stated above.

WBS Marking Bands
80+ - an outstanding piece of work, of publishable quality, showing total mastery of the subject-matter, with a highly developed and mature ability to analyse, synthesise and apply knowledge and concepts. All objectives of the set work are covered, and work is free of errors with a very high level of technical competence. There is evidence of critical reflection; and the work demonstrates originality of thought, and the ability to tackle questions and issues not previously encountered. Ideas are expressed with fluency.
70-79 - an excellent piece of work, showing a high degree of mastery of the subject-matter, with a well-developed ability to analyse, synthesise and apply knowledge and concepts. All major objectives of the set work are covered, and work is free of all but very minor errors, with a high level of technical competence. There is evidence of critical reflection, and of ability to tackle questions and issues not previously encountered. Ideas are expressed clearly. However, the originality required for an 80+ mark is absent.
60-69 - a good piece of work, showing a sound and thorough grasp of the subject-matter, though lacking the breadth and depth required for a first-class mark. A good attempt at analysis, synthesis and application of knowledge and concepts, but more limited in scope than that required for a mark of 70+. Most objectives of the work set are covered. Work is generally technically competent, but there may be a few gaps leading to some errors. Some evidence of critical reflection, and the ability to make a reasonable attempt at tackling questions and issues not previously encountered. Ideas are generally expressed clearly, with some minor exceptions.
50-59 - a fair piece of work, showing grasp of major elements of the subject-matter but possibly with some gaps or areas of confusion. Only the basic requirements of the work set are covered.   The attempt at analysis, synthesis and application of knowledge and concepts is superficial, with a heavy reliance on module materials. Work may contain some errors, and technical competence is at a routine level only. Ability to tackle questions and issues not previously encountered is limited. Little critical reflection. Some confusion and immaturity in expression of ideas.
40-49 - a poor piece of work, showing some familiarity with the subject-matter, but with major gaps and serious misconceptions. Only some of the basic requirements of the work set are achieved. Little or no attempt at analysis, synthesis or application of knowledge, and a low level of technical competence, with many errors. Difficulty in beginning to address questions and issues not previously encountered. Inability to reflect critically on an argument or viewpoint.  Ideas are poorly expressed and structured. The author would apparently find it difficult to study the topic at a higher level.
30-39 - work not of passable standard, with serious gaps in knowledge of the subject-matter, and many areas of confusion. Few or none of the basic requirements of the work set are achieved, and there is an inability to apply knowledge. Technical competence is poor, with many serious errors. The student finds it impossible to begin to address questions and issues not previously encountered. The level of expression and structure is very inadequate. The author would apparently not be capable of studying the topic at a higher level.
Below 30 - a very bad piece of work, showing that the author has failed to engage seriously with any of the subject-matter involved, and/or demonstrates total confusion over the requirements of the work set. It is very unlikely that work of a passing standard would be produced even if the author were given the opportunity to repeat the work.