Description
Within this particular detailed elucidation with regards to management education and entrepreneurship dr sushmita b waraich.
AIMA Journal of Management & Research, November 2012, Volume 6, Issue 4/4, ISSN 0974-497 Copy
right © 2012 AJMR-AIMA
Article No.6
MANAGEMENT EDUCATION AND
ENTREPRENEURSHIP
Dr Sushmita B Waraich
Associate Professor at IITM, under GGS Indraprastha University
&
Renu Sharma
Pursuing PhD
Abstract: Since the job market could reach a saturation point, the inventory of available jobs may
be exhausted soon, creating entrepreneurs would go a long way towards the development of the economy
as well as job creation. The education sector, by encouraging entrepreneurial spirit could itself become an
established growth industry. Management education provides a potential fertile ground to develop
entrepreneurial skills and abilities like independent thinking, opportunity identification, risk taking ability
etc. It could provide a hunting ground to discover the hidden entrepreneurs from amongst the otherwise
academically talented crop of students. This paper explores the linkage between management education and
entrepreneurship, whether B-schools can create/discover entrepreneurs, the content and relevance of
entrepreneurship courses at B-schools and the significance of incubator programs in B-schools. For the
purpose of this qualitative research, 22 entrepreneurs were interviewed, their views taken and analyzed.
Key words: Entrepreneurship, Education, B-schools, incubator programs
Introduction and Review of Literature
In today’s world of work, it is increasingly being felt that, with jobs reaching a saturation
point creating entrepreneurs would go a long way in the creation of jobs and also
development of the economy. Though there are different schools of thought, where one
school is of the view that it is in the genes and another school believes that entrepreneurs
can be made. If we believe in the former than no effort will be made, with the assumption
that it will come only automatically where we have no roles to play. Entrepreneurship
plays such a vital role in the economic development of countries all over the world.
Educating people who can start, innovate, build or buy businesses is crucial to the
economic development of the world. It is essential that schools continue to invest heavily
in entrepreneurship to enhance their region’s economic viability (Finkle 2012). The
importance of encouraging the development of small and medium size enterprises in the
promotion of economic growth is a familiar theme (OECD, 1993). There seems to be
widespread recognition that entrepreneurship is the engine driving the economy and
society of most nations (Brock and Evans, 1989; Acs, 1992; Carree and Thurik, 2002).
Recognizing the economic benefits of entrepreneurship, governments in different
AIMA Journal of Management & Research, November 2012, Volume 6, Issue 4/4, ISSN 0974-497 Copy
right © 2012 AJMR-AIMA
countries envision universities as agents fostering entrepreneurial activities (Bunders,
Broerse and Zweekhorst, 1999). Carl Schramm of the Kauffman Foundation argues, in a
comment more relevant to the current economic situation, “Historically through the last
seven recessions it’s been entrepreneurs who essentially restarted the economy” (Riley,
2009).
There is increasing focus on the general utility of entrepreneurial skills and aptitudes (i.e.
creativity, independent thinking, opportunity recognition and exploitation etc.) and it is
our contention that entrepreneurship education offers an innovative new paradigm for
business school education that answers some of the challenges that are currently leveled
against the MBA (Binks, Starkey and Mahon, 2006). Although entrepreneurship is not a
new concept, it has gained increasing interest and research attention over the past 15
years: today entrepreneurship is considered the essential lever to cope with the new
competitive landscape (Hitt & Reed, 2000). This has emerged for a number of reasons,
such as the fact that entrepreneurship is perceived as bringing benefits at both the macro
level of economic development (Birch, 1979) and also at the micro level of personal
satisfaction and achievement (Anderson, Kirkwood and Jack, 1998).
A central issue of entrepreneurship research has been to find an answer to the question of
what triggers and reinforces entrepreneurial intention and entrepreneurial activity of an
individual (Shane and Venkataraman, 2000). Entrepreneurship education is a central
strategy at education institutes to foster entrepreneurial intentions among students (Linan,
2004). The essential requirement behind this plan is that entrepreneurship is both
teachable and learnable (Saravanakumar and Saravanan 2012).
Courses designed to teach the creation and development of new business ventures first
appeared in the United States during the 1960s. In 1971, the University of Southern
California created the first Master of Business Administration concentration in
entrepreneurship; the following year the same university launched the first undergraduate
concentration in entrepreneurship (Katz, 2003). In 2005 the European Commission made
entrepreneurship education one of the main objectives in its Lisbon Agenda (Euractive,
2004a), and created an Action Plan on Entrepreneurship that proposed developing
entrepreneurial “mindsets”, increasing “awareness of the entrepreneurial spirit by
presenting best practice models and fostering entrepreneurial attitudes and skills among
young people” (Euractiv, 2004b). Business schools throughout China and India have
launched educational programs as well as scientific publications and journal in
entrepreneurship (Dana, 2011). Many stories abound of the enormous socio-economic
and educational benefits of entrepreneurship. Consequently, entrepreneurship education
programs are proliferating in business schools across the nation.
Economic, social and cultural factors all contribute to the generation of entrepreneurship
(Hart, 2003). The demand side factors describe the external conditions that influence
entrepreneurship creation, including the societal, technological, economic, and political
aspects of the surrounding environment. On this side, the questions concern why, when
AIMA Journal of Management & Research, November 2012, Volume 6, Issue 4/4, ISSN 0974-497 Copy
right © 2012 AJMR-AIMA
and how opportunities for entrepreneurship to occur. The supply-side refer to the
individual entrepreneur’s abilities to create new enterprises. The questions on this side
concern why, when and how some individuals and not others are able to discover,
develop and exploit the entrepreneurial opportunities. Education, specifically,
entrepreneurship education, may have a direct influence on the knowledge, capabilities
and preferences for becoming an entrepreneur (Pena et al., 2010). Thus, according to
them, many factors influence, and may be employed to stimulate entrepreneurship.
In a recent review of the literature on entrepreneurship education, Mwasalwiba (2010)
found that scholars most commonly define entrepreneurship education as some kind of
educational (or training process) that is aimed at influencing individuals’ attitudes,
behavior, values or intentions towards entrepreneurship, either as a possible career or to
enhance among them an appreciation of its role in the community (i.e. creating an
entrepreneurial society). Significantly, though he found relative agreement that the major
rationale for entrepreneurship education is more economic than social (with
entrepreneurship seen as a panacea to a range of economic problems, especially
employment), there has been a partial convergence towards a behavioral view of an
entrepreneur with entrepreneurship education seeking principally to influence attitudes,
values and the general community culture. In this way, scholars are reluctant to associate
entrepreneurship education strictly with new venture creation as a sole educational
objective.
Benefits of entrepreneurship programs
Pena et al., 2010 were of the view that though the impact of these programs can be
difficult to evaluate, the list of potential benefits is substantial. The potential benefits
from entrepreneurial education include the following:
? Increased entrepreneurial activity – By encouraging youth and adults to consider
entrepreneurship as a viable career path, entrepreneurship education could “not
only expand the pool of potential entrepreneurs but also help trigger wider interest
in and support for those seeking to start and grow new companies (Hart, 2003).
? Greater diversity in entrepreneurship – Entrepreneurship education allows a wider
diversity of groups to learn the skills and develop the networks to successfully
engage in entrepreneurial activities. Such diversity among potential entrepreneurs
means a broader source of ideas and perspectives in opportunity recognition and
solution development.
? More entrepreneurial successes. Ronstadt (1985) argues that if entrepreneurship is
taught effectively, it may generate more and better entrepreneurs and increase
entrepreneurial success rates.
AIMA Journal of Management & Research, November 2012, Volume 6, Issue 4/4, ISSN 0974-497 Copy
right © 2012 AJMR-AIMA
? Better motivation for at-risk groups to complete formal education –
Entrepreneurship education may serve as an effective means to engage youth
while training them to contribute to economic development and sustainable
communities (Aspen Insitute, 2008). In some cases, entrepreneurship education
programs may be especially appealing to at-risk youth and may help stem the tide
of school dropouts.
? More business-savvy population – Entrepreneurship education teaches lifelong
learning and 21
st
-century skills (Fiet, 2001 and Gibb, 2002) as well as the
practical application of business management competencies (Young, 1997). The
more available those programs are, the more opportunities there are for the youth
and adults to acquire those competencies and live more productive lives.
? Improved creative and critical thinking – Entrepreneurship education puts great
emphasis on improving the cognitive abilities of the students in creativity,
opportunity recognition, and critical thinking. Students who choose to learn
through entrepreneurship programs may have heightened creativity and critical-
thinking abilities.
Business Incubators as facilitators of enterprise development
According to Peters, Rice and Sundararajan (2004) incubator has been described as an
evolving innovative organizational form that is a vehicle for enterprise development. The
term ‘incubator’ was derived from the fundamental meaning of the term: the artificial
nurturing of a chicken egg in order to hatch them faster in a sheltered environment. The
same hatching concept is applied to the incubating of companies; it speeds up new
ventures’ establishment and increases their chances of success (Hansen et al., 2000). An
incubator thus hatches new ideas by providing new ventures with physical and intangible
resources (Allen and Bazan, 1990). The American National Business Incubation (NBIA)
describes business incubation as a dynamic process of business enterprise development.
The term refers to an interactive development process where the aim is to encourage
people to start their own business and to support start-up companies in the development
of innovative products. A true incubator, therefore, is not only office space with a shared
secretary and a common fax machine. For, besides accommodation, an incubator should
offer services such as hands-on-management, access to finance (mainly through links
with seed capital funds or business angels), legal advice, operational know-how and
access to new markets (Aernoudt, 2004). A university incubator refers to an incubation
program sponsored by a university to nurture new and small businesses by providing
support throughout the early stages of development (Knopp, 2006).
