Description
With this criteria amplify developing entrepreneurial graduates putting entrepreneurship at the centre.
Developing Entrepreneurial Graduates
Putting entrepreneurship at the centre of higher education
September 2008
Developing Entrepreneurial Graduates
Putting entrepreneurship at the centre of higher education
Foreword
When I was at university, in the 1980s, ‘business’ was very much a dirty word in academic circles.
In fact, the main interaction between business and universities came at the careers offce – there
was little recognition of the value of bringing business and academia together, and even less
appreciation of the value of preparing students for careers in business.
I am happy to say that the situation has changed dramatically, although there is still a great deal
of work to be done. With the publication of this report, I hope we can give new momentum to
entrepreneurship in higher education.
We need, frst, to refect on the importance of entrepreneurial graduates to the United Kingdom
and the critical role that Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) play in creating an environment where
students can fourish. The UK’s competitiveness hinges on our ability to create business-ready
graduates with entrepreneurial skills. I also believe that HEIs must embrace business education
if they want to appeal to students, offering the entrepreneurship and business courses they
increasingly desire.
Above all, we must create new opportunities for students to develop entrepreneurial mindsets,
behaviours and skills – abilities that will help them not only to create their own futures, but also to
contribute to the UK’s economy and to our standing in the world.
There is a role here for everyone. All stakeholders – from Vice-Chancellors to lecturers, careers
advisers to entrepreneurs, alumni and all types of organisations – have something to contribute.
Although there has been signifcant progress in the HE sector during the past decade, there
is much left to do if we want all students to have the opportunity to access enterprise and
entrepreneurship. It is time for us to meet this challenge head-on.
NESTA, NCGE and CIHE understand that it is imperative for our students to develop their
entrepreneurial abilities, and I am sure that this report – and particularly its Implementation
Framework for Higher Education – will provide valuable and practical guidance for all of us on how
we can achieve these vital goals.
Lord Bilimoria CBE DL
Founder and Chairman, Cobra Beer
National Champion, National Council for Graduate Entrepreneurship
3
4
Developing Entrepreneurial Graduates
Putting entrepreneurship at the centre of higher education
Preface
Governments across the globe are seeking to develop entrepreneurial economies where
competitiveness and growth can thrive and innovation and creativity can drive new ways to improve
the social and economic well-being of their people.
In an environment where high skills lead to high value added, graduates are key to national growth.
Inspired, self-confdent, talented and enterprising graduates are more likely to found and lead
dynamic new ventures and transform any organisation they join or manage.
Developing entrepreneurial graduates is therefore essential to our future success. Universities and
other Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) are ideally placed to expose students to environments
which foster entrepreneurial mindsets.
NESTA, NCGE and CIHE have brought together a panel of international experts to share their
insights and explore these challenges.
The ‘Developing Entrepreneurial Graduates’ report offers a framework to help every HEI to
create an enabling environment as part of a cross-campus approach. Our report has three main
conclusions:
top-level leadership and ownership of this agenda is required; •
academic faculties and students need to fnd innovative ways to appropriate entrepreneurship in •
their subject discipline; and
it is crucial to involve entrepreneurs and entrepreneurial organisations. •
Our three organisations will continue to collaborate, to animate action and to work with
universities, business, government and third sector organisations to ensure our graduates are the
innovators and creative entrepreneurs of the future.
We welcome your views and involvement in this joint endeavour.
Jonathan Kestenbaum Ian Robertson Richard Brown
Chief Executive, NESTA Chief Executive, NCGE Chief Executive, CIHE
5
Acknowledgements
This report was written by: Keith Herrmann, Deputy CEO, CIHE who also co-ordinated the project
on behalf of the project team; Professor Paul Hannon, Director of Research and Education, NCGE;
Dr Juliet Cox, Research Associate, NESTA; and Philip Ternouth, Associate Director, CIHE. Additional
contributions were made by Dr Theresa Crowley, Research Director, NESTA.
NESTA, NCGE and CIHE would like to acknowledge the work of the expert panel and thank them
for their contribution to the Developing Entrepreneurial Graduates project: Dr Elizabeth Gatewood,
Dr Tony Mendes, Prof. Allan Gibb, Uffe Elbaek, Prof. Daniel Hjorth, David Clews and Ian Ritchie.
Thanks also go to Dr David Good at the Cambridge-MIT Institute for hosting the frst panel
meeting at King’s College, Cambridge and for additional contributions to the panel meetings,
and to Mike Carr at BT for hosting the second panel meeting at BT’s headquarters in London.
NESTA is the National Endowment for Science, Technology and the Arts. We invest in early-stage
companies, inform and shape policy, and deliver practical programmes that inspire others to solve
the big challenges of the future.
The National Council for Graduate Entrepreneurship (NCGE) is the UK’s national body focusing on
enhancing the entrepreneurial capacity of the Higher Education sector. We do this by: supporting
long-term cultural change in our universities; shaping the institutional environment to be more
conducive to enterprise and entrepreneurship; increasing the level of graduate entrepreneurial
activity; and informing national policy and practice.
The Council for Industry and Higher Education (CIHE) is a high-level partnership between leading
people from a wide range of businesses, universities and colleges. The Council leads in developing
an agreed agenda on the learning issues at higher education level that affect our international
competitiveness, social cohesion and individual development.
Executive summary
The UK faces the same challenges as those
of most developed countries. Rapid social
change, a volatile economy and worldwide
competition for talented students combine to
make these challenges all the more pressing.
But these are also opportunities for new ideas.
And government has responded with a range
of national policies and initiatives aimed
at achieving a more competitive economy
in which enterprise, entrepreneurship and
innovation are the drivers of growth. Graduates
with entrepreneurial and innovative mindsets,
behaviours and skills are vital to making this
happen. Here, the higher education sector,
through entrepreneurship education, has a
crucial role to play.
But this report shows that entrepreneurship is
not for business alone. Addressing the major
social challenges of our century requires public
bodies and social ventures to recruit graduates
with the skills to transform such challenges into
opportunities for change.
More UK students need to engage in
entrepreneurial activity
Entrepreneurship education is currently taught
primarily through modules in business school
courses and extra-curricular activities.
1
But
UK students need more opportunities to
participate in it. At the same time, traditional
business school entrepreneurship education
needs to change: many students and
academics, especially those in non-business
disciplines, do not see its narrow focus on
business start-up as relevant. HEIs need to
enhance the perception and relevance of
entrepreneurship education, so that both
students and staff recognise the value of
its combination of innovation, creativity,
collaboration and risk-taking skills to a wide
range of disciplines.
Major structural, cultural and attitudinal
barriers are making it hard to embed
entrepreneurship education in HEIs. Many
Vice-Chancellors believe that they have already
introduced it in their institutions; in reality it
rarely enjoys the same status as research or
the pursuit of academic excellence. This lack
of status is in turn compounded by short-
term and unreliable funding. Moreover, there
are academic tensions between traditional
‘instruction’ and the experiential learning,
action-oriented, mentoring and group project
approach needed for effective entrepreneurship
education. Often sitting outside formal
structures, there is a danger that a lack of clear
and coherent objectives will deliver variable
outcomes.
‘Developing Entrepreneurial Graduates’ is a
call for action
The report urges universities to institute a
systematic overhaul of academic disciplines so
that entrepreneurship education is embedded
in every subject. We do so in recognition of the
fact that graduates need more than academic
attainment. To add value, they need to have
the entrepreneurial skills that enable them to
seize and exploit opportunities, solve issues
and problems, generate and communicate
ideas, and make a difference in their
communities.
6
NCGE (2007) ‘Enterprise and 1.
Entrepreneurship in Higher
Education.’ Birmingham:
NCGE.
Our report offers a framework for delivering
entrepreneurship education within HEIs. We
draw on our international panel’s expertise to
develop three guiding themes around which
HEIs can create a culture in which to foster and
develop entrepreneurial graduates:
An enabling institutional environment •
that has clarity of purpose and outcomes,
and builds capacity for entrepreneurship
education across the whole institution. This
has implications for resources, the nature
of performance targets, and leadership
and educator development; it also requires
cultural change at an institutional level.
Engaging internal and external stakeholders •
means talking to national, regional and local
government, funders and employers, as well
as those within HEIs. Stronger relationships
between entrepreneurs and university
leaders, lecturers and tutors are particularly
important if entrepreneurship education is to
be rigorously grounded in academic theory,
while drawing on the fast-changing realities
and practice of commercial and social
entrepreneurship.
Developing entrepreneurial teaching and •
learning practices demands a shift from
transmission models of teaching (learning
‘about’) to experiential learning (learning
‘for’) and offers students techniques
that can be applied in the real world. Our
report calls for learning approaches that
incorporate practical examples from outside
the university into the classroom, and
offer refective practice, ownership and
opportunity to students.
Vice-Chancellors can provide visible
leadership
Achieving this requires co-ordinated action
on campus – starting from the top. Vice-
Chancellors should do more to encourage
academics and entrepreneurship educators
to work with entrepreneurs and students
to overcome any barriers to creating an
entrepreneurial culture in our HEIs. They
should champion entrepreneurship education
across campus and ensure that it becomes a
core part of university life. Vice-Chancellors
can also encourage leading entrepreneurs to
bring new thinking to their HEIs, drawing on
the entrepreneurs’ life experience, to enliven
the theoretical base of entrepreneurship
education. Vice-Chancellors need to incentivise
and reward those academics who engage in
entrepreneurship education. They should use
their infuence to encourage Research Councils
UK (RCUK) to ensure that entrepreneurial
outcomes are given proper recognition in those
impact indicators that measure the social and
economic value of research and knowledge
exchange.
Academics are the enablers of change in the
curriculum
The relevance of entrepreneurship education
should be increased across a more diverse
range of subjects and disciplines. More work
is needed to promote this to teaching and
learning staff. Here, the NCGE Entrepreneurial
Learning Outcomes Framework can help ensure
successful evaluation of learning outcomes.
Academics can also encourage curricular
innovation from other subject disciplines and
learn from the Higher Education Academy
Subject Centres and the Centres for Excellence
in Teaching and Learning (CETLs). As course
leaders, tutors and careers advisers, faculty
members can encourage students to take up
entrepreneurship education opportunities.
They can also demonstrate the importance
and relevance of the skills it fosters to wider
academic achievement.
Entrepreneurship educators can enrich
students’ university experience
Entrepreneurship education can make a
student’s experience of higher education richer
and more fulflling; provided educators offer
stimulating learning experiences. Students
should have the chance to experiment, discover
new ways of thinking, and meet successful
entrepreneurs. They should be encouraged
to explore both theory and practice; building
commercial awareness and developing venture
creation skills. Entrepreneurship education can
both accentuate individual achievement, and
provide opportunities for team-work and the
development of other ‘soft’ skills that are so
valuable to business and society today.
The university itself offers opportunities to
develop these skills, not least through student
unions and societies; students can learn
from taking up roles in these student bodies.
Educators can provide project management
and budgeting training, and teach the other
professional skills needed to carry out these
roles successfully. Such practical roles can help
develop an entrepreneurship curriculum that is
more focused on hands-on experience rather
than theory; one that integrates experience
with the taught curriculum.
7
European Commission (2008) 2.
‘Entrepreneurship in Higher
Education, especially in Non-
business Studies.’ Brussels:
European Commission,
Directorate-General for
Enterprise and Industry.
Business and social entrepreneurs must be
fully involved
Strong links with and input from entrepreneurs
in all sectors are essential to align university
curricula to the needs of employers. Such links
will also enable students to learn from those
with up-to-date expertise. Doing so will give
them the knowledge, experience and abilities
to link theory and practice. Entrepreneurs
may become Entrepreneurial Fellows, guest
lecturers, entrepreneurs-in-residence, mentors,
role models or Professors of Practice. They can
draw in turn on the expertise of academics
by hosting academic placements in their
organisations and can contribute to future
employee development by providing student
placements and offering company projects as
case studies.
Students should seize the opportunities
that entrepreneurial education presents to
enable them to prepare for their futures
Whether they want to build a career in the
private, public or third sector, students
need opportunities to learn and practise
entrepreneurial skills. Positions in student
unions, clubs and societies can offer students
genuine entrepreneurial experiences that
allow for experimentation with new ideas and
concepts. They can also be a source of practical
problem solving, opportunity spotting, project
management, budgeting, communication,
team-work, coping with pressure and managing
complexity; all of which are skills in demand
by employers. HEIs can also offer, through
their links with business and alumni bodies,
the opportunities to network and build social
capital that are part of the essential fabric of a
successful entrepreneurial career in any sector.
Government can support entrepreneurial
education by providing overarching
strategic goals
The UK Government, Welsh Assembly
Government, Scottish Government and
Northern Ireland Executive’s work over the past
decade to embed entrepreneurship education
in primary, secondary, further and higher
education has created a strong foundation to
develop an integrated policy framework that
covers the entire education spectrum from
primary school to university. This would support
and develop the growing consensus across
Europe that entrepreneurship education must
stretch beyond a narrow focus on business
start-up; instead by ‘fostering entrepreneurial
mindsets’
2
it can equip young people with
highly transferable and valuable skills with
which to build their future roles in the economy
and society.
8
9
Contents
Developing Entrepreneurial Graduates
Putting entrepreneurship at the centre of higher education
Part 1: Developing Entrepreneurial Graduates – Opportunities and Challenges 10
Part 2: A Higher Education Implementation Framework for Developing 14
Entrepreneurial Graduates
Principle 1: Creating an enabling institutional environment 14
Principle 2: Engaging stakeholders inside and outside the university 18
Principle 3: Developing entrepreneurial teaching and learning practices 20
Enabling Environments, Stakeholders and Entrepreneurial Practices: 23
a framework for developing more entrepreneurial graduates
Part 3: A Call for Co-ordinated Action by All Stakeholders 24
Vice-Chancellors 24
Academic faculty 26
Entrepreneurship educators 26
Entrepreneurs 27
Students 28
Government 29
Appendix A: NCGE Strategic Models 30
Appendix B: NCGE Entrepreneurial Learning Outcomes Framework 31
Appendix C: Panel Biographies 34
Part 1: Developing Entrepreneurial Graduates –
Opportunities and Challenges
We face profound economic and social
structural changes – the earlier restructuring of
western manufacturing, the shift to service and
knowledge-based economies, globalisation,
and the rise of emerging economies, along
with societal challenges such as environmental
sustainability and ageing populations. These
necessitate innovative and entrepreneurial
responses; not only to deal with such
challenges, but to create opportunities from
them.
3
Like other governments, the UK government
and the devolved administrations have
responded with a range of policies
and initiatives aimed at developing a
more entrepreneurial economy in which
competitiveness and growth thrive and where
innovation and creativity drive new ways of
enhancing social and economic wellbeing.
4
Developing innovative and entrepreneurial
individuals as a response to challenges
One policy response has been to develop
individual capabilities for entrepreneurship
and social innovation. The recent Department
for Innovation, Universities and Skills (DIUS)
White Paper, ‘Innovation Nation’, stresses
the importance of ‘unlocking the talent of all
our people’ to prosper in today’s globalised
economy.
Equally, the Department for Business,
Enterprise and Regulatory Reform (BERR)
‘Enterprise Strategy’ published in March
2008 clearly demonstrates the importance
of enterprise and entrepreneurship to the
future of the UK economy.
5
Broad initiatives
to develop workforce skills,
6
increase technical
skills (often through STEM graduates),
7
promote lifelong learning
8
or encourage
entrepreneurship in the creative industries
9
help contribute to this agenda. However, for
organisations, businesses and communities
to thrive and succeed, there is a need also for
individuals to develop more entrepreneurial
and innovative mindsets, behaviours, skills and
capacities.
10
The role of Higher Education Institutions
(HEIs) in developing entrepreneurial
individuals
In the context of structural change,
government recognition of HEIs as agents
of economic and social growth
11
has led
to support and extra funding (through
initiatives such as the Science and Enterprise
Challenge Fund and the Higher Education
Innovation Fund) to enable HEIs to increase
their engagement with the wider community.
Consequently, HEIs have increasingly become
more involved in regional economic and social
development (through closer business, industry
and third sector collaborations,
12
for example)
and activities such as the commercialisation of
intellectual property.
These initiatives have also emphasised
how HEIs can develop entrepreneurial
and innovative individuals through
entrepreneurship education.
13
Graduates
are seen as key to national growth. Inspired,
self-confdent, talented entrepreneurial
graduates are more likely to found and lead
dynamic new organisations and social ventures
and to have the capacity to transform the
organisations they lead and manage. Through
entrepreneurship education programmes, HEIs
can expose students to environments that
foster entrepreneurial mindsets, behaviours
and capabilities to deal with an increasingly
complex and uncertain world.
14
10
Department for Innovation, 3.
Universities and Skills (2008)
‘Innovation Nation.’ London:
The Stationery Offce;
Department for Business,
Enterprise and Regulatory
Reform (2008) ‘Enterprise:
Unlocking the UK Talent.’
London: The Stationery
Offce.
For example, HM Treasury 4.
has identifed fve drivers of
productivity as investment,
innovation, enterprise, skills
and competition, and the UK
government has set about
investing in, improving and
promoting these drivers to
advance the UK’s economy
and society (HM Treasury
(2000) ‘Productivity in the
UK: The Evidence and the
Government’s Approach.’
London: The Stationery
Offce).
Department for Business, 5.
Enterprise and Regulatory
Reform (2008) op.cit.
As outlined in the Leitch 6.
Review of Skills (Leitch, S.
(2006) ‘Leitch Review of
Skills: Prosperity for all in
the global economy – world
class skills.’ London: HM
Treasury). See Department
for Innovation, Universities
and Skills (2008) ‘World
Class Skills: implementing
the Leitch Review of Skills
in England.’ London: The
Stationery Offce. See
Department for Innovation,
Universities and Skills (2008)
‘Higher Education at Work
– High Skills: High Value.’
London: The Stationery
Offce.
Department for Innovation, 7.
Universities and Skills (2008)
‘Innovation Nation.’ London:
The Stationery Offce,
Chapter 7; Lord Sainsbury
of Turville (2007) ‘The Race
to the Top: A Review of
Government’s Science and
Innovation Policies.’ London:
The Stationery Offce.
See also Smith, H. (2007)
‘STEM Review: the Science,
Technology, Engineering,
Maths Supply Chain.’ London:
CIHE; Welsh Assembly
Government (March 2002)
‘Reaching Higher: Higher
Education and the Learning
Country – A Strategy for
the Higher Education sector
in Wales.’ Cardiff: Welsh
Assembly Government;
Scottish Government (2004)
‘The Competitiveness
of Higher Education in
Scotland, Phase 3: Summary.’
Available at:http://www.
scotland.gov.uk/Resource/
Doc/47171/0028787.pdf.
For example, Department 8.
for Work and Pensions,
Department for Innovation,
Universities and Skills and
the Cabinet Offce Strategy
Unit (2008) ‘Life Chances:
Supporting people to get
on in the labour market.’
Available at:http://www.
dius.gov.uk/publications/
life_chances_180308.pdf;
and Department for Work and
Pensions and Department for
Innovation, Universities and
Skills (2008) ‘Ready for Work,
Skilled for Work: Unlocking
Britain’s talent.’ London: The
Stationery Offce.
Moving towards the entrepreneurial
university
The project partners have addressed
entrepreneurship education in their earlier
work.
15
In ‘Towards the Entrepreneurial
University’
16
the NCGE outlined three strategic
models for developing the entrepreneurial
university: a fully integrated and embedded
model; an intermediate model; and an
external support model (Appendix A). The
report also developed an ‘Entrepreneurial
Learning Outcomes Framework’
17
(Appendix
B) which clarifes what students should learn
from entrepreneurial educational experiences
and aims to infuence curriculum design and
delivery in UK HEIs.
Challenges to developing entrepreneurial
environments within HEIs
Further work by the project partners has
explored the scope to which the desired
entrepreneurial environments and outcomes
were evident in UK HEIs. A mapping study
18
of entrepreneurship education in 127 UK
universities and higher education institutions
found that:
the average level of student engagement in •
entrepreneurship education has grown to 11
per cent, but needs to expand more rapidly;
business schools dominate provision with 61 •
per cent of all delivery, with limited provision
in other departments and faculties;
more than 80 per cent of extra-curricular •
entrepreneurship education activity is funded
from public money, with strong reliance on
short-term funding making such initiatives
inherently fragile; and
fewer than 50 per cent of HEIs display the •
range of key entrepreneurial characteristics,
as suggested in the ‘Toward the
Entrepreneurial University’ report, and need
to transform radically the culture of higher
education.
The ‘Good Practice in Enterprise Development
in UK Higher Education’ report
19
identifed the
potential barriers and challenges in creating
environments which are highly conducive to
developing entrepreneurial and innovative
graduates. These challenges include the
sustainability of current activity given the
fragility of funding mechanisms;
20
low levels of
scale and reach of student engagement; and
questions about the relevance, consistency,
commitment and quality of the experience for
students in non-business subject disciplines.
Box 1 summarises the main barriers and
challenges.
Developing a new approach to
entrepreneurship education
To address these opportunities and challenges,
‘Developing Entrepreneurial Graduates’ brings
together for the frst time the work of the
National Endowment for Science, Technology
11
Department for Culture, 9.
Media and Sport (2007)
‘Creative Britain: New Talents
for a New Economy.’ London:
The Stationery Offce.
NESTA (2007) ‘Education 10.
for Innovation Policy Brief.’
London: NESTA.
Department for Innovation, 11.
Universities and Skills (2008)
‘Innovation Nation.’ London:
The Stationery Offce.
As recommended by the 12.
Lambert Review (Lambert,
R. (2003) ‘Lambert Review
of Business-University
Collaboration.’ London:
HM Treasury). See also
Brown, R. and Ternouth,
P. (2006) ‘International
Competitiveness: Businesses
Working with Universities.’
London: CIHE.
The Dearing Report was 13.
the frst to recommend
that universities encourage
entrepreneurship through
innovative curriculum
design and postgraduate
programmes. See Dearing,
R. (1997) ‘The National
Committee of Inquiry into
Higher Education.’ London:
NCIHE.
Gibb argues that HEIs must 14.
seek to equip students
for a ‘life-world’ of much
greater uncertainty and
complexity involving
frequent occupational, job
and contract status change,
global mobility, adaptation
to different cultures,
working in a world of fuid
organisational structures,
greater probability of
self-employment and wider
responsibilities in family and
social life (Gibb, A. (2005)
‘Towards the Entrepreneurial
University.’ Policy Paper
3, Birmingham: NCGE.
Available at:http://www.
ncge.com/uploads/Exec_
Summary_-_AllanGibb.
pdf. Accessed on 17 August
2008).
See NESTA (2007) 15.
