Description
In this brief criteria concerning entrepreneurial education as a strategy for global competitiveness.
Forum Empresarial
ISSN: 1541-8561
[email protected]
Centro de Investigaciones Comerciales e
Iniciativas Académicas
Puerto Rico
De Hoyos Ruperto, Moraima; Figueroa Medina, Carmen I.
Entrepreneurial Education as a Strategy for Global Competitiveness: Entrepreneurship Challenge in
Puerto Rico
Forum Empresarial, vol. 16, núm. 1, mayo, 2011, pp. 1-23
Centro de Investigaciones Comerciales e Iniciativas Académicas
San Juan, Puerto Rico
Available in:http://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=63122680001
How to cite
Complete issue
More information about this article
Journal's homepage in redalyc.org
Scientific Information System
Network of Scientific Journals from Latin America, the Caribbean, Spain and Portugal
Non-profit academic project, developed under the open access initiative
1
ISSN 1541-8561
ABSTRACT:
Entrepreneurial education is important as a diffusion mechanism to foster mind-sets,
skills, and behaviors on the entrepreneurship context in Puerto Rico. Entrepreneur-
ial challenges were denoted by interviewing governmental, private and civic sectors’
leaders as well entrepreneurs. Qualitative analysis demonstrates a successful entre-
preneurial strategy should be anchored in an inter-organizational process that could
build up the adequate entrepreneurial mindset through a formal interdisciplinary edu-
cational curriculum. Results suggest the necessity of change from the traditional busi-
ness education hub to an entrepreneurial education able to develop creative thoughts
as a strategy for global competitiveness and sustainable entrepreneurial growth.
Keywords: entrepreneurship, entrepreneurial education, entrepreneurial environ-
ment, entrepreneurialism
RESUMEN:
La educación empresarial es importante como mecanismo de difusión para promo-
ver mentalidades, aptitudes y conductas necesarias para el contexto empresarial en
Puerto Rico. Los retos empresariales fueron señalados al entrevistar a líderes de secto-
res cívico, gubernamental y privado, en adición de empresarios. El análisis cualitativo
demuestra que una estrategia empresarial exitosa debe basarse en un proceso inte-
gral organizativo que pudiera construir la mentalidad emprendedora mediante un
currículo educativo formal interdisciplinario. Los resultados sugieren la necesidad de
un cambio en la e?gie tradicional de la educación de negocios hacia una educación
empresarial que pueda desarrollar un pensamiento creativo como estrategia para la
competitividad global y el crecimiento empresarial sostenible.
Palabras clave: empresarismo, educación, ambiente empresarial, espíritu emprendedor
FORUM EMPRESARIAL
Vol. 16, Núm. 1 • mayo 2011 / pp. 1-23
Entrepreneurial Education as a Strategy for Global
Competitiveness: Entrepreneurship Challenge
in Puerto Rico
Moraima De Hoyos Ruperto / [email protected]
University of Puerto Rico
Mayagüez Campus
Carmen I. Figueroa Medina / [email protected]
University of Puerto Rico
Mayagüez Campus
2 FORUM EMPRESARIAL Vol. 16,1 (MAYO 2011) ISSN 1541-8561
INTRODUCTION
Studies conducted over the last ten years illustrate the multiple
challenges that country administrators face on designing a sustain-
able and competitive entrepreneurial environment in Puerto Rico.
These challenges encompass a low rate of early-stage entrepreneur-
ial activities (Bosma, Jones, Autio, & Levie, 2008) limited market
structure (Cortés, 2006), structural problems (Aponte, 2002), in ad-
dition of excessive public debt, bureaucracy, and lack of indepen-
dent trade, since Puerto Rico is subject to U.S. trade laws and restric-
tions (Collins, Bosworth, & Soto-Class, 2006; Davis & Rivera-Batiz,
2006). Since, a country’s global competitiveness depends on native
entrepreneurial factors (Casson, 2003) built within their political,
social, and historical context (Reynolds, Hay, & Camp, 1999); en-
trepreneurs, institutions, and governments play strong and speci?c
roles in fostering a nationwide entrepreneurial climate (Lundström
& Stevenson, 2005). This explains why some national economies are
stronger and grow more rapidly than others (Reynolds et al., 2002).
In 1994, the Puerto Rico government joined other private and
civic sectors of the Island to propose an initiative to jumpstart na-
tive entrepreneurial development as part of the “New” National
Economic Development Model (Economic Productivity Council,
1994). To accomplish this objective the private and public sectors
are expected to provide external support to the “native” small busi-
ness enterprises. In addition, the public sector must become more
effective and ef?cient providing the private sector with policies and
regulations that can enable the economic development of Puerto
Rico (Economic Productivity Council, 1994).
Despite this attempt, reports from worldwide organizations
such as the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM), the World
Economic Forum (WEF), and the World Bank (WB) con?rm
that entrepreneurialism has failed to ?ourish in Puerto Rico. For
instance, the 2007 GEM report revealed that among high-income
countries Puerto Rico, at 3.1%, has one of the lowest rates of early-
stage entrepreneurial activity, compared to 9.6% in the United
States, 10% in Hong Kong, and 26%, 23%, and 27%, respectively,
for the low to medium income countries of Peru, Colombia, and
DE HOYOS RUPERTO / FIGUEROA MEDINA
3
ISSN 1541-8561
Thailand. Likewise, the 2007 GEM adult population perception
survey indicates Puerto Rico is average or above average in terms of
entrepreneurial potential, capabilities, and intention, but lower in
opportunity than other high-income countries.
To better our understanding about the reasons for the low level of
entrepreneurial activity in Puerto Rico, we performed a qualitative
research study based on interviewees with local entrepreneurs and
civic, private and governmental leaders throughout the Island. We
theorize that the way in which leaders perceive entrepreneurial
climate may in?uence decisions they make and subsequently affect
new business start-ups. Our study seeks to identify the unique factors
that may impact Puerto Rico entrepreneurial environment with the
purpose of providing useful information to guide decision makers.
Our data suggests that Puerto Rico’s low rate of entrepreneurship
stems from the lack of adequate entrepreneurial education regarding
the general educational curriculum and the linkages of the university
with the outsiders. In addition, higher education programs follow
the traditional business education programs, rather than a creative
one. While, on the other hand, the limited linkages among the
university and other business trade organizations, as well as with
entrepreneurs, restricted the ?ow of valuable information.
A striking de?cit of adequate entrepreneurial education and link-
ages between educational institutions and entrepreneurs has been
well documented in the literature as vital to supporting venture cre-
ation and sustainability. In Puerto Rico this has been identi?ed as a
factor deteriorating entrepreneurship. Our ?ndings call for strategic
initiatives from educational institutions and entrepreneurial support
organizations?public, private, and civic?and entrepreneurs them-
selves to foster educational network development and utilization.
THEORETICAL BACKGROUND
Entrepreneurship is considered a key element for a sustainable
economic growth (Levie & Autio, 2007; Audretsch & Thurik, 2001;
Gartner et al., 2004; Kantis et al., 2002; Lundström & Stevenson,
2005). However, the literature is not entirely consistent about the
factors that drive it. Thus, as Van de Ven (2007) suggests, we need
ENTREPRENEURIAL EDUCATION AS A STRATEGY FOR GLOBAL COMPETITIVENESS
4 FORUM EMPRESARIAL Vol. 16,1 (MAYO 2011) ISSN 1541-8561
to continue evaluating the entrepreneurship process and its causal
mechanisms to advance the understanding of its dynamics and de-
velopment over time.
Entrepreneurship is not solely de?ned by entrepreneurs, but by
the relationships between entrepreneurs, enterprises, and the en-
vironment (Lundström & Stevenson, 2005). Enterprise might be
involved inside an innovative process within existing ?rms, new ven-
ture creation (Audretsch & Thurik, 2001), or through replication
(Baumol et al., 2007); but all with the ?nal purpose of generating
economic activities for the development of a sustainable economy
(Gartner et al., 2004; Kantis et al., 2002). Environmental factors may
include the economic system, institutional arragements such as the
collaboration between university and business trade organization
with entrepreneurs, and the role of government on legal, political,
and social structures, among others (Saxenian, 1994; Lowrey, 2003;
Lundström & Stevenson, 2005).
The Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM), a leading interna-
tional research program intended to enhance understanding of the
role of entrepreneurship in the national economic growth, created
a conceptual model summarizing the major causal mechanisms af-
fecting national economies – the general (GNFCs) and the entre-
preneurial (EFCs) contextual factors. Among the GNFCs, the GEM
model (2007) includes; external trade openness, the role of govern-
ment, ?nancial markets’ ef?ciency, technology intensity, physical
infrastructure, management skills, labor market structure, and in-
stitutional regulations. These factors are considered primarily on a
macroeconomic level. The GEM model also recognizes ten different
EFCs, that primarily work at a microeconomic level, which may affect
the creation and development of new ?rms. They are: 1) ?nancial
support, 2) goverment policies, 3) goverment programs, 4) educa-
tion and training, 5) research and development (R&D) transfer, 6)
commercial and professional infrastructure, 7) international market
openness, 8) access to physical infrastructure, 9) cultural and social
norms, and 10) intellectual property rights protection.
Essentially, Todaro (1981) stated that the structure of the educa-
tional system is linked to the particular economic and social char-
acter of the society in which it is contained, as well as to its history.
DE HOYOS RUPERTO / FIGUEROA MEDINA
5
ISSN 1541-8561
Furthermore, he claimed that the educational system in?uences so-
cial development, thus the link between education and country de-
velopment is a two-way process. In the case of entrepreneurship, the
educational system is considered one of the principal in?uencing
factors of the venture creation process since it is strongly related to
the overall attitude of society (Levie & Autio, 2007; Aponte, 1999).
However, the GEM 2010 expert survey report suggests that entrepre-
neurship education and training in school and outside of school are
inadequate in most countries (Corduras-Martinez, Levie, Kelley, Sae-
mundsson, & Schott, 2010). Moreover, Kirby (2003) af?rmed that
educational systems need to focus not simply on what is taught but
how it is taught.
Therefore, as Varela (2003) argues, our function as a nation is to
educate our citizens within the bounds of ethics and social respon-
sibility to make human beings capable of acting independently, in-
novatively, and with the capacity for achieving goals and taking risks
to create new sources of wealth and employment. This contrasts dra-
matically with the traditional “mass-production” educational system
that has dominated for decades, even in the United States, that tends
to “teach students how to become pro?cient employees instead of
successful business person” (Solomon, 1989). Even when entrepre-
neurship in higher education has grown signi?cantly over the past
5-10 years, and strong growth is expected to continue; researchers
agreed that more needs to be done. Entrepreneurship in higher
education needs to expand particularly in the areas of curriculum
development, training and development of teachers, funding entre-
preneurship, cross disciplinary research collaboration and facilita-
tion of spin-outs from higher education institutions (Twaalfhoven &
Wilson, 2004).
Moreover, Gavron et al. (1998) established that to promote an
entrepreneurial culture, the nations need collaborative policies be-
tween public and private sectors that encourage educational systems
and business support schemes. Recently, the WEF 2009 report ex-
pressed it in the following way: “While the contexts around the world
vary dramatically, entrepreneurship education, in its various forms,
can equip people to proactively, pursue those opportunities available
to them based on their local environments and cultures” (p.12).