Edward Sybert of University of Maryland (cited in Peters, Rice and Sundararajan, 2004)
has stated there will be an increasing need for incubation “because of the complexity of
businesses, the rise of the Internet, and legal and regulatory issues”. On the other hand,
Stephan Bent questions their value, stating that “the incubator system makes some
companies too sheltered, others not sheltered enough” (see Cunningham, 1999). Finer
AIMA Journal of Management & Research, November 2012, Volume 6, Issue 4/4, ISSN 0974-497 Copy
right © 2012 AJMR-AIMA
and Holberton (2002) assert incubators are a flawed model because they take the
initiative away from the start-up team. The value of incubators’ role in the entrepreneurial
process is continually debated.
Objective and significance of the study
The objective of the current paper is to explore the linkage between management
education and entrepreneurship development i.e. whether-B schools can create/discover
entrepreneurs, the content and relevance of entrepreneurship courses at B-schools and the
significance of incubator programs in B-schools. This study is of great significance
because, in recent years, nurturing entrepreneurship has become a topic of great
importance for the government as well as private sector. It is being widely recognized
that business start-ups are the driving force behind economic growth and significant job
creation.
Methodology
A qualitative research design was employed to explore the contributions of management
education towards entrepreneurship development. A sample of 22 entrepreneurs was
interviewed, for gazing their perceptions on the topic. Each of them owned their own
enterprise (small/ medium sized) and was above the age of 35 years, based in Delhi and
NCR. In the interview schedule, structured questions were used along with some open-
ended questions. The questions were specifically formulated for the purpose of this study.
Based on the earlier studies and literature review, questions were raised, related to the
management education and entrepreneurship development. Broadly, it consisted of four
parts – linkage between management education and entrepreneurship development,
whether B-schools can create/discover entrepreneurs, the content and relevance of
entrepreneurship courses at B-schools and the significance of business incubator
programs in B-schools.
Findings
The discussions and interviews with the managers, their responses (to the questions asked
to them), relevant to the topic have been analysed and discussed below.
Linkage between management education and entrepreneurship
? Studies suggest that entrepreneurship represents a set of learned skills and can be
taught (Fiet, 2001b; Klofsten, 2000; Raffo, Lovatt, Banks and O’Connor, 2000).
Most evidence suggests that entrepreneurship can be taught, but there is not
nearly as much agreement in defining elements of successful entrepreneurship
education. In fact, concerns have been raised about the effectiveness of past
entrepreneurship education efforts (Feldman, 2001; Harris, Forbes and Fletcher,
2000), in some instances finding formal entrepreneurial training to be
disadvantageous (Raffo et al., 2000), even calling it an antithesis to
entrepreneurship (Gibb,1987; Harris et al., 2000). Thus, the question framed was:
Can entrepreneurship be nurtured/ taught in B-schools or does it emerge
spontaneously? To this question, 95% of the respondents agreed that
AIMA Journal of Management & Research, November 2012, Volume 6, Issue 4/4, ISSN 0974-497 Copy
right © 2012 AJMR-AIMA
entrepreneurship can be nurtured/taught in B-schools. Only 5% of the
respondents were of the view that it emerges spontaneously. A number of times it
happens that entrepreneurship emerges out of pressing needs.
? In a study by Luthje (2002), respondents were asked to rate the different aspects
of entrepreneurial education and support. The findings suggested that the most
striking discrepancy was related with the “atmosphere” that may inspire graduates
to develop ideas for new ventures. Whereas this factor is the highest in the US
sample it is the lowest in the German sample. The prevalent atmosphere may be
based on several elements of the educational program such as the exposure to role
models of entrepreneurship and students’ stimulation around frontier technologies
and path-breaking ideas. The American business school is apparently better
prepared to instill entrepreneurial spirit in its graduates than the German
university. On the contrary, the findings of a survey with business owners in India
suggest that management education is not an important driver of entrepreneurial
attitudes (Gupta, 1992). Based on these findings the question raised was: Can we
increase the level of entrepreneurship in India through management education?
60% of the respondents were of the view that we can increase the level of
entrepreneurship in India through management education whereas, 40%
disagreed, considering the fact that in India there are many other constraints/
factors which deter entrepreneurship even after having completed management
education.
? To the next question, to encourage entrepreneurship in the society, should
entrepreneurship be a direct stream/course in management or should it be just a
part of general management education? 70% were of the view that it should be a
distinct stream/course in management and 30% were of the view that it should be
part of general management education. In the former, it was said that by being a
distinct stream the thrust is entirely on entrepreneurial education. While the later
felt that being a credit course in general management education would also
suffice.
? Weber et al (2009) suggest that the effects of entrepreneurship and enterprise
education and its resultant impact on individual students will differ from student
to student ‘because students have received signals of their entrepreneurial ability
prior to the entrepreneurship courses taken at a university’. These signals come,
not only from family and peer groups or from educational experiences, but from
wider collective cultural arbitraries, including gendered notions about the skills
and abilities necessary to succeed in particular roles (Bourdieu, 1998). Based on
this, the question raised was – Among the students who are pursuing a course in
entrepreneurship education a lot depends on whether their parents are themselves
self-employed or not? 55% of the respondents said agreed that a lot depends on
whether students’ parents themselves are self-employed or not. Whereas 45%
AIMA Journal of Management & Research, November 2012, Volume 6, Issue 4/4, ISSN 0974-497 Copy
right © 2012 AJMR-AIMA
were of the view that irrespective of their parents employment students can be
nurtured to become entrepreneurs because of the grooming and environment
provided in management education.
? Chamard (1989) discusses that formal education system is not particularly
supportive of entrepreneurship and possibly even suppresses the more important
entrepreneurial characteristics. In his view, very little can be done in the regular
primary and secondary school system to encourage entrepreneurship. Remedial
work at the post-secondary level is his suggested strategy. Singh (1990) makes a
similar argument in the case of developing countries, suggesting that education
may actually inhibit entrepreneurship and indicating the need for a reorientation
of the school systems to emphasize and value entrepreneurship if are to cultivate
an enterprise culture. Gasse (1985) argues for the importance of identifying and
evaluating entrepreneurial potential at the secondary level. Similarly, Filion
(1994) suggests that “high school is the most determinant level in the
development of young people’s entrepreneurial potential. Based on the above
lines, the question raised was – Entrepreneurship, as a special course, should be
encouraged right at the higher secondary/under-graduation level or only
introduced at the post-graduation level? To this question, 60% of the respondents
were of the view that it should be introduced at higher-secondary/under-
graduation level and 40% of the respondents were of the view that it should be
introduced only at the post-graduation level.
Whether B-schools can create/discover entrepreneurs?
? There are four questions in this section – Does entrepreneurship education
produce champions of innovation? Does entrepreneurship education produce
successful business and industry leaders? Does entrepreneurship education
increase the likelihood of self-employment? Does entrepreneurship education
help in/be a catalyst in goal-setting abilities of students? To all the four questions,
there has been almost 100% agreement that entrepreneurship education produces
champions of innovation and successful business and industry leaders as well as
it increases the likelihood of self-employment and helps in being a catalyst in
goal-setting abilities of students.
? The ongoing growth in entrepreneurship education in the developed world,
particularly the United States, is testament to the latent demand that exists for a
greater focus on developing skills in entrepreneurial ‘creativity and risk taking’,
rather than solely on traditional-style business education (Plumly et al, 2008). In
India, the Entrepreneurship Development Institute of India (EDII) also
demonstrates that although access to resources is very important, so too are
programs that improve personal confidence and motivate aspiring entrepreneurs,
in the process, helping individuals to realize their hidden potential (Dana, 2001).
A study by Saravanakumar and Saravanan (2012) on 76 full-time MBA students
AIMA Journal of Management & Research, November 2012, Volume 6, Issue 4/4, ISSN 0974-497 Copy
right © 2012 AJMR-AIMA
revealed that 26% had intention of starting their business which is an indication
that entrepreneurship education has created a positive impact on the respondents
to consider self-employment as a career option.
? Entrepreneurship education involves development of attitudes, behaviors, skills
and attributes applied individually and/or collectively to help individuals and
organizations of all kinds to create, cope with and enjoy change and innovation
(Gibb, 2006; Frank, 2007), the responses of the entrepreneurs in the current study
were fully in line with the research findings.
The content and relevance of entrepreneurship courses at B-schools
? Ascertaining what needs to be taught in terms of entrepreneurship education is no
easy task as no formula exists for what constitutes entrepreneurship to begin with
(Dana, 2001). Taatila (2010) highlights the need for learning to take place in the
relevant business environment while also detailing the need for real-life case
studies based around student-centred and pragmatic pedagogical approaches.
Plumy et al (2008) agree, stating that ‘reality-based pedagogies’ embedded in
courses anchored to skill-building are better suited to entrepreneurship education
than more traditional methodologies that focus on knowledge building, such as
accounting or management. Bringing together the workplace and learning, while
‘integrating theory and practice’, is the key to implementing effective
entrepreneurship education (Leppisaari et al, 2008). So the question follows –
Should the study curriculum include more practical education wherein students
prepare real world consulting projects for different enterprises? 100% of the
entrepreneurs felt that the study curriculum should include more practical
education, which is fully in line with the earlier research findings.