‘Entrepreneurship Education
for the Creative Industries
Policy Brief.’ London:
NESTA; NESTA (2007) ‘Five
Ways Universities drive
Innovation Policy Brief.’
London: NESTA; Hague,
D. and Holmes C. (2006)
‘Oxford Entrepreneurs.’
London: CIHE.
Gibb op. cit. (2005) 16.
Further developed in Gibb, 17.
A. (2006) ‘Entrepreneurial
Learning Outcomes – a
benchmark framework.’
Birmingham: NCGE.
NCGE (2007) ‘Enterprise and 18.
Entrepreneurship in Higher
Education.’ Birmingham:
NCGE.
Botham, R. and Mason, C. 19.
(2007) ‘Good Practice in
Enterprise Development
in UK Higher Education.’
Birmingham: NCGE,
sponsored by NCGE, The
Higher Education Academy,
CIHE, Enterprise Insight
and the DTI Small Business
Service.
Hannon, P. (2007) Enterprise 20.
for all? The Fragility of
Enterprise Provision across
England’s HEIs. ‘Journal
of Small Business and
Enterprise Development.’ 14
(2), pp.183-210.
11
A complex policy environment • in which
funding is short-term, fragile and often
focused on projects/events rather than
on long-term capacity building and
educator development.
Varying degrees of ‘embedding’ •
entrepreneurship education across
institutions.
Evidence of • reliance on short-term
initiative funding and reliance on the
enthusiasm of individuals – both result
in this activity being inherently fragile.
Varying levels of • engagement from
business schools.
Varying extent to which • formal
objectives have been set for
entrepreneurship education and
evaluation methods established.
Many combinations of • different learning
and support arrangements with some
variable evidence of effectiveness.
Focus on • conventional pedagogies
– tension exists between traditional,
formal academic teaching methods and
assessment and opportunities for ‘live’
learning in which entrepreneurial practice
and experience may be introduced.
Box 1: Challenges limiting HEIs’ capability to deliver
entrepreneurial graduates
12
and the Arts (NESTA), the National Council
for Graduate Entrepreneurship (NCGE)
and the Council for Industry and Higher
Education (CIHE) to address the urgent need
for HEIs to create a radical new approach to
entrepreneurship in tertiary education.
Drawing on our past work – as well as the
experiences and recommendations of our
expert panel – we outline a new approach
to higher education that moves its focus
and purpose from transmitting subject
knowledge to developing graduates who
have the knowledge, skills, motivation and
entrepreneurial capacity to address economic
and social needs, both in the workplace and in
their communities.
Gaining from an international panel’s
expertise
To undertake this project, the project partners
convened an international panel of experts
from the feld of entrepreneurship education
and practice, outlined below (Appendix C has
extended panel member profles). This panel
brought a range of different perspectives
and insights to the project process, including
technology entrepreneurship, the creative
industries, social enterprise and higher
education.
Dr Elizabeth Gatewood – Director, Offce •
of Entrepreneurship and Liberal Arts, Wake
Forest University, North Carolina; developing
approaches to entrepreneurship in the liberal
arts.
Dr Tony Mendes – Executive Director of the •
Academy for Entrepreneurial Leadership at
the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign;
entrepreneurial educator who formerly
served as Director of College Initiatives at the
Kauffman Foundation.
Prof. Allan Gibb – Durham University, •
England; lead consultant to the NCGE on
entrepreneurship education, and engaged in
the feld of entrepreneurship, small business
and enterprise development for over 30
years.
Mr Uffe Elbaek – Founder, KaosPilots, •
Denmark; developed alternative approaches
to higher education and entrepreneurial
approaches to learning.
Prof. Daniel Hjorth – Research Professor, •
Copenhagen Business School, Denmark;
initiator of the Nordic annual workshop on
‘Entrepreneurship Learning’ (in Stockholm).
Mr David Clews – Director of the Higher •
Education Academy for Art, Design
and Media; and author of ‘Creating
Entrepreneurship’ (ADM-HEA, 2007),
the joint ADM-HEA/NESTA report on
entrepreneurship education for the creative
industries.
Mr Ian Ritchie – technology entrepreneur, •
founder of OWL (a forerunner to the world-
wide web), Non-executive Chairman of
Iomart plc, Scapa, Computer Applications
Service, Caspian Learning and the Interactive
Design Institute, Scotland.
The panel members joined the project
partners in a series of face-to-face and virtual
meetings using an emergent methodology and
collaborative approach. The panel was asked
to explore the broad range of institutional,
cultural and structural issues and challenges
Entrepreneurship is not solely about
business skills or starting new ventures; it is
a way of thinking and behaving relevant to
all parts of society and the economy.
Entrepreneurship education is a process
which develops individuals’ mindsets,
behaviours, skills and capabilities and can
be applied to create value in a range of
contexts and environments from the public
sector, charities, universities and social
enterprises to corporate organisations and
new venture start-ups.
Entrepreneurial and enterprising graduates
should be equipped to fulfl their potential
and to create their own futures.
Box 2: The project adopted a broad approach to entrepreneurship
and entrepreneurship education
(Figure 1) to ‘mainstreaming enterprise and
entrepreneurship’ in HEIs. This process enabled
us to learn from their insights, experiences and
expertise. Parts 2 and 3 include examples and
case studies from panel members’ experiences.
Thus, a rich diversity of experience and
practice has helped shape the Implementation
Framework outlined in this report.
The approach taken by the report to
entrepreneurship and entrepreneurship
education is outlined in Box 2.
21
The report
uses the term Higher Education Institutions
(HEIs) to refer to universities and other higher
education institutions.
How this report seeks to add value
This report outlines a framework through which
UK HEIs can create the right environments
to develop enterprising and entrepreneurial
graduates.
Based on the panel members’ expertise, this
report aims to build on their experiences – in
addition to the previous work carried out
by the project partners – by providing an
Implementation Framework for HEIs to help
them to create more enabling environments
conducive to developing entrepreneurial
graduates. In doing so, the report also
provides guidance on how to put models of
entrepreneurial HEIs into practice and to deliver
the desired learning outcomes in the NCGE’s
Entrepreneurial Learning Outcomes Framework.
We recognise that this is a challenging
endeavour, but this report provides HEIs
with the impetus and practical support to
embed entrepreneurship at the centre of their
activities.
This report is addressed to Vice-Chancellors,
academics, entrepreneurship educators,
22
entrepreneurs, students and government.
Part 3 outlines a number of actions for key
stakeholders emphasising that ‘there is
something for everyone to do’ in developing
entrepreneurial graduates.
13 13
The report also 21.
frames enterprise and
entrepreneurship as
follows: The enterprise
concept… focuses upon
the development of the
‘enterprising person and
entrepreneurial mindset’.
The former constitutes
a set of personal skills,
attributes, behavioural and
motivational capacities
which can be used in any
context (social, work, leisure
etc). The entrepreneurial
concept… focuses upon the
application of enterprising
skills in the context of
setting up a new venture,
developing/growing an
existing venture and
designing an entrepreneurial
organisation (one in which
the capacity for effective
use of enterprising skills
will be enhanced). Available
at:http://www.ncge.com
[Accessed on 17th August
2008].
By educators we mean all 22.
staff engaged in teaching
and supporting learning in
entrepreneurship across the
institution.
Figure 1: Challenges and opportunities for ‘mainstreaming’ enterprise and
entrepreneurship education
Entrepreneurship
education
Need for more
co-ordinated
government
policy
Need for
coherent
sense of clarity
and purpose
Varying
levels of
university
support
Fragility
of funding
Inconsistent
institutional
embedding
Need to
strengthen
links with
industry
Need for
shared
framework
for measuring
impact
Need for more
engagement
with non-business
disciplines
More
opportunities for
‘live’ learning
needed
Need for more
innovative
pedagogies
Need for more
qualified
entrepreneurship
educators
Part 2: A Higher Education Implementation Framework
for Developing Entrepreneurial Graduates
Our report offers an Implementation
Framework for making HEIs more conducive to
the development of entrepreneurial mindsets,
behaviours, skills and opportunities. Here we
outline and describe this framework and the
key principles that underpin its structure.
The project acknowledged that the traditional
business school model of entrepreneurship
education and its narrow focus on the ‘business
plan’ is alienating for many non-business
students and academic faculty.
23
The co-
location of entrepreneurship with technology
and business innovation has developed an
over-emphasis on this ‘business’ focus.
The project identifed that a strategic
shift is needed in our understanding of
entrepreneurship today to reposition its role
and contribution to the student experience.
The project examined how universities
interact with business and society and how
academic faculties can fnd innovative ways to
appropriate entrepreneurship to their subject
disciplines, beneftting teaching and research in
the process.
Figure 2 presents an Implementation
Framework for Higher Education. It connects
a set of underpinning principles to three main
themes: Enabling Environments, Engaging
Stakeholders and Entrepreneurial Practices.
The Framework emphasises the need for an
overarching institutional Enabling Environment
that is highly conducive to enterprise and
entrepreneurship development; within which
key stakeholders can effectively support
the achievement of desired entrepreneurial
outcomes; through the adoption of a set
of Entrepreneurial Practices that ensure
that students and graduates gain realistic
entrepreneurial insights that enable them
to thrive and succeed in the complex,
uncertain and ambiguous economic and social
environments of the future.
The Implementation Framework should help
to confgure a more detailed campus-wide
strategy for entrepreneurship education. It
is underpinned by a set of guiding principles
informed by the experiences and views of the
international expert panel members:
The need for an enabling institutional 1.
environment.
The engagement of key stakeholders 2.
within and outside the institution.
The development of entrepreneurial 3.
pedagogic approaches in teaching,
learning and support practices.
Principle 1: Creating an enabling
institutional environment
Universities and other HEIs can provide the
right environments for student enterprise and
graduate entrepreneurship. Such environments
should inspire and motivate individuals to
fnd opportunities, acquire resources and
take action in a variety of contexts that have
relevance to their lives and aspirations. In such
environments, there should be clarity about
entrepreneurial outcomes, how these align with
appropriate ways of learning, and what learning
needs to take place.
Clarity of purpose and clarity of outcomes •
Aligning institutional entrepreneurship
goals with clear outcomes and outputs
is essential to exploiting the potential
14
Research with students in 23.
arts, design and media found
that they “…are suspicious
of commercial motivations
and popular depictions of
entrepreneurial activity…
they are uncomfortable
with popular depictions
of entrepreneurship in
television programmes
such as The Apprentice
and Dragons’ Den,
because they regard
them as confrontational,
and concerned with
commercial gain at the
expense of society and
the environment.” In Art,
Design, Media Subject
Centre (2007) ‘Creating
Entrepreneurship:
Entrepreneurship Education
for the Creative Industries.’
Brighton: ADM-HEA,
University of Brighton; and
HEA and NESTA (2007)
‘Creating Entrepreneurship:
Entrepreneurship Education
for the Creative Industries.’
London: HEA and NESTA.
impact of individual learning activities and
experiences. The creation of an overarching
institutional enterprise and entrepreneurship
framework can guide strategy and aid impact
measurement.
Institutional capacity building •
There is a strong imperative to develop a
whole-campus approach, reaching students
in all subjects and at all levels of learning
and experience.
24
Introducing an enterprise
and entrepreneurship strategy will have
implications for resources and performance
targets. It may also require changes in a
university’s culture and practices, together
with additional leadership and educator
development.
Institutional reach •
The activity is relevant and applicable to
both students and academics,
25
to research
and teaching, and for the relationships
universities have with the local and regional
economy. This is needed to situate the
experience of entrepreneurship in any
subject discipline
26
and place it at the centre
of activities. Academics should adopt an
entrepreneurial approach to both teaching
and curiosity-driven research if students are
to learn in an environment which encourages
entrepreneurial thinking and behaviour.
Achieving Enabling Environments
Visible leadership from the top
The panel highlighted the strategic and
symbolic importance of strong visible
leadership in a university. This is vital to
transform the understanding and perceptions
of those who shape an institution’s strategic
direction and the environment in which change
can be enabled. Here the Vice-Chancellor
15
Hulsey, L., Rosenberg, 24.
L. and Kim, B. (2006)
‘Seeding Entrepreneurship
Across Campus – early
implementation experiences
of the Kauffman Campuses
Initiative.’ Kansas: Kauffman
Foundation; See also Cone,
J. (2007) Entrepreneurship
on Campus: Why the Real
Mission is Cultural Change.
In ‘Kauffman Thoughtbook’
Kansas: Kauffman
Foundation, pp.78-86.
Mendes, A., Kehoe, C. 25.
and Dowd, K. (2006)
‘Academic Entrepreneurship:
Possibilities and Pitfalls.’
Academy for Entrepreneurial
Leadership, University
of Illinois at Urbana-
Champaign.
The Swedish experience 26.
shows that entrepreneurship
education is embraced
by engineering/technical
schools, art schools and (but
more slowly) by teachers’
colleges. Data from 2005
shows that more than
70 Swedish universities
provide entrepreneurship
courses and programmes;
Johannisson, B., Madsén, T.,
Hjorth, D., Ivarsson, U., and
Öien, A. (1997) ‘Ds 1997:
3 I Entrepreneurskapets
Tecken – En Studie av
Skolning i Förnyelse.’
Stockholm: Fritzes. This is
a Swedish Governmental
report commissioned by the
Department of Trade and
Commerce. (English Title: ‘In
the Sign of Entrepreneurship
– A Study of Learning
Renewal.’).
Figure 2: An Implementation Framework for Higher Education
Social enterprises
Entrepreneurs and businesses
Students clubs and societies
Engaging
stakeholders
Academic faculty
Vice-Chancellors
Capacity
building
Institutional
embeddedness
Visible leadership
Institutional
culture
Clarity of
purpose and
outcomes
Cross-campus reach
Engagement
with practice
Entrepreneurship
educators
Developing
Entrepreneurial
Graduates
Enabling
environments
Experiential approaches
Experimentation and discovery
Innovative pedagogues
Entrepreneurial
practices
Multidisciplinary
and the senior management team are crucial.
They must give an explicit demonstration of
their strong commitment to entrepreneurship
education if others are to take it seriously.
This includes due reward and recognition for
members of staff who work well in partnership
with entrepreneurs, businesses and social
enterprises. Institutions can consider:
Demonstrating how adopting a vision a.
and purpose for ‘entrepreneurship
education’ across the campus is crucial to
repositioning the role of the university in
the economy of the future.
Designing the overall student experience b.
to ensure that graduates are more
employable, enterprising and innovative,
and are more able to make a social and
economic contribution.
Demonstrating the importance of the c.
entrepreneur’s real-life experiences,
understanding business and venture
creation, and developing graduate
entrepreneurial capacities.
Institutional embeddedness
The success of such an enabling environment
will depend on the extent to which it is part of
the day-to-day operations of the university.
Enterprise and entrepreneurship should not
be set apart, but established as a core part
of ‘university life’. Achieving this will be
contingent upon a range of factors:
A shared and integrated institutional •
framework for enterprise and
entrepreneurship.
Personnel and recruitment policies. •
Faculty-level recognition in career •
development, performance and rewards of
the value of engagement in entrepreneurship
16
Now operating across 14 universities in
the US, the Foundation has invested $48
million in its Kauffman Campus Initiative,
and more recently also worked with the
Burton D. Morgan Foundation to invest
in fve colleges in Northeast Ohio. This
initiative has made a concerted effort to
expand entrepreneurship education beyond
the business school to the full student
body. Securing university commitment
to this broad ambition is the single most
important criterion that the Kauffman
Foundation uses to assign its funding. It
also requires universities to:
involve their president (Vice-Chancellor) •
personally in the sign-off and
presentation of their application to the
Kauffman panel;
provide for cross-campus coverage of •
entrepreneurship education to make it
a common and accessible activity for all
students;
match-fund the Kauffman investment in •
their university with their own resources;
provide a model for disseminating the •
learning from their experiences to other
US universities; and
offer a view on the likelihood that the •
initiative would change campus culture
and produce a sustainable entrepreneurial
spirit on campus.
All campus initiatives involve faculty
and students from a variety of academic
disciplines and take entrepreneurship
education beyond the conventional
business school model of new business
ventures. Some universities have chosen
to create minor degree programmes,
offer introductory courses for incoming
freshmen, expand the role of technology
transfer, or build or expand community-
based businesses that beneft students
and surrounding communities. Some
are broadening existing entrepreneurial
activities on liberal arts or technology-
oriented campuses. Others are focused on
developing Hispanic-American or African-
American entrepreneurship, and cross-
cultural business creation.
Source: Kauffman Foundation, 2008.
www.kauffman.org
Case example 1: Securing high-level leadership – lessons from
the Kauffman Foundation
education, supported by CPD and other staff
development and training.
Greater application of a wide range of •
pedagogic tools.
Integrating entrepreneurial learning •
opportunities and outcomes within core
curriculum provision.
Good connections between teaching, •
learning, knowledge exchange and support.
Exploiting opportunities to fund increased •
access for students and graduates
to experiences of enterprise and
entrepreneurship.
Broadening the institutional reach of
activity
This report identifes the main institutional
stakeholders with a role in the embedding
process. Higher Education leaders are in a
position to ensure that all staff and academics
are fully involved. They can incentivise links
with local entrepreneurs, businesses and
the community that support enterprise and
entrepreneurship learning and development
opportunities. Relationships with policy and
regulatory institutions also enable students
17
The Academy for Entrepreneurial
Leadership at the University has
nine separate initiatives to extend
entrepreneurship across the campus.
The Faculty Fellows programme provides •
grants of $15,000 to academics to
develop entrepreneurship modules in
their subjects (curriculum development).
This encourages commitment by faculty
to incorporate it into the core curriculum
– 40 courses have been developed so far.
An Entrepreneurship Research Fund •
provides grants of $2,000 for research in
entrepreneurship and how it is relevant
to any subject discipline (available to all
2,000 faculty members on campus).
The Graduate Scholars programme offers •
opportunities to graduate students
who wish to develop the study of
entrepreneurship as a component of their
research and teaching portfolio (available
to all 10,000 graduate students on
campus).
An Entrepreneurial Opportunity Fund •
provides awards of up to $5,000 (open
to all faculty and students) for ideas
which expand the understanding and
appreciation of entrepreneurship on
campus.
The Academy Affliates programme •
(available to faculty, university
administrators and leaders across the
university) is a network of faculty and
community members from diverse
disciplines who want to foster the study
and growth of entrepreneurship. They are
a vital link between the Academy and a
diverse array of academic units.
Entrepreneurship Lectures and co- •
sponsored events provide opportunities
to collaborate with numerous research
centres and academic units on campus.
Student Registered organisations •
in entrepreneurship – the Academy
currently provides fnancial support and
advice to fve student organisations.
Scholars in Residence programme •
(involving three scholars selected by
the Academy from various disciplines
and rotated annually) hosts ‘real’
entrepreneurs to share their experiences
with students and academic faculty.
Research Support Services (available to all •
faculty and departments) and community
outreach and engagement programmes
(including internships with local
entrepreneurial companies, workshops,
consulting and grant programmes for
high growth entrepreneurial frms).
Source: Dr Tony Mendes, Academy for Entrepreneurial
Leadership, 2008.
www.business.uiuc.edu/ael/
Case example 2: Embedding entrepreneurship education across the
campus – lessons from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
to understand the context within which
entrepreneurship is developed. This also
extends to the university’s wider responsibility
to its students; how does the institution ensure
that its students are prepared for the future
world, one they need to and will help create?
How does the careers service support student
placements in entrepreneurial organisations
and team-based project work with local
companies and social enterprises?
Principle 2: Engaging stakeholders
inside and outside the university
Entrepreneurship does not take place in
isolation from its broader environment;
continuous learning is sustained through
relationships with stakeholders and others.
Indeed, successful entrepreneurship is more
likely where stakeholder relationships provide
learning opportunities and facilitate the
creation and exchange of tacit knowledge.
Stakeholder engagement •
It is important to involve as many
stakeholders as possible in the provision of
entrepreneurship education. Their diverse
voices are refected in this report. Acquiring
shared ownership of the inputs, processes
and outcomes from entrepreneurship
education is likely to enhance the overall
impact of institutional activities.
Stakeholders inside and outside HE •
The stakeholder community can include:
university leadership and administrators;
students and alumni; academic faculty
and staff; entrepreneurship educators and
support; local entrepreneurs; funders of
all types; small and large businesses in the
private and public sectors; government;
and regional, national and international
organisations.
Valuing an international perspective •
The contribution of internal and external
stakeholders can enrich the learning
environment. In an entrepreneurial
context, this extends to recognising the
value in learning across cultures and
academic disciplines. Hence for students
these experiences should accommodate
an international dimension.
27
Exposure
to entrepreneurship in an international
setting helps students develop their global
awareness.
Approaches to engaging stakeholders
The stakeholder community for
entrepreneurship education is broad and
diverse. HEIs need to consider developing
coherent and connected strategies in order to
engage stakeholders around a shared vision
for entrepreneurship education, both internally
and externally.
Engaging internal stakeholders
The drivers for academic success are in
themselves changing and thus requiring an
entrepreneurial response from academic
departments. This has engendered a shift in
organisational culture through an increasing
focus on external income generation;
demonstrating economic and social impact; the
international competition for securing research
funding; recruiting students; and achieving
academic excellence internationally.
To encourage greater engagement in
entrepreneurial activity across academic
departments, it is important that HEIs raise
its status by recognising and rewarding those
that are successful in engaging stakeholders
to exploit new entrepreneurial opportunities.
HEIs need to review how best to equip staff to
effectively work with stakeholders outside of
the institution.
Dedicated entrepreneurship educators often
have less status and prestige than academics
who contribute more to the Research
Assessment Exercise.
28
This is particularly true
in knowledge-driven disciplines. In order to
develop more integrated approaches HEIs need
to consider how to address this issue. We can
learn from entrepreneurship education in the
creative industries where practice is considered
as important as research.
Raising the relevance and profle of
entrepreneurship across all academic
departments requires it to be placed at the
heart of all university practices. Academic
entrepreneurs can also serve as infuential role
models and provide useful ways to demonstrate
the relevance of entrepreneurial action in
different subject areas through international
examples of inspiring practice.
As the Government’s desire for more
meaningful links with business grows, HEIs may
begin to change their staff recruitment and
reward mechanisms. There are examples in the
UK of a reward and promotion strategy that
deliberately rewards excellence in teaching,
18
Brown, R. Barnes, J. 27.
and Archer, W. (2008
forthcoming) ‘Global
Horizons and the Role of
Employers.’ London: CIHE.
The Higher Education 28.
Funding Council for England
(HEFCE) is working to
develop new arrangements
for the assessment and
funding of research. The new
arrangements – the Research
Excellence Framework (REF)
– will be introduced after the
2008 Research Assessment
Exercise (RAE).
research and stakeholder engagement (work
with businesses and the local community).
