Model Of The Entrepreneurship Process

Description
This detailed criteria with regards to model of the entrepreneurship process.

Contents:

• Model of the Entrepreneurship Process and Chapter 1 – Pg 3 - 38

INTRODUCING
ENTREPRENEURSHIP
ESTABLISHMENT
PHASE
Model of the
Entrepreneurship Process
1
Entrepreneurial
Process Dynamics
2
Entrepreneurial
Human Capital
3
Entrepreneurial
Social Capital
4
Entrepreneurial
Environment
5
Entrepreneurial
Intentions and
Opportunities
10
Ethics and Social
Responsibility
12
Techno-
entrepreneurship
14
Corporate
Intrapreneurship
16
International
Entrepreneurship
11
Strategic
Entrepreneurship
13
E-commerce and
Entrepreneurship
15
Social
Entrepreneurship
PRE- ESTABLISHMENT
PHASE
6
Preparing a
Business Plan
7
Selecting a Venture
Form
8
SA Policy Framework
for Start-ups
9
Financing New
Ventures
INTRODUCING
ENTREPRENEURSHIP
Entrepreneurial
Intentions and
Opportunities
Financing New
Ventures
Entrepreneurial
Social Capital
Entrepreneurial
Human Capital
SA Policy Framework
for Start-ups
Selecting a Venture
Form
Preparing a
Business Plan
Ethics and Social
Responsibility
ESTABLISHMENT
PHASE
Model of the
Entrepreneurship Process
1
Entrepreneurial
Process Dynamics
000 Entr_Theory.indb 3 17/8/08 12:55:40
1.1

Introduction
In this chapter we provide an overview of entrepreneurship. De?nitions of
entrepreneurship are examined and distinctions between entrepreneurship,
traditional management and small business management allow for further
interrogation of the concept. Various pro?le scenarios illustrate what
entrepreneurship is really about, by providing pertinent examples of
entrepreneurship and related concepts. The ?eld of entrepreneurship is
broadly outlined by tracing the evolution of the ?led via its major theorists.
The entrepreneurial process is then delineated and the various components
brie?y explained. By viewing entrepreneurship as a process, a model is
devised which serves as an integrative framework for the book. The model
Learning outcomes
After reading this chapter, you will be able to demonstrate:
Comprehension in theory to:
1 Describe entrepreneurship as a process
2 Conceptualise entrepreneurship
3 Contrast between entrepreneurship and small business management
4 Outline the entrepreneurship process
5 Evaluate the dynamics of the entrepreneurial process
6 Appraise the relevance of entrepreneurship in South Africa
7 Discuss the evolution of the ?eld of entrepreneurship
8 Discuss the dynamics of change as it relates to entrepreneurship.
Practical (transferable) skills to:
1 Interpret case studies based on the entrepreneurial process
2 Formulate own de?nition of entrepreneurship
3 Conduct a search on the nature of entrepreneurship in a changing context.
Entrepreneurial process
dynamics
Chapter 1
000 Entr_Theory.indb 4 17/8/08 12:55:40
5
ENTREPRENEURI AL PROCESS DYNAMI CS
is based on the principles of conceptualisation and execution – a process
of thinking and doing – a blend of theory and practice – resonating with
the title of the book. Subsequently, the relevance of entrepreneurship is
examined in various contexts, and ?nally entrepreneurship is viewed as a
dynamic changing process. The chapter ends with a case exercise.
1.2