? The current and dominant pedagogical approach to undergraduate
entrepreneurship programs in the US stresses a linear and relatively abstract
process of new venture creation (Edelman, Manolova, and Brush, 2008; Honig,
2004) typically emphasizes business planning and deemphasizes understanding
and development of entrepreneurial competencies – the knowledge, skills, and
abilities that contribute to an individual’s ability to become an entrepreneur.
Moreover, when undergraduate entrepreneurship programs are evaluated, success
is often defined (and measured) in terms of the number of business plans
completed and entered into competitions, student intentions to start a business,
and/or the actual launching of a new business (USASBE, 2010). Thus, the
question raised – Should business plan competitions, which could fuel interest in
entrepreneurship, be given maximum importance in the curriculum? 100%
entrepreneur respondents agreed that business plan competitions should be given
maximum importance in the curriculum. The responses of the entrepreneurs were
fully in line with previous research findings.
AIMA Journal of Management & Research, November 2012, Volume 6, Issue 4/4, ISSN 0974-497 Copy
right © 2012 AJMR-AIMA
? McMullan and Long (1987) argue that entrepreneurship education should include
skill-building courses such as negotiation, leadership and creative thinking. In
discussing the preconditions for a proposed degree in entrepreneurship, Vesper
and McMullan (1988) also argue for skill-building courses in addition to
knowledge-based courses pertaining to entrepreneurship. Baron and Markman
(2000) note specific social skills, including the ability to accurately assess others,
adapt to changing and different social situations initially and consistently portray
a good impression of self to others and to successfully persuade others, impact the
success of the entrepreneur. They also note that these skills are trainable and can
be developed by individuals. Byers et al (1997) suggest that entrepreneurship
education needs to include a greater emphasis on social processes and social
behavior. Hence, the question – Should courses taught foster the social and
leadership skills needed by entrepreneurs? To this 85% respondents agreed that
the courses taught for entrepreneurship education should foster the social and
leadership skills needed by entrepreneurs and 15% disagreed probably being
skeptical that these skills are difficult to be taught rather they should have been
inculcated earlier.
? As argued by McMullan and Long (1987), entrepreneurship education should
include exposure to technological innovation and new product development.
Social interactions shape and develop the entrepreneurial perceptions, attitude and
abilities (Rae and Carswell, 2000) particularly, entrepreneurial leadership (Holt,
Rutherford and Clohessy, 2003). Based on this the question thus raised – Should
there be enough scope for nurturing new ideas and innovation among students at
B-schools? 100% of the respondents were of the view that there should be enough
scope for nurturing new ideas and innovation among students at B-schools.
Significance of business incubator programs in B-schools
? Fostering contacts with sponsors that can fund, support and coach the process
of starting innovative companies should therefore be a major field of faculty
management activities (Luthje and Franke, 2002). Business incubators have
been around for quite sometime in India, which are, typically attached to b-
schools or universities offering a proving ground, with back-office resources,
for entrepreneurs who create value out of their ideas. Bonaccorsi and Piccaluga
(1994) in their study concluded that university incubators offer access to
otherwise unattainable resources to a new venture (see also Mian, 1996). As
pointed out by Todorovic and Suntornpithug (2008), different key players
(ranging from profit entities, government entities to academic institutions) play
and important role in creating and sponsoring incubators, contributing to
different forms of incubators (e.g. university incubators, corporate incubators,
internet incubators, for-profit incubators, non-profit incubators, rural incubators
and virtual incubators). Peters, Rice and Sundararaj (2004) found that there is
AIMA Journal of Management & Research, November 2012, Volume 6, Issue 4/4, ISSN 0974-497 Copy
right © 2012 AJMR-AIMA
little “impact of the services offered, namely infrastructure, coaching and
networks, on the graduation rates of the respective incubators’ tenants”. This
would suggest that it is not the physical services offered by an incubator that
make a difference but the capability development related variables such as
skills, abilities and their sense of priorities, or the dynamic component.
? Thus, the questions - Does the incubation program provide students with the
knowledge required to start a new company? Does the B-school incubator
program provide a platform for visibility among the venture capitalists and
angel funding? To both the questions, 100% agreed that the incubation
program provides students with the knowledge required to start a new company
as well as it provides a platform for visibility among the venture capitalists and
angel funding. This is in line with earlier research findings. Bruno and Tyebjee
(1985), in their study, pointed out that during the capital emphasis phase the
entrepreneur is in communication with business angels, venture capitalists and
other investors for raising capital. This communication highlights another
service that incubators provide: increased connectivity or networking.
Entrepreneurs view networking as one of the great benefits of being a part of an
incubator (Lender, 2003).
? The last question to the respondents was – How would you best describe an
incubator program? Broadly, categorizing the responses of the entrepreneurs –
one in which business ideas are nurtured and taken to the market; besides
offering physical infrastructure and helping with initial funding, if necessary,
an ideal incubation program should have structured scope for feedback on a
fixed frequency(from a mentor) for the future entrepreneur. The mentor should
preferably be an entrepreneur her/himself and providing opportunities for
networking would go a long way.
Conclusion
To conclude, there is agreement to a great degree that management education would lead
to entrepreneurship though some of the respondents were of the view that the constraints
faced by entrepreneurs in India are many and could deter the entrepreneurship drive. A
majority were of the view that instead of being a part of general management education it
should be a distinct stream/course in management. Almost half of the respondents opined
that a lot depends on the students’ parents i.e. whether they are themselves self-employed
or not. Comparatively, more than fifty per cent of the entrepreneurs were of the view that
in order to create that atmosphere and entrepreneurial attitude, entrepreneurship
education should be introduced right at the higher secondary/under graduation level. The
curriculum of entrepreneurship education should include more of practical exposure with
enough scope for innovation. The business incubator programs though at a nascent stage
in India do provide the right direction to start a new enterprise as well as to become
visible among venture capitalists and angel funding.
AIMA Journal of Management & Research, November 2012, Volume 6, Issue 4/4, ISSN 0974-497 Copy
right © 2012 AJMR-AIMA
For management education to successfully contribute to entrepreneurship development
there are several factors which should be kept in mind. While selecting students majority
of the students should be selected who have the ability to take risks and the initiative to
be on their own. Secondly, there should be a blend of experienced academic faculty
members for theoretical base as well as entrepreneurs on board in order to have practical
exposure. Apart from classroom education, their attitudinal training, in entrepreneurship
should go hand in hand especially bringing out that confidence to engage. They should
exposed to enough of real life situations by participating in business plan competitions on
a regular basis, handling live industry projects more often and the like. Successful
entrepreneurs should be roped in, to share their experiences with the students – things
like challenges faced by them, opportunities in the market, knowledge about financial
assistance. More and more interaction with entrepreneurs through guest lectures and
seminars/conferences and close association with senior managers in high growth,
innovative companies would go a long way in enlightening the future entrepreneurs. By
being associated with entrepreneurs the desire to start a new venture becomes more
intense. Last but not the least, both government as well as private entities should take
active interest in nurturing the entrepreneurial venture.
References
Acs, Z.J. (1992). Small Business Economics: A Global Perspective, Challenge, 35, 3844.
Aernoudt, R. (2004). Incubators: Tools for Entrepreneurship, Small Business Economies,
23, pp. 127-135.
Allen, D.N. and Bazan, E.J. (1990). Value added contributions of Pennsylvania’s
Business Incubators to Tenant firms and Local Economies, UniversityPark, PA:
Pennsylvania State University.
Anderson, A.R., Kirkwood, S. and Jack, S.L. (1998). Teaching Entrepreneurship:
Mentoring Experience. Paper presented at Babson Conference, Belgium.
Aspen Insitute (2008). Youth Entrepreneurship in America: A policy maker’s action
guide. The Aspen Institute. Washingtion, D.C.
Baron, R. A. and Markman, G.D. (2000). Beyond social capital: How social skills can
enhance entrepreneurs’ success, Academy of Management Executive, Vol.14(1), 12
Binks, M., Starkey, K., and Mahon, C. (2006). Entrepreneurship education and the
business school, Technology Analysis and Strategic Management, Vol. 18 (1), February,
pp. 1-18.
Birch, D. (1979). The Job Generating Process. Cambridge.
AIMA Journal of Management & Research, November 2012, Volume 6, Issue 4/4, ISSN 0974-497 Copy
right © 2012 AJMR-AIMA
Bonaccorsi, A. and Piccaluga, A. (1994). A theoretical framework for the evaluation of
university – industry relationship, R & D Management, (24)3: 229-245.
Bourdieu, P. (1998). Practical reason: On the theory of action. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Brock, W.A. and Evans, D.S. (1989). Small Business Economics, Small business
economics, 1, 7-2.
Bruno, A.V. and Tyebjee, T.T. (1985). The entrepreneur’s search for capital. Journal of
Business Venturing, (1)1, pp. 61-75.
Bunders, J.F.G., Broerse, J.E.W. and Zweekhorst, M.B.M. (1999). The triple helix
enriched with the user perspective: A view from Bangladesh, Journal of Technology
Transfer, (24), 2-3: 235.
Byers, T., Kist, H., and Sutton, R. (1997). Characteristics of the entrepreneur: Social
creatures, Not Solo Heroes. In R.C.Dorf (Ed.), The Handbook of Technology
Management, Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press LLC.
Carree, M.A. and Thurik, A.R. (2000). The impact of entrepreneurship on economic
growth. In Audretsch, D.B. and Acs, Z.J. (eds.) Handbook of Entrepreneuship, Boston:
Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Chamard, J. (1989). Public Education: Its effect on entrepreneurial characteristics,
Journal of Small Business Entrepreneurship, 6(2), pp. 23-30.
Cunningham, M.R. (1999). Preparing Biotechnology Leaders of the Future, Managing
Intellectual Property, 89, pp.18-26.