Exploiting academic links with industry
There is a growing emphasis on the need
for improved links between business and
academia. These are important not only
for the organisations involved, but also for
developing knowledge exchange and for
deepening the absorptive capacity of local and
regional economies by attracting and retaining
entrepreneurial graduates from the UK and
overseas.
29
Academic links with industry come in many
forms: using university research to develop
solutions to industry-specifc problems;
research contracts; business relationship
management; student placements; and spin-
outs and licensing of university technology.
These are vital for ensuring that the curriculum
is linked with industry. The approach found
in creative industries education, which links
curriculum development and the student
experience through ongoing engagement with
business (a relationship-based approach),
shows how this can work well. This approach
provides both the student and the academic
with ‘real’ exposure to creative companies,
ensuring that the learning of a craft or skill
is directly related to its application. In doing
so, it weaves a seamless interface between
theory (academic curriculum) and practice
(entrepreneurial action).
30
Engaging with and supporting alumni
Links with business and the community also
extend to alumni. At Wake Forest University,
North Carolina, the Offce for Entrepreneurship
and Liberal Arts actively engages
entrepreneurial alumni who are also parents of
students attending the university. The Offce
involves parents and alumni on advisory panels
to put pressure on the university to support
the entrepreneurship programme. Using
entrepreneurial alumni from particular subject
disciplines as role models and guest lecturers
can also help to demonstrate the relevance of
entrepreneurship in any subject discipline.
In 2008, NCGE published the results of a
commissioned analysis of The Sunday Times
‘Top 100’ listings for Fast Growth (Fast Track)
and Technology Companies (Tech Track).
The fndings provide clear evidence of the
contributions that graduates are making to
our most innovative and dynamic young UK
companies:
31
19
NESTA (2007) op. cit. See 29.
also Abreu, M., Grinevich,
V., Hughes, A. and Ternouth,
P. (2008 forthcoming)
‘University-Business Links in
the UK: Boundary Spanning,
Gatekeepers and the Process
of Knowledge Exchange.’
London: CIHE.
This is the ideal scenario, 30.
but the research from
‘Creating Entrepreneurship’
(ADM-HEA, 2007) has
shown that this perspective
has its faws. New research
that ADM is undertaking for
the Department for Culture,
Media and Sport (DCMS)
is currently examining
this issue and will make
recommendations on how to
improve these engagements
with industry.
NCGE (2007) ‘Analysis 31.
of Founders of the UK’s
Fastest Growing Private
Companies.’ Birmingham:
NCGE. Available at: http://
www.ncge.com/fles/40.pdf
[Accessed on 17th August
2008].
In Scotland, knowledge exchange schemes
are designed to change university
behaviour by rewarding business-university
collaboration and generating enterprising
outcomes. The Prospekt Partnership
at the University of Edinburgh aims to
boost activities in knowledge exchange,
entrepreneurship and public outreach with:
a dedicated commercialisation team who •
proactively engage with industry;
a hub for informatics teaching, •
commercialising advanced and applied
computing research and industry
collaboration;
programmes and activities to encourage •
entrepreneurship and resultant new
venture businesses; and
a platform for the international promotion •
of the School of Informatics and leverage
of its global alumni network.
These state-of-the-art enterprise facilities
provide a hub for researchers, students,
entrepreneurs and investors to stimulate
breakthrough research, generate industrial
applications and add value to the Scottish
economy. The University of Edinburgh’s
School of Informatics is considered one
of Scotland’s national assets and one of
the top fve locations in the world for
computing science and information-related
research.
Source: Ian Ritchie, taken from University of
Edinburgh, Informatics News, 23rd June 2006.
www.inf.ed.ac.uk/
Case example 3: Prospecting for entrepreneurial outcomes –
lessons from the University of Edinburgh
“University graduates founded/managed
70 per cent of all fast growth companies
and 84 per cent of the top technology
companies. These companies had grown
their total sales revenues from £950 million
to £4.3 billion in the 3 years to 2006/07
with an average annual sales growth rate of
111 per cent and employing some 38,000
people.”
Often graduates seek to start up an
entrepreneurial venture when they are around
30. Universities should do more to help alumni
with their entrepreneurial ambitions by offering
support or providing access to opportunities,
venture capital, business planning and risk
assessment, market research, and management
development training. Alumni could also
become entrepreneurial role models to inspire
students and HEIs could engage with them to
generate endowment funds.
Recent graduates often cite lack of experience
and self-confdence as barriers to engaging in
an entrepreneurial opportunity. Universities
can support the development of personal
confdence and provide relevant exposure to
experienced entrepreneurs to reduce these
barriers.
Overall, UK universities should be encouraged
to adopt a broad-based whole-campus
approach that creates an enabling institutional
environment which attracts entrepreneurial
people and supports the application of
innovative learning practices.
Principle 3: Developing
entrepreneurial teaching and
learning practices
The delivery of the desired entrepreneurial
outcomes challenges HEIs and educators to
review and refect on what needs to be taught
and learnt and how the appropriate learning
environments and approaches can be created.
32
Such practices should be clearly aligned with
existing goals, outcomes and assessment
processes.
Learning environments and pedagogies •
The development of learners’ entrepreneurial
capacities
33
involves developing their
20
Fiet, J. (2001) The 32.
Pedagogical Side of
Entrepreneurship Theory.
‘Journal of Business
Venturing.’ 16 (2), pp.101-
117.
Sarasvathy, S. (2007) 33.
‘What makes Entrepreneurs
Entrepreneurial?’
Charlottesville: Darden
Graduate School of Business,
University of Virginia.
At Wake Forest University a focus on •
winning over prominent members of
faculty in key departments ensured
there was early leadership in the feld.
Using such leaders to support the
entrepreneurship agenda and lend
credibility was crucial to embedding
entrepreneurship education more broadly.
Encouraging early adopters helped to pull
through demand.
To engage students, the focus is on •
providing different types of learning
experience outside the classroom to
attract their attention. The courses are
framed around innovative problem-
solving (not new venture creation) using
projects and group work.
Seed grants are available, especially for •
supporting internships which provide
students with an opportunity to scope
out and explore an ‘open challenge’ on
any ‘entrepreneurial or creative’ issue
through a year of independent study.
The Offce of Entrepreneurship and •
Liberal Arts uses an advisory council of
parents and alumni to create relevance
in the learning experience, build links
with business and put pressure on the
university to respond to parents and
alumni as stakeholders supporting the
entrepreneurship programme.
First year (fresher) seminars provide •
an out-of-curriculum experience of
entrepreneurship. This provides a way
of getting students ‘hooked’ early on in
their university lives. Second and third
year modules are also offered to provide
progression in the learning experience.
Source: Dr Elizabeth Gatewood, Offce of
Entrepreneurship and Liberal Arts, 2008.
www.entrepreneurship.wfu.edu/
Case example 4: Finding early adopters – lessons from Wake
Forest University, North Carolina
mindsets, attitudes, belief systems,
34
self-
effcacy, emotions and personal values as
much as their technical knowledge and skills.
This is particularly important if the goal is to
increase entrepreneurial propensity and not
just personal desirability or feasibility. It is
about translating ‘I want to’ and ‘I can’ into ‘I
will’ and ‘I am’. Achieving this transformation
requires a learning model that emphasises
experience, action and refective practices,
and offers ownership and opportunity to the
learner.
35
The application of a wide range of
innovative pedagogies ensures that every
type of learner can engage meaningfully.
36
Embedding the ‘entrepreneurial life- •
world’
Increasing graduates’ capacity for
entrepreneurial action requires building their
self-confdence and self-effcacy.
37
Exposure
to entrepreneurial people, organisations
and environments is essential. The
entrepreneurial learning opportunity needs
therefore to embed experiences that enable
learners to experience entrepreneurial ways
of thinking, behaving and acting, and to be
responsible for their own actions and future
through personal discovery, performance,
experimentation and learning from failure.
Developing entrepreneurial teaching and
learning
There is a clear need to shift from transmission
models of teaching (learning ‘about’) to
experiential learning (learning ‘for’), where
students can learn entrepreneurial techniques
that can be applied in a broad range of
settings. Experience is crucial for understanding
and embedding entrepreneurial concepts
and can be delivered through innovative
pedagogies that challenge students, encourage
input from outside the university and bring
‘real world’ experience into the classroom or
laboratory.
Developing engaging learning practices
It is important that students experience
learning practices that are relevant for
achieving the desired entrepreneurial
outcomes. Experience from Sweden, Denmark,
the US and the UK shows that educators need
to have the freedom to frame student learning
opportunities in a number of ways:
Typically, the ‘entrepreneurial life-world’ •
resonates with students in disciplines where
the learning is practice-based. Pedagogic
practices include high levels of learning-
through-doing, problem creation and
solving, and project-centred learning that
often simulates ‘real-world’ situations.
Hence educators should incorporate
experimentation, discovery, practice,
refection on theory, and opportunities for
students to learn from each other, into their
practices.
Use multi-disciplinary approaches which •
involve students and academics from a range
of departments – bringing different forms of
knowledge and perspectives to the learning
process.
Ensure fexibility so that the diffusion of •
learning allows students to reconfgure their
knowledge, juxtapose different approaches,
be adventurous, be playful and adopt self-
directed styles of learning.
Situate or contextualise entrepreneurship •
around innovation, creativity, collaboration
and problem solving, rather than focusing
solely on new venture creation.
Develop practical mechanisms to embed •
a broad experience of entrepreneurship
that includes understanding business and
social enterprise and the new venture
creation process. However, this should
extend to cover learning how to recognise
opportunities, take risks, think strategically,
work fexibly, develop resilience, manage
complexity, cope with loneliness and
acquire the more generic employability skills
needed for the workplace (team-working,
communication skills, commercial awareness
and problem creation and solving).
A project or practice-based learning
process, rather than one that is theoretical,
makes learning relevant to a range of
applications. This also requires a language
for entrepreneurship in HE that recognises
its importance in contexts beyond business;
38
there is much to learn from education in arts,
drama, design and media.
Immersion in practice places the practitioner
at the centre of the learning experience. The
use of drama and performance techniques is an
essential part of the entrepreneurial learning
process as many entrepreneurs are continually
‘acting’ and ‘performing’ in their many roles.
Hence practitioners are fully recognised for
their contribution and are highly valued by
academics.
39
The ‘Creating Entrepreneurship’ report
40
provides an excellent overview of education
models and approaches which place
21
Elbaek, U. (2006) 34.
‘KaosPilots A-Z.’ Aarhus:
KaosCommunication.
Hjorth, D. and Johannisson, 35.
B. (2007) Learning as an
Entrepreneurial Process.
In Fayolle, A. (ed.)
‘Handbook of Research in
Entrepreneurship Education.’
Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
NCGE through its 36.
development of
the International
Entrepreneurship Educators
Programme has produced a
series of ‘Pedagogic Briefng
Notes’ for enterprise and
entrepreneurship educators.
A Compendium of over 50
pedagogies will be published
in 2008/09.
Cooper, S. and Lucas, W. 37.
(2007) Enhancing Self-
Effcacy for Entrepreneurship
and Innovation. In Good,
D., Greenwald, S., Cox, R.
and Goldman, M. (eds.)
‘University Collaboration
for Innovation: Lessons
from the Cambridge-MIT
Institute.’ Rotterdam:
Sense Publishers. This
work used Bandura’s model
of self-effcacy to test if
entrepreneurship education
enhanced self-confdence
and entrepreneurial intent.
For more on Bandura’s
work on self-effcacy, see
Bandura, A. (1997) ‘Self-
effcacy: The Exercise of
Control.’ New York: Freeman.
Hjorth, D. and Johannisson, 38.
B. (1997) Training for
Entrepreneurship: Playing
and Language Games.
‘In IntEnt97, conference
proceedings, Monterey Bay,
1997.’ Aldershot: Ashgate
Publishers
The Work Foundation 39.
(2007) ‘Staying Ahead: the
Economic Performance of
the UK’s Creative Industries.’
London: The Work
Foundation; ADM-HEA
(2007) op. cit.
entrepreneurial learning at the intersection
between theory and practice (see Case example
6).
Embedding pedagogic approaches that
work in practice
There are many examples of good practice,
though it is not possible to present them all
in this report.
41
The biggest challenge is not
in developing more good practice, but in
embedding the breadth of entrepreneurship
education pedagogies across the diversity of
student learning experiences. Two important
points emphasised by our panel members are
however outlined here:
Using student placements to enhance the •
learning
Opportunities for practice can be provided
by making student placements and other
forms of business engagement part of
the curriculum. These activities can (a)
enhance the student learning experience;
(b) provide universities with a vehicle to
build links with business; and (c) over time
build communities of practice that involve
outside organisations, academics, students
and the institution. Students can also bring
new thinking and ideas to an organisation
they work with on a project or placement.
But it is crucial that student placements help
deliver relevant learning outcomes, and that
businesses or organisations taking students
work with academics to ensure that these
activities make a helpful contribution to the
learning process; otherwise, they can be
particularly damaging.
42
Student placements
can also offer opportunities for new venture
creation and provide students with ‘real’
entrepreneurial experiences.
43
Enhancing self-directed learning •
International experience also shows that the
success of student engagement with learning
for entrepreneurship depends on students’
level of ambition and commitment: their
desire for self-development and self-directed
learning and levels of self-effcacy.
44
To a
large degree, entrepreneurship is centred
on the individual – hence the importance
of students seeing their entrepreneurial
experience develop in line with their
aspirations. Entrepreneurship education may
be relevant across all subject disciplines but
these guidelines also recognise that this is
not an activity for all.
22
ADM-HEA (2007) op. cit. 40.
For further work on this 41.
see: European Commission
(2008) ‘Entrepreneurship
in Higher Education,
especially in Non-business
Studies.’ Brussels: European
Commission, Directorate-
General for Enterprise and
Industry; Botham, R. and
Mason, C. (2007) op. cit.
The NCGE has developed a
series of ‘Pedagogic Briefng
Notes (see footnote above).
Lucas, W. (2007) 42.
‘Enhancing the Value of
Work Experience for the
Student and the Company.’
In conference proceedings
EDHEE (Education and
High Growth Innovation)
workshop, Kings College,
Cambridge-MIT Initiative.
The ‘SPEED’ Project in the 43.
UK is run by a consortium of
UK universities and provides
student funding for creating
and running a company for
one year.
Cooper, S. and Lucas, W. 44.
(2007) op. cit.
At the Universities of Stockholm
and Malmö, a Masters Programme in
entrepreneurship is offered to students
from diverse felds such as fne arts,
medicine, engineering, biology and
business.
The programme invites students to •
approach entrepreneurship as part
of society rather than simply part of
business – it is framed as a way of
existence.
Enabling students to learn from each •
other is a central part of the programme.
Students work with businesses on a •
real-life development project. This allows
them to learn ‘in’ entrepreneurship and
creating knowledge ‘for’ as well as ‘about’
entrepreneurship.
Student projects focus on: (1) life-images •
of entrepreneurship – entrepreneurs
visit the programme and tell stories;
students write a report refecting upon
their learning from these ‘live cases’; (2)
an entrepreneurial project – students
can choose from: engaging in an
entrepreneurial venture, developing their
own business plan, or investigating a
topic from an entrepreneurial perspective.
Source: Professor Daniel Hjorth and
Professor Bengt Johannisson, 2006.
www.cbs.dk
Case example 5: Learning as an entrepreneurial process – lessons
from the Universities of Stockholm and Malmö
Enabling Environments,
Stakeholders and Entrepreneurial
Practices: a framework for
developing more entrepreneurial
graduates
Our framework has been underpinned by a
number of key principles which have been
brought together under three themes: the
Enabling Environment; Engaging Stakeholders;
and Entrepreneurial Practices. These can
contribute to strategic and collective
action in HEIs to enhance opportunities for
entrepreneurial graduates, and to initiate
an institutional step-change and movement
towards creating a more entrepreneurial
culture.
45
Institutions that are committed
to contributing to the development of
entrepreneurial graduates demonstrate the
approaches, practices and vision outlined in
this report. They may be described as being
imbued with an ‘entrepreneurial spirit’.
46
However it is clear that this alone is
insuffcient.
47
We need clear metrics and
impact measures to assess this entrepreneurial
contribution and its effects on students and
graduates, staff and the institution, on the
local community and on economic and social
development.
23
Cherwitz, R. (2005) Creating 45.
a Culture of Intellectual
Entrepreneurship. ‘Academe.’
91 (4), July/August.
Gibb, A. and Hannon, 46.
P. (2006) Towards the
Entrepreneurial University.
‘International Journal
of Entrepreneurship
Education.’ 4, pp.73-110.
See also the criteria for
the NCGE-sponsored THE
‘Entrepreneurial University
of the Year’ Award which
includes: the institutional
environment – leadership
and culture; student
engagement – application
and attitude; innovative
staff – curricula design
and pedagogies; impact –
entrepreneurial outcomes.
Clark, B. (2004) ‘Sustaining 47.
Change in Universities’
Society for Research into
Higher Education.’ London:
Open University Press.
One model emerging from the HEA-
ADM research suggests the following
key elements for delivering robust
entrepreneurship education for the creative
industries:
A free-standing subject-focused module •
or components for entrepreneurship
education aimed at delivering knowledge
and skills for and about entrepreneurship.
The learning within these courses is •
part of the core curriculum. Learning
outcomes are developed in practice-
based modules.
Entrepreneurial behaviours, attributes •
and skills are developed through direct
engagement with industry. The form of
engagement is wide ranging and may
include work placements, contributions to
curriculum delivery and assessment and
industry-based assignments by creative
industries professionals and other
specialists.
Pedagogies that support deep learning •
approaches by focusing on situated
and project-based learning and have
high currency for art, design and media
students.
Source: David Clews, taken from ADM-HEA (2007).
www.adm.heacademy.ac.uk/
Case example 6: HEA-ADM emerging models – lessons from
entrepreneurship education in the creative industries
Part 3: A Call for Co-ordinated Action by All Stakeholders
Our project has demonstrated the importance
of internal and external stakeholder
engagement to the successful and effective
development of entrepreneurial graduates.
Internally, institutional leaders, faculty staff,
educators and student organisations should
connect with careers and employability support
teams, incubators and knowledge transfer
offces. Externally, the meaningful engagement
of policymakers, alumni, local entrepreneurs,
funders and private and public sector
organisations (large and small) can help to
shape entrepreneurship education strategy and
practice and create entrepreneurial opportunity
and experiences for students and staff.
Understanding the aspirations and needs
of key stakeholders provides the potential
for coalescing interests, pooling resources
and addressing strategic challenges through
sustainable partnerships. The international
panel emphasised the importance of
stakeholders taking collective and co-ordinated
action. Figure 3 outlines the typical stakeholder
landscape surrounding any such university or
HEI.
Recommendations for key stakeholder
actions
The Implementation Framework presented
in this report has a strong stakeholder focus.
Its purpose is to guide all stakeholders in
creating the Enabling Environments that
are conducive to developing entrepreneurial
graduates. Successful implementation demands
commitment and action from key stakeholder
groups, including those identifed in Figure
3. Our international panel has highlighted a
number of stakeholder actions that should
help deliver desirable outcomes. These actions
would ensure a campus-wide approach to
implementing the Framework.
The Priority Actions identifed below are
not meant to be prescriptive. They provide
examples of Entrepreneurial Practice from
across the globe.
Vice-Chancellors
Champion enterprise and entrepreneurship •
education with a vision, purpose and strategy
that supports a cross-campus opportunity
available to all students and academic faculty
and that delivers clear entrepreneurial
outcomes both inside and outside the
university.
Encourage a more co-ordinated approach •
that ties in student societies, the careers
service, student placement schemes, senior
management, all academic faculties, science
parks, incubators and other knowledge
exchange activities.
Lead changes to quality assurance (QA) •
protocols to facilitate company projects and
other forms of engagement.
Invest in staff development that enhances •
professional capability in enterprise and
entrepreneurship education, not least
in their application of a wider base of
pedagogic tools. This should also inform the
development of assessment systems that
motivate and develop more entrepreneurial
graduates.
24
Make bold changes to reward and •
remuneration frameworks to recognise the
entrepreneurial behaviour of academics and
practitioners who work with entrepreneurial
organisations in business and the community.
The spillovers from the co-creation of new
knowledge and practices
48
generated from
these interactions and relationships should
permeate the learning environment and
improve the student experience. This may
encourage greater interaction between
academics, entrepreneurial organisations and
students, thereby strengthening the nexus
between theory, concept and practice.
Give entrepreneurs status in universities – as •
academic adjuncts, visiting Entrepreneurial
Fellows, entrepreneurs-in-residence or
Professors of Practice.
Work to infuence the Research Councils UK •
(RCUK) to change their impact indicators
25
Abreu, M. 48. et al. (2008
forthcoming) op. cit.
Figure 3: The typical stakeholder landscape for entrepreneurship in Higher Education
Alumni
Vice-
Chancellors
Entrepreneurship
educators
Academic
faculty
Local
entrepreneurs
Students
Social
enterprises
Local
community
Third sector
organisations
EEUK
HE agencies
3
NESTA
Enterprise
support
NDPBs and
government
agencies
2
Government
1
Large
employers
and SMEs
NCGE
CIHE
Funding Councils
RCUK
TSB
UKTI
2. HM Treasury
DIUS
BERR
1. DCSF
DCMS
RDAs
Scottish Government
Welsh Assembly Government
Northern Ireland Executive
3. HEA
CETLs
QAA
AURIL
UNICO
Enterprise
Focused
HEIs
Key:
HM Treasury - Her Majesty’s Treasury
DIUS - Department for Innovation, Universities & Skills
BERR - Department for Business, Enterprise & Regulatory
Reform
DCSF - Department for Children, Schools and Families
DCMS - Department for Culture, Media and Sport
RDAs - Regional Development Agencies
RCUK - Research Councils UK
TSB - Technology Strategy Board
UKTI - UK Trade and Investment
NDPB – Non-departmental public body
HEA - Higher Education Academy
CETLs - Centres for Excellence in Teaching and Learning
QAA - Qualifcations Assurance Agency
AURIL - Association of University Research and Industry Links
UNICO - The University Companies Association
CIHE - Council for Industry and Higher Education
NESTA - National Endowment for Science, Technology and
the Arts
NCGE - National Council for Graduate Entrepreneurship
EEUK – Enterprise Educators UK
for measuring the social and economic
value of research so that they recognise
entrepreneurial outcomes.
Academic faculty
Show how entrepreneurship education •
is relevant across diverse subjects and
disciplines, and promote it to teaching staff.
Leverage links with business, entrepreneurial •
alumni and social enterprises that can
help to demonstrate the relevance of
entrepreneurship in any subject discipline.
Leverage business involvement from •
research, knowledge exchange and the
exploitation of intellectual property (IP) to
demonstrate the connectedness between
the worlds of entrepreneurship and higher
education.