ENTREPRENEURIAL EDUCATION AS A STRATEGY FOR GLOBAL COMPETITIVENESS
6 FORUM EMPRESARIAL Vol. 16,1 (MAYO 2011) ISSN 1541-8561
In that sense, Lundström & Stevenson (2005) recognized the im-
portance of the role of government on the adequacy to set policies,
joint with the role of universities and other educational organiza-
tions in the emergence of entrepreneurship culture. Hence, the
conection between the educational organizations and outsiders is
particularly important in order to build an overall understanding of
the entrepreneurship domain through the society’s education and
build awareness about the value and support of entrepreneurship
on the country’s development (Gavron et al., 1998). Similarly, uni-
versities play a key role as entrepreneurial hub, connecting research-
ers, students, entrepreneurs, companies and other stakeholders
(Saxenian, 1994; World Economic Forum, 2009). Furthermore, the
conection between universities and the rest of the entrepreneurial
stakeholders generally provides key players in the processes of inven-
tion, innovation and commercialization (Wright, 2007). The WEF
(2009) highlighted the importance of entrepreneurship education
and training on the development of entrepreneurial capabilities in
the following way:
… while education is one of the most important foundations for
economic development, entrepreneurship is a major driver of
innovation and economic growth. Entrepreneurship education
plays an essential role in shaping attitudes, skills and culture-
from the primary level up. We believe entrepreneurial skills,
attitude and behaviors can be learned, and that exposure to
entrepreneurship education throughout an individual’s lifelong
learning path, starting from youth and continuing through
adulhood into higher education-as well as reaching out to those
economically or socially excluded-is imperative. (p. 7-8)
Furthermore, Gibb & Hannon (2006) recognized the fundamen-
tal of training students in the skills they will need to develop the
entrepreneurial ability of creating business ideas, identifying and
recognizing opportunities, setting up a business and managing its
growth. Typically, skill-building courses in entrepreneurship educa-
tion are creativity, new venture creation, business planning, lead-
ership, entrepreneurial marketing, entrepreneurial ?nance and
growth management as well as soft skills such as negotiation. How-
ever, the GEM 2010 special report on education recommends the
DE HOYOS RUPERTO / FIGUEROA MEDINA
7
ISSN 1541-8561
evaluation and encouragement of creativity, self-suf?ciency, and in-
novation as well as the study of entrepreneurship since primary and
secondary schools.
RESEARCH OBJECTIVES
Our study seeks to identify the unique factors that may impact
Puerto Rico’s entrepreneurial environment with the purpose of
providing useful information to guide decision makers. Based on
the prominent themes that emerged through the interviews, the
entrepreneurship challenge under consideration is education. Also,
this study aims to address the unexplained stagnant entrepreneurial
environment in Puerto Rico, even when new venture creation is
positively perceived (Aponte, 2002) and indicators points’ to average
or above conditions, in terms of entrepreneurial potential, capabilities
and intentions, compared with other high income countries (GEM
2007). Entrepreneur’s understandings of environmental barriers to
and enablers of business creation may, we reasoned, affect how and to
what extent they launch new ?rms. For a future project, others areas
like individual networking and systemic networking will be included
in order to obtain a better understanding of the entrepreneurship
challenge in Puerto Rico.
METHODOLOGY
While there are many qualitative methods available to research-
ers, a grounded theory approach was preferred for this study. This
method intersects disciplines and subjects, providing the oppor-
tunity to develop an in-depth understanding of the Puerto Rico’s
entrepreneurial condition through governmental private and civic
sectors leaders as well entrepreneurs. Semi-structural interview com-
prised of open-ended questions (as the Appendix A shows) were
performed to maximize the opportunity for respondents for free
expression while allowing the authors to guide the general direction
of the interview.
Methodologies are “neither appropriate nor inappropriate until
they are applied to a speci?c research problem” (Downey & Ireland,
ENTREPRENEURIAL EDUCATION AS A STRATEGY FOR GLOBAL COMPETITIVENESS
8 FORUM EMPRESARIAL Vol. 16,1 (MAYO 2011) ISSN 1541-8561
1979). A researcher’s choice of methodology should take into ac-
count the research objective, the research question, and the prob-
lem to be addressed. As Van Maanen (1979) points out, the choice
of research methodology is situated “in the overall form, focus and
emphasis of study.” We believe the qualitative inquiry method was
well suited to address the subject of this study: the unexplained fail-
ure of a sustainable entrepreneurial environment in Puerto Rico.
We were interested in discerning how key ?gures in Puerto Rico—
entrepreneurs as well as policy makers and in?uential leaders who
may directly or indirectly affect entrepreneurial efforts—perceive
the Island’s current entrepreneurial movement or atmosphere. Our
intent was to gather “rich” data from these individuals based on their
personal experiences and backgrounds as well as their understand-
ing of entrepreneurialism and what it means to them (Babbie, 2007;
Maxwell, 2005).
Suddaby (2006) suggests that grounded theory is more appropri-
ate when wanting to learn how individuals interpret reality—in our
case how leaders and entrepreneurs perceive the entrepreneurial
environment and its socio-economic role in Puerto Rico. Grounded
theory emphasizes the observation of patterns in the data that help
us to build theories directly from “the actual meanings and con-
cepts used by social actors in a real setting” (Gephart, 2004: 457).
Grounded theorists aim to remain “open” to the data by resisting
commitment to a prior theory or assumption. The grounded theo-
rist’s commitment to “openness” is also re?ected in the data collec-
tion process.
The conducted semi-structured interviews comprised of open-
ended questions that maximized respondents’ opportunities for
free expression while allowing us to guide the general direction of
the interviews. Considering the same way, trying to avoid implicit
hypothesis-testing and instead allows for inductive reasoning to pre-
vail. Nevertheless, this knowledge implies the possibility of a bias on
the part of the author, since a theory-free individual, without expec-
tations when collecting and analyzing data is unrealistic. Two impor-
tant characteristics of grounded theory are constant comparison and
theoretical sampling. Constant comparison refers to the researcher’s
continual examination and comparison of data or a simultaneously
DE HOYOS RUPERTO / FIGUEROA MEDINA
9
ISSN 1541-8561
collected and analyzed process. This implies immediate active im-
mersion in the data rather than its post-collection management.
Theoretical sampling also refers to the researcher’s recognition that
the data, rather than a prior design decision, dictates when the data
collection terminates. Consequently, the size and composition of the
sample may be suggested, but not dictated by prior design. Two main
principles under the theoretical sampling are appropriateness and
adequacy (Glaser, 1967). Appropriateness was achieved by carefully
selecting participants who were knowledgeable about the area being
explored, while adequacy was addressed by continuing the sampling
and coding until theoretical saturation was reached.
SAMPLE
Fifteen organizational leaders in Puerto Rico —?ve from each sec-
tor; the civil, governmental, and private sector— and ?fteen entre-
preneurs were selected to take part in this study. The civic, public,
and private sector participants were selected through the following
process. We identi?ed key agencies and organizations from several
available sources, including the Puerto Rico Of?cial Government’s
Web site, which details the government agencies involved in business
start-ups, and the Puerto Rico. Industrial and Commercial Directory
and its respective Web site. Then, relying on the researcher’s per-
sonal network and experience and those of several business experts,
the list was narrowed to twenty-?ve organizations chosen based on
their public intervention in policy matters. From those twenty-?ve,
?fteen initial representatives were identi?ed. Criteria for selection
were their business/industrial sector and the geographical area
they cover. A careful selection was made to re?ect a wide range
of knowledge about Puerto Rico’s entrepreneurial efforts. Since
we were seeking to understand the entrepreneurial environment
as perceived by those who have the ability to encourage change
in Puerto Rico’s entrepreneurial policies, the leaders selected for
this study were in top management positions, such as presidents,
directors, and executive directors of those organizations with
public policy in?uence. If any one of the ?rst ?fteen selected was
ENTREPRENEURIAL EDUCATION AS A STRATEGY FOR GLOBAL COMPETITIVENESS
10 FORUM EMPRESARIAL Vol. 16,1 (MAYO 2011) ISSN 1541-8561
unavailable, he or she was substituted by another similar and/or
related organizational leader. In this manner the total of available
organizational leaders that were interviewed was fourteen, including
four from the private sector, ?ve from the public sector and ?ve from
the civic sector.
Entrepreneurs were chosen from among those mentioned in in-
terviews with the above-mentioned leaders and based on their avail-
ability; eleven entrepreneurs were interviewed. The list included
both newly established and experienced entrepreneurs. Since these
entrepreneurs were named during conversations with the organiza-
tional leaders, factors such as industry diversity and the type and/or
business size were not controlled. In accordance with the principles
of theoretical sampling, which permits decisions about sample size
and composition to change during the process of data collection, a
decision was made to extend the sample to Puerto Rican entrepre-
neurs doing business outside the Island. These entrepreneurs were
selected from the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce directory and,
because of the information at our disposal and the access to it, all
were from the state of Ohio. We later decided not to include those
four Ohio interviews in the analysis because the conversations did
not ?t the study’s purpose.
DATA COLLECTION
The primary data collecting method was semi-structured inter-
views that lasted about one hour and were conducted between June
and August 2009. Respondents were contacted via phone or e-mail
to determine if they were willing to be interviewed. Twenty one face-
to-face interviews and four telephone interviews were conducted. All
were audio recorded with the permission of the interviewee. The re-
corded interviews were electronically stored and professionally tran-
scribed. An interview protocol was used to ensure consistency even
when the semi-structured methods followed intuitive leads during
the interview process (Spradley, 1979).
The interview questions were broad and open-ended to allow re-
spondents to narrate experiences and understandings rather than
be questioned solely on speci?c details (Maxwell, 2005). The ques-
DE HOYOS RUPERTO / FIGUEROA MEDINA
11
ISSN 1541-8561
tions were aimed toward individual experiences and sought to avoid
theoretical or hypothetical assessments. They also encouraged sub-
stantial responses from interviewees and allowed them to emphasize
ideas and issues most relevant to the events they described.
We began by asking respondents to describe their personal
and professional background. This gave us the opportunity to
understand how their academic ?elds, years of experience, and their
specializations, for example, in?uenced each one’s perspective and
the various issues they discussed during the interview. Second, we
asked respondents to talk about the organization or business they
represent. This question gave us a broader understanding of the
organization’s purpose or agenda and the business environment
to which each is related. Next we asked participants to describe a
successful entrepreneurial venture they witnessed or experienced
?rsthand in Puerto Rico during the last ?ve years. The purpose of
this question was to identify what the informant saw as the most
relevant factors to entrepreneurial success. Thereafter, we asked
the participants to describe an unsuccessful venture they directly
experienced or witnessed in Puerto Rico during the last ?ve years,
with the same purpose, and to help identify the factors they consider
detrimental to the entrepreneurial environment. Finally, we gave
each interviewee an opportunity to discuss what he or she thinks
are the most important factors driving entrepreneurship, negatively
as well as positively, in Puerto Rico. This question was meant to
provide the interviewees the opportunity to freely express what he
or she would do to change the environment in Puerto Rico without
limitations, as if with a “magic wand.” One question was added for
those Puerto Ricans doing business abroad to explore why they
decided to leave instead of remaining on the Island.