Dana, L. P. (2001). The Education and Training of Entrepreneurs in Asia, Education and
Training, 43 (8/9): 405-415.
Dana, L.P. (2001). The education and training of entrepreneurship in Asia, Education +
Training, Vol. 43, no. 8/9, pp. 405-415.
Edelman, L.F., Manolova, T.S. and Brush, C.G. (2008). Entrepreneurship education:
Correspondence between practices of nascent entrepreneurs and textbook prescriptions
for success. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 7(1), 56-70.
Euractiv (2004b). Entrepreneurship in Europe, Retrieved October 2009 fromhttp://www.euractiv.com/en/innovation/entrepreneurship-europe/article-117477.
Euractive (2004a). Lisbon Agenda. Retrieved October 2009 fromhttp://euractiv.com/en/future-eu/lisbon-agenda/article-117510.
AIMA Journal of Management & Research, November 2012, Volume 6, Issue 4/4, ISSN 0974-497 Copy
right © 2012 AJMR-AIMA
Feldman, J.M. (2001). Towards the post-university: Centres of higher learning and
creativity spaces as economic development and social change agents. Economic and
Industrial Democracy, (22) 1, pp.99-142.
Fiet, J.O. (2001a). The pedagogical side of entrepreneurship theory, Journal of Business
Venturing, 16: 101-117.
Fiet, J. (2001b). The theoretical side of teaching entrepreneurship. Journal of Business
Venturing, (16) 1: 1-24.
Filion, L.J. (1994). Ten steps to entrepreneurial teaching, Journal of Small Business and
Entrepreneurship, 11 (3), pp. 68-78.
Finer,B. and Holberton, P. (2002). Incubators: There and Back, Journal of Business
Strategy, Vol. 23 (3), 21-24.
Finkle, T.A. (2012). Trends in the market for entrepreneurship faculty from 1989-2010,
Journal of Entrepreneurial Education, Vol. 15, pp. 1042-1055.
Frank, A.I. (2007). Entrepreneurship and enterprise skills: A missing element of planning
education, Planning, Practice and Research, 22 (4), 635-648.
Gasse. Y. (1985). A strategy for the promotion and identification of potential
entrepreneurs at the secondary level, FER, Babson College: Welleslsy, MA, pp. 538-559.
Gibb, A. (2006). Entrepreneurship/Enterprise education in schools and colleges: Are we
really building the onion or peeling it away?” Paper presented in National Council for
Graduate Entrepreneurship, Working paper 039/2006.
Gibb, A.A. (1987). Enterprise culture – its meaning and implications for education and
training. Journal of European Industrial Training, (11) 2: pp.3-39.
Gibb, A.A. (2002). In pursuit of a new enterprise and entrepreneurship paradigm for
learning: Creative destruction, New values, New ways of doing things and new
combinations of knowledge, International Journal of Management Reviews, 4(3): 233
269.
Gupta, A. (1992). The informal education of the Indian entrepreneur, Journal of small
business and entrepreneurship, 9(4), 63-70.
Hansen, M.T. and Berger, J.A. (2000)., The State of the Incubator Market space, Boston,
MA: Harvard Business School.
AIMA Journal of Management & Research, November 2012, Volume 6, Issue 4/4, ISSN 0974-497 Copy
right © 2012 AJMR-AIMA
Harris,S., Forbes,T. and Fletcher, M. (2000). Taught and enacted strategic approaches in
young enterprises. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior and Research,(6)3,
pp.125-145.
Hart, D.M. (2003). Entrepreneurship Policy: What it is and where it cam from?
Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
Hitt, M. A. and Reed, T.S. (2000). Entrepreneurship in the new competitive landscape. In
Entrepreneurship as Strategy (eds.) Meyer, G.D. and Heppard, K.A. Thousand Oaks:
Sage Publications.
Holt, D.T., Rutherford, M.W. and Clohessy, G.R. (2007). Corporate entrepreneurship: An
empirical look at individual characteristics, context, and process, Journal of leadership
and organizational studies, 13(4), pp. 40-54.
Honig, B. (2004). Entrepreneurship education: Toward a model of contingency-based
planning. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 3(3), 258-273.
Katz, J. (2003). The Chronology and Intellectual Trajectory of American
Entrepreneurship Education – 1876-1999, Journal of Business Venturing, 18: 283-300.
Klofsten, M. (2000). Training entrepreneurship at universities: A Swedish case, Journal
of European Industrial Training, (24) 6, pp. 337-344.
Knopp, L. (2006). Saving for a rainy day: Prudent planning helps incubators weather
financial woes, NBIA Review, December.
Lender, C. (2003). Management, professionals and funding of university business
incubators worldwide. Paper presented at the 48
th
ICSB Conference, Belfast, UK.
Leppisaari, I., Tenhunen, M.L. and Kleimola, R. (2008). How to support entrepreneurial
learning through an online pedagogical R & D project? – Case: continuator
entrepreneurship, The Business Review, Cambridge, Vol. 9 (2), pp. 76-83.
Linan, F. (2004). Intention-based models of entrepreneurship education, Piccolla
Impresa/Small Business, Iss. 3, pp. 11-35.
Luthje, C. and Franke, N. (2002). Fostering entrepreneurship through university
education and training: Lessons from Massachussetts Institute of Technology, 2
nd
Annual
Conference on Innovative Research in Management, May 9-11, Stockholm, Sweden.
McMullan, W.E. and Long, W.A. (1987). Entrepreneurship education in the nineties,
Journal of Business Venturing, Vol.2(3), pp. 261-275.
AIMA Journal of Management & Research, November 2012, Volume 6, Issue 4/4, ISSN 0974-497 Copy
right © 2012 AJMR-AIMA
Mian, S.A. (1997). Assessing value – Added contributions of university technology
business incubators to tenant firms, Research Policy, (25)3, pp. 325-335.
Mwasalwiba, E.S. (2010). Entrepreneurship education: A review of its objectives,
teaching methods and impact indicators, Education and Training, Vol. 52.(1), pp. 20-47.
NBIA (1997). Impact of Incubator Investments, EDA, Universities of Michigan and
Ohio, report prepared under award from the U.S. Department of Commerce Economic
Development Administration.
OECD (1993). ‘Les Petites et Moyennes Enterprises Enterprises: Technologie et
Competitivite’, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris,
France.
Pena, V., Transue, M., Riggieri, A., Shipp, S., and Atta, R.V. (2010). A Survey of
Entrepreneurship Education Initiatives, Science and Technology Policy Institute, IDA,
Washington DC.
Peters, L., Rice, M., and Sundararajan, M. (2004). The role of incubators in the
entrepreneurial process, Journal of Technology Transfer, Vol. 29, pp. 83-91.
Plumly, L.W., Marshall, L.L., Eastman, J., Iyer, R., Stanley,K.L., and Boatright, J.
(2008). Developing entrepreneurial competencies: A student business, Journal of
Entrepreneurship Education, Vol. 11, pp. 17-28.
Rae, D. and Carswell,M. (2000). Using a life-story approach in entrepreneurial learning:
the development of a conceptual model and its implications in the design of learning
experiences, Education + Training, 42 (4/5), pp.220-227.
Raffo, C., Lovatt, A., Banks, M. and O’Connor, J. (2000). Teaching and learning
entrepreneurship for micro and small businesses in the cultural industries sector.
Education and Training, (42), 6: 356-365.
Riley, N. S. (2009). Giving Capitalism Its Due, The Weekend Interview with Carl
Schramm, Wall Street Journal.
Ronstadt, R. (1985). The educated entrepreneurs: A new era of entrepreneurial education
is beginning, American Journal of Small Business, 10 (1): 7-23.
Saravanakumar, M. and Saravanan, S. (2012). Entrepreneurship education shaping
students entrepreneurial intention, European Journal of Social Sciences, Vol. 33 (2), pp.
317-323.
Schramm, C.J. (2008). Innovations, Kansas City: Kauffman Foundation, Winter:7.
AIMA Journal of Management & Research, November 2012, Volume 6, Issue 4/4, ISSN 0974-497 Copy
right © 2012 AJMR-AIMA
Shane, S. and Venkataraman, S. (2000). The promise of entrepreneurship as a field of
research, Academy of Management Review, 25 (1), pp. 217.
Singh, J.B. (1990). Entrepreneurship education as a catalyst of development in the third
world, Journal of Small Business and Entrepreneurship, 7(4), pp. 56-63.
Taatila, V.P. (2010). Learning entrepreneurship in higher education, Education +
Training, Vol.52 (1), pp. 48-61.
Todorovic, Z. W. and Suntornpithug, N. (2008). The Multi-dimensional nature of
university incubators: Capability/Resource emphasis phases, Journal of Enterprising
Culture, Vol. 16 (4), pp. 385-410.
United States Association for Small Business Entrepreneurship (2010). What
entrepreneurship program are doing in the assessment area, Retrieved July 1, 2010.
Vesper, K.H. and McMullan, W.E. (1988). Entrepreneurship:Today courses, tomorrow
degrees?, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 13(1), pp. 7-13.
Weber, R., von Graevenitz, G. et al (2009). The effects of entrepreneurship education,
Discussion paper Munich School of Management. Available at:http://epub.ub.unimuenchen.de/10966/3/EEE_WvGH_LMUe.pdf.
Young, J.E. (1997). Entrepreneurship education and learning for university students and
Practicing entrepreneurs. In Entrepreneurship 2000. D.L. Sexton and R.W. Smilor (eds.).