Encourage and recruit the ‘next generation’ •
of entrepreneurship educators, provide
opportunities for students to learn from each
other and provide more entrepreneurship
training for educators in both business
and non-business disciplines. Find ways to
engage
49
and animate academic colleagues,
and create a vibrant and active network of
entrepreneur educators across campuses and
institutions.
Use the NCGE’s Entrepreneurial Learning •
Outcomes Framework to ensure that the
teaching and learning environment achieves
the outcomes suggested in Appendix B.
Learn from the Higher Education Academy •
Subject Centres
50
and the Centres for
Excellence in Teaching and Learning
51
(CETLs) to encourage curricular innovation
from other subject disciplines.
Entrepreneurship educators
Encourage curricular design that can •
introduce entrepreneurship into any subject
discipline. Collaboration across different
faculties is essential for helping academics
appropriate their understanding and
application of entrepreneurship in their
subject discipline.
Support learning approaches that accentuate •
individual pursuit of achievement while
26
Mendes, A. (2004) ‘The 49.
Academy Needs Assessment
Survey: Findings and
Implications.’ Urbana-
Champaign: Academy for
Entrepreneurial Leadership,
University of Illinois at
Urbana-Champaign.
See www.heacademy.ac.uk 50.
See www.hefce.ac.uk/ 51.
learning/TInits/cetl/
The Entrepreneurship Affliates Programme
is a network of like-minded entrepreneurial
educators, faculty and administrators.
This network binds educators across the •
campus and engages them in numerous
activities throughout the year, ending in
an annual celebration dinner.
Members of this affliate network •
feel empowered to suggest changes
in their departments that will expand
entrepreneurial concepts and practices.
The university Provost also convened •
an ‘entrepreneurship at Illinois’ panel,
charged with designing comprehensive
strategies that will result in Illinois being
a truly ‘entrepreneurial university’.
The rewards are not only monetary; •
they include substantial recognition
where collaboration is rewarded through
the Vice-Chancellor’s Innovation and
Entrepreneurship Awards Scheme to
celebrate and recognise academic
achievement in entrepreneurship
education. Started with six entrants from
over 2,500 academic staff, there are now
so many applicants the Academy can only
consider one in three applicants for entry
to the programme.
Source: Dr Tony Mendes, Academy for Entrepreneurial
Leadership, 2008.
www.business.uiuc.edu/ael
Case example 7: Empowering educators – lessons from the
Entrepreneurship Affliates Programme, University of Illinois,
Urbana-Champaign
allowing suffcient attention to team-work
and other ‘soft’ skills.
Create opportunities within the formal •
curriculum for practical experience and
refection. This may require considerable
change to the QA systems, the methods
of teaching and assessment and a more
balanced approach to taught and non-taught
curricula.
Exploit available resources to enhance the •
provision of entrepreneurship education as a
cross-campus offering.
Encourage students to re-learn from •
experience, explore theory and practice and
focus on building commercial awareness and
venture creation skills that can be deployed
in any context, not just in setting up a
business.
Develop a broad base of learning models and •
approaches that enable experimentation,
support self-discovery and provide access to
practitioners via experiential and effectuation
models of learning.
52
Encourage students to initiate and join clubs •
and societies as these provide practical
opportunities to develop enterprise skills
and experience entrepreneurial action in
practice. Educators can provide training on
project management, budgeting and other
professional skills needed.
Secure opportunities meaningfully to engage •
entrepreneurial alumni as role models,
mentors and speakers. Links with alumni
can also extend to offering support on
access to capital, advice on IP, management
development and other training where they
have nascent entrepreneurial ambitions.
Engage industry practitioners in curriculum •
innovation and offering extended
entrepreneurial experiences and learning
opportunities through ‘real’ projects and
internships.
Entrepreneurs
Serve as a guest lecturer, entrepreneur-in- •
residence, mentor, role model, and member
of curriculum advisory committees or
Professor of Practice.
Collaborate more proactively with academics •
to provide an entrepreneurial learning
experience for students
53
through student
placements and providing projects as case
studies.
Work as Entrepreneurial Fellows in a •
meaningful relationship with educators
27
Sarasvathy, S. (2007) 52.
op. cit., p.2. An adapted
explanation from Sarasvathy
explains that “the word
‘effectual’ is the inverse
of ‘causal’. In general, in
MBA programmes across
the world, students are
taught causal or predictive
reasoning. Causal
rationality begins with a
pre-determined goal and
a given set of means, and
seeks to identify the optimal
– fastest, cheapest, most
effcient, etc. – alternative
to achieve the given
goal. Effectual reasoning,
however, does not begin
with a specifc goal. Instead,
it begins with a given set
of means and allows goals
to emerge contingently
over time from the varied
imagination and diverse
aspirations of entrepreneurs
and the people they interact
with.”
Abreu, M. 53. et al. (2008
forthcoming) op. cit.; Lucas,
W. (2007) op. cit.
At Wake Forest University approaches and
strategies have included:
Using entrepreneurial alumni from •
particular subject disciplines as role
models and guest lecturers. As adjunct
faculty, entrepreneurs can be useful in
outlining the case for entrepreneurship
education – they are enthusiasts by
nature and often want to work to
advance entrepreneurial interests at their
alma mater.
Co-teaching courses with entrepreneurs •
and regular faculty as a way of bridging
theory and practice.
Using entrepreneurs as advisers or •
mentors to student ventures or as
a sounding board for students and
academics who are considering creating a
spin-out business.
Using entrepreneurs on panels for •
business plan competitions or to provide
input where grant funding is allocated to
students on a proof of concept basis to
explore possible business ideas.
Source: Dr Elizabeth Gatewood, Offce of
Entrepreneurship and Liberal Arts, 2008.
www.entrepreneurship.wfu.edu/
Case example 8: Engaging entrepreneurs – lessons from
entrepreneurs in practice at Wake Forest University, North Carolina
.
where they share ownership of the design
and delivery of entrepreneurial outcomes.
This could involve entrepreneurs and
business people providing input to align the
curriculum with industry/employer needs
and acting as external examiners on module
design where required.
Host Academic Fellows on placements to •
ensure knowledge exchange operates in
both directions. This fosters improved links
between academia and the outside world
and can enhance and enrich the learning
process by using these external contributors
in teaching and knowledge exchange.
Students
Seek opportunities to engage with •
entrepreneurial networks to develop
contacts, build the social capital needed to
take entrepreneurial action, and have access
to contacts for proof of concept, funding to
support an idea, and market testing.
Enrol on entrepreneurship courses and •
participate in extra-curricular activities
including student clubs and societies,
competitions and social enterprises. These
allow experimentation with ideas and
concepts, provide opportunities to network
28
The KaosPilots programme in Denmark
adopts a value-based approach to
entrepreneurship centred on a new
understanding of modern entrepreneurship.
This recognises that an entrepreneurial
education leads not only to students
getting good jobs, but that it enables them
to create new and exciting jobs for the
future. This requires:
an institutional culture and learning •
experience based on the practice of
entrepreneurship;
a learning process based on a •
commitment to being playful, creative,
curious, solving ‘real world’ problems,
street-wise (in touch with communities)
and compassionate;
an approach that creates the right •
balance between ‘head, heart and hand –
the balance between the action-oriented,
the intellectual and the emotional aspects
of learning’;
an experience where students learn •
together and take risks together by
co-creating, testing, displaying and
developing solutions to global social
challenges; and
a connection with social innovation and •
people working in an emerging ‘fourth
sector’ where business, not-for-proft and
community interact.
The KaosPilots programme also
disconnects entrepreneurship and ‘money’
through embedding the learning of
entrepreneurship in ‘values’. By adopting
a broad defnition of entrepreneurship
– defned as opportunity identifcation
and value creation – and by channelling
creativity and innovation to create value in
the community, students are more easily
engaged. A values-based approach situates
their learning within a framework that
allows students to shape their own meaning
of entrepreneurship.
KaosPilots shows that entrepreneurial
students are generally not ‘business studies’
students. ‘Business’ per se is often alien to
KaosPilots students – they fnd purpose in
something that offers a gateway to their
future, and that in turn requires them to be
entrepreneurial.
For many students, the KaosPilots
experience is more about fnding a career
with meaning and purpose. Many students
focus not on existing careers, but on
creating the careers that they want to have
– careers which provide a sense of meaning,
purpose and autonomy.
Source: Uffe Elbaek, KaosPilots A-Z, 2006.
www.kaospilots.dk
Case example 9: Celebrating entrepreneurship in action – lessons
from KaosPilots in Denmark
and can help to inform career path choices;
all of which provide genuine entrepreneurial
experiences. Organisations value graduates
who can demonstrate their entrepreneurial
and personal skills in problem creating
and solving, opportunity spotting, project
management, budgeting, team-work,
communication skills and coping with
pressure.
Determine to create a career which provides •
a sense of meaning, purpose and autonomy.
Participate in international programmes and •
exchanges to experience entrepreneurship,
learning and work experiences outside the
UK.
Government
Develop a set of overarching strategic goals, •
such as in the Norwegian Government
example,
54
where key Ministries have
collaborated to develop a national policy
framework that sets out clear objectives
and addresses progression across the entire
education spectrum.
Implement the European Union’s Oslo •
Agenda that established a commitment
to promote the integration of the
learning experience of enterprise and
entrepreneurship from primary school
through to secondary school, vocational
education and university across all subject
areas.
55
There is also an emerging consensus
across Europe that entrepreneurship
education must stretch beyond a narrow
focus on business start-up to equip young
people with the personal skills, attributes and
behaviours that focus on creativity, initiative,
self-confdence and practical experience.
56
Infuence government agencies such as •
the funding councils, quality assurance
agencies and regional development agencies
to further enhance their support for
entrepreneurship in higher education.
29
Norwegian Directorate for 54.
Education and Training
(2006) ‘Norwegian Strategy
Plan for Entrepreneurship in
Education.’ Oslo: Norwegian
Directorate for Education
and Training.
European Commission 55.
(2006) ‘Entrepreneurship
Education in Europe:
fostering entrepreneurial
mindsets through education
and learning.’ Oslo:
European Commission.
Ibid. Recommendations from 56.
Workshop 3.
Appendix A: NCGE Strategic Models
57
30
Source: Gibb, A. (2005) 57.
‘Towards an Entrepreneurial
University.’ Policy Paper
3. Birmingham: NCGE.
Available at:http://www.
ncge.com/uploads/Exec_
Summary_-_AllanGibb.pdf
[Accessed on 17 August
2008].
The Optimum Fully Integrated Model would
include the following characteristics:
University-wide application of •
entrepreneurship teaching.
Joined with offce of technology transfer. •
Innovative pedagogical support for every •
department.
Life-long learning approach in all •
departments.
All departments and subjects covered. •
Emphasis upon interdisciplinary teaching, •
degrees and centres.
Professorial status for Research and •
Development excellence.
‘Development’ sabbaticals for staff •
wishing to commercialise IP.
Professors of Practice, Adjunct •
Professors, Visiting Development Fellows.
Entrepreneur teams invited in to harvest ideas. •
Social integration of entrepreneurs and •
status awarded to them.
Entrepreneurship as an offce of the Vice- •
Chancellor.
All activities academic-led but in •
partnership with external stakeholders.
Research and development activity •
rewarded in all departments.
Active stakeholder participation with •
university staff in joint ventures.
Open approach to intellectual property •
and investment in university ventures.
Staff of departments trained to develop •
and offer entrepreneurship courses.
An Intermediate Model, more adjacent to the
university, but still led by it, might include:
A specialist centre, university-owned but •
adjacent to the university.
Headed by university professor. •
Programme and pedagogical •
development/emphasis.
Development of specialist entrepreneurship •
programme offer to all departments.
Offers of staff training. •
Centre established as stakeholder •
partnership.
Staff appointments open to external •
stakeholders.
Harvesting departmental staff who wish •
to engage in entrepreneurship.
Joint ventures and programmes with •
science park and technology transfer
processes.
Engagement with panels of entrepreneurs •
to encourage linking with departments to
harness technology.
Links to business support services and •
venture capitalists.
Model 1: The Fully Integrated and Embedded (Optimum) Model
Model 2: The Intermediate – University-Led Model
A more External Business Services Support
Model might be a compromise embracing:
A specialist centre, stakeholder-owned •
but with university participation.
Headed by business executive. •
Located alongside technology transfer or •
science park activity.
Training programme offers to •
departments.
Counselling and business support services •
offer to university staff and students.
Promotions and other activities. •
Joint ventures with science parks and •
technology transfer agents.
Engagement with the entrepreneurial and •
stakeholder community.
Partnerships with interested academic •
staff.
Model 3: The External Support Model – Stakeholder-Driven
31
Appendix B: NCGE Entrepreneurial Learning Outcomes
Framework
58
To what degree does the programme help students to
‘feel’ the world of:
living with uncertainty and complexity •
having to do everything under pressure •
coping with loneliness •
holistic management •
no sell, no income •
no cash in hand, no income •
building know-who and trust relationships •
learning by doing, copying, making things up, •
problem solving
managing interdependencies •
working fexibly and long hours •
Students clearly empathise
with, understand and ‘feel’ the
life-world of the entrepreneur
B. Creating empathy with the entrepreneurial life-world
To what degree does a programme have activities that
seek clearly to develop:
opportunity seeking •
initiative taking •
ownership of a development •
commitment to see things through •
personal locus of control (autonomy) •
intuitive decision making with limited information •
networking capacity •
strategic thinking •
negotiation capacity •
selling/persuasive capacity •
achievement orientation •
incremental risk taking •
Key entrepreneurial behaviours,
skills and attitudes have been
developed (these will need to
be agreed and clearly set out)
A. Entrepreneurial behaviour, attitude and skill development
Source: Gibb, A. (2005) 58.
‘Towards an Entrepreneurial
University.’ Policy Paper
3. Birmingham: NCGE.
Available at:http://www.
ncge.com/uploads/Exec_
Summary_-_AllanGibb.pdf
[Accessed on 17 August
2008].
To what degree does the programme seek to inculcate
and create empathy with key entrepreneurial values:
strong sense of independence •
distrust of bureaucracy and its values •
self made/self belief •
strong sense of ownership •
belief that rewards come with own effort •
hard work brings its rewards •
belief that can make things happen •
strong action orientation •
belief in informal arrangements •
strong belief in the value of know-who and trust •
strong belief in freedom to take action •
belief in the individual and community not the state •
Key entrepreneurial values have
been inculcated
C. Key entrepreneurial values
32
To what degree does the programme take students
through:
the total process of setting up an organisation from •
idea to survival and provide understanding of what
challenges will arise at each stage
how to handle these challenges •
Students understand the
process (stages) of setting up
an organisation, the associated
tasks and learning needs
E. Understanding of processes of business entry and tasks
To what degree does the programme help students to:
understand the benefts from an entrepreneurship •
career
compare with career as an employee •
have some entrepreneurial ‘heroes as friends’ •
acquaintances
have images of entrepreneurial people ‘just like them’ •
Motivation towards a career in
entrepreneurship has been built
and students clearly understand
the comparative benefts
D. Motivation to entrepreneurship career
To what degree does the programme build the
capacity to:
fnd an idea •
appraise an idea •
see problems as opportunities •
identify the key people to be infuenced in any •
development
build the know-who •
learn from relationships •
assess business development needs •
know where to look for answers •
improve emotional self awareness, manage and read •
emotions and handle relationships
constantly see yourself and the business through •
the eyes of stakeholders and particularly customers
Students have the key generic
competencies associated with
entrepreneurship (generic how-
to’s)
F. Generic entrepreneurship competencies
33
To what degree does the programme help students to:
see products and services as combinations of benefts •
develop a total service package •
price a product service •
identify and approach good customers •
appraise and learn from competition •
monitor the environment with limited resource •
choose appropriate sales strategy and manage it •
identify the appropriate scale of a business to make •
a living
set standards for operations performance and •
manage them
fnance the business appropriately from different •
sources
develop a business plan as a relationship •
communication instrument
acquire appropriate systems to manage cash, •
payments, collections, profts and costs
select a good accountant •
manage, with minimum fuss, statutory requirements •
Students have a grasp of key
business how-to’s associated
with the start-up process
G. Key minimum business how-to’s
How does the programme help students to:
identify all key stakeholders impacting upon any •
venture
understand the needs of all key stakeholders at the •
start–up and survival stage
know how to educate stakeholders •
know how to learn from them •
know how best to build and manage the •
relationship
Students understand the
nature of the relationships
they need to develop with
key stakeholders and are
familiarised with them
H. Managing relationships
Appendix C: Panel Biographies
Professor Allan Gibb BA PhD OBE
Professor Emeritus, Durham University, England
Allan Gibb, former chair and Director of the Small Business Centre at Durham Business School,
England, has been engaged in the feld of Entrepreneurship and Small Business Enterprise
development for over 30 years. He has experience in over 80 countries around the world, has been
adviser to many governments, governmental organisations and non-government entities and has
worked with all of the major international development organisations. He has broad expertise
ranging from the feld of education at all levels, to small and medium-sized business creation,
development and internationalisation, and large company restructuring and intrapreneurial
development. He has published widely on issues covering enterprise/entrepreneurial education,
SME policy development, entrepreneurial restructuring of organisations and management
development.
Uffe Elbaek
Founder and former principal of The KaosPilots – International School of New Business Design and
Social Innovation, Denmark
Uffe Elbaek was founder and principal of the KaosPilots in Denmark (from 1991 to 2006), a
world-renowned centre for value-based entrepreneurship education – it provides an educational
experience like none other. Uffe is also a regular contributor to a range of leading Danish and
International newspapers and magazines. In November 2001 and again in 2005 Uffe Elbaek was
elected to Aarhus City Council (Denmark’s second city) for the Danish Social-Liberal Party.
He is also on the board of several Danish and international organisations, and has received
numerous honours and awards, ranging from his appointment as ambassador for the local premier
league football club AGF to Knight of the Dannebrog. Uffe is currently the CEO of the World
Outgames 2009 being held in Copenhagen next year and Special Advisor for the new leadership
team at KaosPilots.
Professor Daniel Hjorth, PhD
Professor of Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management, Copenhagen Business School,
Denmark
Daniel Hjorth is Research Director (for the Organisational Creativity Group) at the Department
of Management, Politics and Philosophy, Copenhagen Business School. Daniel is (together with
Chris Steyaert) editor for a series of four books (2003, 2004, 2006, and 2009 published by Edward
Elgar) that represent a new movement in entrepreneurship studies. His work is also published
34
in ‘Organization’, ‘Human Relations’, ‘Journal of Management Inquiry’, ‘Journal of Management
Education’, and ‘Journal of Business Venturing’.
Daniel is presently focusing on Organisational Creativity; Aesthetics in Business Competitiveness;
and A Philosophy of Entrepreneurship. He was (together with Magnus Aronsson) in 1998 founder
of the now Nordic yearly workshop on ‘Entrepreneurship and Learning’ (in Stockholm) and has
wide experience of developing and teaching entrepreneurship at business schools, teachers’
colleges, technical universities, and art schools.
David Clews
Director of the Higher Education Academy Art, Design and Media Subject Centre, England
David Clews is a registered architect and after ten years in practice became a full-time academic.
He is the author of ‘Creating Entrepreneurship’, a report with NESTA based on research into
Entrepreneurship Education for the Creative Industries. He has spoken at conferences and HEIs on
enhancing graduate entrepreneurship in art, design and media subjects.
David is an executive member of the Design Educators’ Association and the Group for Learning in
Art and Design, an independent assessor for the Architects Registration Board and a member of the
Royal Institution of British Architects Visiting Board. The Subject Centre supports a wide range of
research and development aimed at the link between learning and professional practice. David is
currently supervising a research project on the links between creative industry and higher education
on behalf of the Department for Culture, Media and Sport.
Dr Elizabeth J. Gatewood
Director of the University Offce of Entrepreneurship and Liberal Arts at Wake Forest University, USA
Elizabeth (Betsy) Gatewood leads an entrepreneurship centre focused on creating and sustaining
an environment that fosters entrepreneurial thinking across the entire campus community at Wake
Forest University. She most recently served as the Jack M. Gill Chair of Entrepreneurship and
Director of The Johnson Centre for Entrepreneurship and Innovation at Indiana University. Betsy
has been named as one of the top ten best entrepreneurship centre directors in the United States
by Entrepreneur Magazine.
She is a member of the ‘Diana’ project, a national research study of women business owners and
equity capital access. She and her colleagues were winners of the FSF-NUTEK International Award
for scientifc work of outstanding quality and importance in the feld of entrepreneurship. Her
research has been published in numerous leading academic journals in the area of entrepreneurship
and new venture creation. Betsy also serves on numerous Boards and is recipient of many business
and education awards.
Ian C. Ritchie CBE, FREng, FRSE
Non-executive Chairman of Iomart plc, Scapa, Computer Applications Service, Caspian Learning
and the Interactive Design Institute, Scotland
Ian Ritchie founded OWL in 1984 that pioneered hypertext application development (a forerunner
to the world-wide web) and sold the company to Panasonic in 1989. Since then he has been
involved in over 25 start-up high-tech businesses, including Digital Bridges, Voxar, VIS Interactive,
Sonaptic and Orbital.
He has been a board member of Scottish Enterprise and of the Scottish Further and Higher
Education Funding Council (SFC) and was a founding board member of the Scottish Institute for
Enterprise. He was awarded a CBE in the 2003 New Year Honours list for services to education and
entrepreneurship.
35
Dr Tony Mendes
Executive Director of the Academy for Entrepreneurial Leadership (AEL) at the University of Illinois
at Urbana-Champaign, USA.
Tony Mendes is an acclaimed entrepreneurial educator who formerly served as Director of College
Initiatives at the Kauffman Foundation. There, he managed a programme grant portfolio with over
200 colleges and universities. In his role with the Academy, Tony is responsible for the integration
of an entrepreneurship curriculum in all of the academic units of the university. He is responsible
for developing and delivering curricular and co-curricular initiatives targeted to faculty, student and
administrative interests.
Prior to joining the Kauffman Foundation, he was founder and president of Mendes and Associates,
a private consulting company. His teaching experience includes courses at numerous leading US
universities. Tony also serves on numerous Boards and was the founding director of ‘Entrepreneurs
Without Borders’, a university-based organisation dedicated to expanding entrepreneurial initiative
throughout the world.
36
Published by NESTA: September 2008
NESTA
1 Plough Place
London EC4A 1DE
[email protected]
www.nesta.org.uk
NCGE
3 Priestley Wharf
Holt Street
Birmingham B7 4BN
[email protected]
www.ncge.com
CIHE
Studio 11, Tiger House
Burton Street
London WC1H 9BY
[email protected]
www.cihe-uk.com
doc_936198157.pdf
With this criteria amplify developing entrepreneurial graduates putting entrepreneurship at the centre.