Conceptualising entrepreneurship
To understand what entrepreneurship is about and what lies at its core, it
becomes important to unpack the meaning of this widely-used term. It has
been suggested that the fundamental activity of entrepreneurship is new
venture creation and new venture creation is a process.
Shane and Venkataraman (2001) suggest that the ?eld of
entrepreneurship focus on the central question of the entrepreneur –
why, when and how some people and not others discover and exploit
opportunities.
Many de?nitions of entrepreneurship are offered by researchers and
practitioners:
‘Entrepreneurship is the act of forming a new organisation of value’
?
(Bateman & Snell 1996:208).
‘Entrepreneurship is the seemingly discontinuous process of combining
?
resources to produce new goods or services’ (Stoner, Freeman & Gilbert
1995:160).
‘… the creation of new enterprise’ (Bartol & Martin 1998:672).
?
‘… the creation of an innovative economic organisation (or network
?
of organisations) for the purpose of gain under conditions of risk and
uncertainty’ (Dollinger 1995:7).
… ‘the process of creating something new with value by devoting the
?
necessary time and effort, assuming the accompanying ?nancial, psychic
and social risks, and receiving the resulting rewards of monetary and
personal satisfaction and independence’ (Hisrich & Peters 1998:9).
And the following has been said of entrepreneurs:
‘... [they] serve as agents of change; provide creative, innovative ideas for
?
business enterprise; and help businesses grow …’ (Kuratko & Hodgetts
1998:32)
‘... [is] a person who habitually creates and innovates to build something
?
of recognised value around perceived opportunities’ (Bolton &
Thompson 2004:16).
Additionally, entrepreneurship is often used in the context of small
business, and based on a quantitative de?nition we can de?ne a small
business as a distinct business whose size lies below speci?ed thresholds.
000 Entr_Theory.indb 5 17/8/08 12:55:41
6
ENTREPRENEURSHI P: THEORY I N PRACTI CE
The National Small Business Act (102 of 1996) speci?es that the number of
employees determines whether the business is micro, very small, or small:
A small business can employ up to ?fty people.
?
A very small business employs no more than ten people.
?
Micro or survivalist businesses are usually one-person operations,
?
though they could employ up to ?ve persons (Rwigema & Karungu
1999:107–124).
According to Filion (1997), people tend to perceive entrepreneurs and de?ne
entrepreneurs using the premises of their own background or disciplines.
For example, the economists emphasise the classic models of economic
behaviour and innovation, the behaviourists the characteristics and pro?les
of entrepreneurs, the management specialists the resourcefulness and
organising capabilities of entrepreneurs. However, these differences need
not create confusion, since similarities do emerge within each discipline.
Some of these similarities in de?nitions include the following terms
used to describe entrepreneurship:
Innovation
?
Idea creation
?
Opportunity recognition
?
Achievement orientation
?
Risk taking
?
Resourcefulness.
?
Based on these formulations, it seems evident that entrepreneurs recognise
opportunities and then use various means to exploit or develop these
opportunities, thus producing a wide range of outcomes.
Focusing on what an entrepreneur does, rather than what he or she is,
allows for the articulation of the following. He or she:
Identi?es new opportunities for products and services
?
Is creative and innovative
?
Starts own enterprise(s)
?
Manages own enterprise
?
Organises and controls resources to ensure pro?t
?
Is able to market a concept, product or service
?
Obtains ?nancial means
?
Is willing to take calculated risks.
?
In drawing upon our ?rst de?nition – why, when and how some people
and not others discover and exploit opportunities – we see the ‘who’ as a
person and the ‘what’ as a process that involves creativity and innovation
and results in something of value that can be recognised by others. It is
imperative to remember that the individual is at the beginning of this
entrepreneurship process, and consequently the focus in the next chapter is
on human capital. Understanding the entrepreneurial process represents
000 Entr_Theory.indb 6 17/8/08 12:55:41
7
ENTREPRENEURI AL PROCESS DYNAMI CS
one of the core questions for the domain of entrepreneurship (Gartner 1990;
Gaglio & Katz 2001).
This conceptualisation ?ts with our overall model and allows for a
clear understanding of the entrepreneurial process. The building process,
of course, ?rst needs an opportunity to build on, and this is something the
entrepreneur is always able to spot.
The entrepreneurship process further recognises that starting a new
venture is not a smooth, continuous, orderly process, but a disjointed,
discontinuous, unique event, and we need to understand the change
in the antecedent variables that trigger the event: variables in human
capital, social capital, and entrepreneurial environment. It may happen
that small differences in the initial conditions produce very great ones in
the ?nal phenomena (Bygrave 1989b:14). To put this in a simplistic form,
entrepreneurs cause entrepreneurship:
E = f (e): [entrepreneurship (E) is a function of entrepreneurs (e)]
Based on these initial conceptualisations, it seems that entrepreneurship can
best be understood when comparing it to traditional management and small
business management. Differences between entrepreneurship, traditional
management, and small businesses are now discussed.
1.2.1