Upstart Publishing Company.
doc_898710807.pdf
Within this particular detailed elucidation with regards to management education and entrepreneurship dr sushmita b waraich.
AIMA Journal of Management & Research, November 2012, Volume 6, Issue 4/4, ISSN 0974-497 Copy
right © 2012 AJMR-AIMA
Article No.6
MANAGEMENT EDUCATION AND
ENTREPRENEURSHIP
Dr Sushmita B Waraich
Associate Professor at IITM, under GGS Indraprastha University
&
Renu Sharma
Pursuing PhD
Abstract: Since the job market could reach a saturation point, the inventory of available jobs may
be exhausted soon, creating entrepreneurs would go a long way towards the development of the economy
as well as job creation. The education sector, by encouraging entrepreneurial spirit could itself become an
established growth industry. Management education provides a potential fertile ground to develop
entrepreneurial skills and abilities like independent thinking, opportunity identification, risk taking ability
etc. It could provide a hunting ground to discover the hidden entrepreneurs from amongst the otherwise
academically talented crop of students. This paper explores the linkage between management education and
entrepreneurship, whether B-schools can create/discover entrepreneurs, the content and relevance of
entrepreneurship courses at B-schools and the significance of incubator programs in B-schools. For the
purpose of this qualitative research, 22 entrepreneurs were interviewed, their views taken and analyzed.
Key words: Entrepreneurship, Education, B-schools, incubator programs
Introduction and Review of Literature
In today’s world of work, it is increasingly being felt that, with jobs reaching a saturation
point creating entrepreneurs would go a long way in the creation of jobs and also
development of the economy. Though there are different schools of thought, where one
school is of the view that it is in the genes and another school believes that entrepreneurs
can be made. If we believe in the former than no effort will be made, with the assumption
that it will come only automatically where we have no roles to play. Entrepreneurship
plays such a vital role in the economic development of countries all over the world.
Educating people who can start, innovate, build or buy businesses is crucial to the
economic development of the world. It is essential that schools continue to invest heavily
in entrepreneurship to enhance their region’s economic viability (Finkle 2012). The
importance of encouraging the development of small and medium size enterprises in the
promotion of economic growth is a familiar theme (OECD, 1993). There seems to be
widespread recognition that entrepreneurship is the engine driving the economy and
society of most nations (Brock and Evans, 1989; Acs, 1992; Carree and Thurik, 2002).
Recognizing the economic benefits of entrepreneurship, governments in different
AIMA Journal of Management & Research, November 2012, Volume 6, Issue 4/4, ISSN 0974-497 Copy
right © 2012 AJMR-AIMA
countries envision universities as agents fostering entrepreneurial activities (Bunders,
Broerse and Zweekhorst, 1999). Carl Schramm of the Kauffman Foundation argues, in a
comment more relevant to the current economic situation, “Historically through the last
seven recessions it’s been entrepreneurs who essentially restarted the economy” (Riley,
2009).
There is increasing focus on the general utility of entrepreneurial skills and aptitudes (i.e.
creativity, independent thinking, opportunity recognition and exploitation etc.) and it is
our contention that entrepreneurship education offers an innovative new paradigm for
business school education that answers some of the challenges that are currently leveled
against the MBA (Binks, Starkey and Mahon, 2006). Although entrepreneurship is not a
new concept, it has gained increasing interest and research attention over the past 15
years: today entrepreneurship is considered the essential lever to cope with the new
competitive landscape (Hitt & Reed, 2000). This has emerged for a number of reasons,
such as the fact that entrepreneurship is perceived as bringing benefits at both the macro
level of economic development (Birch, 1979) and also at the micro level of personal
satisfaction and achievement (Anderson, Kirkwood and Jack, 1998).
A central issue of entrepreneurship research has been to find an answer to the question of
what triggers and reinforces entrepreneurial intention and entrepreneurial activity of an
individual (Shane and Venkataraman, 2000). Entrepreneurship education is a central
strategy at education institutes to foster entrepreneurial intentions among students (Linan,
2004). The essential requirement behind this plan is that entrepreneurship is both
teachable and learnable (Saravanakumar and Saravanan 2012).
Courses designed to teach the creation and development of new business ventures first
appeared in the United States during the 1960s. In 1971, the University of Southern
California created the first Master of Business Administration concentration in
entrepreneurship; the following year the same university launched the first undergraduate
concentration in entrepreneurship (Katz, 2003). In 2005 the European Commission made
entrepreneurship education one of the main objectives in its Lisbon Agenda (Euractive,
2004a), and created an Action Plan on Entrepreneurship that proposed developing
entrepreneurial “mindsets”, increasing “awareness of the entrepreneurial spirit by
presenting best practice models and fostering entrepreneurial attitudes and skills among
young people” (Euractiv, 2004b). Business schools throughout China and India have
launched educational programs as well as scientific publications and journal in
entrepreneurship (Dana, 2011). Many stories abound of the enormous socio-economic
and educational benefits of entrepreneurship. Consequently, entrepreneurship education
programs are proliferating in business schools across the nation.
Economic, social and cultural factors all contribute to the generation of entrepreneurship
(Hart, 2003). The demand side factors describe the external conditions that influence
entrepreneurship creation, including the societal, technological, economic, and political
aspects of the surrounding environment. On this side, the questions concern why, when
AIMA Journal of Management & Research, November 2012, Volume 6, Issue 4/4, ISSN 0974-497 Copy
right © 2012 AJMR-AIMA
and how opportunities for entrepreneurship to occur. The supply-side refer to the
individual entrepreneur’s abilities to create new enterprises. The questions on this side
concern why, when and how some individuals and not others are able to discover,
develop and exploit the entrepreneurial opportunities. Education, specifically,
entrepreneurship education, may have a direct influence on the knowledge, capabilities
and preferences for becoming an entrepreneur (Pena et al., 2010). Thus, according to
them, many factors influence, and may be employed to stimulate entrepreneurship.
In a recent review of the literature on entrepreneurship education, Mwasalwiba (2010)
found that scholars most commonly define entrepreneurship education as some kind of
educational (or training process) that is aimed at influencing individuals’ attitudes,
behavior, values or intentions towards entrepreneurship, either as a possible career or to
enhance among them an appreciation of its role in the community (i.e. creating an
entrepreneurial society). Significantly, though he found relative agreement that the major
rationale for entrepreneurship education is more economic than social (with
entrepreneurship seen as a panacea to a range of economic problems, especially
employment), there has been a partial convergence towards a behavioral view of an
entrepreneur with entrepreneurship education seeking principally to influence attitudes,
values and the general community culture. In this way, scholars are reluctant to associate
entrepreneurship education strictly with new venture creation as a sole educational
objective.
Benefits of entrepreneurship programs
Pena et al., 2010 were of the view that though the impact of these programs can be
difficult to evaluate, the list of potential benefits is substantial. The potential benefits
from entrepreneurial education include the following:
? Increased entrepreneurial activity – By encouraging youth and adults to consider
entrepreneurship as a viable career path, entrepreneurship education could “not
only expand the pool of potential entrepreneurs but also help trigger wider interest
in and support for those seeking to start and grow new companies (Hart, 2003).
? Greater diversity in entrepreneurship – Entrepreneurship education allows a wider
diversity of groups to learn the skills and develop the networks to successfully
engage in entrepreneurial activities. Such diversity among potential entrepreneurs
means a broader source of ideas and perspectives in opportunity recognition and
solution development.
? More entrepreneurial successes. Ronstadt (1985) argues that if entrepreneurship is
taught effectively, it may generate more and better entrepreneurs and increase
entrepreneurial success rates.
AIMA Journal of Management & Research, November 2012, Volume 6, Issue 4/4, ISSN 0974-497 Copy
right © 2012 AJMR-AIMA
? Better motivation for at-risk groups to complete formal education –
Entrepreneurship education may serve as an effective means to engage youth
while training them to contribute to economic development and sustainable
communities (Aspen Insitute, 2008). In some cases, entrepreneurship education
programs may be especially appealing to at-risk youth and may help stem the tide
of school dropouts.
? More business-savvy population – Entrepreneurship education teaches lifelong
learning and 21
st
-century skills (Fiet, 2001 and Gibb, 2002) as well as the
practical application of business management competencies (Young, 1997). The
more available those programs are, the more opportunities there are for the youth
and adults to acquire those competencies and live more productive lives.
? Improved creative and critical thinking – Entrepreneurship education puts great
emphasis on improving the cognitive abilities of the students in creativity,
opportunity recognition, and critical thinking. Students who choose to learn
through entrepreneurship programs may have heightened creativity and critical-
thinking abilities.
Business Incubators as facilitators of enterprise development
According to Peters, Rice and Sundararajan (2004) incubator has been described as an
evolving innovative organizational form that is a vehicle for enterprise development. The
term ‘incubator’ was derived from the fundamental meaning of the term: the artificial
nurturing of a chicken egg in order to hatch them faster in a sheltered environment. The
same hatching concept is applied to the incubating of companies; it speeds up new
ventures’ establishment and increases their chances of success (Hansen et al., 2000). An
incubator thus hatches new ideas by providing new ventures with physical and intangible
resources (Allen and Bazan, 1990). The American National Business Incubation (NBIA)
describes business incubation as a dynamic process of business enterprise development.
The term refers to an interactive development process where the aim is to encourage
people to start their own business and to support start-up companies in the development
of innovative products. A true incubator, therefore, is not only office space with a shared
secretary and a common fax machine. For, besides accommodation, an incubator should
offer services such as hands-on-management, access to finance (mainly through links
with seed capital funds or business angels), legal advice, operational know-how and
access to new markets (Aernoudt, 2004). A university incubator refers to an incubation
program sponsored by a university to nurture new and small businesses by providing
support throughout the early stages of development (Knopp, 2006).