DATA ANALYSIS
Qualitative data analysis often involves a coding process during
which raw data is raised to a conceptual level. We used techniques
recommended by Corbin and Strauss conducted open, axial, and
selective coding that allowed us to make comparisons between data
and, in doing so, derive ideas to stand for the data and develop
ENTREPRENEURIAL EDUCATION AS A STRATEGY FOR GLOBAL COMPETITIVENESS
12 FORUM EMPRESARIAL Vol. 16,1 (MAYO 2011) ISSN 1541-8561
properties and dimensions of the concepts (Corbin & Strauss, 2008).
This kind of analysis involves a process of generating, developing,
and verifying impressions by continual comparison of similarities
and differences against the next set of data and/or revising previous
concepts.
Recordings of the interviews were listened to multiple times and
the transcripts read repeatedly in an attempt to develop tentative
ideas about categories and relationships (Emerson, Fretz, & Shaw,
1995). The coding process was conducted as soon as the transcribed
interviews were available and was accomplished through the use
of manual techniques. Using the inductive process followed by the
theoretical sampling approach helped us identify relevant concepts,
patterns, and themes. Under the theoretical sampling approach we
were able to gather follow-up data based on those relevant concepts
and to be more sensitive during subsequent interviews with regard to
questions, observations, and listening. We began by conducting open-
coding, a line by line analysis of every transcript to identify “codable
moments” (Boyatsis, 1998) or fragments of text with potential
signi?cance. We captured 2,352 such “moments” in the twenty-
one interviews. These were compared and assigned to 122 labeled
categories. Next we considered the categories independently for
each of the two subsets of our sample—leaders and entrepreneurs—
nothing ?rst level similarities and differences between them. During
the second phase of coding (axial coding), re-examination of
our codes and the text they represented resulted in re?ning and
combining related themes and concepts emerging from the data
(Corbin and Strauss, 2008) and moving back and forth between the
data and the literature. This process reduced the substantive codes
earlier generated from 2,352 to 210 and into 10 labeled categories
(Boyatsis, 1998).
Our third phase of analysis involved selective coding such is a
process in which the integration of categories and conceptualization
moved us from substantive to formal theory. The theory building
process allowed us to derive an explanatory framework to describe
the phenomenon the participants were explaining and, more
importantly, look at the implications and relevance of this theory in
more than one substantive area (Glaser & Strauss, 1967). As part of
DE HOYOS RUPERTO / FIGUEROA MEDINA
13
ISSN 1541-8561
the above data analysis process, several memos, interview outlines,
and notes were written. These memos and notes were constantly
reviewed, revised, and organized as data collection and analysis
continued.
FINDINGS
The ?nding suggests that two major challenges related to educa-
tion should be addressed in order to be competitive in the global
arena. First, the requirement of a transformation on entrepreneurial
education that might promote the creative thought as a strategy for
a sustainable entrepreneurial growth in Puerto Rico. Second, the ur-
gency of collaboration agreements among several institutions, such
as the university and other private, public, and civic organizations, in
order to expand entrepreneurial opportunities.
FINDING 1: Entrepreneurial education is recognize as strategy for
global competitiveness
1.1. Changes in educational curriculum is one of the most
urgent requirements for the ?ourishing of entrepreneurial
environment
Twenty out of twenty-one respondents are aware that the
country’s lack of formal entrepreneurial education is a limitation for
entrepreneurship in Puerto Rico. An entrepreneur expressed it in
the following way:
Look at education. For example, in my MBA, they never talked
about entrepreneurship. From 1993 to 1997, they taught me about
business, but more about how to work within a company and rise up
as a manager in the company. But the fact was [I was educated] to
be a worker, not an entrepreneur. There wasn’t [entrepreneurial]
preparation or an ecosystem.
Even when members of all groups recognized the necessity to
make changes on the educational curriculum, private and public
leaders were the groups who suggested this was the most urgent re-
quirement for the entrepreneurial environment change.
ENTREPRENEURIAL EDUCATION AS A STRATEGY FOR GLOBAL COMPETITIVENESS
14 FORUM EMPRESARIAL Vol. 16,1 (MAYO 2011) ISSN 1541-8561
1.2. Successful entrepreneurs recognize their entrepreneurial
education experience as a key factor for their success
Successful entrepreneurs recognize their entrepreneurial educa-
tion experience as a key factor in their success. Moreover, four of
them narrated the process of self-education on business and entre-
preneurial issues as a key step for their business starting process.
These four entrepreneurs mention that even when they had their
respective ?eld of education, the absence of entrepreneurial educa-
tion was a de?ciency recognized by them during the start-up process.
Four out of ?ve civic leaders point out the great amount of short
term entrepreneurial educational programs available that include
seminars, individual consulting service for starting a business, as well
as other matters like ?nancing options and business requirements
on the island. The aforementioned issue suggests that the acknowl-
edgment of the importance of entrepreneurial education by entre-
preneurs might be a key element for the venture success.
1.3. The limited formal entrepreneurial education linkages
among institutions restrict the development of a competitive
entrepreneurial environment in Puerto Rico
Members of all groups recognize the limited formal linkages
among university, government, private and civic organization as
a barrier for the local entrepreneurial to ?ourish as the following
quotes exemplify:
What we need to do is strategize with the universities and the private
sector to work toward entrepreneurial development. To do that we
must break the kiosk mentality in which each one wants control and
are looking to grab the other’s prestige and respect.
Three civic leaders and seven entrepreneurs’ af?rm the impor-
tance of the university as a source of information, knowledge and
experience that can rebound in opportunities for entrepreneurs
as the following interviewee said: “An opportunity was provided to
utilize technological knowledge along with education, and I took
advantage of it.”
DE HOYOS RUPERTO / FIGUEROA MEDINA
15
ISSN 1541-8561
1.4. Entrepreneurial education helps to develop the creative
thought among other competencies required for venture
success
Some of the bene?ts mentioned by interviewees regarding en-
trepreneurial education were; the development of an open mind
to attempt new things, the assistance in increasing the level of self-
con?dence, and the tools provided for innovative thoughts’ develop-
ment. For example one entrepreneur reported how having taken a
course in entrepreneurship during his college years at the university
helped him to take af?rmative actions to start a business. Today, this
entrepreneur is the owner of a successful company.
I was studying engineering but I took an entrepreneurship course…
That course really helped me expand my vision and understand
that the sky was the limit... I started selling baskets of candy, cookies
and coffee at the University... today I have a successful international
manufacturing company…
1.5. Traditional business “mass-production” education, limited
the development of the entrepreneurial mindset
Four entrepreneurs, two private leaders and three public and
civic leaders mentioned the employee mindset created by the rapid
industrialization process with Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) was a
barrier for the development of an entrepreneurial mindset. Almost
every respondent agreed that the educational approach given during
the era of industrialization was to prepare good employees and that
it remains to this day. Respondents agree that we need to give a “360”
turnaround to education in order to provide space for creativity,
critical thinking and sharing experience, among others things. One
of the entrepreneurs articulated it this way:
…most important business lessons I’ve had come from shared
experiences with other entrepreneurs, not from my business degree...
At the university, they taught me accounting, ?nance... but, did not
teach me how to deal with the challenges you face as an entrepreneur
every day... They de?nitely taught me to be a good follower-employee...
not a visionary-an entrepreneur.
ENTREPRENEURIAL EDUCATION AS A STRATEGY FOR GLOBAL COMPETITIVENESS
16 FORUM EMPRESARIAL Vol. 16,1 (MAYO 2011) ISSN 1541-8561
Table 1 shows some additional quotes on the aforementioned
conditions expressed by responders.
Table 1: Necessity of Changes on P.R. Entrepreneurial Education
Interviewee Quotes
Entrepreneur (15), pages 10-11 “We need to do as they do in Israel. They took private
equity to create an entrepreneurship center…almost like a
university of entrepreneurship…I’m sure if we create that
academy, we will get entrepreneurs to create businesses
with 50 or 60 employees each. Then, that would be much
more productive than leaving things to chance.”
Civic Org Leader (3), page 11 “Thinking in long-term, government and educational
institutions should establish collaborative linkages in a
way that could provide formal entrepreneurial education
for everyone since primary grades….needs to show the
importance of entrepreneurship.”
Private Org. Leader (5), page 16 “They teach us a lot in schools …but what is not being
taught is that you can study to create a business and
you are going to work for yourself…those areas of
entrepreneurship are not cultivated. We should dedicate
more time early in the school process in creating that
business culture…it’s planting the seed.”
Governmental Org. Leader (10),
page 6-8
“To work in the future, we have to educate those that are
in the system now…the way of teaching should engage
the imagination and the problem solving. This is extremely
important for entrepreneurs…thus; education has to be
restructured at all levels.”
Entrepreneur (15), pages 6-12 “The most important factor of entrepreneurship is education.
It’s what gives you the confdence that you can do it…
But the fact is that they are preparing 8:00AM to 5:00PM
employees not entrepreneurs…I think that universities
should change to an entrepreneurial focus.”
DISCUSSIONS AND CONCLUSION
Puerto Rico, which has long fostered an employee mindset, faces a
challenge to move to an entrepreneurial one. During the past decade
a number of universities and business trade organizations have created
educational programs to promote a new entrepreneurship culture.
DE HOYOS RUPERTO / FIGUEROA MEDINA
17
ISSN 1541-8561
However, our interviewees still emphasized the necessity of change
from a traditional environment to an entrepreneurial education.
Those changes should be focus on educational curriculum, exposure
to entrepreneurial experiences, inter-organizational relationships,
entrepreneurial competencies and mindset.
The ?ndings of this study support Guiso, Sapienza, & Zingales
(2006) argument that prior beliefs, values and preferences will
directly impact economic outcomes. Cultural capital, or the mindset
such as attitudes, values, aspirations and sense of self-ef?cacy, may
in?uence the individual behavior and the decision-making process
over time. Therefore, our research suggests the building of a strong
entrepreneurial environment which encourages a change on a
cultural mindset through formal education might be a key piece to the
puzzle. According to the United Nations Conference on Trade and
Development (UNCTD) (2010, p.3) focusing on entrepreneurship
education policies facilitates the creation of an entrepreneurial
culture and supports the entrepreneurs’ development in pursuing
the identi?cation of opportunities.
Moreover, this research reveals the necessity of collaboration
among private, civic and governmental business trade organizations
to accelerate the entrepreneurship education in order to spur an
entrepreneurial environment. The development of entrepreneurial
networks across sectors will provoke partnerships, share of experi-
ences, information and knowledge which is vital to develop a sustain-
able education system. Gibb (2005) highlighted about the existence
of a broad consensus that universities have become more entrepre-
neurial. Hence, universities, institutions, and entrepreneurs as well,
need to be actively involved to play a key role to promote a formal
curriculum transformation. These changes might be address to em-
phasize the necessity of interdisciplinary knowledge, social compe-
tence and the creative thought.
LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH
Our sample size was small, but ample and consistent with similar
qualitative inquiries using a grounded-theory approach. While the
sample included successful and unsuccessful entrepreneurs, they
ENTREPRENEURIAL EDUCATION AS A STRATEGY FOR GLOBAL COMPETITIVENESS
18 FORUM EMPRESARIAL Vol. 16,1 (MAYO 2011) ISSN 1541-8561
were not pre-selected purposefully to represent speci?c types of
business or industry sectors. The strong patterns revealed across our
sample cannot, therefore, be strictly interpreted as representative of
all or a particular industry set of ?rms. Moreover, since the sample
was limited to small-and-medium sized businesses in Puerto Rico,
our ?ndings may not be generalizable to large companies.
We relied on each entrepreneur and leader’s memory and
interpretation of past and current decisions and experiences, which
may have been in?uenced by the effect of time on memory (Park,
Hertzog, Kidder, Morrell, & Mayhorn, 1997). To minimize this risk,
we asked for very speci?c examples and encouraged rich detail in
their telling. However, we recognize that respondents are apt to
consider and report their activities in a manner that re?ects well
upon their own view of themselves (Pasupathi, 2001).
Our ?ndings are most certainly not a comprehensive explanation
of the lack of entrepreneurship in Puerto Rico; rather, they offer a
perspective about potentially critical factors that may affect it. Also,
the results points to additional research opportunities, both qualita-
tive and quantitative, that would further our understanding of Puer-
to Rican educational institutions, business trade leaders and entre-
preneurs and the effects of them on entrepreneurial performance.
Our provision of evidence about the necessity of an educational re-
structuration in Puerto Rico should be followed by more targeted
research on educational institutions to determine if the problem is
cognitive, structural or relational. Case studies of entrepreneurial
educational programs that have overcome the old structures and
that are helping ?ourish the entrepreneurial environment would
provide practical guidance for a new entrepreneurial paradigm.
DE HOYOS RUPERTO / FIGUEROA MEDINA
19
ISSN 1541-8561
REFERENCES
Aponte, M. (2002). Start-Ups in Puerto Rico: Poor entreprenueurial
spirit or structural problem? Paper presented at the International
Council for Small Business, Puerto Rico, June 16-19.
Aponte, M. (1999). Entrepreneurship education: An institution
for development University of Puerto Rico’s model. Paper
presented at the 44th World Conference of the International
Council Small Business, Naples, Italy, June 20-23.
Audretsch, D. B., & Thurik, R. (2001). Linking entrepreneurship to growth.
OECD Science, Technology and Industry Working Papers,
2001/2, OECD Publishing. doi:10.1787/736170038056.
Babbie, E. (2007). The practice of social research (11th Edition).
Belmont, CA: Thomson Higher Education.
Baumol, W., Litan, R., & Schramm, C. (2007). Good capitalism, bad
capitalism, and the economics of growth and prosperity. Michigan:
Yale University Press.
Bosma, N., Jones, K., Autio, E., & Levie, J. (2008). Global entrepreneur-
ship monitor: 2007 executive report. Babson Park, MA and London:
Babson College, London Business School and Global Entrepre-
neuship Research Consortium.
Boyatzis, R. E. (1998). Transforming qualitative information: Thematic
analysis and code development. Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE
Publications, Inc.
Casson, M. (2003). Entrepreneurship, business culture and the
theory of the ?rm. In Z. Acs & D. Audretsch (Eds.), Handbook
of entrepreneurship research (pp. 223-246). Great Britain: Kluwer
Academic Publishers.
Collins, S. M., Bosworth, B. P., & Soto-Class, M. A. (2006). Restoring
growth in Puerto Rico: Overview and policy options. Washington,
D.C.: Brookings Institution Press.
Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008). Basics of qualitative research (3rd
Edition). Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications, Inc.
Corduras-Martinez, A., Levie, J., Kelley, D. J., Saemundsson, R. J.,
& Schott, T. (2010). Global entrepreneurship monitor special report:
A global perspective on entrepreneurship education and training.
GERA.
ENTREPRENEURIAL EDUCATION AS A STRATEGY FOR GLOBAL COMPETITIVENESS
20 FORUM EMPRESARIAL Vol. 16,1 (MAYO 2011) ISSN 1541-8561
Cortés, F. (2006). The development of entrepreneurial networks in
Puerto Rico: A global perspective. Inter Metro Business Journal,
2, 16-38.
Davis, S. J., & Rivera-Batiz, L. A. (2006). The climate for business
development and employment growth. In S. M. Collins, B.
Bosworth & M. A. Soto-Class (Eds.), The economy of Puerto Rico:
Restoring growth (pp. 255-318). Washington, DC: Brooking
Institution Press.
Downey, H., & Ireland, R. (1979). Quantitative versus qualitative: En-
vironmental assessment in organizational Studies. Administra-
tive Science Quarterly, 24(4), 630-637.
Economic Productivity Council. (1994). New economic development model.
San Juan, P.R.: Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Governor’s
Of?ce.
Emerson, R. M., Fretz, R. I., & Shaw, L. L. (1995). Writing ethnographic
?eldnotes. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Gartner, W. B., Shaver, K. G., Carter, N. M., & Reynolds, P. D. (2004).
Handbook of entrepreneurial dynamics: The process of business creation.
California: Sage Publications, Inc.
Gavron, R., Cowling, M., Holtham, G., & Westall, A. (1998). The
entrepreneurial society. London: The Institue for Public Policy
Research.
Gephart, R. (2004). Qualitative research and the Academy of Man-
agement Journal. Academy of Management Journal, 47, 454-462.
Gibb, A. (2005). Towards the entrepreneurial university: Entrepreneurship
education as a lever for change. NCGE Policy paper on their website
www.ncge.org.uk.
Gibb, A., & Hannon, P. (2006). Towards the entrepreneurial university?
Durham, Birmingham: National Council for Graduate Entre-
preneurship.
Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strate-
gies for qualitative reseach. New York: Aldine.
Guiso, L., Sapienza, P., & Zingales, L. (2006). Does the culture af-
fect economic outcomes? Journal of Economic Perspectives, 20(2),
23-48.
DE HOYOS RUPERTO / FIGUEROA MEDINA
21
ISSN 1541-8561
Kantis, H., Ishida, M., & Komori, M. (2002). Entrepreneurship in emerging
economies: The creation and development of new ?rms in Latin America
and East Asia. Washington: Inter-American Development Bank.
Kirby, D. A. (2003). Entrepreneurship education: Can business schools
meet the challenge? In E. Genesca, D. Urbano, J. Capellera,
C. Guallarte & J. Vergés, Creación de empresas: Entrepreneurship:
Homenaje al profesor José María Veciana Vergés (pp. 359-375).
Bellatera: Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona.
Levie, J., & Autio, E. (2007). Entrepreneurial framework conditions
and national-level entrepreneurial activity: Seven- year panel
study. Paper presented at the Third International Global
Entrepreneurship Conference, Washignton, D.C., October 1-3.
Lowrey, Y. (2003). The entrepreneur and entrepreneurship: A
neoclassical approach. Paper presented at the ASSA Annual
Meeting, Washington, D.C: Of?ce of Advocacy, Small Business
Administration, January 5.
Lundström, A., & Stevenson, L. A. (2005). Entrepreneurship policy: The-
ory and practice. New York: Springer Science + Business Media,
Inc.
Maxwell, J. A. (2005). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach
(2nd Edition, Vol. 42). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications,
Inc.
Park, D., Hertzog, C., Kidder, D., Morrell, R., & Mayhorn, C. (1997).
Effect of age on event-based and time-based prospective
memory. Psychology and Aging, 18, 314-327.
Pasupathi, M. (2001). The social construction of the personal past
and its implications for adult development. Psychological Bulletin,
127(5), 661-672.
Reynolds, P., Camp, S., Bygrave, W., Autio, E., & Hay, M. (2002).
Global entrepreneurship report: 2001 executive report. Babson Park,
MA and London, UK: Babson College and London Business
School.
Reynolds, P., Hay, M., & Camp, M. (1999). Global entrepreneurship mon-
itor: 1999 executive report. Babson Park, MA and London: Babson
College and London Business School.
ENTREPRENEURIAL EDUCATION AS A STRATEGY FOR GLOBAL COMPETITIVENESS
22 FORUM EMPRESARIAL Vol. 16,1 (MAYO 2011) ISSN 1541-8561
Saxenian, A. (1994). Regional advantage: Culture and competition in
Silicon Valley and Route 128. Cambridge: Harvard University
Press.
Solomon, G. (1989). Youth: Tomorrow’s entrepreneurs. ICSB Bulletin,
XXVI, 5, 1-2.
Spradley, J. P. (1979). The ethnographic interview. Belmont, CA:
Wadsworth Group/Thomson Learning.
Suddaby, R. (2006). From the editors: What grounded theory is not.
Academy of Management, 49(4), 633-642.
Todaro, M. (1981). Economic development in the Third World. New York:
Longman.
Twaalfhoven, B., & Wilson, K. (2004). Breeding more gazelles: The role
of European universities. Hilversum: European Foundation for
Entrepreneurship Research.
United Nations Conference on Trade and Development. (2010).
Entrepreneurship education, innovation and capacity-building in
developing countries. New York and Geneva: UN Trade and
Development Board.
Van de Ven, A. (2007). Engaged scholarship: A guide for organizational
and social research. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Van Maanen, J. (Ed.). (1979). Reclaiming qualitative methods for
organizational research: Qualitative methodology. Newbury Park:
Sage Publications.
Varela, R. (2003). La cultura empresarial como estrategia de desa-
rrollo para América Latina. In E. Genesca, D. Urbano, J. Cape-
lleras, C. Guallarte & J. Verges, Creación de empresas: Entrepreneu-
rship: Homenaje al profesor José María Veciana Vergés (pp. 471-489).
Bellaterra: Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona.
World Economic Forum. (2009). Educating the next wave of entrepreneurs:
Unlocking entrepreneurial capabilities to meet the global challenges of the
21st century: A report of the Global Education Initiative. Switzerland:
World Economic Forum.
Wright, M. (2007). University-industry links: Regional policies and
iniciatives in the United Kingdom. In S. Yusuf & K. Nabeshima,
How universities promote economic growth (pp. 151-162). Washing-
ton: World Bank.
DE HOYOS RUPERTO / FIGUEROA MEDINA
23
ISSN 1541-8561
APPENDIX A
Interview Protocol
What is your background? 1.
Can you describe your organization? 2.
Can you tell me about successful entrepreneurial events that 3.
you remember from the last ?ve years? Explain what happened
and how it came about.
Can you tell me about any unsuccessful entrepreneurial events 4.
that occurred in the last ?ve years? Tell me what happened and
how they came about.
If you were given a magic wand that would allow you to add 5.
or change something in regard to the entrepreneurial or
business environment in Puerto Rico, what would you wish
for?
ENTREPRENEURIAL EDUCATION AS A STRATEGY FOR GLOBAL COMPETITIVENESS
doc_622580789.pdf
In this brief criteria concerning entrepreneurial education as a strategy for global competitiveness.