Developing Entrepreneurial Graduates
Putting entrepreneurship at the centre of higher education
September 2008
Developing Entrepreneurial Graduates
Putting entrepreneurship at the centre of higher education
Foreword
When I was at university, in the 1980s, ‘business’ was very much a dirty word in academic circles.
In fact, the main interaction between business and universities came at the careers offce – there
was little recognition of the value of bringing business and academia together, and even less
appreciation of the value of preparing students for careers in business.
I am happy to say that the situation has changed dramatically, although there is still a great deal
of work to be done. With the publication of this report, I hope we can give new momentum to
entrepreneurship in higher education.
We need, frst, to refect on the importance of entrepreneurial graduates to the United Kingdom
and the critical role that Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) play in creating an environment where
students can fourish. The UK’s competitiveness hinges on our ability to create business-ready
graduates with entrepreneurial skills. I also believe that HEIs must embrace business education
if they want to appeal to students, offering the entrepreneurship and business courses they
increasingly desire.
Above all, we must create new opportunities for students to develop entrepreneurial mindsets,
behaviours and skills – abilities that will help them not only to create their own futures, but also to
contribute to the UK’s economy and to our standing in the world.
There is a role here for everyone. All stakeholders – from Vice-Chancellors to lecturers, careers
advisers to entrepreneurs, alumni and all types of organisations – have something to contribute.
Although there has been signifcant progress in the HE sector during the past decade, there
is much left to do if we want all students to have the opportunity to access enterprise and
entrepreneurship. It is time for us to meet this challenge head-on.
NESTA, NCGE and CIHE understand that it is imperative for our students to develop their
entrepreneurial abilities, and I am sure that this report – and particularly its Implementation
Framework for Higher Education – will provide valuable and practical guidance for all of us on how
we can achieve these vital goals.
Lord Bilimoria CBE DL
Founder and Chairman, Cobra Beer
National Champion, National Council for Graduate Entrepreneurship
3
4
Developing Entrepreneurial Graduates
Putting entrepreneurship at the centre of higher education
Preface
Governments across the globe are seeking to develop entrepreneurial economies where
competitiveness and growth can thrive and innovation and creativity can drive new ways to improve
the social and economic well-being of their people.
In an environment where high skills lead to high value added, graduates are key to national growth.
Inspired, self-confdent, talented and enterprising graduates are more likely to found and lead
dynamic new ventures and transform any organisation they join or manage.
Developing entrepreneurial graduates is therefore essential to our future success. Universities and
other Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) are ideally placed to expose students to environments
which foster entrepreneurial mindsets.
NESTA, NCGE and CIHE have brought together a panel of international experts to share their
insights and explore these challenges.
The ‘Developing Entrepreneurial Graduates’ report offers a framework to help every HEI to
create an enabling environment as part of a cross-campus approach. Our report has three main
conclusions:
top-level leadership and ownership of this agenda is required; •
academic faculties and students need to fnd innovative ways to appropriate entrepreneurship in •
their subject discipline; and
it is crucial to involve entrepreneurs and entrepreneurial organisations. •
Our three organisations will continue to collaborate, to animate action and to work with
universities, business, government and third sector organisations to ensure our graduates are the
innovators and creative entrepreneurs of the future.
We welcome your views and involvement in this joint endeavour.
Jonathan Kestenbaum Ian Robertson Richard Brown
Chief Executive, NESTA Chief Executive, NCGE Chief Executive, CIHE
5
Acknowledgements
This report was written by: Keith Herrmann, Deputy CEO, CIHE who also co-ordinated the project
on behalf of the project team; Professor Paul Hannon, Director of Research and Education, NCGE;
Dr Juliet Cox, Research Associate, NESTA; and Philip Ternouth, Associate Director, CIHE. Additional
contributions were made by Dr Theresa Crowley, Research Director, NESTA.
NESTA, NCGE and CIHE would like to acknowledge the work of the expert panel and thank them
for their contribution to the Developing Entrepreneurial Graduates project: Dr Elizabeth Gatewood,
Dr Tony Mendes, Prof. Allan Gibb, Uffe Elbaek, Prof. Daniel Hjorth, David Clews and Ian Ritchie.
Thanks also go to Dr David Good at the Cambridge-MIT Institute for hosting the frst panel
meeting at King’s College, Cambridge and for additional contributions to the panel meetings,
and to Mike Carr at BT for hosting the second panel meeting at BT’s headquarters in London.
NESTA is the National Endowment for Science, Technology and the Arts. We invest in early-stage
companies, inform and shape policy, and deliver practical programmes that inspire others to solve
the big challenges of the future.
The National Council for Graduate Entrepreneurship (NCGE) is the UK’s national body focusing on
enhancing the entrepreneurial capacity of the Higher Education sector. We do this by: supporting
long-term cultural change in our universities; shaping the institutional environment to be more
conducive to enterprise and entrepreneurship; increasing the level of graduate entrepreneurial
activity; and informing national policy and practice.
The Council for Industry and Higher Education (CIHE) is a high-level partnership between leading
people from a wide range of businesses, universities and colleges. The Council leads in developing
an agreed agenda on the learning issues at higher education level that affect our international
competitiveness, social cohesion and individual development.
Executive summary
The UK faces the same challenges as those
of most developed countries. Rapid social
change, a volatile economy and worldwide
competition for talented students combine to
make these challenges all the more pressing.
But these are also opportunities for new ideas.
And government has responded with a range
of national policies and initiatives aimed
at achieving a more competitive economy
in which enterprise, entrepreneurship and
innovation are the drivers of growth. Graduates
with entrepreneurial and innovative mindsets,
behaviours and skills are vital to making this
happen. Here, the higher education sector,
through entrepreneurship education, has a
crucial role to play.
But this report shows that entrepreneurship is
not for business alone. Addressing the major
social challenges of our century requires public
bodies and social ventures to recruit graduates
with the skills to transform such challenges into
opportunities for change.
More UK students need to engage in
entrepreneurial activity
Entrepreneurship education is currently taught
primarily through modules in business school
courses and extra-curricular activities.
1
But
UK students need more opportunities to
participate in it. At the same time, traditional
business school entrepreneurship education
needs to change: many students and
academics, especially those in non-business
disciplines, do not see its narrow focus on
business start-up as relevant. HEIs need to
enhance the perception and relevance of
entrepreneurship education, so that both
students and staff recognise the value of
its combination of innovation, creativity,
collaboration and risk-taking skills to a wide
range of disciplines.
Major structural, cultural and attitudinal
barriers are making it hard to embed
entrepreneurship education in HEIs. Many
Vice-Chancellors believe that they have already
introduced it in their institutions; in reality it
rarely enjoys the same status as research or
the pursuit of academic excellence. This lack
of status is in turn compounded by short-
term and unreliable funding. Moreover, there
are academic tensions between traditional
‘instruction’ and the experiential learning,
action-oriented, mentoring and group project
approach needed for effective entrepreneurship
education. Often sitting outside formal
structures, there is a danger that a lack of clear
and coherent objectives will deliver variable
outcomes.
‘Developing Entrepreneurial Graduates’ is a
call for action
The report urges universities to institute a
systematic overhaul of academic disciplines so
that entrepreneurship education is embedded
in every subject. We do so in recognition of the
fact that graduates need more than academic
attainment. To add value, they need to have
the entrepreneurial skills that enable them to
seize and exploit opportunities, solve issues
and problems, generate and communicate
ideas, and make a difference in their
communities.
6
NCGE (2007) ‘Enterprise and 1.
Entrepreneurship in Higher
Education.’ Birmingham:
NCGE.
Our report offers a framework for delivering
entrepreneurship education within HEIs. We
draw on our international panel’s expertise to
develop three guiding themes around which
HEIs can create a culture in which to foster and
develop entrepreneurial graduates:
An enabling institutional environment •
that has clarity of purpose and outcomes,
and builds capacity for entrepreneurship
education across the whole institution. This
has implications for resources, the nature
of performance targets, and leadership
and educator development; it also requires
cultural change at an institutional level.
Engaging internal and external stakeholders •
means talking to national, regional and local
government, funders and employers, as well
as those within HEIs. Stronger relationships
between entrepreneurs and university
leaders, lecturers and tutors are particularly
important if entrepreneurship education is to
be rigorously grounded in academic theory,
while drawing on the fast-changing realities
and practice of commercial and social
entrepreneurship.
Developing entrepreneurial teaching and •
learning practices demands a shift from
transmission models of teaching (learning
‘about’) to experiential learning (learning
‘for’) and offers students techniques
that can be applied in the real world. Our
report calls for learning approaches that
incorporate practical examples from outside
the university into the classroom, and
offer refective practice, ownership and
opportunity to students.
Vice-Chancellors can provide visible
leadership
Achieving this requires co-ordinated action
on campus – starting from the top. Vice-
Chancellors should do more to encourage
academics and entrepreneurship educators
to work with entrepreneurs and students
to overcome any barriers to creating an
entrepreneurial culture in our HEIs. They
should champion entrepreneurship education
across campus and ensure that it becomes a
core part of university life. Vice-Chancellors
can also encourage leading entrepreneurs to
bring new thinking to their HEIs, drawing on
the entrepreneurs’ life experience, to enliven
the theoretical base of entrepreneurship
education. Vice-Chancellors need to incentivise
and reward those academics who engage in
entrepreneurship education. They should use
their infuence to encourage Research Councils
UK (RCUK) to ensure that entrepreneurial
outcomes are given proper recognition in those
impact indicators that measure the social and
economic value of research and knowledge
exchange.
Academics are the enablers of change in the
curriculum
The relevance of entrepreneurship education
should be increased across a more diverse
range of subjects and disciplines. More work
is needed to promote this to teaching and
learning staff. Here, the NCGE Entrepreneurial
Learning Outcomes Framework can help ensure
successful evaluation of learning outcomes.
Academics can also encourage curricular
innovation from other subject disciplines and
learn from the Higher Education Academy
Subject Centres and the Centres for Excellence
in Teaching and Learning (CETLs). As course
leaders, tutors and careers advisers, faculty
members can encourage students to take up
entrepreneurship education opportunities.
They can also demonstrate the importance
and relevance of the skills it fosters to wider
academic achievement.
Entrepreneurship educators can enrich
students’ university experience
Entrepreneurship education can make a
student’s experience of higher education richer
and more fulflling; provided educators offer
stimulating learning experiences. Students
should have the chance to experiment, discover
new ways of thinking, and meet successful
entrepreneurs. They should be encouraged
to explore both theory and practice; building
commercial awareness and developing venture
creation skills. Entrepreneurship education can
both accentuate individual achievement, and
provide opportunities for team-work and the
development of other ‘soft’ skills that are so
valuable to business and society today.
The university itself offers opportunities to
develop these skills, not least through student
unions and societies; students can learn
from taking up roles in these student bodies.
Educators can provide project management
and budgeting training, and teach the other
professional skills needed to carry out these
roles successfully. Such practical roles can help
develop an entrepreneurship curriculum that is
more focused on hands-on experience rather
than theory; one that integrates experience
with the taught curriculum.
7
European Commission (2008) 2.
‘Entrepreneurship in Higher
Education, especially in Non-
business Studies.’ Brussels:
European Commission,
Directorate-General for
Enterprise and Industry.
Business and social entrepreneurs must be
fully involved
Strong links with and input from entrepreneurs
in all sectors are essential to align university
curricula to the needs of employers. Such links
will also enable students to learn from those
with up-to-date expertise. Doing so will give
them the knowledge, experience and abilities
to link theory and practice. Entrepreneurs
may become Entrepreneurial Fellows, guest
lecturers, entrepreneurs-in-residence, mentors,
role models or Professors of Practice. They can
draw in turn on the expertise of academics
by hosting academic placements in their
organisations and can contribute to future
employee development by providing student
placements and offering company projects as
case studies.
Students should seize the opportunities
that entrepreneurial education presents to
enable them to prepare for their futures
Whether they want to build a career in the
private, public or third sector, students
need opportunities to learn and practise
entrepreneurial skills. Positions in student
unions, clubs and societies can offer students
genuine entrepreneurial experiences that
allow for experimentation with new ideas and
concepts. They can also be a source of practical
problem solving, opportunity spotting, project
management, budgeting, communication,
team-work, coping with pressure and managing
complexity; all of which are skills in demand
by employers. HEIs can also offer, through
their links with business and alumni bodies,
the opportunities to network and build social
capital that are part of the essential fabric of a
successful entrepreneurial career in any sector.
Government can support entrepreneurial
education by providing overarching
strategic goals
The UK Government, Welsh Assembly
Government, Scottish Government and
Northern Ireland Executive’s work over the past
decade to embed entrepreneurship education
in primary, secondary, further and higher
education has created a strong foundation to
develop an integrated policy framework that
covers the entire education spectrum from
primary school to university. This would support
and develop the growing consensus across
Europe that entrepreneurship education must
stretch beyond a narrow focus on business
start-up; instead by ‘fostering entrepreneurial
mindsets’
2
it can equip young people with
highly transferable and valuable skills with
which to build their future roles in the economy
and society.
8
9
Contents
Developing Entrepreneurial Graduates
Putting entrepreneurship at the centre of higher education
Part 1: Developing Entrepreneurial Graduates – Opportunities and Challenges 10
Part 2: A Higher Education Implementation Framework for Developing 14
Entrepreneurial Graduates
Principle 1: Creating an enabling institutional environment 14
Principle 2: Engaging stakeholders inside and outside the university 18
Principle 3: Developing entrepreneurial teaching and learning practices 20
Enabling Environments, Stakeholders and Entrepreneurial Practices: 23
a framework for developing more entrepreneurial graduates
Part 3: A Call for Co-ordinated Action by All Stakeholders 24
Vice-Chancellors 24
Academic faculty 26
Entrepreneurship educators 26
Entrepreneurs 27
Students 28
Government 29
Appendix A: NCGE Strategic Models 30
Appendix B: NCGE Entrepreneurial Learning Outcomes Framework 31
Appendix C: Panel Biographies 34
Part 1: Developing Entrepreneurial Graduates –
Opportunities and Challenges
We face profound economic and social
structural changes – the earlier restructuring of
western manufacturing, the shift to service and
knowledge-based economies, globalisation,
and the rise of emerging economies, along
with societal challenges such as environmental
sustainability and ageing populations. These
necessitate innovative and entrepreneurial
responses; not only to deal with such
challenges, but to create opportunities from
them.
3
Like other governments, the UK government
and the devolved administrations have
responded with a range of policies
and initiatives aimed at developing a
more entrepreneurial economy in which
competitiveness and growth thrive and where
innovation and creativity drive new ways of
enhancing social and economic wellbeing.
4
Developing innovative and entrepreneurial
individuals as a response to challenges
One policy response has been to develop
individual capabilities for entrepreneurship
and social innovation. The recent Department
for Innovation, Universities and Skills (DIUS)
White Paper, ‘Innovation Nation’, stresses
the importance of ‘unlocking the talent of all
our people’ to prosper in today’s globalised
economy.
Equally, the Department for Business,
Enterprise and Regulatory Reform (BERR)
‘Enterprise Strategy’ published in March
2008 clearly demonstrates the importance
of enterprise and entrepreneurship to the
future of the UK economy.
5
Broad initiatives
to develop workforce skills,
6
increase technical
skills (often through STEM graduates),
7
promote lifelong learning
8
or encourage
entrepreneurship in the creative industries
9
help contribute to this agenda. However, for
organisations, businesses and communities
to thrive and succeed, there is a need also for
individuals to develop more entrepreneurial
and innovative mindsets, behaviours, skills and
capacities.
10
The role of Higher Education Institutions
(HEIs) in developing entrepreneurial
individuals
In the context of structural change,
government recognition of HEIs as agents
of economic and social growth
11
has led
to support and extra funding (through
initiatives such as the Science and Enterprise
Challenge Fund and the Higher Education
Innovation Fund) to enable HEIs to increase
their engagement with the wider community.
Consequently, HEIs have increasingly become
more involved in regional economic and social
development (through closer business, industry
and third sector collaborations,
12
for example)
and activities such as the commercialisation of
intellectual property.
These initiatives have also emphasised
how HEIs can develop entrepreneurial
and innovative individuals through
entrepreneurship education.
13
Graduates
are seen as key to national growth. Inspired,
self-confdent, talented entrepreneurial
graduates are more likely to found and lead
dynamic new organisations and social ventures
and to have the capacity to transform the
organisations they lead and manage. Through
entrepreneurship education programmes, HEIs
can expose students to environments that
foster entrepreneurial mindsets, behaviours
and capabilities to deal with an increasingly
complex and uncertain world.
14
10
Department for Innovation, 3.
Universities and Skills (2008)
‘Innovation Nation.’ London:
The Stationery Offce;
Department for Business,
Enterprise and Regulatory
Reform (2008) ‘Enterprise:
Unlocking the UK Talent.’
London: The Stationery
Offce.
For example, HM Treasury 4.
has identifed fve drivers of
productivity as investment,
innovation, enterprise, skills
and competition, and the UK
government has set about
investing in, improving and
promoting these drivers to
advance the UK’s economy
and society (HM Treasury
(2000) ‘Productivity in the
UK: The Evidence and the
Government’s Approach.’
London: The Stationery
Offce).
Department for Business, 5.
Enterprise and Regulatory
Reform (2008) op.cit.
As outlined in the Leitch 6.
Review of Skills (Leitch, S.
(2006) ‘Leitch Review of
Skills: Prosperity for all in
the global economy – world
class skills.’ London: HM
Treasury). See Department
for Innovation, Universities
and Skills (2008) ‘World
Class Skills: implementing
the Leitch Review of Skills
in England.’ London: The
Stationery Offce. See
Department for Innovation,
Universities and Skills (2008)
‘Higher Education at Work
– High Skills: High Value.’
London: The Stationery
Offce.
Department for Innovation, 7.
Universities and Skills (2008)
‘Innovation Nation.’ London:
The Stationery Offce,
Chapter 7; Lord Sainsbury
of Turville (2007) ‘The Race
to the Top: A Review of
Government’s Science and
Innovation Policies.’ London:
The Stationery Offce.
See also Smith, H. (2007)
‘STEM Review: the Science,
Technology, Engineering,
Maths Supply Chain.’ London:
CIHE; Welsh Assembly
Government (March 2002)
‘Reaching Higher: Higher
Education and the Learning
Country – A Strategy for
the Higher Education sector
in Wales.’ Cardiff: Welsh
Assembly Government;
Scottish Government (2004)
‘The Competitiveness
of Higher Education in
Scotland, Phase 3: Summary.’
Available at:http://www.
scotland.gov.uk/Resource/
Doc/47171/0028787.pdf.
For example, Department 8.
for Work and Pensions,
Department for Innovation,
Universities and Skills and
the Cabinet Offce Strategy
Unit (2008) ‘Life Chances:
Supporting people to get
on in the labour market.’
Available at:http://www.
dius.gov.uk/publications/
life_chances_180308.pdf;
and Department for Work and
Pensions and Department for
Innovation, Universities and
Skills (2008) ‘Ready for Work,
Skilled for Work: Unlocking
Britain’s talent.’ London: The
Stationery Offce.
Moving towards the entrepreneurial
university
The project partners have addressed
entrepreneurship education in their earlier
work.
15
In ‘Towards the Entrepreneurial
University’
16
the NCGE outlined three strategic
models for developing the entrepreneurial
university: a fully integrated and embedded
model; an intermediate model; and an
external support model (Appendix A). The
report also developed an ‘Entrepreneurial
Learning Outcomes Framework’
17
(Appendix
B) which clarifes what students should learn
from entrepreneurial educational experiences
and aims to infuence curriculum design and
delivery in UK HEIs.
Challenges to developing entrepreneurial
environments within HEIs
Further work by the project partners has
explored the scope to which the desired
entrepreneurial environments and outcomes
were evident in UK HEIs. A mapping study
18
of entrepreneurship education in 127 UK
universities and higher education institutions
found that:
the average level of student engagement in •
entrepreneurship education has grown to 11
per cent, but needs to expand more rapidly;
business schools dominate provision with 61 •
per cent of all delivery, with limited provision
in other departments and faculties;
more than 80 per cent of extra-curricular •
entrepreneurship education activity is funded
from public money, with strong reliance on
short-term funding making such initiatives
inherently fragile; and
fewer than 50 per cent of HEIs display the •
range of key entrepreneurial characteristics,
as suggested in the ‘Toward the
Entrepreneurial University’ report, and need
to transform radically the culture of higher
education.
The ‘Good Practice in Enterprise Development
in UK Higher Education’ report
19
identifed the
potential barriers and challenges in creating
environments which are highly conducive to
developing entrepreneurial and innovative
graduates. These challenges include the
sustainability of current activity given the
fragility of funding mechanisms;
20
low levels of
scale and reach of student engagement; and
questions about the relevance, consistency,
commitment and quality of the experience for
students in non-business subject disciplines.
Box 1 summarises the main barriers and
challenges.
Developing a new approach to
entrepreneurship education
To address these opportunities and challenges,
‘Developing Entrepreneurial Graduates’ brings
together for the frst time the work of the
National Endowment for Science, Technology
11
Department for Culture, 9.
Media and Sport (2007)
‘Creative Britain: New Talents
for a New Economy.’ London:
The Stationery Offce.
NESTA (2007) ‘Education 10.
for Innovation Policy Brief.’
London: NESTA.
Department for Innovation, 11.
Universities and Skills (2008)
‘Innovation Nation.’ London:
The Stationery Offce.
As recommended by the 12.
Lambert Review (Lambert,
R. (2003) ‘Lambert Review
of Business-University
Collaboration.’ London:
HM Treasury). See also
Brown, R. and Ternouth,
P. (2006) ‘International
Competitiveness: Businesses
Working with Universities.’
London: CIHE.
The Dearing Report was 13.
the frst to recommend
that universities encourage
entrepreneurship through
innovative curriculum
design and postgraduate
programmes. See Dearing,
R. (1997) ‘The National
Committee of Inquiry into
Higher Education.’ London:
NCIHE.
Gibb argues that HEIs must 14.
seek to equip students
for a ‘life-world’ of much
greater uncertainty and
complexity involving
frequent occupational, job
and contract status change,
global mobility, adaptation
to different cultures,
working in a world of fuid
organisational structures,
greater probability of
self-employment and wider
responsibilities in family and
social life (Gibb, A. (2005)
‘Towards the Entrepreneurial
University.’ Policy Paper
3, Birmingham: NCGE.
Available at:http://www.
ncge.com/uploads/Exec_
Summary_-_AllanGibb.
pdf. Accessed on 17 August
2008).
See NESTA (2007) 15.