Edward Sybert of University of Maryland (cited in Peters, Rice and Sundararajan, 2004)
has stated there will be an increasing need for incubation “because of the complexity of
businesses, the rise of the Internet, and legal and regulatory issues”. On the other hand,
Stephan Bent questions their value, stating that “the incubator system makes some
companies too sheltered, others not sheltered enough” (see Cunningham, 1999). Finer
AIMA Journal of Management & Research, November 2012, Volume 6, Issue 4/4, ISSN 0974-497 Copy
right © 2012 AJMR-AIMA
and Holberton (2002) assert incubators are a flawed model because they take the
initiative away from the start-up team. The value of incubators’ role in the entrepreneurial
process is continually debated.
Objective and significance of the study
The objective of the current paper is to explore the linkage between management
education and entrepreneurship development i.e. whether-B schools can create/discover
entrepreneurs, the content and relevance of entrepreneurship courses at B-schools and the
significance of incubator programs in B-schools. This study is of great significance
because, in recent years, nurturing entrepreneurship has become a topic of great
importance for the government as well as private sector. It is being widely recognized
that business start-ups are the driving force behind economic growth and significant job
creation.
Methodology
A qualitative research design was employed to explore the contributions of management
education towards entrepreneurship development. A sample of 22 entrepreneurs was
interviewed, for gazing their perceptions on the topic. Each of them owned their own
enterprise (small/ medium sized) and was above the age of 35 years, based in Delhi and
NCR. In the interview schedule, structured questions were used along with some open-
ended questions. The questions were specifically formulated for the purpose of this study.
Based on the earlier studies and literature review, questions were raised, related to the
management education and entrepreneurship development. Broadly, it consisted of four
parts – linkage between management education and entrepreneurship development,
whether B-schools can create/discover entrepreneurs, the content and relevance of
entrepreneurship courses at B-schools and the significance of business incubator
programs in B-schools.
Findings
The discussions and interviews with the managers, their responses (to the questions asked
to them), relevant to the topic have been analysed and discussed below.
Linkage between management education and entrepreneurship
? Studies suggest that entrepreneurship represents a set of learned skills and can be
taught (Fiet, 2001b; Klofsten, 2000; Raffo, Lovatt, Banks and O’Connor, 2000).
Most evidence suggests that entrepreneurship can be taught, but there is not
nearly as much agreement in defining elements of successful entrepreneurship
education. In fact, concerns have been raised about the effectiveness of past
entrepreneurship education efforts (Feldman, 2001; Harris, Forbes and Fletcher,
2000), in some instances finding formal entrepreneurial training to be
disadvantageous (Raffo et al., 2000), even calling it an antithesis to
entrepreneurship (Gibb,1987; Harris et al., 2000). Thus, the question framed was:
Can entrepreneurship be nurtured/ taught in B-schools or does it emerge
spontaneously? To this question, 95% of the respondents agreed that
AIMA Journal of Management & Research, November 2012, Volume 6, Issue 4/4, ISSN 0974-497 Copy
right © 2012 AJMR-AIMA
entrepreneurship can be nurtured/taught in B-schools. Only 5% of the
respondents were of the view that it emerges spontaneously. A number of times it
happens that entrepreneurship emerges out of pressing needs.
? In a study by Luthje (2002), respondents were asked to rate the different aspects
of entrepreneurial education and support. The findings suggested that the most
striking discrepancy was related with the “atmosphere” that may inspire graduates
to develop ideas for new ventures. Whereas this factor is the highest in the US
sample it is the lowest in the German sample. The prevalent atmosphere may be
based on several elements of the educational program such as the exposure to role
models of entrepreneurship and students’ stimulation around frontier technologies
and path-breaking ideas. The American business school is apparently better
prepared to instill entrepreneurial spirit in its graduates than the German
university. On the contrary, the findings of a survey with business owners in India
suggest that management education is not an important driver of entrepreneurial
attitudes (Gupta, 1992). Based on these findings the question raised was: Can we
increase the level of entrepreneurship in India through management education?
60% of the respondents were of the view that we can increase the level of
entrepreneurship in India through management education whereas, 40%
disagreed, considering the fact that in India there are many other constraints/
factors which deter entrepreneurship even after having completed management
education.
? To the next question, to encourage entrepreneurship in the society, should
entrepreneurship be a direct stream/course in management or should it be just a
part of general management education? 70% were of the view that it should be a
distinct stream/course in management and 30% were of the view that it should be
part of general management education. In the former, it was said that by being a
distinct stream the thrust is entirely on entrepreneurial education. While the later
felt that being a credit course in general management education would also
suffice.
? Weber et al (2009) suggest that the effects of entrepreneurship and enterprise
education and its resultant impact on individual students will differ from student
to student ‘because students have received signals of their entrepreneurial ability
prior to the entrepreneurship courses taken at a university’. These signals come,
not only from family and peer groups or from educational experiences, but from
wider collective cultural arbitraries, including gendered notions about the skills
and abilities necessary to succeed in particular roles (Bourdieu, 1998). Based on
this, the question raised was – Among the students who are pursuing a course in
entrepreneurship education a lot depends on whether their parents are themselves
self-employed or not? 55% of the respondents said agreed that a lot depends on
whether students’ parents themselves are self-employed or not. Whereas 45%
AIMA Journal of Management & Research, November 2012, Volume 6, Issue 4/4, ISSN 0974-497 Copy
right © 2012 AJMR-AIMA
were of the view that irrespective of their parents employment students can be
nurtured to become entrepreneurs because of the grooming and environment
provided in management education.
? Chamard (1989) discusses that formal education system is not particularly
supportive of entrepreneurship and possibly even suppresses the more important
entrepreneurial characteristics. In his view, very little can be done in the regular
primary and secondary school system to encourage entrepreneurship. Remedial
work at the post-secondary level is his suggested strategy. Singh (1990) makes a
similar argument in the case of developing countries, suggesting that education
may actually inhibit entrepreneurship and indicating the need for a reorientation
of the school systems to emphasize and value entrepreneurship if are to cultivate
an enterprise culture. Gasse (1985) argues for the importance of identifying and
evaluating entrepreneurial potential at the secondary level. Similarly, Filion
(1994) suggests that “high school is the most determinant level in the
development of young people’s entrepreneurial potential. Based on the above
lines, the question raised was – Entrepreneurship, as a special course, should be
encouraged right at the higher secondary/under-graduation level or only
introduced at the post-graduation level? To this question, 60% of the respondents
were of the view that it should be introduced at higher-secondary/under-
graduation level and 40% of the respondents were of the view that it should be
introduced only at the post-graduation level.
Whether B-schools can create/discover entrepreneurs?
? There are four questions in this section – Does entrepreneurship education
produce champions of innovation? Does entrepreneurship education produce
successful business and industry leaders? Does entrepreneurship education
increase the likelihood of self-employment? Does entrepreneurship education
help in/be a catalyst in goal-setting abilities of students? To all the four questions,
there has been almost 100% agreement that entrepreneurship education produces
champions of innovation and successful business and industry leaders as well as
it increases the likelihood of self-employment and helps in being a catalyst in
goal-setting abilities of students.
? The ongoing growth in entrepreneurship education in the developed world,
particularly the United States, is testament to the latent demand that exists for a
greater focus on developing skills in entrepreneurial ‘creativity and risk taking’,
rather than solely on traditional-style business education (Plumly et al, 2008). In
India, the Entrepreneurship Development Institute of India (EDII) also
demonstrates that although access to resources is very important, so too are
programs that improve personal confidence and motivate aspiring entrepreneurs,
in the process, helping individuals to realize their hidden potential (Dana, 2001).
A study by Saravanakumar and Saravanan (2012) on 76 full-time MBA students
AIMA Journal of Management & Research, November 2012, Volume 6, Issue 4/4, ISSN 0974-497 Copy
right © 2012 AJMR-AIMA
revealed that 26% had intention of starting their business which is an indication
that entrepreneurship education has created a positive impact on the respondents
to consider self-employment as a career option.
? Entrepreneurship education involves development of attitudes, behaviors, skills
and attributes applied individually and/or collectively to help individuals and
organizations of all kinds to create, cope with and enjoy change and innovation
(Gibb, 2006; Frank, 2007), the responses of the entrepreneurs in the current study
were fully in line with the research findings.
The content and relevance of entrepreneurship courses at B-schools
? Ascertaining what needs to be taught in terms of entrepreneurship education is no
easy task as no formula exists for what constitutes entrepreneurship to begin with
(Dana, 2001). Taatila (2010) highlights the need for learning to take place in the
relevant business environment while also detailing the need for real-life case
studies based around student-centred and pragmatic pedagogical approaches.
Plumy et al (2008) agree, stating that ‘reality-based pedagogies’ embedded in
courses anchored to skill-building are better suited to entrepreneurship education
than more traditional methodologies that focus on knowledge building, such as
accounting or management. Bringing together the workplace and learning, while
‘integrating theory and practice’, is the key to implementing effective
entrepreneurship education (Leppisaari et al, 2008). So the question follows –
Should the study curriculum include more practical education wherein students
prepare real world consulting projects for different enterprises? 100% of the
entrepreneurs felt that the study curriculum should include more practical
education, which is fully in line with the earlier research findings.