Forum Empresarial
ISSN: 1541-8561
[email protected]
Centro de Investigaciones Comerciales e
Iniciativas Académicas
Puerto Rico
De Hoyos Ruperto, Moraima; Figueroa Medina, Carmen I.
Entrepreneurial Education as a Strategy for Global Competitiveness: Entrepreneurship Challenge in
Puerto Rico
Forum Empresarial, vol. 16, núm. 1, mayo, 2011, pp. 1-23
Centro de Investigaciones Comerciales e Iniciativas Académicas
San Juan, Puerto Rico
Available in:http://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=63122680001
How to cite
Complete issue
More information about this article
Journal's homepage in redalyc.org
Scientific Information System
Network of Scientific Journals from Latin America, the Caribbean, Spain and Portugal
Non-profit academic project, developed under the open access initiative
1
ISSN 1541-8561
ABSTRACT:
Entrepreneurial education is important as a diffusion mechanism to foster mind-sets,
skills, and behaviors on the entrepreneurship context in Puerto Rico. Entrepreneur-
ial challenges were denoted by interviewing governmental, private and civic sectors’
leaders as well entrepreneurs. Qualitative analysis demonstrates a successful entre-
preneurial strategy should be anchored in an inter-organizational process that could
build up the adequate entrepreneurial mindset through a formal interdisciplinary edu-
cational curriculum. Results suggest the necessity of change from the traditional busi-
ness education hub to an entrepreneurial education able to develop creative thoughts
as a strategy for global competitiveness and sustainable entrepreneurial growth.
Keywords: entrepreneurship, entrepreneurial education, entrepreneurial environ-
ment, entrepreneurialism
RESUMEN:
La educación empresarial es importante como mecanismo de difusión para promo-
ver mentalidades, aptitudes y conductas necesarias para el contexto empresarial en
Puerto Rico. Los retos empresariales fueron señalados al entrevistar a líderes de secto-
res cívico, gubernamental y privado, en adición de empresarios. El análisis cualitativo
demuestra que una estrategia empresarial exitosa debe basarse en un proceso inte-
gral organizativo que pudiera construir la mentalidad emprendedora mediante un
currículo educativo formal interdisciplinario. Los resultados sugieren la necesidad de
un cambio en la e?gie tradicional de la educación de negocios hacia una educación
empresarial que pueda desarrollar un pensamiento creativo como estrategia para la
competitividad global y el crecimiento empresarial sostenible.
Palabras clave: empresarismo, educación, ambiente empresarial, espíritu emprendedor
FORUM EMPRESARIAL
Vol. 16, Núm. 1 • mayo 2011 / pp. 1-23
Entrepreneurial Education as a Strategy for Global
Competitiveness: Entrepreneurship Challenge
in Puerto Rico
Moraima De Hoyos Ruperto / [email protected]
University of Puerto Rico
Mayagüez Campus
Carmen I. Figueroa Medina / [email protected]
University of Puerto Rico
Mayagüez Campus
2 FORUM EMPRESARIAL Vol. 16,1 (MAYO 2011) ISSN 1541-8561
INTRODUCTION
Studies conducted over the last ten years illustrate the multiple
challenges that country administrators face on designing a sustain-
able and competitive entrepreneurial environment in Puerto Rico.
These challenges encompass a low rate of early-stage entrepreneur-
ial activities (Bosma, Jones, Autio, & Levie, 2008) limited market
structure (Cortés, 2006), structural problems (Aponte, 2002), in ad-
dition of excessive public debt, bureaucracy, and lack of indepen-
dent trade, since Puerto Rico is subject to U.S. trade laws and restric-
tions (Collins, Bosworth, & Soto-Class, 2006; Davis & Rivera-Batiz,
2006). Since, a country’s global competitiveness depends on native
entrepreneurial factors (Casson, 2003) built within their political,
social, and historical context (Reynolds, Hay, & Camp, 1999); en-
trepreneurs, institutions, and governments play strong and speci?c
roles in fostering a nationwide entrepreneurial climate (Lundström
& Stevenson, 2005). This explains why some national economies are
stronger and grow more rapidly than others (Reynolds et al., 2002).
In 1994, the Puerto Rico government joined other private and
civic sectors of the Island to propose an initiative to jumpstart na-
tive entrepreneurial development as part of the “New” National
Economic Development Model (Economic Productivity Council,
1994). To accomplish this objective the private and public sectors
are expected to provide external support to the “native” small busi-
ness enterprises. In addition, the public sector must become more
effective and ef?cient providing the private sector with policies and
regulations that can enable the economic development of Puerto
Rico (Economic Productivity Council, 1994).
Despite this attempt, reports from worldwide organizations
such as the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM), the World
Economic Forum (WEF), and the World Bank (WB) con?rm
that entrepreneurialism has failed to ?ourish in Puerto Rico. For
instance, the 2007 GEM report revealed that among high-income
countries Puerto Rico, at 3.1%, has one of the lowest rates of early-
stage entrepreneurial activity, compared to 9.6% in the United
States, 10% in Hong Kong, and 26%, 23%, and 27%, respectively,
for the low to medium income countries of Peru, Colombia, and
DE HOYOS RUPERTO / FIGUEROA MEDINA
3
ISSN 1541-8561
Thailand. Likewise, the 2007 GEM adult population perception
survey indicates Puerto Rico is average or above average in terms of
entrepreneurial potential, capabilities, and intention, but lower in
opportunity than other high-income countries.
To better our understanding about the reasons for the low level of
entrepreneurial activity in Puerto Rico, we performed a qualitative
research study based on interviewees with local entrepreneurs and
civic, private and governmental leaders throughout the Island. We
theorize that the way in which leaders perceive entrepreneurial
climate may in?uence decisions they make and subsequently affect
new business start-ups. Our study seeks to identify the unique factors
that may impact Puerto Rico entrepreneurial environment with the
purpose of providing useful information to guide decision makers.
Our data suggests that Puerto Rico’s low rate of entrepreneurship
stems from the lack of adequate entrepreneurial education regarding
the general educational curriculum and the linkages of the university
with the outsiders. In addition, higher education programs follow
the traditional business education programs, rather than a creative
one. While, on the other hand, the limited linkages among the
university and other business trade organizations, as well as with
entrepreneurs, restricted the ?ow of valuable information.
A striking de?cit of adequate entrepreneurial education and link-
ages between educational institutions and entrepreneurs has been
well documented in the literature as vital to supporting venture cre-
ation and sustainability. In Puerto Rico this has been identi?ed as a
factor deteriorating entrepreneurship. Our ?ndings call for strategic
initiatives from educational institutions and entrepreneurial support
organizations?public, private, and civic?and entrepreneurs them-
selves to foster educational network development and utilization.
THEORETICAL BACKGROUND
Entrepreneurship is considered a key element for a sustainable
economic growth (Levie & Autio, 2007; Audretsch & Thurik, 2001;
Gartner et al., 2004; Kantis et al., 2002; Lundström & Stevenson,
2005). However, the literature is not entirely consistent about the
factors that drive it. Thus, as Van de Ven (2007) suggests, we need
ENTREPRENEURIAL EDUCATION AS A STRATEGY FOR GLOBAL COMPETITIVENESS
4 FORUM EMPRESARIAL Vol. 16,1 (MAYO 2011) ISSN 1541-8561
to continue evaluating the entrepreneurship process and its causal
mechanisms to advance the understanding of its dynamics and de-
velopment over time.
Entrepreneurship is not solely de?ned by entrepreneurs, but by
the relationships between entrepreneurs, enterprises, and the en-
vironment (Lundström & Stevenson, 2005). Enterprise might be
involved inside an innovative process within existing ?rms, new ven-
ture creation (Audretsch & Thurik, 2001), or through replication
(Baumol et al., 2007); but all with the ?nal purpose of generating
economic activities for the development of a sustainable economy
(Gartner et al., 2004; Kantis et al., 2002). Environmental factors may
include the economic system, institutional arragements such as the
collaboration between university and business trade organization
with entrepreneurs, and the role of government on legal, political,
and social structures, among others (Saxenian, 1994; Lowrey, 2003;
Lundström & Stevenson, 2005).
The Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM), a leading interna-
tional research program intended to enhance understanding of the
role of entrepreneurship in the national economic growth, created
a conceptual model summarizing the major causal mechanisms af-
fecting national economies – the general (GNFCs) and the entre-
preneurial (EFCs) contextual factors. Among the GNFCs, the GEM
model (2007) includes; external trade openness, the role of govern-
ment, ?nancial markets’ ef?ciency, technology intensity, physical
infrastructure, management skills, labor market structure, and in-
stitutional regulations. These factors are considered primarily on a
macroeconomic level. The GEM model also recognizes ten different
EFCs, that primarily work at a microeconomic level, which may affect
the creation and development of new ?rms. They are: 1) ?nancial
support, 2) goverment policies, 3) goverment programs, 4) educa-
tion and training, 5) research and development (R&D) transfer, 6)
commercial and professional infrastructure, 7) international market
openness, 8) access to physical infrastructure, 9) cultural and social
norms, and 10) intellectual property rights protection.
Essentially, Todaro (1981) stated that the structure of the educa-
tional system is linked to the particular economic and social char-
acter of the society in which it is contained, as well as to its history.
DE HOYOS RUPERTO / FIGUEROA MEDINA
5
ISSN 1541-8561
Furthermore, he claimed that the educational system in?uences so-
cial development, thus the link between education and country de-
velopment is a two-way process. In the case of entrepreneurship, the
educational system is considered one of the principal in?uencing
factors of the venture creation process since it is strongly related to
the overall attitude of society (Levie & Autio, 2007; Aponte, 1999).
However, the GEM 2010 expert survey report suggests that entrepre-
neurship education and training in school and outside of school are
inadequate in most countries (Corduras-Martinez, Levie, Kelley, Sae-
mundsson, & Schott, 2010). Moreover, Kirby (2003) af?rmed that
educational systems need to focus not simply on what is taught but
how it is taught.
Therefore, as Varela (2003) argues, our function as a nation is to
educate our citizens within the bounds of ethics and social respon-
sibility to make human beings capable of acting independently, in-
novatively, and with the capacity for achieving goals and taking risks
to create new sources of wealth and employment. This contrasts dra-
matically with the traditional “mass-production” educational system
that has dominated for decades, even in the United States, that tends
to “teach students how to become pro?cient employees instead of
successful business person” (Solomon, 1989). Even when entrepre-
neurship in higher education has grown signi?cantly over the past
5-10 years, and strong growth is expected to continue; researchers
agreed that more needs to be done. Entrepreneurship in higher
education needs to expand particularly in the areas of curriculum
development, training and development of teachers, funding entre-
preneurship, cross disciplinary research collaboration and facilita-
tion of spin-outs from higher education institutions (Twaalfhoven &
Wilson, 2004).
Moreover, Gavron et al. (1998) established that to promote an
entrepreneurial culture, the nations need collaborative policies be-
tween public and private sectors that encourage educational systems
and business support schemes. Recently, the WEF 2009 report ex-
pressed it in the following way: “While the contexts around the world
vary dramatically, entrepreneurship education, in its various forms,
can equip people to proactively, pursue those opportunities available
to them based on their local environments and cultures” (p.12).