‘Entrepreneurship Education
for the Creative Industries
Policy Brief.’ London:
NESTA; NESTA (2007) ‘Five
Ways Universities drive
Innovation Policy Brief.’
London: NESTA; Hague,
D. and Holmes C. (2006)
‘Oxford Entrepreneurs.’
London: CIHE.
Gibb op. cit. (2005) 16.
Further developed in Gibb, 17.
A. (2006) ‘Entrepreneurial
Learning Outcomes – a
benchmark framework.’
Birmingham: NCGE.
NCGE (2007) ‘Enterprise and 18.
Entrepreneurship in Higher
Education.’ Birmingham:
NCGE.
Botham, R. and Mason, C. 19.
(2007) ‘Good Practice in
Enterprise Development
in UK Higher Education.’
Birmingham: NCGE,
sponsored by NCGE, The
Higher Education Academy,
CIHE, Enterprise Insight
and the DTI Small Business
Service.
Hannon, P. (2007) Enterprise 20.
for all? The Fragility of
Enterprise Provision across
England’s HEIs. ‘Journal
of Small Business and
Enterprise Development.’ 14
(2), pp.183-210.
11
A complex policy environment • in which
funding is short-term, fragile and often
focused on projects/events rather than
on long-term capacity building and
educator development.
Varying degrees of ‘embedding’ •
entrepreneurship education across
institutions.
Evidence of • reliance on short-term
initiative funding and reliance on the
enthusiasm of individuals – both result
in this activity being inherently fragile.
Varying levels of • engagement from
business schools.
Varying extent to which • formal
objectives have been set for
entrepreneurship education and
evaluation methods established.
Many combinations of • different learning
and support arrangements with some
variable evidence of effectiveness.
Focus on • conventional pedagogies
– tension exists between traditional,
formal academic teaching methods and
assessment and opportunities for ‘live’
learning in which entrepreneurial practice
and experience may be introduced.
Box 1: Challenges limiting HEIs’ capability to deliver
entrepreneurial graduates
12
and the Arts (NESTA), the National Council
for Graduate Entrepreneurship (NCGE)
and the Council for Industry and Higher
Education (CIHE) to address the urgent need
for HEIs to create a radical new approach to
entrepreneurship in tertiary education.
Drawing on our past work – as well as the
experiences and recommendations of our
expert panel – we outline a new approach
to higher education that moves its focus
and purpose from transmitting subject
knowledge to developing graduates who
have the knowledge, skills, motivation and
entrepreneurial capacity to address economic
and social needs, both in the workplace and in
their communities.
Gaining from an international panel’s
expertise
To undertake this project, the project partners
convened an international panel of experts
from the feld of entrepreneurship education
and practice, outlined below (Appendix C has
extended panel member profles). This panel
brought a range of different perspectives
and insights to the project process, including
technology entrepreneurship, the creative
industries, social enterprise and higher
education.
Dr Elizabeth Gatewood – Director, Offce •
of Entrepreneurship and Liberal Arts, Wake
Forest University, North Carolina; developing
approaches to entrepreneurship in the liberal
arts.
Dr Tony Mendes – Executive Director of the •
Academy for Entrepreneurial Leadership at
the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign;
entrepreneurial educator who formerly
served as Director of College Initiatives at the
Kauffman Foundation.
Prof. Allan Gibb – Durham University, •
England; lead consultant to the NCGE on
entrepreneurship education, and engaged in
the feld of entrepreneurship, small business
and enterprise development for over 30
years.
Mr Uffe Elbaek – Founder, KaosPilots, •
Denmark; developed alternative approaches
to higher education and entrepreneurial
approaches to learning.
Prof. Daniel Hjorth – Research Professor, •
Copenhagen Business School, Denmark;
initiator of the Nordic annual workshop on
‘Entrepreneurship Learning’ (in Stockholm).
Mr David Clews – Director of the Higher •
Education Academy for Art, Design
and Media; and author of ‘Creating
Entrepreneurship’ (ADM-HEA, 2007),
the joint ADM-HEA/NESTA report on
entrepreneurship education for the creative
industries.
Mr Ian Ritchie – technology entrepreneur, •
founder of OWL (a forerunner to the world-
wide web), Non-executive Chairman of
Iomart plc, Scapa, Computer Applications
Service, Caspian Learning and the Interactive
Design Institute, Scotland.
The panel members joined the project
partners in a series of face-to-face and virtual
meetings using an emergent methodology and
collaborative approach. The panel was asked
to explore the broad range of institutional,
cultural and structural issues and challenges
Entrepreneurship is not solely about
business skills or starting new ventures; it is
a way of thinking and behaving relevant to
all parts of society and the economy.
Entrepreneurship education is a process
which develops individuals’ mindsets,
behaviours, skills and capabilities and can
be applied to create value in a range of
contexts and environments from the public
sector, charities, universities and social
enterprises to corporate organisations and
new venture start-ups.
Entrepreneurial and enterprising graduates
should be equipped to fulfl their potential
and to create their own futures.
Box 2: The project adopted a broad approach to entrepreneurship
and entrepreneurship education
(Figure 1) to ‘mainstreaming enterprise and
entrepreneurship’ in HEIs. This process enabled
us to learn from their insights, experiences and
expertise. Parts 2 and 3 include examples and
case studies from panel members’ experiences.
Thus, a rich diversity of experience and
practice has helped shape the Implementation
Framework outlined in this report.
The approach taken by the report to
entrepreneurship and entrepreneurship
education is outlined in Box 2.
21
The report
uses the term Higher Education Institutions
(HEIs) to refer to universities and other higher
education institutions.
How this report seeks to add value
This report outlines a framework through which
UK HEIs can create the right environments
to develop enterprising and entrepreneurial
graduates.
Based on the panel members’ expertise, this
report aims to build on their experiences – in
addition to the previous work carried out
by the project partners – by providing an
Implementation Framework for HEIs to help
them to create more enabling environments
conducive to developing entrepreneurial
graduates. In doing so, the report also
provides guidance on how to put models of
entrepreneurial HEIs into practice and to deliver
the desired learning outcomes in the NCGE’s
Entrepreneurial Learning Outcomes Framework.
We recognise that this is a challenging
endeavour, but this report provides HEIs
with the impetus and practical support to
embed entrepreneurship at the centre of their
activities.
This report is addressed to Vice-Chancellors,
academics, entrepreneurship educators,
22
entrepreneurs, students and government.
Part 3 outlines a number of actions for key
stakeholders emphasising that ‘there is
something for everyone to do’ in developing
entrepreneurial graduates.
13 13
The report also 21.
frames enterprise and
entrepreneurship as
follows: The enterprise
concept… focuses upon
the development of the
‘enterprising person and
entrepreneurial mindset’.
The former constitutes
a set of personal skills,
attributes, behavioural and
motivational capacities
which can be used in any
context (social, work, leisure
etc). The entrepreneurial
concept… focuses upon the
application of enterprising
skills in the context of
setting up a new venture,
developing/growing an
existing venture and
designing an entrepreneurial
organisation (one in which
the capacity for effective
use of enterprising skills
will be enhanced). Available
at:http://www.ncge.com
[Accessed on 17th August
2008].
By educators we mean all 22.
staff engaged in teaching
and supporting learning in
entrepreneurship across the
institution.
Figure 1: Challenges and opportunities for ‘mainstreaming’ enterprise and
entrepreneurship education
Entrepreneurship
education
Need for more
co-ordinated
government
policy
Need for
coherent
sense of clarity
and purpose
Varying
levels of
university
support
Fragility
of funding
Inconsistent
institutional
embedding
Need to
strengthen
links with
industry
Need for
shared
framework
for measuring
impact
Need for more
engagement
with non-business
disciplines
More
opportunities for
‘live’ learning
needed
Need for more
innovative
pedagogies
Need for more
qualified
entrepreneurship
educators
Part 2: A Higher Education Implementation Framework
for Developing Entrepreneurial Graduates
Our report offers an Implementation
Framework for making HEIs more conducive to
the development of entrepreneurial mindsets,
behaviours, skills and opportunities. Here we
outline and describe this framework and the
key principles that underpin its structure.
The project acknowledged that the traditional
business school model of entrepreneurship
education and its narrow focus on the ‘business
plan’ is alienating for many non-business
students and academic faculty.
23
The co-
location of entrepreneurship with technology
and business innovation has developed an
over-emphasis on this ‘business’ focus.
The project identifed that a strategic
shift is needed in our understanding of
entrepreneurship today to reposition its role
and contribution to the student experience.
The project examined how universities
interact with business and society and how
academic faculties can fnd innovative ways to
appropriate entrepreneurship to their subject
disciplines, beneftting teaching and research in
the process.
Figure 2 presents an Implementation
Framework for Higher Education. It connects
a set of underpinning principles to three main
themes: Enabling Environments, Engaging
Stakeholders and Entrepreneurial Practices.
The Framework emphasises the need for an
overarching institutional Enabling Environment
that is highly conducive to enterprise and
entrepreneurship development; within which
key stakeholders can effectively support
the achievement of desired entrepreneurial
outcomes; through the adoption of a set
of Entrepreneurial Practices that ensure
that students and graduates gain realistic
entrepreneurial insights that enable them
to thrive and succeed in the complex,
uncertain and ambiguous economic and social
environments of the future.
The Implementation Framework should help
to confgure a more detailed campus-wide
strategy for entrepreneurship education. It
is underpinned by a set of guiding principles
informed by the experiences and views of the
international expert panel members:
The need for an enabling institutional 1.
environment.
The engagement of key stakeholders 2.
within and outside the institution.
The development of entrepreneurial 3.
pedagogic approaches in teaching,
learning and support practices.
Principle 1: Creating an enabling
institutional environment
Universities and other HEIs can provide the
right environments for student enterprise and
graduate entrepreneurship. Such environments
should inspire and motivate individuals to
fnd opportunities, acquire resources and
take action in a variety of contexts that have
relevance to their lives and aspirations. In such
environments, there should be clarity about
entrepreneurial outcomes, how these align with
appropriate ways of learning, and what learning
needs to take place.
Clarity of purpose and clarity of outcomes •
Aligning institutional entrepreneurship
goals with clear outcomes and outputs
is essential to exploiting the potential
14
Research with students in 23.
arts, design and media found
that they “…are suspicious
of commercial motivations
and popular depictions of
entrepreneurial activity…
they are uncomfortable
with popular depictions
of entrepreneurship in
television programmes
such as The Apprentice
and Dragons’ Den,
because they regard
them as confrontational,
and concerned with
commercial gain at the
expense of society and
the environment.” In Art,
Design, Media Subject
Centre (2007) ‘Creating
Entrepreneurship:
Entrepreneurship Education
for the Creative Industries.’
Brighton: ADM-HEA,
University of Brighton; and
HEA and NESTA (2007)
‘Creating Entrepreneurship:
Entrepreneurship Education
for the Creative Industries.’
London: HEA and NESTA.
impact of individual learning activities and
experiences. The creation of an overarching
institutional enterprise and entrepreneurship
framework can guide strategy and aid impact
measurement.
Institutional capacity building •
There is a strong imperative to develop a
whole-campus approach, reaching students
in all subjects and at all levels of learning
and experience.
24
Introducing an enterprise
and entrepreneurship strategy will have
implications for resources and performance
targets. It may also require changes in a
university’s culture and practices, together
with additional leadership and educator
development.
Institutional reach •
The activity is relevant and applicable to
both students and academics,
25
to research
and teaching, and for the relationships
universities have with the local and regional
economy. This is needed to situate the
experience of entrepreneurship in any
subject discipline
26
and place it at the centre
of activities. Academics should adopt an
entrepreneurial approach to both teaching
and curiosity-driven research if students are
to learn in an environment which encourages
entrepreneurial thinking and behaviour.
Achieving Enabling Environments
Visible leadership from the top
The panel highlighted the strategic and
symbolic importance of strong visible
leadership in a university. This is vital to
transform the understanding and perceptions
of those who shape an institution’s strategic
direction and the environment in which change
can be enabled. Here the Vice-Chancellor
15
Hulsey, L., Rosenberg, 24.
L. and Kim, B. (2006)
‘Seeding Entrepreneurship
Across Campus – early
implementation experiences
of the Kauffman Campuses
Initiative.’ Kansas: Kauffman
Foundation; See also Cone,
J. (2007) Entrepreneurship
on Campus: Why the Real
Mission is Cultural Change.
In ‘Kauffman Thoughtbook’
Kansas: Kauffman
Foundation, pp.78-86.
Mendes, A., Kehoe, C. 25.
and Dowd, K. (2006)
‘Academic Entrepreneurship:
Possibilities and Pitfalls.’
Academy for Entrepreneurial
Leadership, University
of Illinois at Urbana-
Champaign.
The Swedish experience 26.
shows that entrepreneurship
education is embraced
by engineering/technical
schools, art schools and (but
more slowly) by teachers’
colleges. Data from 2005
shows that more than
70 Swedish universities
provide entrepreneurship
courses and programmes;
Johannisson, B., Madsén, T.,
Hjorth, D., Ivarsson, U., and
Öien, A. (1997) ‘Ds 1997:
3 I Entrepreneurskapets
Tecken – En Studie av
Skolning i Förnyelse.’
Stockholm: Fritzes. This is
a Swedish Governmental
report commissioned by the
Department of Trade and
Commerce. (English Title: ‘In
the Sign of Entrepreneurship
– A Study of Learning
Renewal.’).
Figure 2: An Implementation Framework for Higher Education
Social enterprises
Entrepreneurs and businesses
Students clubs and societies
Engaging
stakeholders
Academic faculty
Vice-Chancellors
Capacity
building
Institutional
embeddedness
Visible leadership
Institutional
culture
Clarity of
purpose and
outcomes
Cross-campus reach
Engagement
with practice
Entrepreneurship
educators
Developing
Entrepreneurial
Graduates
Enabling
environments
Experiential approaches
Experimentation and discovery
Innovative pedagogues
Entrepreneurial
practices
Multidisciplinary
and the senior management team are crucial.
They must give an explicit demonstration of
their strong commitment to entrepreneurship
education if others are to take it seriously.
This includes due reward and recognition for
members of staff who work well in partnership
with entrepreneurs, businesses and social
enterprises. Institutions can consider:
Demonstrating how adopting a vision a.
and purpose for ‘entrepreneurship
education’ across the campus is crucial to
repositioning the role of the university in
the economy of the future.
Designing the overall student experience b.
to ensure that graduates are more
employable, enterprising and innovative,
and are more able to make a social and
economic contribution.
Demonstrating the importance of the c.
entrepreneur’s real-life experiences,
understanding business and venture
creation, and developing graduate
entrepreneurial capacities.
Institutional embeddedness
The success of such an enabling environment
will depend on the extent to which it is part of
the day-to-day operations of the university.
Enterprise and entrepreneurship should not
be set apart, but established as a core part
of ‘university life’. Achieving this will be
contingent upon a range of factors:
A shared and integrated institutional •
framework for enterprise and
entrepreneurship.
Personnel and recruitment policies. •
Faculty-level recognition in career •
development, performance and rewards of
the value of engagement in entrepreneurship
16
Now operating across 14 universities in
the US, the Foundation has invested $48
million in its Kauffman Campus Initiative,
and more recently also worked with the
Burton D. Morgan Foundation to invest
in fve colleges in Northeast Ohio. This
initiative has made a concerted effort to
expand entrepreneurship education beyond
the business school to the full student
body. Securing university commitment
to this broad ambition is the single most
important criterion that the Kauffman
Foundation uses to assign its funding. It
also requires universities to:
involve their president (Vice-Chancellor) •
personally in the sign-off and
presentation of their application to the
Kauffman panel;
provide for cross-campus coverage of •
entrepreneurship education to make it
a common and accessible activity for all
students;
match-fund the Kauffman investment in •
their university with their own resources;
provide a model for disseminating the •
learning from their experiences to other
US universities; and
offer a view on the likelihood that the •
initiative would change campus culture
and produce a sustainable entrepreneurial
spirit on campus.
All campus initiatives involve faculty
and students from a variety of academic
disciplines and take entrepreneurship
education beyond the conventional
business school model of new business
ventures. Some universities have chosen
to create minor degree programmes,
offer introductory courses for incoming
freshmen, expand the role of technology
transfer, or build or expand community-
based businesses that beneft students
and surrounding communities. Some
are broadening existing entrepreneurial
activities on liberal arts or technology-
oriented campuses. Others are focused on
developing Hispanic-American or African-
American entrepreneurship, and cross-
cultural business creation.
Source: Kauffman Foundation, 2008.
www.kauffman.org
Case example 1: Securing high-level leadership – lessons from
the Kauffman Foundation
education, supported by CPD and other staff
development and training.
Greater application of a wide range of •
pedagogic tools.
Integrating entrepreneurial learning •
opportunities and outcomes within core
curriculum provision.
Good connections between teaching, •
learning, knowledge exchange and support.
Exploiting opportunities to fund increased •
access for students and graduates
to experiences of enterprise and
entrepreneurship.
Broadening the institutional reach of
activity
This report identifes the main institutional
stakeholders with a role in the embedding
process. Higher Education leaders are in a
position to ensure that all staff and academics
are fully involved. They can incentivise links
with local entrepreneurs, businesses and
the community that support enterprise and
entrepreneurship learning and development
opportunities. Relationships with policy and
regulatory institutions also enable students
17
The Academy for Entrepreneurial
Leadership at the University has
nine separate initiatives to extend
entrepreneurship across the campus.
The Faculty Fellows programme provides •
grants of $15,000 to academics to
develop entrepreneurship modules in
their subjects (curriculum development).
This encourages commitment by faculty
to incorporate it into the core curriculum
– 40 courses have been developed so far.
An Entrepreneurship Research Fund •
provides grants of $2,000 for research in
entrepreneurship and how it is relevant
to any subject discipline (available to all
2,000 faculty members on campus).
The Graduate Scholars programme offers •
opportunities to graduate students
who wish to develop the study of
entrepreneurship as a component of their
research and teaching portfolio (available
to all 10,000 graduate students on
campus).
An Entrepreneurial Opportunity Fund •
provides awards of up to $5,000 (open
to all faculty and students) for ideas
which expand the understanding and
appreciation of entrepreneurship on
campus.
The Academy Affliates programme •
(available to faculty, university
administrators and leaders across the
university) is a network of faculty and
community members from diverse
disciplines who want to foster the study
and growth of entrepreneurship. They are
a vital link between the Academy and a
diverse array of academic units.
Entrepreneurship Lectures and co- •
sponsored events provide opportunities
to collaborate with numerous research
centres and academic units on campus.
Student Registered organisations •
in entrepreneurship – the Academy
currently provides fnancial support and
advice to fve student organisations.
Scholars in Residence programme •
(involving three scholars selected by
the Academy from various disciplines
and rotated annually) hosts ‘real’
entrepreneurs to share their experiences
with students and academic faculty.
Research Support Services (available to all •
faculty and departments) and community
outreach and engagement programmes
(including internships with local
entrepreneurial companies, workshops,
consulting and grant programmes for
high growth entrepreneurial frms).
Source: Dr Tony Mendes, Academy for Entrepreneurial
Leadership, 2008.
www.business.uiuc.edu/ael/
Case example 2: Embedding entrepreneurship education across the
campus – lessons from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
to understand the context within which
entrepreneurship is developed. This also
extends to the university’s wider responsibility
to its students; how does the institution ensure
that its students are prepared for the future
world, one they need to and will help create?
How does the careers service support student
placements in entrepreneurial organisations
and team-based project work with local
companies and social enterprises?
Principle 2: Engaging stakeholders
inside and outside the university
Entrepreneurship does not take place in
isolation from its broader environment;
continuous learning is sustained through
relationships with stakeholders and others.
Indeed, successful entrepreneurship is more
likely where stakeholder relationships provide
learning opportunities and facilitate the
creation and exchange of tacit knowledge.
Stakeholder engagement •
It is important to involve as many
stakeholders as possible in the provision of
entrepreneurship education. Their diverse
voices are refected in this report. Acquiring
shared ownership of the inputs, processes
and outcomes from entrepreneurship
education is likely to enhance the overall
impact of institutional activities.
Stakeholders inside and outside HE •
The stakeholder community can include:
university leadership and administrators;
students and alumni; academic faculty
and staff; entrepreneurship educators and
support; local entrepreneurs; funders of
all types; small and large businesses in the
private and public sectors; government;
and regional, national and international
organisations.
Valuing an international perspective •
The contribution of internal and external
stakeholders can enrich the learning
environment. In an entrepreneurial
context, this extends to recognising the
value in learning across cultures and
academic disciplines. Hence for students
these experiences should accommodate
an international dimension.
27
Exposure
to entrepreneurship in an international
setting helps students develop their global
awareness.
Approaches to engaging stakeholders
The stakeholder community for
entrepreneurship education is broad and
diverse. HEIs need to consider developing
coherent and connected strategies in order to
engage stakeholders around a shared vision
for entrepreneurship education, both internally
and externally.
Engaging internal stakeholders
The drivers for academic success are in
themselves changing and thus requiring an
entrepreneurial response from academic
departments. This has engendered a shift in
organisational culture through an increasing
focus on external income generation;
demonstrating economic and social impact; the
international competition for securing research
funding; recruiting students; and achieving
academic excellence internationally.
To encourage greater engagement in
entrepreneurial activity across academic
departments, it is important that HEIs raise
its status by recognising and rewarding those
that are successful in engaging stakeholders
to exploit new entrepreneurial opportunities.
HEIs need to review how best to equip staff to
effectively work with stakeholders outside of
the institution.
Dedicated entrepreneurship educators often
have less status and prestige than academics
who contribute more to the Research
Assessment Exercise.
28
This is particularly true
in knowledge-driven disciplines. In order to
develop more integrated approaches HEIs need
to consider how to address this issue. We can
learn from entrepreneurship education in the
creative industries where practice is considered
as important as research.
Raising the relevance and profle of
entrepreneurship across all academic
departments requires it to be placed at the
heart of all university practices. Academic
entrepreneurs can also serve as infuential role
models and provide useful ways to demonstrate
the relevance of entrepreneurial action in
different subject areas through international
examples of inspiring practice.
As the Government’s desire for more
meaningful links with business grows, HEIs may
begin to change their staff recruitment and
reward mechanisms. There are examples in the
UK of a reward and promotion strategy that
deliberately rewards excellence in teaching,
18
Brown, R. Barnes, J. 27.
and Archer, W. (2008
forthcoming) ‘Global
Horizons and the Role of
Employers.’ London: CIHE.
The Higher Education 28.
Funding Council for England
(HEFCE) is working to
develop new arrangements
for the assessment and
funding of research. The new
arrangements – the Research
Excellence Framework (REF)
– will be introduced after the
2008 Research Assessment
Exercise (RAE).
research and stakeholder engagement (work
with businesses and the local community).