? The current and dominant pedagogical approach to undergraduate
entrepreneurship programs in the US stresses a linear and relatively abstract
process of new venture creation (Edelman, Manolova, and Brush, 2008; Honig,
2004) typically emphasizes business planning and deemphasizes understanding
and development of entrepreneurial competencies – the knowledge, skills, and
abilities that contribute to an individual’s ability to become an entrepreneur.
Moreover, when undergraduate entrepreneurship programs are evaluated, success
is often defined (and measured) in terms of the number of business plans
completed and entered into competitions, student intentions to start a business,
and/or the actual launching of a new business (USASBE, 2010). Thus, the
question raised – Should business plan competitions, which could fuel interest in
entrepreneurship, be given maximum importance in the curriculum? 100%
entrepreneur respondents agreed that business plan competitions should be given
maximum importance in the curriculum. The responses of the entrepreneurs were
fully in line with previous research findings.
AIMA Journal of Management & Research, November 2012, Volume 6, Issue 4/4, ISSN 0974-497 Copy
right © 2012 AJMR-AIMA
? McMullan and Long (1987) argue that entrepreneurship education should include
skill-building courses such as negotiation, leadership and creative thinking. In
discussing the preconditions for a proposed degree in entrepreneurship, Vesper
and McMullan (1988) also argue for skill-building courses in addition to
knowledge-based courses pertaining to entrepreneurship. Baron and Markman
(2000) note specific social skills, including the ability to accurately assess others,
adapt to changing and different social situations initially and consistently portray
a good impression of self to others and to successfully persuade others, impact the
success of the entrepreneur. They also note that these skills are trainable and can
be developed by individuals. Byers et al (1997) suggest that entrepreneurship
education needs to include a greater emphasis on social processes and social
behavior. Hence, the question – Should courses taught foster the social and
leadership skills needed by entrepreneurs? To this 85% respondents agreed that
the courses taught for entrepreneurship education should foster the social and
leadership skills needed by entrepreneurs and 15% disagreed probably being
skeptical that these skills are difficult to be taught rather they should have been
inculcated earlier.
? As argued by McMullan and Long (1987), entrepreneurship education should
include exposure to technological innovation and new product development.
Social interactions shape and develop the entrepreneurial perceptions, attitude and
abilities (Rae and Carswell, 2000) particularly, entrepreneurial leadership (Holt,
Rutherford and Clohessy, 2003). Based on this the question thus raised – Should
there be enough scope for nurturing new ideas and innovation among students at
B-schools? 100% of the respondents were of the view that there should be enough
scope for nurturing new ideas and innovation among students at B-schools.
Significance of business incubator programs in B-schools
? Fostering contacts with sponsors that can fund, support and coach the process
of starting innovative companies should therefore be a major field of faculty
management activities (Luthje and Franke, 2002). Business incubators have
been around for quite sometime in India, which are, typically attached to b-
schools or universities offering a proving ground, with back-office resources,
for entrepreneurs who create value out of their ideas. Bonaccorsi and Piccaluga
(1994) in their study concluded that university incubators offer access to
otherwise unattainable resources to a new venture (see also Mian, 1996). As
pointed out by Todorovic and Suntornpithug (2008), different key players
(ranging from profit entities, government entities to academic institutions) play
and important role in creating and sponsoring incubators, contributing to
different forms of incubators (e.g. university incubators, corporate incubators,
internet incubators, for-profit incubators, non-profit incubators, rural incubators
and virtual incubators). Peters, Rice and Sundararaj (2004) found that there is
AIMA Journal of Management & Research, November 2012, Volume 6, Issue 4/4, ISSN 0974-497 Copy
right © 2012 AJMR-AIMA
little “impact of the services offered, namely infrastructure, coaching and
networks, on the graduation rates of the respective incubators’ tenants”. This
would suggest that it is not the physical services offered by an incubator that
make a difference but the capability development related variables such as
skills, abilities and their sense of priorities, or the dynamic component.
? Thus, the questions - Does the incubation program provide students with the
knowledge required to start a new company? Does the B-school incubator
program provide a platform for visibility among the venture capitalists and
angel funding? To both the questions, 100% agreed that the incubation
program provides students with the knowledge required to start a new company
as well as it provides a platform for visibility among the venture capitalists and
angel funding. This is in line with earlier research findings. Bruno and Tyebjee
(1985), in their study, pointed out that during the capital emphasis phase the
entrepreneur is in communication with business angels, venture capitalists and
other investors for raising capital. This communication highlights another
service that incubators provide: increased connectivity or networking.
Entrepreneurs view networking as one of the great benefits of being a part of an
incubator (Lender, 2003).
? The last question to the respondents was – How would you best describe an
incubator program? Broadly, categorizing the responses of the entrepreneurs –
one in which business ideas are nurtured and taken to the market; besides
offering physical infrastructure and helping with initial funding, if necessary,
an ideal incubation program should have structured scope for feedback on a
fixed frequency(from a mentor) for the future entrepreneur. The mentor should
preferably be an entrepreneur her/himself and providing opportunities for
networking would go a long way.
Conclusion
To conclude, there is agreement to a great degree that management education would lead
to entrepreneurship though some of the respondents were of the view that the constraints
faced by entrepreneurs in India are many and could deter the entrepreneurship drive. A
majority were of the view that instead of being a part of general management education it
should be a distinct stream/course in management. Almost half of the respondents opined
that a lot depends on the students’ parents i.e. whether they are themselves self-employed
or not. Comparatively, more than fifty per cent of the entrepreneurs were of the view that
in order to create that atmosphere and entrepreneurial attitude, entrepreneurship
education should be introduced right at the higher secondary/under graduation level. The
curriculum of entrepreneurship education should include more of practical exposure with
enough scope for innovation. The business incubator programs though at a nascent stage
in India do provide the right direction to start a new enterprise as well as to become
visible among venture capitalists and angel funding.
AIMA Journal of Management & Research, November 2012, Volume 6, Issue 4/4, ISSN 0974-497 Copy
right © 2012 AJMR-AIMA
For management education to successfully contribute to entrepreneurship development
there are several factors which should be kept in mind. While selecting students majority
of the students should be selected who have the ability to take risks and the initiative to
be on their own. Secondly, there should be a blend of experienced academic faculty
members for theoretical base as well as entrepreneurs on board in order to have practical
exposure. Apart from classroom education, their attitudinal training, in entrepreneurship
should go hand in hand especially bringing out that confidence to engage. They should
exposed to enough of real life situations by participating in business plan competitions on
a regular basis, handling live industry projects more often and the like. Successful
entrepreneurs should be roped in, to share their experiences with the students – things
like challenges faced by them, opportunities in the market, knowledge about financial
assistance. More and more interaction with entrepreneurs through guest lectures and
seminars/conferences and close association with senior managers in high growth,
innovative companies would go a long way in enlightening the future entrepreneurs. By
being associated with entrepreneurs the desire to start a new venture becomes more
intense. Last but not the least, both government as well as private entities should take
active interest in nurturing the entrepreneurial venture.
References
Acs, Z.J. (1992). Small Business Economics: A Global Perspective, Challenge, 35, 3844.
Aernoudt, R. (2004). Incubators: Tools for Entrepreneurship, Small Business Economies,
23, pp. 127-135.
Allen, D.N. and Bazan, E.J. (1990). Value added contributions of Pennsylvania’s
Business Incubators to Tenant firms and Local Economies, UniversityPark, PA:
Pennsylvania State University.
Anderson, A.R., Kirkwood, S. and Jack, S.L. (1998). Teaching Entrepreneurship:
Mentoring Experience. Paper presented at Babson Conference, Belgium.
Aspen Insitute (2008). Youth Entrepreneurship in America: A policy maker’s action
guide. The Aspen Institute. Washingtion, D.C.
Baron, R. A. and Markman, G.D. (2000). Beyond social capital: How social skills can
enhance entrepreneurs’ success, Academy of Management Executive, Vol.14(1), 12
Binks, M., Starkey, K., and Mahon, C. (2006). Entrepreneurship education and the
business school, Technology Analysis and Strategic Management, Vol. 18 (1), February,
pp. 1-18.
Birch, D. (1979). The Job Generating Process. Cambridge.
AIMA Journal of Management & Research, November 2012, Volume 6, Issue 4/4, ISSN 0974-497 Copy
right © 2012 AJMR-AIMA
Bonaccorsi, A. and Piccaluga, A. (1994). A theoretical framework for the evaluation of
university – industry relationship, R & D Management, (24)3: 229-245.
Bourdieu, P. (1998). Practical reason: On the theory of action. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Brock, W.A. and Evans, D.S. (1989). Small Business Economics, Small business
economics, 1, 7-2.
Bruno, A.V. and Tyebjee, T.T. (1985). The entrepreneur’s search for capital. Journal of
Business Venturing, (1)1, pp. 61-75.
Bunders, J.F.G., Broerse, J.E.W. and Zweekhorst, M.B.M. (1999). The triple helix
enriched with the user perspective: A view from Bangladesh, Journal of Technology
Transfer, (24), 2-3: 235.
Byers, T., Kist, H., and Sutton, R. (1997). Characteristics of the entrepreneur: Social
creatures, Not Solo Heroes. In R.C.Dorf (Ed.), The Handbook of Technology
Management, Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press LLC.
Carree, M.A. and Thurik, A.R. (2000). The impact of entrepreneurship on economic
growth. In Audretsch, D.B. and Acs, Z.J. (eds.) Handbook of Entrepreneuship, Boston:
Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Chamard, J. (1989). Public Education: Its effect on entrepreneurial characteristics,
Journal of Small Business Entrepreneurship, 6(2), pp. 23-30.
Cunningham, M.R. (1999). Preparing Biotechnology Leaders of the Future, Managing
Intellectual Property, 89, pp.18-26.