ENTREPRENEURIAL EDUCATION AS A STRATEGY FOR GLOBAL COMPETITIVENESS
6 FORUM EMPRESARIAL Vol. 16,1 (MAYO 2011) ISSN 1541-8561
In that sense, Lundström & Stevenson (2005) recognized the im-
portance of the role of government on the adequacy to set policies,
joint with the role of universities and other educational organiza-
tions in the emergence of entrepreneurship culture. Hence, the
conection between the educational organizations and outsiders is
particularly important in order to build an overall understanding of
the entrepreneurship domain through the society’s education and
build awareness about the value and support of entrepreneurship
on the country’s development (Gavron et al., 1998). Similarly, uni-
versities play a key role as entrepreneurial hub, connecting research-
ers, students, entrepreneurs, companies and other stakeholders
(Saxenian, 1994; World Economic Forum, 2009). Furthermore, the
conection between universities and the rest of the entrepreneurial
stakeholders generally provides key players in the processes of inven-
tion, innovation and commercialization (Wright, 2007). The WEF
(2009) highlighted the importance of entrepreneurship education
and training on the development of entrepreneurial capabilities in
the following way:
… while education is one of the most important foundations for
economic development, entrepreneurship is a major driver of
innovation and economic growth. Entrepreneurship education
plays an essential role in shaping attitudes, skills and culture-
from the primary level up. We believe entrepreneurial skills,
attitude and behaviors can be learned, and that exposure to
entrepreneurship education throughout an individual’s lifelong
learning path, starting from youth and continuing through
adulhood into higher education-as well as reaching out to those
economically or socially excluded-is imperative. (p. 7-8)
Furthermore, Gibb & Hannon (2006) recognized the fundamen-
tal of training students in the skills they will need to develop the
entrepreneurial ability of creating business ideas, identifying and
recognizing opportunities, setting up a business and managing its
growth. Typically, skill-building courses in entrepreneurship educa-
tion are creativity, new venture creation, business planning, lead-
ership, entrepreneurial marketing, entrepreneurial ?nance and
growth management as well as soft skills such as negotiation. How-
ever, the GEM 2010 special report on education recommends the
DE HOYOS RUPERTO / FIGUEROA MEDINA
7
ISSN 1541-8561
evaluation and encouragement of creativity, self-suf?ciency, and in-
novation as well as the study of entrepreneurship since primary and
secondary schools.
RESEARCH OBJECTIVES
Our study seeks to identify the unique factors that may impact
Puerto Rico’s entrepreneurial environment with the purpose of
providing useful information to guide decision makers. Based on
the prominent themes that emerged through the interviews, the
entrepreneurship challenge under consideration is education. Also,
this study aims to address the unexplained stagnant entrepreneurial
environment in Puerto Rico, even when new venture creation is
positively perceived (Aponte, 2002) and indicators points’ to average
or above conditions, in terms of entrepreneurial potential, capabilities
and intentions, compared with other high income countries (GEM
2007). Entrepreneur’s understandings of environmental barriers to
and enablers of business creation may, we reasoned, affect how and to
what extent they launch new ?rms. For a future project, others areas
like individual networking and systemic networking will be included
in order to obtain a better understanding of the entrepreneurship
challenge in Puerto Rico.
METHODOLOGY
While there are many qualitative methods available to research-
ers, a grounded theory approach was preferred for this study. This
method intersects disciplines and subjects, providing the oppor-
tunity to develop an in-depth understanding of the Puerto Rico’s
entrepreneurial condition through governmental private and civic
sectors leaders as well entrepreneurs. Semi-structural interview com-
prised of open-ended questions (as the Appendix A shows) were
performed to maximize the opportunity for respondents for free
expression while allowing the authors to guide the general direction
of the interview.
Methodologies are “neither appropriate nor inappropriate until
they are applied to a speci?c research problem” (Downey & Ireland,
ENTREPRENEURIAL EDUCATION AS A STRATEGY FOR GLOBAL COMPETITIVENESS
8 FORUM EMPRESARIAL Vol. 16,1 (MAYO 2011) ISSN 1541-8561
1979). A researcher’s choice of methodology should take into ac-
count the research objective, the research question, and the prob-
lem to be addressed. As Van Maanen (1979) points out, the choice
of research methodology is situated “in the overall form, focus and
emphasis of study.” We believe the qualitative inquiry method was
well suited to address the subject of this study: the unexplained fail-
ure of a sustainable entrepreneurial environment in Puerto Rico.
We were interested in discerning how key ?gures in Puerto Rico—
entrepreneurs as well as policy makers and in?uential leaders who
may directly or indirectly affect entrepreneurial efforts—perceive
the Island’s current entrepreneurial movement or atmosphere. Our
intent was to gather “rich” data from these individuals based on their
personal experiences and backgrounds as well as their understand-
ing of entrepreneurialism and what it means to them (Babbie, 2007;
Maxwell, 2005).
Suddaby (2006) suggests that grounded theory is more appropri-
ate when wanting to learn how individuals interpret reality—in our
case how leaders and entrepreneurs perceive the entrepreneurial
environment and its socio-economic role in Puerto Rico. Grounded
theory emphasizes the observation of patterns in the data that help
us to build theories directly from “the actual meanings and con-
cepts used by social actors in a real setting” (Gephart, 2004: 457).
Grounded theorists aim to remain “open” to the data by resisting
commitment to a prior theory or assumption. The grounded theo-
rist’s commitment to “openness” is also re?ected in the data collec-
tion process.
The conducted semi-structured interviews comprised of open-
ended questions that maximized respondents’ opportunities for
free expression while allowing us to guide the general direction of
the interviews. Considering the same way, trying to avoid implicit
hypothesis-testing and instead allows for inductive reasoning to pre-
vail. Nevertheless, this knowledge implies the possibility of a bias on
the part of the author, since a theory-free individual, without expec-
tations when collecting and analyzing data is unrealistic. Two impor-
tant characteristics of grounded theory are constant comparison and
theoretical sampling. Constant comparison refers to the researcher’s
continual examination and comparison of data or a simultaneously
DE HOYOS RUPERTO / FIGUEROA MEDINA
9
ISSN 1541-8561
collected and analyzed process. This implies immediate active im-
mersion in the data rather than its post-collection management.
Theoretical sampling also refers to the researcher’s recognition that
the data, rather than a prior design decision, dictates when the data
collection terminates. Consequently, the size and composition of the
sample may be suggested, but not dictated by prior design. Two main
principles under the theoretical sampling are appropriateness and
adequacy (Glaser, 1967). Appropriateness was achieved by carefully
selecting participants who were knowledgeable about the area being
explored, while adequacy was addressed by continuing the sampling
and coding until theoretical saturation was reached.
SAMPLE
Fifteen organizational leaders in Puerto Rico —?ve from each sec-
tor; the civil, governmental, and private sector— and ?fteen entre-
preneurs were selected to take part in this study. The civic, public,
and private sector participants were selected through the following
process. We identi?ed key agencies and organizations from several
available sources, including the Puerto Rico Of?cial Government’s
Web site, which details the government agencies involved in business
start-ups, and the Puerto Rico. Industrial and Commercial Directory
and its respective Web site. Then, relying on the researcher’s per-
sonal network and experience and those of several business experts,
the list was narrowed to twenty-?ve organizations chosen based on
their public intervention in policy matters. From those twenty-?ve,
?fteen initial representatives were identi?ed. Criteria for selection
were their business/industrial sector and the geographical area
they cover. A careful selection was made to re?ect a wide range
of knowledge about Puerto Rico’s entrepreneurial efforts. Since
we were seeking to understand the entrepreneurial environment
as perceived by those who have the ability to encourage change
in Puerto Rico’s entrepreneurial policies, the leaders selected for
this study were in top management positions, such as presidents,
directors, and executive directors of those organizations with
public policy in?uence. If any one of the ?rst ?fteen selected was
ENTREPRENEURIAL EDUCATION AS A STRATEGY FOR GLOBAL COMPETITIVENESS
10 FORUM EMPRESARIAL Vol. 16,1 (MAYO 2011) ISSN 1541-8561
unavailable, he or she was substituted by another similar and/or
related organizational leader. In this manner the total of available
organizational leaders that were interviewed was fourteen, including
four from the private sector, ?ve from the public sector and ?ve from
the civic sector.
Entrepreneurs were chosen from among those mentioned in in-
terviews with the above-mentioned leaders and based on their avail-
ability; eleven entrepreneurs were interviewed. The list included
both newly established and experienced entrepreneurs. Since these
entrepreneurs were named during conversations with the organiza-
tional leaders, factors such as industry diversity and the type and/or
business size were not controlled. In accordance with the principles
of theoretical sampling, which permits decisions about sample size
and composition to change during the process of data collection, a
decision was made to extend the sample to Puerto Rican entrepre-
neurs doing business outside the Island. These entrepreneurs were
selected from the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce directory and,
because of the information at our disposal and the access to it, all
were from the state of Ohio. We later decided not to include those
four Ohio interviews in the analysis because the conversations did
not ?t the study’s purpose.
DATA COLLECTION
The primary data collecting method was semi-structured inter-
views that lasted about one hour and were conducted between June
and August 2009. Respondents were contacted via phone or e-mail
to determine if they were willing to be interviewed. Twenty one face-
to-face interviews and four telephone interviews were conducted. All
were audio recorded with the permission of the interviewee. The re-
corded interviews were electronically stored and professionally tran-
scribed. An interview protocol was used to ensure consistency even
when the semi-structured methods followed intuitive leads during
the interview process (Spradley, 1979).
The interview questions were broad and open-ended to allow re-
spondents to narrate experiences and understandings rather than
be questioned solely on speci?c details (Maxwell, 2005). The ques-
DE HOYOS RUPERTO / FIGUEROA MEDINA
11
ISSN 1541-8561
tions were aimed toward individual experiences and sought to avoid
theoretical or hypothetical assessments. They also encouraged sub-
stantial responses from interviewees and allowed them to emphasize
ideas and issues most relevant to the events they described.
We began by asking respondents to describe their personal
and professional background. This gave us the opportunity to
understand how their academic ?elds, years of experience, and their
specializations, for example, in?uenced each one’s perspective and
the various issues they discussed during the interview. Second, we
asked respondents to talk about the organization or business they
represent. This question gave us a broader understanding of the
organization’s purpose or agenda and the business environment
to which each is related. Next we asked participants to describe a
successful entrepreneurial venture they witnessed or experienced
?rsthand in Puerto Rico during the last ?ve years. The purpose of
this question was to identify what the informant saw as the most
relevant factors to entrepreneurial success. Thereafter, we asked
the participants to describe an unsuccessful venture they directly
experienced or witnessed in Puerto Rico during the last ?ve years,
with the same purpose, and to help identify the factors they consider
detrimental to the entrepreneurial environment. Finally, we gave
each interviewee an opportunity to discuss what he or she thinks
are the most important factors driving entrepreneurship, negatively
as well as positively, in Puerto Rico. This question was meant to
provide the interviewees the opportunity to freely express what he
or she would do to change the environment in Puerto Rico without
limitations, as if with a “magic wand.” One question was added for
those Puerto Ricans doing business abroad to explore why they
decided to leave instead of remaining on the Island.