Exploiting academic links with industry
There is a growing emphasis on the need
for improved links between business and
academia. These are important not only
for the organisations involved, but also for
developing knowledge exchange and for
deepening the absorptive capacity of local and
regional economies by attracting and retaining
entrepreneurial graduates from the UK and
overseas.
29
Academic links with industry come in many
forms: using university research to develop
solutions to industry-specifc problems;
research contracts; business relationship
management; student placements; and spin-
outs and licensing of university technology.
These are vital for ensuring that the curriculum
is linked with industry. The approach found
in creative industries education, which links
curriculum development and the student
experience through ongoing engagement with
business (a relationship-based approach),
shows how this can work well. This approach
provides both the student and the academic
with ‘real’ exposure to creative companies,
ensuring that the learning of a craft or skill
is directly related to its application. In doing
so, it weaves a seamless interface between
theory (academic curriculum) and practice
(entrepreneurial action).
30
Engaging with and supporting alumni
Links with business and the community also
extend to alumni. At Wake Forest University,
North Carolina, the Offce for Entrepreneurship
and Liberal Arts actively engages
entrepreneurial alumni who are also parents of
students attending the university. The Offce
involves parents and alumni on advisory panels
to put pressure on the university to support
the entrepreneurship programme. Using
entrepreneurial alumni from particular subject
disciplines as role models and guest lecturers
can also help to demonstrate the relevance of
entrepreneurship in any subject discipline.
In 2008, NCGE published the results of a
commissioned analysis of The Sunday Times
‘Top 100’ listings for Fast Growth (Fast Track)
and Technology Companies (Tech Track).
The fndings provide clear evidence of the
contributions that graduates are making to
our most innovative and dynamic young UK
companies:
31
19
NESTA (2007) op. cit. See 29.
also Abreu, M., Grinevich,
V., Hughes, A. and Ternouth,
P. (2008 forthcoming)
‘University-Business Links in
the UK: Boundary Spanning,
Gatekeepers and the Process
of Knowledge Exchange.’
London: CIHE.
This is the ideal scenario, 30.
but the research from
‘Creating Entrepreneurship’
(ADM-HEA, 2007) has
shown that this perspective
has its faws. New research
that ADM is undertaking for
the Department for Culture,
Media and Sport (DCMS)
is currently examining
this issue and will make
recommendations on how to
improve these engagements
with industry.
NCGE (2007) ‘Analysis 31.
of Founders of the UK’s
Fastest Growing Private
Companies.’ Birmingham:
NCGE. Available at: http://
www.ncge.com/fles/40.pdf
[Accessed on 17th August
2008].
In Scotland, knowledge exchange schemes
are designed to change university
behaviour by rewarding business-university
collaboration and generating enterprising
outcomes. The Prospekt Partnership
at the University of Edinburgh aims to
boost activities in knowledge exchange,
entrepreneurship and public outreach with:
a dedicated commercialisation team who •
proactively engage with industry;
a hub for informatics teaching, •
commercialising advanced and applied
computing research and industry
collaboration;
programmes and activities to encourage •
entrepreneurship and resultant new
venture businesses; and
a platform for the international promotion •
of the School of Informatics and leverage
of its global alumni network.
These state-of-the-art enterprise facilities
provide a hub for researchers, students,
entrepreneurs and investors to stimulate
breakthrough research, generate industrial
applications and add value to the Scottish
economy. The University of Edinburgh’s
School of Informatics is considered one
of Scotland’s national assets and one of
the top fve locations in the world for
computing science and information-related
research.
Source: Ian Ritchie, taken from University of
Edinburgh, Informatics News, 23rd June 2006.
www.inf.ed.ac.uk/
Case example 3: Prospecting for entrepreneurial outcomes –
lessons from the University of Edinburgh
“University graduates founded/managed
70 per cent of all fast growth companies
and 84 per cent of the top technology
companies. These companies had grown
their total sales revenues from £950 million
to £4.3 billion in the 3 years to 2006/07
with an average annual sales growth rate of
111 per cent and employing some 38,000
people.”
Often graduates seek to start up an
entrepreneurial venture when they are around
30. Universities should do more to help alumni
with their entrepreneurial ambitions by offering
support or providing access to opportunities,
venture capital, business planning and risk
assessment, market research, and management
development training. Alumni could also
become entrepreneurial role models to inspire
students and HEIs could engage with them to
generate endowment funds.
Recent graduates often cite lack of experience
and self-confdence as barriers to engaging in
an entrepreneurial opportunity. Universities
can support the development of personal
confdence and provide relevant exposure to
experienced entrepreneurs to reduce these
barriers.
Overall, UK universities should be encouraged
to adopt a broad-based whole-campus
approach that creates an enabling institutional
environment which attracts entrepreneurial
people and supports the application of
innovative learning practices.
Principle 3: Developing
entrepreneurial teaching and
learning practices
The delivery of the desired entrepreneurial
outcomes challenges HEIs and educators to
review and refect on what needs to be taught
and learnt and how the appropriate learning
environments and approaches can be created.
32
Such practices should be clearly aligned with
existing goals, outcomes and assessment
processes.
Learning environments and pedagogies •
The development of learners’ entrepreneurial
capacities
33
involves developing their
20
Fiet, J. (2001) The 32.
Pedagogical Side of
Entrepreneurship Theory.
‘Journal of Business
Venturing.’ 16 (2), pp.101-
117.
Sarasvathy, S. (2007) 33.
‘What makes Entrepreneurs
Entrepreneurial?’
Charlottesville: Darden
Graduate School of Business,
University of Virginia.
At Wake Forest University a focus on •
winning over prominent members of
faculty in key departments ensured
there was early leadership in the feld.
Using such leaders to support the
entrepreneurship agenda and lend
credibility was crucial to embedding
entrepreneurship education more broadly.
Encouraging early adopters helped to pull
through demand.
To engage students, the focus is on •
providing different types of learning
experience outside the classroom to
attract their attention. The courses are
framed around innovative problem-
solving (not new venture creation) using
projects and group work.
Seed grants are available, especially for •
supporting internships which provide
students with an opportunity to scope
out and explore an ‘open challenge’ on
any ‘entrepreneurial or creative’ issue
through a year of independent study.
The Offce of Entrepreneurship and •
Liberal Arts uses an advisory council of
parents and alumni to create relevance
in the learning experience, build links
with business and put pressure on the
university to respond to parents and
alumni as stakeholders supporting the
entrepreneurship programme.
First year (fresher) seminars provide •
an out-of-curriculum experience of
entrepreneurship. This provides a way
of getting students ‘hooked’ early on in
their university lives. Second and third
year modules are also offered to provide
progression in the learning experience.
Source: Dr Elizabeth Gatewood, Offce of
Entrepreneurship and Liberal Arts, 2008.
www.entrepreneurship.wfu.edu/
Case example 4: Finding early adopters – lessons from Wake
Forest University, North Carolina
mindsets, attitudes, belief systems,
34
self-
effcacy, emotions and personal values as
much as their technical knowledge and skills.
This is particularly important if the goal is to
increase entrepreneurial propensity and not
just personal desirability or feasibility. It is
about translating ‘I want to’ and ‘I can’ into ‘I
will’ and ‘I am’. Achieving this transformation
requires a learning model that emphasises
experience, action and refective practices,
and offers ownership and opportunity to the
learner.
35
The application of a wide range of
innovative pedagogies ensures that every
type of learner can engage meaningfully.
36
Embedding the ‘entrepreneurial life- •
world’
Increasing graduates’ capacity for
entrepreneurial action requires building their
self-confdence and self-effcacy.
37
Exposure
to entrepreneurial people, organisations
and environments is essential. The
entrepreneurial learning opportunity needs
therefore to embed experiences that enable
learners to experience entrepreneurial ways
of thinking, behaving and acting, and to be
responsible for their own actions and future
through personal discovery, performance,
experimentation and learning from failure.
Developing entrepreneurial teaching and
learning
There is a clear need to shift from transmission
models of teaching (learning ‘about’) to
experiential learning (learning ‘for’), where
students can learn entrepreneurial techniques
that can be applied in a broad range of
settings. Experience is crucial for understanding
and embedding entrepreneurial concepts
and can be delivered through innovative
pedagogies that challenge students, encourage
input from outside the university and bring
‘real world’ experience into the classroom or
laboratory.
Developing engaging learning practices
It is important that students experience
learning practices that are relevant for
achieving the desired entrepreneurial
outcomes. Experience from Sweden, Denmark,
the US and the UK shows that educators need
to have the freedom to frame student learning
opportunities in a number of ways:
Typically, the ‘entrepreneurial life-world’ •
resonates with students in disciplines where
the learning is practice-based. Pedagogic
practices include high levels of learning-
through-doing, problem creation and
solving, and project-centred learning that
often simulates ‘real-world’ situations.
Hence educators should incorporate
experimentation, discovery, practice,
refection on theory, and opportunities for
students to learn from each other, into their
practices.
Use multi-disciplinary approaches which •
involve students and academics from a range
of departments – bringing different forms of
knowledge and perspectives to the learning
process.
Ensure fexibility so that the diffusion of •
learning allows students to reconfgure their
knowledge, juxtapose different approaches,
be adventurous, be playful and adopt self-
directed styles of learning.
Situate or contextualise entrepreneurship •
around innovation, creativity, collaboration
and problem solving, rather than focusing
solely on new venture creation.
Develop practical mechanisms to embed •
a broad experience of entrepreneurship
that includes understanding business and
social enterprise and the new venture
creation process. However, this should
extend to cover learning how to recognise
opportunities, take risks, think strategically,
work fexibly, develop resilience, manage
complexity, cope with loneliness and
acquire the more generic employability skills
needed for the workplace (team-working,
communication skills, commercial awareness
and problem creation and solving).
A project or practice-based learning
process, rather than one that is theoretical,
makes learning relevant to a range of
applications. This also requires a language
for entrepreneurship in HE that recognises
its importance in contexts beyond business;
38
there is much to learn from education in arts,
drama, design and media.
Immersion in practice places the practitioner
at the centre of the learning experience. The
use of drama and performance techniques is an
essential part of the entrepreneurial learning
process as many entrepreneurs are continually
‘acting’ and ‘performing’ in their many roles.
Hence practitioners are fully recognised for
their contribution and are highly valued by
academics.
39
The ‘Creating Entrepreneurship’ report
40
provides an excellent overview of education
models and approaches which place
21
Elbaek, U. (2006) 34.
‘KaosPilots A-Z.’ Aarhus:
KaosCommunication.
Hjorth, D. and Johannisson, 35.
B. (2007) Learning as an
Entrepreneurial Process.
In Fayolle, A. (ed.)
‘Handbook of Research in
Entrepreneurship Education.’
Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
NCGE through its 36.
development of
the International
Entrepreneurship Educators
Programme has produced a
series of ‘Pedagogic Briefng
Notes’ for enterprise and
entrepreneurship educators.
A Compendium of over 50
pedagogies will be published
in 2008/09.
Cooper, S. and Lucas, W. 37.
(2007) Enhancing Self-
Effcacy for Entrepreneurship
and Innovation. In Good,
D., Greenwald, S., Cox, R.
and Goldman, M. (eds.)
‘University Collaboration
for Innovation: Lessons
from the Cambridge-MIT
Institute.’ Rotterdam:
Sense Publishers. This
work used Bandura’s model
of self-effcacy to test if
entrepreneurship education
enhanced self-confdence
and entrepreneurial intent.
For more on Bandura’s
work on self-effcacy, see
Bandura, A. (1997) ‘Self-
effcacy: The Exercise of
Control.’ New York: Freeman.
Hjorth, D. and Johannisson, 38.
B. (1997) Training for
Entrepreneurship: Playing
and Language Games.
‘In IntEnt97, conference
proceedings, Monterey Bay,
1997.’ Aldershot: Ashgate
Publishers
The Work Foundation 39.
(2007) ‘Staying Ahead: the
Economic Performance of
the UK’s Creative Industries.’
London: The Work
Foundation; ADM-HEA
(2007) op. cit.
entrepreneurial learning at the intersection
between theory and practice (see Case example
6).
Embedding pedagogic approaches that
work in practice
There are many examples of good practice,
though it is not possible to present them all
in this report.
41
The biggest challenge is not
in developing more good practice, but in
embedding the breadth of entrepreneurship
education pedagogies across the diversity of
student learning experiences. Two important
points emphasised by our panel members are
however outlined here:
Using student placements to enhance the •
learning
Opportunities for practice can be provided
by making student placements and other
forms of business engagement part of
the curriculum. These activities can (a)
enhance the student learning experience;
(b) provide universities with a vehicle to
build links with business; and (c) over time
build communities of practice that involve
outside organisations, academics, students
and the institution. Students can also bring
new thinking and ideas to an organisation
they work with on a project or placement.
But it is crucial that student placements help
deliver relevant learning outcomes, and that
businesses or organisations taking students
work with academics to ensure that these
activities make a helpful contribution to the
learning process; otherwise, they can be
particularly damaging.
42
Student placements
can also offer opportunities for new venture
creation and provide students with ‘real’
entrepreneurial experiences.
43
Enhancing self-directed learning •
International experience also shows that the
success of student engagement with learning
for entrepreneurship depends on students’
level of ambition and commitment: their
desire for self-development and self-directed
learning and levels of self-effcacy.
44
To a
large degree, entrepreneurship is centred
on the individual – hence the importance
of students seeing their entrepreneurial
experience develop in line with their
aspirations. Entrepreneurship education may
be relevant across all subject disciplines but
these guidelines also recognise that this is
not an activity for all.
22
ADM-HEA (2007) op. cit. 40.
For further work on this 41.
see: European Commission
(2008) ‘Entrepreneurship
in Higher Education,
especially in Non-business
Studies.’ Brussels: European
Commission, Directorate-
General for Enterprise and
Industry; Botham, R. and
Mason, C. (2007) op. cit.
The NCGE has developed a
series of ‘Pedagogic Briefng
Notes (see footnote above).
Lucas, W. (2007) 42.
‘Enhancing the Value of
Work Experience for the
Student and the Company.’
In conference proceedings
EDHEE (Education and
High Growth Innovation)
workshop, Kings College,
Cambridge-MIT Initiative.
The ‘SPEED’ Project in the 43.
UK is run by a consortium of
UK universities and provides
student funding for creating
and running a company for
one year.
Cooper, S. and Lucas, W. 44.
(2007) op. cit.
At the Universities of Stockholm
and Malmö, a Masters Programme in
entrepreneurship is offered to students
from diverse felds such as fne arts,
medicine, engineering, biology and
business.
The programme invites students to •
approach entrepreneurship as part
of society rather than simply part of
business – it is framed as a way of
existence.
Enabling students to learn from each •
other is a central part of the programme.
Students work with businesses on a •
real-life development project. This allows
them to learn ‘in’ entrepreneurship and
creating knowledge ‘for’ as well as ‘about’
entrepreneurship.
Student projects focus on: (1) life-images •
of entrepreneurship – entrepreneurs
visit the programme and tell stories;
students write a report refecting upon
their learning from these ‘live cases’; (2)
an entrepreneurial project – students
can choose from: engaging in an
entrepreneurial venture, developing their
own business plan, or investigating a
topic from an entrepreneurial perspective.
Source: Professor Daniel Hjorth and
Professor Bengt Johannisson, 2006.
www.cbs.dk
Case example 5: Learning as an entrepreneurial process – lessons
from the Universities of Stockholm and Malmö
Enabling Environments,
Stakeholders and Entrepreneurial
Practices: a framework for
developing more entrepreneurial
graduates
Our framework has been underpinned by a
number of key principles which have been
brought together under three themes: the
Enabling Environment; Engaging Stakeholders;
and Entrepreneurial Practices. These can
contribute to strategic and collective
action in HEIs to enhance opportunities for
entrepreneurial graduates, and to initiate
an institutional step-change and movement
towards creating a more entrepreneurial
culture.
45
Institutions that are committed
to contributing to the development of
entrepreneurial graduates demonstrate the
approaches, practices and vision outlined in
this report. They may be described as being
imbued with an ‘entrepreneurial spirit’.
46
However it is clear that this alone is
insuffcient.
47
We need clear metrics and
impact measures to assess this entrepreneurial
contribution and its effects on students and
graduates, staff and the institution, on the
local community and on economic and social
development.
23
Cherwitz, R. (2005) Creating 45.
a Culture of Intellectual
Entrepreneurship. ‘Academe.’
91 (4), July/August.
Gibb, A. and Hannon, 46.
P. (2006) Towards the
Entrepreneurial University.
‘International Journal
of Entrepreneurship
Education.’ 4, pp.73-110.
See also the criteria for
the NCGE-sponsored THE
‘Entrepreneurial University
of the Year’ Award which
includes: the institutional
environment – leadership
and culture; student
engagement – application
and attitude; innovative
staff – curricula design
and pedagogies; impact –
entrepreneurial outcomes.
Clark, B. (2004) ‘Sustaining 47.
Change in Universities’
Society for Research into
Higher Education.’ London:
Open University Press.
One model emerging from the HEA-
ADM research suggests the following
key elements for delivering robust
entrepreneurship education for the creative
industries:
A free-standing subject-focused module •
or components for entrepreneurship
education aimed at delivering knowledge
and skills for and about entrepreneurship.
The learning within these courses is •
part of the core curriculum. Learning
outcomes are developed in practice-
based modules.
Entrepreneurial behaviours, attributes •
and skills are developed through direct
engagement with industry. The form of
engagement is wide ranging and may
include work placements, contributions to
curriculum delivery and assessment and
industry-based assignments by creative
industries professionals and other
specialists.
Pedagogies that support deep learning •
approaches by focusing on situated
and project-based learning and have
high currency for art, design and media
students.
Source: David Clews, taken from ADM-HEA (2007).
www.adm.heacademy.ac.uk/
Case example 6: HEA-ADM emerging models – lessons from
entrepreneurship education in the creative industries
Part 3: A Call for Co-ordinated Action by All Stakeholders
Our project has demonstrated the importance
of internal and external stakeholder
engagement to the successful and effective
development of entrepreneurial graduates.
Internally, institutional leaders, faculty staff,
educators and student organisations should
connect with careers and employability support
teams, incubators and knowledge transfer
offces. Externally, the meaningful engagement
of policymakers, alumni, local entrepreneurs,
funders and private and public sector
organisations (large and small) can help to
shape entrepreneurship education strategy and
practice and create entrepreneurial opportunity
and experiences for students and staff.
Understanding the aspirations and needs
of key stakeholders provides the potential
for coalescing interests, pooling resources
and addressing strategic challenges through
sustainable partnerships. The international
panel emphasised the importance of
stakeholders taking collective and co-ordinated
action. Figure 3 outlines the typical stakeholder
landscape surrounding any such university or
HEI.
Recommendations for key stakeholder
actions
The Implementation Framework presented
in this report has a strong stakeholder focus.
Its purpose is to guide all stakeholders in
creating the Enabling Environments that
are conducive to developing entrepreneurial
graduates. Successful implementation demands
commitment and action from key stakeholder
groups, including those identifed in Figure
3. Our international panel has highlighted a
number of stakeholder actions that should
help deliver desirable outcomes. These actions
would ensure a campus-wide approach to
implementing the Framework.
The Priority Actions identifed below are
not meant to be prescriptive. They provide
examples of Entrepreneurial Practice from
across the globe.
Vice-Chancellors
Champion enterprise and entrepreneurship •
education with a vision, purpose and strategy
that supports a cross-campus opportunity
available to all students and academic faculty
and that delivers clear entrepreneurial
outcomes both inside and outside the
university.
Encourage a more co-ordinated approach •
that ties in student societies, the careers
service, student placement schemes, senior
management, all academic faculties, science
parks, incubators and other knowledge
exchange activities.
Lead changes to quality assurance (QA) •
protocols to facilitate company projects and
other forms of engagement.
Invest in staff development that enhances •
professional capability in enterprise and
entrepreneurship education, not least
in their application of a wider base of
pedagogic tools. This should also inform the
development of assessment systems that
motivate and develop more entrepreneurial
graduates.
24
Make bold changes to reward and •
remuneration frameworks to recognise the
entrepreneurial behaviour of academics and
practitioners who work with entrepreneurial
organisations in business and the community.
The spillovers from the co-creation of new
knowledge and practices
48
generated from
these interactions and relationships should
permeate the learning environment and
improve the student experience. This may
encourage greater interaction between
academics, entrepreneurial organisations and
students, thereby strengthening the nexus
between theory, concept and practice.
Give entrepreneurs status in universities – as •
academic adjuncts, visiting Entrepreneurial
Fellows, entrepreneurs-in-residence or
Professors of Practice.
Work to infuence the Research Councils UK •
(RCUK) to change their impact indicators
25
Abreu, M. 48. et al. (2008
forthcoming) op. cit.
Figure 3: The typical stakeholder landscape for entrepreneurship in Higher Education
Alumni
Vice-
Chancellors
Entrepreneurship
educators
Academic
faculty
Local
entrepreneurs
Students
Social
enterprises
Local
community
Third sector
organisations
EEUK
HE agencies
3
NESTA
Enterprise
support
NDPBs and
government
agencies
2
Government
1
Large
employers
and SMEs
NCGE
CIHE
Funding Councils
RCUK
TSB
UKTI
2. HM Treasury
DIUS
BERR
1. DCSF
DCMS
RDAs
Scottish Government
Welsh Assembly Government
Northern Ireland Executive
3. HEA
CETLs
QAA
AURIL
UNICO
Enterprise
Focused
HEIs
Key:
HM Treasury - Her Majesty’s Treasury
DIUS - Department for Innovation, Universities & Skills
BERR - Department for Business, Enterprise & Regulatory
Reform
DCSF - Department for Children, Schools and Families
DCMS - Department for Culture, Media and Sport
RDAs - Regional Development Agencies
RCUK - Research Councils UK
TSB - Technology Strategy Board
UKTI - UK Trade and Investment
NDPB – Non-departmental public body
HEA - Higher Education Academy
CETLs - Centres for Excellence in Teaching and Learning
QAA - Qualifcations Assurance Agency
AURIL - Association of University Research and Industry Links
UNICO - The University Companies Association
CIHE - Council for Industry and Higher Education
NESTA - National Endowment for Science, Technology and
the Arts
NCGE - National Council for Graduate Entrepreneurship
EEUK – Enterprise Educators UK
for measuring the social and economic
value of research so that they recognise
entrepreneurial outcomes.
Academic faculty
Show how entrepreneurship education •
is relevant across diverse subjects and
disciplines, and promote it to teaching staff.
Leverage links with business, entrepreneurial •
alumni and social enterprises that can
help to demonstrate the relevance of
entrepreneurship in any subject discipline.
Leverage business involvement from •
research, knowledge exchange and the
exploitation of intellectual property (IP) to
demonstrate the connectedness between
the worlds of entrepreneurship and higher
education.