Dana, L. P. (2001). The Education and Training of Entrepreneurs in Asia, Education and
Training, 43 (8/9): 405-415.
Dana, L.P. (2001). The education and training of entrepreneurship in Asia, Education +
Training, Vol. 43, no. 8/9, pp. 405-415.
Edelman, L.F., Manolova, T.S. and Brush, C.G. (2008). Entrepreneurship education:
Correspondence between practices of nascent entrepreneurs and textbook prescriptions
for success. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 7(1), 56-70.
Euractiv (2004b). Entrepreneurship in Europe, Retrieved October 2009 fromhttp://www.euractiv.com/en/innovation/entrepreneurship-europe/article-117477.
Euractive (2004a). Lisbon Agenda. Retrieved October 2009 fromhttp://euractiv.com/en/future-eu/lisbon-agenda/article-117510.
AIMA Journal of Management & Research, November 2012, Volume 6, Issue 4/4, ISSN 0974-497 Copy
right © 2012 AJMR-AIMA
Feldman, J.M. (2001). Towards the post-university: Centres of higher learning and
creativity spaces as economic development and social change agents. Economic and
Industrial Democracy, (22) 1, pp.99-142.
Fiet, J.O. (2001a). The pedagogical side of entrepreneurship theory, Journal of Business
Venturing, 16: 101-117.
Fiet, J. (2001b). The theoretical side of teaching entrepreneurship. Journal of Business
Venturing, (16) 1: 1-24.
Filion, L.J. (1994). Ten steps to entrepreneurial teaching, Journal of Small Business and
Entrepreneurship, 11 (3), pp. 68-78.
Finer,B. and Holberton, P. (2002). Incubators: There and Back, Journal of Business
Strategy, Vol. 23 (3), 21-24.
Finkle, T.A. (2012). Trends in the market for entrepreneurship faculty from 1989-2010,
Journal of Entrepreneurial Education, Vol. 15, pp. 1042-1055.
Frank, A.I. (2007). Entrepreneurship and enterprise skills: A missing element of planning
education, Planning, Practice and Research, 22 (4), 635-648.
Gasse. Y. (1985). A strategy for the promotion and identification of potential
entrepreneurs at the secondary level, FER, Babson College: Welleslsy, MA, pp. 538-559.
Gibb, A. (2006). Entrepreneurship/Enterprise education in schools and colleges: Are we
really building the onion or peeling it away?” Paper presented in National Council for
Graduate Entrepreneurship, Working paper 039/2006.
Gibb, A.A. (1987). Enterprise culture – its meaning and implications for education and
training. Journal of European Industrial Training, (11) 2: pp.3-39.
Gibb, A.A. (2002). In pursuit of a new enterprise and entrepreneurship paradigm for
learning: Creative destruction, New values, New ways of doing things and new
combinations of knowledge, International Journal of Management Reviews, 4(3): 233
269.
Gupta, A. (1992). The informal education of the Indian entrepreneur, Journal of small
business and entrepreneurship, 9(4), 63-70.
Hansen, M.T. and Berger, J.A. (2000)., The State of the Incubator Market space, Boston,
MA: Harvard Business School.
AIMA Journal of Management & Research, November 2012, Volume 6, Issue 4/4, ISSN 0974-497 Copy
right © 2012 AJMR-AIMA
Harris,S., Forbes,T. and Fletcher, M. (2000). Taught and enacted strategic approaches in
young enterprises. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior and Research,(6)3,
pp.125-145.
Hart, D.M. (2003). Entrepreneurship Policy: What it is and where it cam from?
Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
Hitt, M. A. and Reed, T.S. (2000). Entrepreneurship in the new competitive landscape. In
Entrepreneurship as Strategy (eds.) Meyer, G.D. and Heppard, K.A. Thousand Oaks:
Sage Publications.
Holt, D.T., Rutherford, M.W. and Clohessy, G.R. (2007). Corporate entrepreneurship: An
empirical look at individual characteristics, context, and process, Journal of leadership
and organizational studies, 13(4), pp. 40-54.
Honig, B. (2004). Entrepreneurship education: Toward a model of contingency-based
planning. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 3(3), 258-273.
Katz, J. (2003). The Chronology and Intellectual Trajectory of American
Entrepreneurship Education – 1876-1999, Journal of Business Venturing, 18: 283-300.
Klofsten, M. (2000). Training entrepreneurship at universities: A Swedish case, Journal
of European Industrial Training, (24) 6, pp. 337-344.
Knopp, L. (2006). Saving for a rainy day: Prudent planning helps incubators weather
financial woes, NBIA Review, December.
Lender, C. (2003). Management, professionals and funding of university business
incubators worldwide. Paper presented at the 48
th
ICSB Conference, Belfast, UK.
Leppisaari, I., Tenhunen, M.L. and Kleimola, R. (2008). How to support entrepreneurial
learning through an online pedagogical R & D project? – Case: continuator
entrepreneurship, The Business Review, Cambridge, Vol. 9 (2), pp. 76-83.
Linan, F. (2004). Intention-based models of entrepreneurship education, Piccolla
Impresa/Small Business, Iss. 3, pp. 11-35.
Luthje, C. and Franke, N. (2002). Fostering entrepreneurship through university
education and training: Lessons from Massachussetts Institute of Technology, 2
nd
Annual
Conference on Innovative Research in Management, May 9-11, Stockholm, Sweden.
McMullan, W.E. and Long, W.A. (1987). Entrepreneurship education in the nineties,
Journal of Business Venturing, Vol.2(3), pp. 261-275.
AIMA Journal of Management & Research, November 2012, Volume 6, Issue 4/4, ISSN 0974-497 Copy
right © 2012 AJMR-AIMA
Mian, S.A. (1997). Assessing value – Added contributions of university technology
business incubators to tenant firms, Research Policy, (25)3, pp. 325-335.
Mwasalwiba, E.S. (2010). Entrepreneurship education: A review of its objectives,
teaching methods and impact indicators, Education and Training, Vol. 52.(1), pp. 20-47.
NBIA (1997). Impact of Incubator Investments, EDA, Universities of Michigan and
Ohio, report prepared under award from the U.S. Department of Commerce Economic
Development Administration.
OECD (1993). ‘Les Petites et Moyennes Enterprises Enterprises: Technologie et
Competitivite’, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris,
France.
Pena, V., Transue, M., Riggieri, A., Shipp, S., and Atta, R.V. (2010). A Survey of
Entrepreneurship Education Initiatives, Science and Technology Policy Institute, IDA,
Washington DC.
Peters, L., Rice, M., and Sundararajan, M. (2004). The role of incubators in the
entrepreneurial process, Journal of Technology Transfer, Vol. 29, pp. 83-91.
Plumly, L.W., Marshall, L.L., Eastman, J., Iyer, R., Stanley,K.L., and Boatright, J.
(2008). Developing entrepreneurial competencies: A student business, Journal of
Entrepreneurship Education, Vol. 11, pp. 17-28.
Rae, D. and Carswell,M. (2000). Using a life-story approach in entrepreneurial learning:
the development of a conceptual model and its implications in the design of learning
experiences, Education + Training, 42 (4/5), pp.220-227.
Raffo, C., Lovatt, A., Banks, M. and O’Connor, J. (2000). Teaching and learning
entrepreneurship for micro and small businesses in the cultural industries sector.
Education and Training, (42), 6: 356-365.
Riley, N. S. (2009). Giving Capitalism Its Due, The Weekend Interview with Carl
Schramm, Wall Street Journal.
Ronstadt, R. (1985). The educated entrepreneurs: A new era of entrepreneurial education
is beginning, American Journal of Small Business, 10 (1): 7-23.
Saravanakumar, M. and Saravanan, S. (2012). Entrepreneurship education shaping
students entrepreneurial intention, European Journal of Social Sciences, Vol. 33 (2), pp.
317-323.
Schramm, C.J. (2008). Innovations, Kansas City: Kauffman Foundation, Winter:7.
AIMA Journal of Management & Research, November 2012, Volume 6, Issue 4/4, ISSN 0974-497 Copy
right © 2012 AJMR-AIMA
Shane, S. and Venkataraman, S. (2000). The promise of entrepreneurship as a field of
research, Academy of Management Review, 25 (1), pp. 217.
Singh, J.B. (1990). Entrepreneurship education as a catalyst of development in the third
world, Journal of Small Business and Entrepreneurship, 7(4), pp. 56-63.
Taatila, V.P. (2010). Learning entrepreneurship in higher education, Education +
Training, Vol.52 (1), pp. 48-61.
Todorovic, Z. W. and Suntornpithug, N. (2008). The Multi-dimensional nature of
university incubators: Capability/Resource emphasis phases, Journal of Enterprising
Culture, Vol. 16 (4), pp. 385-410.
United States Association for Small Business Entrepreneurship (2010). What
entrepreneurship program are doing in the assessment area, Retrieved July 1, 2010.
Vesper, K.H. and McMullan, W.E. (1988). Entrepreneurship:Today courses, tomorrow
degrees?, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 13(1), pp. 7-13.
Weber, R., von Graevenitz, G. et al (2009). The effects of entrepreneurship education,
Discussion paper Munich School of Management. Available at:http://epub.ub.unimuenchen.de/10966/3/EEE_WvGH_LMUe.pdf.
Young, J.E. (1997). Entrepreneurship education and learning for university students and
Practicing entrepreneurs. In Entrepreneurship 2000. D.L. Sexton and R.W. Smilor (eds.).
Upstart Publishing Company.
doc_898710807.pdf