DATA ANALYSIS
Qualitative data analysis often involves a coding process during
which raw data is raised to a conceptual level. We used techniques
recommended by Corbin and Strauss conducted open, axial, and
selective coding that allowed us to make comparisons between data
and, in doing so, derive ideas to stand for the data and develop
ENTREPRENEURIAL EDUCATION AS A STRATEGY FOR GLOBAL COMPETITIVENESS
12 FORUM EMPRESARIAL Vol. 16,1 (MAYO 2011) ISSN 1541-8561
properties and dimensions of the concepts (Corbin & Strauss, 2008).
This kind of analysis involves a process of generating, developing,
and verifying impressions by continual comparison of similarities
and differences against the next set of data and/or revising previous
concepts.
Recordings of the interviews were listened to multiple times and
the transcripts read repeatedly in an attempt to develop tentative
ideas about categories and relationships (Emerson, Fretz, & Shaw,
1995). The coding process was conducted as soon as the transcribed
interviews were available and was accomplished through the use
of manual techniques. Using the inductive process followed by the
theoretical sampling approach helped us identify relevant concepts,
patterns, and themes. Under the theoretical sampling approach we
were able to gather follow-up data based on those relevant concepts
and to be more sensitive during subsequent interviews with regard to
questions, observations, and listening. We began by conducting open-
coding, a line by line analysis of every transcript to identify “codable
moments” (Boyatsis, 1998) or fragments of text with potential
signi?cance. We captured 2,352 such “moments” in the twenty-
one interviews. These were compared and assigned to 122 labeled
categories. Next we considered the categories independently for
each of the two subsets of our sample—leaders and entrepreneurs—
nothing ?rst level similarities and differences between them. During
the second phase of coding (axial coding), re-examination of
our codes and the text they represented resulted in re?ning and
combining related themes and concepts emerging from the data
(Corbin and Strauss, 2008) and moving back and forth between the
data and the literature. This process reduced the substantive codes
earlier generated from 2,352 to 210 and into 10 labeled categories
(Boyatsis, 1998).
Our third phase of analysis involved selective coding such is a
process in which the integration of categories and conceptualization
moved us from substantive to formal theory. The theory building
process allowed us to derive an explanatory framework to describe
the phenomenon the participants were explaining and, more
importantly, look at the implications and relevance of this theory in
more than one substantive area (Glaser & Strauss, 1967). As part of
DE HOYOS RUPERTO / FIGUEROA MEDINA
13
ISSN 1541-8561
the above data analysis process, several memos, interview outlines,
and notes were written. These memos and notes were constantly
reviewed, revised, and organized as data collection and analysis
continued.
FINDINGS
The ?nding suggests that two major challenges related to educa-
tion should be addressed in order to be competitive in the global
arena. First, the requirement of a transformation on entrepreneurial
education that might promote the creative thought as a strategy for
a sustainable entrepreneurial growth in Puerto Rico. Second, the ur-
gency of collaboration agreements among several institutions, such
as the university and other private, public, and civic organizations, in
order to expand entrepreneurial opportunities.
FINDING 1: Entrepreneurial education is recognize as strategy for
global competitiveness
1.1. Changes in educational curriculum is one of the most
urgent requirements for the ?ourishing of entrepreneurial
environment
Twenty out of twenty-one respondents are aware that the
country’s lack of formal entrepreneurial education is a limitation for
entrepreneurship in Puerto Rico. An entrepreneur expressed it in
the following way:
Look at education. For example, in my MBA, they never talked
about entrepreneurship. From 1993 to 1997, they taught me about
business, but more about how to work within a company and rise up
as a manager in the company. But the fact was [I was educated] to
be a worker, not an entrepreneur. There wasn’t [entrepreneurial]
preparation or an ecosystem.
Even when members of all groups recognized the necessity to
make changes on the educational curriculum, private and public
leaders were the groups who suggested this was the most urgent re-
quirement for the entrepreneurial environment change.
ENTREPRENEURIAL EDUCATION AS A STRATEGY FOR GLOBAL COMPETITIVENESS
14 FORUM EMPRESARIAL Vol. 16,1 (MAYO 2011) ISSN 1541-8561
1.2. Successful entrepreneurs recognize their entrepreneurial
education experience as a key factor for their success
Successful entrepreneurs recognize their entrepreneurial educa-
tion experience as a key factor in their success. Moreover, four of
them narrated the process of self-education on business and entre-
preneurial issues as a key step for their business starting process.
These four entrepreneurs mention that even when they had their
respective ?eld of education, the absence of entrepreneurial educa-
tion was a de?ciency recognized by them during the start-up process.
Four out of ?ve civic leaders point out the great amount of short
term entrepreneurial educational programs available that include
seminars, individual consulting service for starting a business, as well
as other matters like ?nancing options and business requirements
on the island. The aforementioned issue suggests that the acknowl-
edgment of the importance of entrepreneurial education by entre-
preneurs might be a key element for the venture success.
1.3. The limited formal entrepreneurial education linkages
among institutions restrict the development of a competitive
entrepreneurial environment in Puerto Rico
Members of all groups recognize the limited formal linkages
among university, government, private and civic organization as
a barrier for the local entrepreneurial to ?ourish as the following
quotes exemplify:
What we need to do is strategize with the universities and the private
sector to work toward entrepreneurial development. To do that we
must break the kiosk mentality in which each one wants control and
are looking to grab the other’s prestige and respect.
Three civic leaders and seven entrepreneurs’ af?rm the impor-
tance of the university as a source of information, knowledge and
experience that can rebound in opportunities for entrepreneurs
as the following interviewee said: “An opportunity was provided to
utilize technological knowledge along with education, and I took
advantage of it.”
DE HOYOS RUPERTO / FIGUEROA MEDINA
15
ISSN 1541-8561
1.4. Entrepreneurial education helps to develop the creative
thought among other competencies required for venture
success
Some of the bene?ts mentioned by interviewees regarding en-
trepreneurial education were; the development of an open mind
to attempt new things, the assistance in increasing the level of self-
con?dence, and the tools provided for innovative thoughts’ develop-
ment. For example one entrepreneur reported how having taken a
course in entrepreneurship during his college years at the university
helped him to take af?rmative actions to start a business. Today, this
entrepreneur is the owner of a successful company.
I was studying engineering but I took an entrepreneurship course…
That course really helped me expand my vision and understand
that the sky was the limit... I started selling baskets of candy, cookies
and coffee at the University... today I have a successful international
manufacturing company…
1.5. Traditional business “mass-production” education, limited
the development of the entrepreneurial mindset
Four entrepreneurs, two private leaders and three public and
civic leaders mentioned the employee mindset created by the rapid
industrialization process with Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) was a
barrier for the development of an entrepreneurial mindset. Almost
every respondent agreed that the educational approach given during
the era of industrialization was to prepare good employees and that
it remains to this day. Respondents agree that we need to give a “360”
turnaround to education in order to provide space for creativity,
critical thinking and sharing experience, among others things. One
of the entrepreneurs articulated it this way:
…most important business lessons I’ve had come from shared
experiences with other entrepreneurs, not from my business degree...
At the university, they taught me accounting, ?nance... but, did not
teach me how to deal with the challenges you face as an entrepreneur
every day... They de?nitely taught me to be a good follower-employee...
not a visionary-an entrepreneur.
ENTREPRENEURIAL EDUCATION AS A STRATEGY FOR GLOBAL COMPETITIVENESS
16 FORUM EMPRESARIAL Vol. 16,1 (MAYO 2011) ISSN 1541-8561
Table 1 shows some additional quotes on the aforementioned
conditions expressed by responders.
Table 1: Necessity of Changes on P.R. Entrepreneurial Education
Interviewee Quotes
Entrepreneur (15), pages 10-11 “We need to do as they do in Israel. They took private
equity to create an entrepreneurship center…almost like a
university of entrepreneurship…I’m sure if we create that
academy, we will get entrepreneurs to create businesses
with 50 or 60 employees each. Then, that would be much
more productive than leaving things to chance.”
Civic Org Leader (3), page 11 “Thinking in long-term, government and educational
institutions should establish collaborative linkages in a
way that could provide formal entrepreneurial education
for everyone since primary grades….needs to show the
importance of entrepreneurship.”
Private Org. Leader (5), page 16 “They teach us a lot in schools …but what is not being
taught is that you can study to create a business and
you are going to work for yourself…those areas of
entrepreneurship are not cultivated. We should dedicate
more time early in the school process in creating that
business culture…it’s planting the seed.”
Governmental Org. Leader (10),
page 6-8
“To work in the future, we have to educate those that are
in the system now…the way of teaching should engage
the imagination and the problem solving. This is extremely
important for entrepreneurs…thus; education has to be
restructured at all levels.”
Entrepreneur (15), pages 6-12 “The most important factor of entrepreneurship is education.
It’s what gives you the confdence that you can do it…
But the fact is that they are preparing 8:00AM to 5:00PM
employees not entrepreneurs…I think that universities
should change to an entrepreneurial focus.”
DISCUSSIONS AND CONCLUSION
Puerto Rico, which has long fostered an employee mindset, faces a
challenge to move to an entrepreneurial one. During the past decade
a number of universities and business trade organizations have created
educational programs to promote a new entrepreneurship culture.
DE HOYOS RUPERTO / FIGUEROA MEDINA
17
ISSN 1541-8561
However, our interviewees still emphasized the necessity of change
from a traditional environment to an entrepreneurial education.
Those changes should be focus on educational curriculum, exposure
to entrepreneurial experiences, inter-organizational relationships,
entrepreneurial competencies and mindset.
The ?ndings of this study support Guiso, Sapienza, & Zingales
(2006) argument that prior beliefs, values and preferences will
directly impact economic outcomes. Cultural capital, or the mindset
such as attitudes, values, aspirations and sense of self-ef?cacy, may
in?uence the individual behavior and the decision-making process
over time. Therefore, our research suggests the building of a strong
entrepreneurial environment which encourages a change on a
cultural mindset through formal education might be a key piece to the
puzzle. According to the United Nations Conference on Trade and
Development (UNCTD) (2010, p.3) focusing on entrepreneurship
education policies facilitates the creation of an entrepreneurial
culture and supports the entrepreneurs’ development in pursuing
the identi?cation of opportunities.
Moreover, this research reveals the necessity of collaboration
among private, civic and governmental business trade organizations
to accelerate the entrepreneurship education in order to spur an
entrepreneurial environment. The development of entrepreneurial
networks across sectors will provoke partnerships, share of experi-
ences, information and knowledge which is vital to develop a sustain-
able education system. Gibb (2005) highlighted about the existence
of a broad consensus that universities have become more entrepre-
neurial. Hence, universities, institutions, and entrepreneurs as well,
need to be actively involved to play a key role to promote a formal
curriculum transformation. These changes might be address to em-
phasize the necessity of interdisciplinary knowledge, social compe-
tence and the creative thought.
LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH
Our sample size was small, but ample and consistent with similar
qualitative inquiries using a grounded-theory approach. While the
sample included successful and unsuccessful entrepreneurs, they
ENTREPRENEURIAL EDUCATION AS A STRATEGY FOR GLOBAL COMPETITIVENESS
18 FORUM EMPRESARIAL Vol. 16,1 (MAYO 2011) ISSN 1541-8561
were not pre-selected purposefully to represent speci?c types of
business or industry sectors. The strong patterns revealed across our
sample cannot, therefore, be strictly interpreted as representative of
all or a particular industry set of ?rms. Moreover, since the sample
was limited to small-and-medium sized businesses in Puerto Rico,
our ?ndings may not be generalizable to large companies.
We relied on each entrepreneur and leader’s memory and
interpretation of past and current decisions and experiences, which
may have been in?uenced by the effect of time on memory (Park,
Hertzog, Kidder, Morrell, & Mayhorn, 1997). To minimize this risk,
we asked for very speci?c examples and encouraged rich detail in
their telling. However, we recognize that respondents are apt to
consider and report their activities in a manner that re?ects well
upon their own view of themselves (Pasupathi, 2001).
Our ?ndings are most certainly not a comprehensive explanation
of the lack of entrepreneurship in Puerto Rico; rather, they offer a
perspective about potentially critical factors that may affect it. Also,
the results points to additional research opportunities, both qualita-
tive and quantitative, that would further our understanding of Puer-
to Rican educational institutions, business trade leaders and entre-
preneurs and the effects of them on entrepreneurial performance.
Our provision of evidence about the necessity of an educational re-
structuration in Puerto Rico should be followed by more targeted
research on educational institutions to determine if the problem is
cognitive, structural or relational. Case studies of entrepreneurial
educational programs that have overcome the old structures and
that are helping ?ourish the entrepreneurial environment would
provide practical guidance for a new entrepreneurial paradigm.
DE HOYOS RUPERTO / FIGUEROA MEDINA
19
ISSN 1541-8561
REFERENCES
Aponte, M. (2002). Start-Ups in Puerto Rico: Poor entreprenueurial
spirit or structural problem? Paper presented at the International
Council for Small Business, Puerto Rico, June 16-19.
Aponte, M. (1999). Entrepreneurship education: An institution
for development University of Puerto Rico’s model. Paper
presented at the 44th World Conference of the International
Council Small Business, Naples, Italy, June 20-23.
Audretsch, D. B., & Thurik, R. (2001). Linking entrepreneurship to growth.
OECD Science, Technology and Industry Working Papers,
2001/2, OECD Publishing. doi:10.1787/736170038056.
Babbie, E. (2007). The practice of social research (11th Edition).
Belmont, CA: Thomson Higher Education.
Baumol, W., Litan, R., & Schramm, C. (2007). Good capitalism, bad
capitalism, and the economics of growth and prosperity. Michigan:
Yale University Press.
Bosma, N., Jones, K., Autio, E., & Levie, J. (2008). Global entrepreneur-
ship monitor: 2007 executive report. Babson Park, MA and London:
Babson College, London Business School and Global Entrepre-
neuship Research Consortium.
Boyatzis, R. E. (1998). Transforming qualitative information: Thematic
analysis and code development. Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE
Publications, Inc.
Casson, M. (2003). Entrepreneurship, business culture and the
theory of the ?rm. In Z. Acs & D. Audretsch (Eds.), Handbook
of entrepreneurship research (pp. 223-246). Great Britain: Kluwer
Academic Publishers.
Collins, S. M., Bosworth, B. P., & Soto-Class, M. A. (2006). Restoring
growth in Puerto Rico: Overview and policy options. Washington,
D.C.: Brookings Institution Press.
Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008). Basics of qualitative research (3rd
Edition). Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications, Inc.
Corduras-Martinez, A., Levie, J., Kelley, D. J., Saemundsson, R. J.,
& Schott, T. (2010). Global entrepreneurship monitor special report:
A global perspective on entrepreneurship education and training.
GERA.
ENTREPRENEURIAL EDUCATION AS A STRATEGY FOR GLOBAL COMPETITIVENESS
20 FORUM EMPRESARIAL Vol. 16,1 (MAYO 2011) ISSN 1541-8561
Cortés, F. (2006). The development of entrepreneurial networks in
Puerto Rico: A global perspective. Inter Metro Business Journal,
2, 16-38.
Davis, S. J., & Rivera-Batiz, L. A. (2006). The climate for business
development and employment growth. In S. M. Collins, B.
Bosworth & M. A. Soto-Class (Eds.), The economy of Puerto Rico:
Restoring growth (pp. 255-318). Washington, DC: Brooking
Institution Press.
Downey, H., & Ireland, R. (1979). Quantitative versus qualitative: En-
vironmental assessment in organizational Studies. Administra-
tive Science Quarterly, 24(4), 630-637.
Economic Productivity Council. (1994). New economic development model.
San Juan, P.R.: Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Governor’s
Of?ce.
Emerson, R. M., Fretz, R. I., & Shaw, L. L. (1995). Writing ethnographic
?eldnotes. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Gartner, W. B., Shaver, K. G., Carter, N. M., & Reynolds, P. D. (2004).
Handbook of entrepreneurial dynamics: The process of business creation.
California: Sage Publications, Inc.
Gavron, R., Cowling, M., Holtham, G., & Westall, A. (1998). The
entrepreneurial society. London: The Institue for Public Policy
Research.
Gephart, R. (2004). Qualitative research and the Academy of Man-
agement Journal. Academy of Management Journal, 47, 454-462.
Gibb, A. (2005). Towards the entrepreneurial university: Entrepreneurship
education as a lever for change. NCGE Policy paper on their website
www.ncge.org.uk.
Gibb, A., & Hannon, P. (2006). Towards the entrepreneurial university?
Durham, Birmingham: National Council for Graduate Entre-
preneurship.
Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strate-
gies for qualitative reseach. New York: Aldine.
Guiso, L., Sapienza, P., & Zingales, L. (2006). Does the culture af-
fect economic outcomes? Journal of Economic Perspectives, 20(2),
23-48.
DE HOYOS RUPERTO / FIGUEROA MEDINA
21
ISSN 1541-8561
Kantis, H., Ishida, M., & Komori, M. (2002). Entrepreneurship in emerging
economies: The creation and development of new ?rms in Latin America
and East Asia. Washington: Inter-American Development Bank.
Kirby, D. A. (2003). Entrepreneurship education: Can business schools
meet the challenge? In E. Genesca, D. Urbano, J. Capellera,
C. Guallarte & J. Vergés, Creación de empresas: Entrepreneurship:
Homenaje al profesor José María Veciana Vergés (pp. 359-375).
Bellatera: Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona.
Levie, J., & Autio, E. (2007). Entrepreneurial framework conditions
and national-level entrepreneurial activity: Seven- year panel
study. Paper presented at the Third International Global
Entrepreneurship Conference, Washignton, D.C., October 1-3.
Lowrey, Y. (2003). The entrepreneur and entrepreneurship: A
neoclassical approach. Paper presented at the ASSA Annual
Meeting, Washington, D.C: Of?ce of Advocacy, Small Business
Administration, January 5.
Lundström, A., & Stevenson, L. A. (2005). Entrepreneurship policy: The-
ory and practice. New York: Springer Science + Business Media,
Inc.
Maxwell, J. A. (2005). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach
(2nd Edition, Vol. 42). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications,
Inc.
Park, D., Hertzog, C., Kidder, D., Morrell, R., & Mayhorn, C. (1997).
Effect of age on event-based and time-based prospective
memory. Psychology and Aging, 18, 314-327.
Pasupathi, M. (2001). The social construction of the personal past
and its implications for adult development. Psychological Bulletin,
127(5), 661-672.
Reynolds, P., Camp, S., Bygrave, W., Autio, E., & Hay, M. (2002).
Global entrepreneurship report: 2001 executive report. Babson Park,
MA and London, UK: Babson College and London Business
School.
Reynolds, P., Hay, M., & Camp, M. (1999). Global entrepreneurship mon-
itor: 1999 executive report. Babson Park, MA and London: Babson
College and London Business School.
ENTREPRENEURIAL EDUCATION AS A STRATEGY FOR GLOBAL COMPETITIVENESS
22 FORUM EMPRESARIAL Vol. 16,1 (MAYO 2011) ISSN 1541-8561
Saxenian, A. (1994). Regional advantage: Culture and competition in
Silicon Valley and Route 128. Cambridge: Harvard University
Press.
Solomon, G. (1989). Youth: Tomorrow’s entrepreneurs. ICSB Bulletin,
XXVI, 5, 1-2.
Spradley, J. P. (1979). The ethnographic interview. Belmont, CA:
Wadsworth Group/Thomson Learning.
Suddaby, R. (2006). From the editors: What grounded theory is not.
Academy of Management, 49(4), 633-642.
Todaro, M. (1981). Economic development in the Third World. New York:
Longman.
Twaalfhoven, B., & Wilson, K. (2004). Breeding more gazelles: The role
of European universities. Hilversum: European Foundation for
Entrepreneurship Research.
United Nations Conference on Trade and Development. (2010).
Entrepreneurship education, innovation and capacity-building in
developing countries. New York and Geneva: UN Trade and
Development Board.
Van de Ven, A. (2007). Engaged scholarship: A guide for organizational
and social research. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Van Maanen, J. (Ed.). (1979). Reclaiming qualitative methods for
organizational research: Qualitative methodology. Newbury Park:
Sage Publications.
Varela, R. (2003). La cultura empresarial como estrategia de desa-
rrollo para América Latina. In E. Genesca, D. Urbano, J. Cape-
lleras, C. Guallarte & J. Verges, Creación de empresas: Entrepreneu-
rship: Homenaje al profesor José María Veciana Vergés (pp. 471-489).
Bellaterra: Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona.
World Economic Forum. (2009). Educating the next wave of entrepreneurs:
Unlocking entrepreneurial capabilities to meet the global challenges of the
21st century: A report of the Global Education Initiative. Switzerland:
World Economic Forum.
Wright, M. (2007). University-industry links: Regional policies and
iniciatives in the United Kingdom. In S. Yusuf & K. Nabeshima,
How universities promote economic growth (pp. 151-162). Washing-
ton: World Bank.
DE HOYOS RUPERTO / FIGUEROA MEDINA
23
ISSN 1541-8561
APPENDIX A
Interview Protocol
What is your background? 1.
Can you describe your organization? 2.
Can you tell me about successful entrepreneurial events that 3.
you remember from the last ?ve years? Explain what happened
and how it came about.
Can you tell me about any unsuccessful entrepreneurial events 4.
that occurred in the last ?ve years? Tell me what happened and
how they came about.
If you were given a magic wand that would allow you to add 5.
or change something in regard to the entrepreneurial or
business environment in Puerto Rico, what would you wish
for?
ENTREPRENEURIAL EDUCATION AS A STRATEGY FOR GLOBAL COMPETITIVENESS
doc_622580789.pdf