Encourage and recruit the ‘next generation’ •
of entrepreneurship educators, provide
opportunities for students to learn from each
other and provide more entrepreneurship
training for educators in both business
and non-business disciplines. Find ways to
engage
49
and animate academic colleagues,
and create a vibrant and active network of
entrepreneur educators across campuses and
institutions.
Use the NCGE’s Entrepreneurial Learning •
Outcomes Framework to ensure that the
teaching and learning environment achieves
the outcomes suggested in Appendix B.
Learn from the Higher Education Academy •
Subject Centres
50
and the Centres for
Excellence in Teaching and Learning
51
(CETLs) to encourage curricular innovation
from other subject disciplines.
Entrepreneurship educators
Encourage curricular design that can •
introduce entrepreneurship into any subject
discipline. Collaboration across different
faculties is essential for helping academics
appropriate their understanding and
application of entrepreneurship in their
subject discipline.
Support learning approaches that accentuate •
individual pursuit of achievement while
26
Mendes, A. (2004) ‘The 49.
Academy Needs Assessment
Survey: Findings and
Implications.’ Urbana-
Champaign: Academy for
Entrepreneurial Leadership,
University of Illinois at
Urbana-Champaign.
See www.heacademy.ac.uk 50.
See www.hefce.ac.uk/ 51.
learning/TInits/cetl/
The Entrepreneurship Affliates Programme
is a network of like-minded entrepreneurial
educators, faculty and administrators.
This network binds educators across the •
campus and engages them in numerous
activities throughout the year, ending in
an annual celebration dinner.
Members of this affliate network •
feel empowered to suggest changes
in their departments that will expand
entrepreneurial concepts and practices.
The university Provost also convened •
an ‘entrepreneurship at Illinois’ panel,
charged with designing comprehensive
strategies that will result in Illinois being
a truly ‘entrepreneurial university’.
The rewards are not only monetary; •
they include substantial recognition
where collaboration is rewarded through
the Vice-Chancellor’s Innovation and
Entrepreneurship Awards Scheme to
celebrate and recognise academic
achievement in entrepreneurship
education. Started with six entrants from
over 2,500 academic staff, there are now
so many applicants the Academy can only
consider one in three applicants for entry
to the programme.
Source: Dr Tony Mendes, Academy for Entrepreneurial
Leadership, 2008.
www.business.uiuc.edu/ael
Case example 7: Empowering educators – lessons from the
Entrepreneurship Affliates Programme, University of Illinois,
Urbana-Champaign
allowing suffcient attention to team-work
and other ‘soft’ skills.
Create opportunities within the formal •
curriculum for practical experience and
refection. This may require considerable
change to the QA systems, the methods
of teaching and assessment and a more
balanced approach to taught and non-taught
curricula.
Exploit available resources to enhance the •
provision of entrepreneurship education as a
cross-campus offering.
Encourage students to re-learn from •
experience, explore theory and practice and
focus on building commercial awareness and
venture creation skills that can be deployed
in any context, not just in setting up a
business.
Develop a broad base of learning models and •
approaches that enable experimentation,
support self-discovery and provide access to
practitioners via experiential and effectuation
models of learning.
52
Encourage students to initiate and join clubs •
and societies as these provide practical
opportunities to develop enterprise skills
and experience entrepreneurial action in
practice. Educators can provide training on
project management, budgeting and other
professional skills needed.
Secure opportunities meaningfully to engage •
entrepreneurial alumni as role models,
mentors and speakers. Links with alumni
can also extend to offering support on
access to capital, advice on IP, management
development and other training where they
have nascent entrepreneurial ambitions.
Engage industry practitioners in curriculum •
innovation and offering extended
entrepreneurial experiences and learning
opportunities through ‘real’ projects and
internships.
Entrepreneurs
Serve as a guest lecturer, entrepreneur-in- •
residence, mentor, role model, and member
of curriculum advisory committees or
Professor of Practice.
Collaborate more proactively with academics •
to provide an entrepreneurial learning
experience for students
53
through student
placements and providing projects as case
studies.
Work as Entrepreneurial Fellows in a •
meaningful relationship with educators
27
Sarasvathy, S. (2007) 52.
op. cit., p.2. An adapted
explanation from Sarasvathy
explains that “the word
‘effectual’ is the inverse
of ‘causal’. In general, in
MBA programmes across
the world, students are
taught causal or predictive
reasoning. Causal
rationality begins with a
pre-determined goal and
a given set of means, and
seeks to identify the optimal
– fastest, cheapest, most
effcient, etc. – alternative
to achieve the given
goal. Effectual reasoning,
however, does not begin
with a specifc goal. Instead,
it begins with a given set
of means and allows goals
to emerge contingently
over time from the varied
imagination and diverse
aspirations of entrepreneurs
and the people they interact
with.”
Abreu, M. 53. et al. (2008
forthcoming) op. cit.; Lucas,
W. (2007) op. cit.
At Wake Forest University approaches and
strategies have included:
Using entrepreneurial alumni from •
particular subject disciplines as role
models and guest lecturers. As adjunct
faculty, entrepreneurs can be useful in
outlining the case for entrepreneurship
education – they are enthusiasts by
nature and often want to work to
advance entrepreneurial interests at their
alma mater.
Co-teaching courses with entrepreneurs •
and regular faculty as a way of bridging
theory and practice.
Using entrepreneurs as advisers or •
mentors to student ventures or as
a sounding board for students and
academics who are considering creating a
spin-out business.
Using entrepreneurs on panels for •
business plan competitions or to provide
input where grant funding is allocated to
students on a proof of concept basis to
explore possible business ideas.
Source: Dr Elizabeth Gatewood, Offce of
Entrepreneurship and Liberal Arts, 2008.
www.entrepreneurship.wfu.edu/
Case example 8: Engaging entrepreneurs – lessons from
entrepreneurs in practice at Wake Forest University, North Carolina
.
where they share ownership of the design
and delivery of entrepreneurial outcomes.
This could involve entrepreneurs and
business people providing input to align the
curriculum with industry/employer needs
and acting as external examiners on module
design where required.
Host Academic Fellows on placements to •
ensure knowledge exchange operates in
both directions. This fosters improved links
between academia and the outside world
and can enhance and enrich the learning
process by using these external contributors
in teaching and knowledge exchange.
Students
Seek opportunities to engage with •
entrepreneurial networks to develop
contacts, build the social capital needed to
take entrepreneurial action, and have access
to contacts for proof of concept, funding to
support an idea, and market testing.
Enrol on entrepreneurship courses and •
participate in extra-curricular activities
including student clubs and societies,
competitions and social enterprises. These
allow experimentation with ideas and
concepts, provide opportunities to network
28
The KaosPilots programme in Denmark
adopts a value-based approach to
entrepreneurship centred on a new
understanding of modern entrepreneurship.
This recognises that an entrepreneurial
education leads not only to students
getting good jobs, but that it enables them
to create new and exciting jobs for the
future. This requires:
an institutional culture and learning •
experience based on the practice of
entrepreneurship;
a learning process based on a •
commitment to being playful, creative,
curious, solving ‘real world’ problems,
street-wise (in touch with communities)
and compassionate;
an approach that creates the right •
balance between ‘head, heart and hand –
the balance between the action-oriented,
the intellectual and the emotional aspects
of learning’;
an experience where students learn •
together and take risks together by
co-creating, testing, displaying and
developing solutions to global social
challenges; and
a connection with social innovation and •
people working in an emerging ‘fourth
sector’ where business, not-for-proft and
community interact.
The KaosPilots programme also
disconnects entrepreneurship and ‘money’
through embedding the learning of
entrepreneurship in ‘values’. By adopting
a broad defnition of entrepreneurship
– defned as opportunity identifcation
and value creation – and by channelling
creativity and innovation to create value in
the community, students are more easily
engaged. A values-based approach situates
their learning within a framework that
allows students to shape their own meaning
of entrepreneurship.
KaosPilots shows that entrepreneurial
students are generally not ‘business studies’
students. ‘Business’ per se is often alien to
KaosPilots students – they fnd purpose in
something that offers a gateway to their
future, and that in turn requires them to be
entrepreneurial.
For many students, the KaosPilots
experience is more about fnding a career
with meaning and purpose. Many students
focus not on existing careers, but on
creating the careers that they want to have
– careers which provide a sense of meaning,
purpose and autonomy.
Source: Uffe Elbaek, KaosPilots A-Z, 2006.
www.kaospilots.dk
Case example 9: Celebrating entrepreneurship in action – lessons
from KaosPilots in Denmark
and can help to inform career path choices;
all of which provide genuine entrepreneurial
experiences. Organisations value graduates
who can demonstrate their entrepreneurial
and personal skills in problem creating
and solving, opportunity spotting, project
management, budgeting, team-work,
communication skills and coping with
pressure.
Determine to create a career which provides •
a sense of meaning, purpose and autonomy.
Participate in international programmes and •
exchanges to experience entrepreneurship,
learning and work experiences outside the
UK.
Government
Develop a set of overarching strategic goals, •
such as in the Norwegian Government
example,
54
where key Ministries have
collaborated to develop a national policy
framework that sets out clear objectives
and addresses progression across the entire
education spectrum.
Implement the European Union’s Oslo •
Agenda that established a commitment
to promote the integration of the
learning experience of enterprise and
entrepreneurship from primary school
through to secondary school, vocational
education and university across all subject
areas.
55
There is also an emerging consensus
across Europe that entrepreneurship
education must stretch beyond a narrow
focus on business start-up to equip young
people with the personal skills, attributes and
behaviours that focus on creativity, initiative,
self-confdence and practical experience.
56
Infuence government agencies such as •
the funding councils, quality assurance
agencies and regional development agencies
to further enhance their support for
entrepreneurship in higher education.
29
Norwegian Directorate for 54.
Education and Training
(2006) ‘Norwegian Strategy
Plan for Entrepreneurship in
Education.’ Oslo: Norwegian
Directorate for Education
and Training.
European Commission 55.
(2006) ‘Entrepreneurship
Education in Europe:
fostering entrepreneurial
mindsets through education
and learning.’ Oslo:
European Commission.
Ibid. Recommendations from 56.
Workshop 3.
Appendix A: NCGE Strategic Models
57
30
Source: Gibb, A. (2005) 57.
‘Towards an Entrepreneurial
University.’ Policy Paper
3. Birmingham: NCGE.
Available at:http://www.
ncge.com/uploads/Exec_
Summary_-_AllanGibb.pdf
[Accessed on 17 August
2008].
The Optimum Fully Integrated Model would
include the following characteristics:
University-wide application of •
entrepreneurship teaching.
Joined with offce of technology transfer. •
Innovative pedagogical support for every •
department.
Life-long learning approach in all •
departments.
All departments and subjects covered. •
Emphasis upon interdisciplinary teaching, •
degrees and centres.
Professorial status for Research and •
Development excellence.
‘Development’ sabbaticals for staff •
wishing to commercialise IP.
Professors of Practice, Adjunct •
Professors, Visiting Development Fellows.
Entrepreneur teams invited in to harvest ideas. •
Social integration of entrepreneurs and •
status awarded to them.
Entrepreneurship as an offce of the Vice- •
Chancellor.
All activities academic-led but in •
partnership with external stakeholders.
Research and development activity •
rewarded in all departments.
Active stakeholder participation with •
university staff in joint ventures.
Open approach to intellectual property •
and investment in university ventures.
Staff of departments trained to develop •
and offer entrepreneurship courses.
An Intermediate Model, more adjacent to the
university, but still led by it, might include:
A specialist centre, university-owned but •
adjacent to the university.
Headed by university professor. •
Programme and pedagogical •
development/emphasis.
Development of specialist entrepreneurship •
programme offer to all departments.
Offers of staff training. •
Centre established as stakeholder •
partnership.
Staff appointments open to external •
stakeholders.
Harvesting departmental staff who wish •
to engage in entrepreneurship.
Joint ventures and programmes with •
science park and technology transfer
processes.
Engagement with panels of entrepreneurs •
to encourage linking with departments to
harness technology.
Links to business support services and •
venture capitalists.
Model 1: The Fully Integrated and Embedded (Optimum) Model
Model 2: The Intermediate – University-Led Model
A more External Business Services Support
Model might be a compromise embracing:
A specialist centre, stakeholder-owned •
but with university participation.
Headed by business executive. •
Located alongside technology transfer or •
science park activity.
Training programme offers to •
departments.
Counselling and business support services •
offer to university staff and students.
Promotions and other activities. •
Joint ventures with science parks and •
technology transfer agents.
Engagement with the entrepreneurial and •
stakeholder community.
Partnerships with interested academic •
staff.
Model 3: The External Support Model – Stakeholder-Driven
31
Appendix B: NCGE Entrepreneurial Learning Outcomes
Framework
58
To what degree does the programme help students to
‘feel’ the world of:
living with uncertainty and complexity •
having to do everything under pressure •
coping with loneliness •
holistic management •
no sell, no income •
no cash in hand, no income •
building know-who and trust relationships •
learning by doing, copying, making things up, •
problem solving
managing interdependencies •
working fexibly and long hours •
Students clearly empathise
with, understand and ‘feel’ the
life-world of the entrepreneur
B. Creating empathy with the entrepreneurial life-world
To what degree does a programme have activities that
seek clearly to develop:
opportunity seeking •
initiative taking •
ownership of a development •
commitment to see things through •
personal locus of control (autonomy) •
intuitive decision making with limited information •
networking capacity •
strategic thinking •
negotiation capacity •
selling/persuasive capacity •
achievement orientation •
incremental risk taking •
Key entrepreneurial behaviours,
skills and attitudes have been
developed (these will need to
be agreed and clearly set out)
A. Entrepreneurial behaviour, attitude and skill development
Source: Gibb, A. (2005) 58.
‘Towards an Entrepreneurial
University.’ Policy Paper
3. Birmingham: NCGE.
Available at:http://www.
ncge.com/uploads/Exec_
Summary_-_AllanGibb.pdf
[Accessed on 17 August
2008].
To what degree does the programme seek to inculcate
and create empathy with key entrepreneurial values:
strong sense of independence •
distrust of bureaucracy and its values •
self made/self belief •
strong sense of ownership •
belief that rewards come with own effort •
hard work brings its rewards •
belief that can make things happen •
strong action orientation •
belief in informal arrangements •
strong belief in the value of know-who and trust •
strong belief in freedom to take action •
belief in the individual and community not the state •
Key entrepreneurial values have
been inculcated
C. Key entrepreneurial values
32
To what degree does the programme take students
through:
the total process of setting up an organisation from •
idea to survival and provide understanding of what
challenges will arise at each stage
how to handle these challenges •
Students understand the
process (stages) of setting up
an organisation, the associated
tasks and learning needs
E. Understanding of processes of business entry and tasks
To what degree does the programme help students to:
understand the benefts from an entrepreneurship •
career
compare with career as an employee •
have some entrepreneurial ‘heroes as friends’ •
acquaintances
have images of entrepreneurial people ‘just like them’ •
Motivation towards a career in
entrepreneurship has been built
and students clearly understand
the comparative benefts
D. Motivation to entrepreneurship career
To what degree does the programme build the
capacity to:
fnd an idea •
appraise an idea •
see problems as opportunities •
identify the key people to be infuenced in any •
development
build the know-who •
learn from relationships •
assess business development needs •
know where to look for answers •
improve emotional self awareness, manage and read •
emotions and handle relationships
constantly see yourself and the business through •
the eyes of stakeholders and particularly customers
Students have the key generic
competencies associated with
entrepreneurship (generic how-
to’s)
F. Generic entrepreneurship competencies
33
To what degree does the programme help students to:
see products and services as combinations of benefts •
develop a total service package •
price a product service •
identify and approach good customers •
appraise and learn from competition •
monitor the environment with limited resource •
choose appropriate sales strategy and manage it •
identify the appropriate scale of a business to make •
a living
set standards for operations performance and •
manage them
fnance the business appropriately from different •
sources
develop a business plan as a relationship •
communication instrument
acquire appropriate systems to manage cash, •
payments, collections, profts and costs
select a good accountant •
manage, with minimum fuss, statutory requirements •
Students have a grasp of key
business how-to’s associated
with the start-up process
G. Key minimum business how-to’s
How does the programme help students to:
identify all key stakeholders impacting upon any •
venture
understand the needs of all key stakeholders at the •
start–up and survival stage
know how to educate stakeholders •
know how to learn from them •
know how best to build and manage the •
relationship
Students understand the
nature of the relationships
they need to develop with
key stakeholders and are
familiarised with them
H. Managing relationships
Appendix C: Panel Biographies
Professor Allan Gibb BA PhD OBE
Professor Emeritus, Durham University, England
Allan Gibb, former chair and Director of the Small Business Centre at Durham Business School,
England, has been engaged in the feld of Entrepreneurship and Small Business Enterprise
development for over 30 years. He has experience in over 80 countries around the world, has been
adviser to many governments, governmental organisations and non-government entities and has
worked with all of the major international development organisations. He has broad expertise
ranging from the feld of education at all levels, to small and medium-sized business creation,
development and internationalisation, and large company restructuring and intrapreneurial
development. He has published widely on issues covering enterprise/entrepreneurial education,
SME policy development, entrepreneurial restructuring of organisations and management
development.
Uffe Elbaek
Founder and former principal of The KaosPilots – International School of New Business Design and
Social Innovation, Denmark
Uffe Elbaek was founder and principal of the KaosPilots in Denmark (from 1991 to 2006), a
world-renowned centre for value-based entrepreneurship education – it provides an educational
experience like none other. Uffe is also a regular contributor to a range of leading Danish and
International newspapers and magazines. In November 2001 and again in 2005 Uffe Elbaek was
elected to Aarhus City Council (Denmark’s second city) for the Danish Social-Liberal Party.
He is also on the board of several Danish and international organisations, and has received
numerous honours and awards, ranging from his appointment as ambassador for the local premier
league football club AGF to Knight of the Dannebrog. Uffe is currently the CEO of the World
Outgames 2009 being held in Copenhagen next year and Special Advisor for the new leadership
team at KaosPilots.
Professor Daniel Hjorth, PhD
Professor of Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management, Copenhagen Business School,
Denmark
Daniel Hjorth is Research Director (for the Organisational Creativity Group) at the Department
of Management, Politics and Philosophy, Copenhagen Business School. Daniel is (together with
Chris Steyaert) editor for a series of four books (2003, 2004, 2006, and 2009 published by Edward
Elgar) that represent a new movement in entrepreneurship studies. His work is also published
34
in ‘Organization’, ‘Human Relations’, ‘Journal of Management Inquiry’, ‘Journal of Management
Education’, and ‘Journal of Business Venturing’.
Daniel is presently focusing on Organisational Creativity; Aesthetics in Business Competitiveness;
and A Philosophy of Entrepreneurship. He was (together with Magnus Aronsson) in 1998 founder
of the now Nordic yearly workshop on ‘Entrepreneurship and Learning’ (in Stockholm) and has
wide experience of developing and teaching entrepreneurship at business schools, teachers’
colleges, technical universities, and art schools.
David Clews
Director of the Higher Education Academy Art, Design and Media Subject Centre, England
David Clews is a registered architect and after ten years in practice became a full-time academic.
He is the author of ‘Creating Entrepreneurship’, a report with NESTA based on research into
Entrepreneurship Education for the Creative Industries. He has spoken at conferences and HEIs on
enhancing graduate entrepreneurship in art, design and media subjects.
David is an executive member of the Design Educators’ Association and the Group for Learning in
Art and Design, an independent assessor for the Architects Registration Board and a member of the
Royal Institution of British Architects Visiting Board. The Subject Centre supports a wide range of
research and development aimed at the link between learning and professional practice. David is
currently supervising a research project on the links between creative industry and higher education
on behalf of the Department for Culture, Media and Sport.
Dr Elizabeth J. Gatewood
Director of the University Offce of Entrepreneurship and Liberal Arts at Wake Forest University, USA
Elizabeth (Betsy) Gatewood leads an entrepreneurship centre focused on creating and sustaining
an environment that fosters entrepreneurial thinking across the entire campus community at Wake
Forest University. She most recently served as the Jack M. Gill Chair of Entrepreneurship and
Director of The Johnson Centre for Entrepreneurship and Innovation at Indiana University. Betsy
has been named as one of the top ten best entrepreneurship centre directors in the United States
by Entrepreneur Magazine.
She is a member of the ‘Diana’ project, a national research study of women business owners and
equity capital access. She and her colleagues were winners of the FSF-NUTEK International Award
for scientifc work of outstanding quality and importance in the feld of entrepreneurship. Her
research has been published in numerous leading academic journals in the area of entrepreneurship
and new venture creation. Betsy also serves on numerous Boards and is recipient of many business
and education awards.
Ian C. Ritchie CBE, FREng, FRSE
Non-executive Chairman of Iomart plc, Scapa, Computer Applications Service, Caspian Learning
and the Interactive Design Institute, Scotland
Ian Ritchie founded OWL in 1984 that pioneered hypertext application development (a forerunner
to the world-wide web) and sold the company to Panasonic in 1989. Since then he has been
involved in over 25 start-up high-tech businesses, including Digital Bridges, Voxar, VIS Interactive,
Sonaptic and Orbital.
He has been a board member of Scottish Enterprise and of the Scottish Further and Higher
Education Funding Council (SFC) and was a founding board member of the Scottish Institute for
Enterprise. He was awarded a CBE in the 2003 New Year Honours list for services to education and
entrepreneurship.
35
Dr Tony Mendes
Executive Director of the Academy for Entrepreneurial Leadership (AEL) at the University of Illinois
at Urbana-Champaign, USA.
Tony Mendes is an acclaimed entrepreneurial educator who formerly served as Director of College
Initiatives at the Kauffman Foundation. There, he managed a programme grant portfolio with over
200 colleges and universities. In his role with the Academy, Tony is responsible for the integration
of an entrepreneurship curriculum in all of the academic units of the university. He is responsible
for developing and delivering curricular and co-curricular initiatives targeted to faculty, student and
administrative interests.
Prior to joining the Kauffman Foundation, he was founder and president of Mendes and Associates,
a private consulting company. His teaching experience includes courses at numerous leading US
universities. Tony also serves on numerous Boards and was the founding director of ‘Entrepreneurs
Without Borders’, a university-based organisation dedicated to expanding entrepreneurial initiative
throughout the world.
36
Published by NESTA: September 2008
NESTA
1 Plough Place
London EC4A 1DE
[email protected]
www.nesta.org.uk
NCGE
3 Priestley Wharf
Holt Street
Birmingham B7 4BN
[email protected]
www.ncge.com
CIHE
Studio 11, Tiger House
Burton Street
London WC1H 9BY
[email protected]
www.cihe-uk.com
doc_936198157.pdf