Entrepreneurship versus traditional management
Traditional management is essentially functionalist in design, and fails to
acknowledge adequately the early stages of organisational development.
Entrepreneurship is primarily concerned with the discovery stage of
organisational development, where a different set of skills is required
from those of controlling and co-ordinating resources, which is often
commensurate with latter stages of organisational development –
predominantly management of existing resources.
For entrepreneurship, emphasis is on new venture creation and growth.
Initiation is the responsibility of the entrepreneur, who examines ideas,
develops opportunity and handles the nuts and bolts of registering the
venture.
In the start-up phase, when the venture is still small, the entrepreneur
usually manages the enterprise. As the organisation grows, professional
managers may be hired to handle administration and strategic management.
Managers perform functions like planning, organising, human resource
management, leading, and controlling, so that management is more akin
to administration. Managers may be hired hands who played no part in
founding the venture.
Management skills are obviously necessary for entrepreneurial
ventures, but it is the difference in degree of how they are applied to new
000 Entr_Theory.indb 7 17/8/08 12:55:42
8
ENTREPRENEURSHI P: THEORY I N PRACTI CE
venture creation that is often neglected. In fact, it has been suggested that
the differences between emerging and existing business are quantum
differences, since management work is ‘enacted, interpreted, and retained
in a fundamentally different manner when compared to entrepreneurial
activity’ (Laukkanen 2000; Gartner, Bird & Starr 1992).
Business entry (entrepreneurship) is a fundamentally different activity
from business management. Its scope includes but is not limited to:
The ability to detect and exploit opportunities
?
The ability to plan in greater detail and project further into the future
?
Greater bias towards creativity
?
Multidisciplinary and process-orientated approaches
?
Enhancement of entrepreneurial behaviour
?
Fostering self-reliance
?
Bridging of gaps between functional areas.
?
Entrepreneurship is seen as a component of community support
infrastructure (Gorman, Hanlon & King 1997).
A clear distinction is also necessary between intrapreneurship
and entrepreneurship. Intrapreneurship is primarily concerned with
innovative activities within an established organisation. The principles of
entrepreneurship, via creativity, innovation and risk-taking, are applied
in a different context – typically a large organisation (a separate chapter
examines the concept of intrapreneurship – often considered a sub-
discipline of entrepreneurship). Intrapreneurship is essentially about big
business, while the typical aim of entrepreneurship is the development of
a cadre of entrepreneurs who will promote economic growth and create
employment.
1.2.2

Entrepreneurship versus small business management
Another important distinction is that between entrepreneurship and small
business management. Typically, small business management is concerned
with the management – limited in scope – of an established business or
the start-up of a business – which is not necessarily new. Not all small
businesses are entrepreneurial, as many are started with limited growth
ambitions. For example, a retired couple may open a café to supplement
their income and keep them busy. No plans exist to grow the shop
spectacularly. Indeed, for leisure’s sake, they may deliberately keep it small.
Hisrich and Peters (1998:13) describe this as a ‘lifestyle organisation: a small
venture that supports the owners and usually does not grow’. Other start-
ups, such as micro enterprises, have such limited scope that their prosperity
is doubtful, although some defy the odds. After all, entrepreneurship is
supposed to be opportunity rather than resource driven.
By contrast, entrepreneurs usually aim for high potential ventures.
However small they start, they revel in parenting rapidly growing,
000 Entr_Theory.indb 8 17/8/08 12:55:42
9
ENTREPRENEURI AL PROCESS DYNAMI CS
innovative businesses. Whether they succeed or not, few entrepreneurs
would settle for stagnation.
Three factors distinguish entrepreneurial organisations from small
businesses: innovation, growth potential, and strategic objectives (Wickham
2001:24).
1 Innovation
The entrepreneurial venture is usually based on a signi?cant innovation,
which is based on differentiated offerings, marketing, distribution, or the
way the organisation is structured and managed differently, or the way
relationships are maintained between organisations. The small business,
on the other hand is usually involved in established markets, products or
services. Nonetheless, a small business may be delivering an innovation,
albeit limited in scope, and likely to be established and produced in an
established manner. Contrastingly, an entrepreneurial venture is usually
based on a signi?cantly new way of doing something. We will discuss
evolutionary versus revolutionary innovations and changes in subsequent
chapters, to unpack the signi?cance of these differences.
2 Potential for growth
As was indicated previously, a quantitative de?nition of what constitutes
a small business is a matter of judgement depending on the country,
government or industrial sector. Suf?ce it to say, an entrepreneurial venture
usually has a great deal more potential for growth than does a small
business. A small business operates within an established market, whereas
the entrepreneurial venture has the potential to create its own market.
3 Strategic objectives
An entrepreneurial venture distinguishes itself from a small business by its
strategic posturing and objective setting. Strategic objectives relate to such
things as:
Sustainable competitive advantage
?
Market development or growth
?
Market share
?
Market position.
?
We will discuss strategy and competitive advantage in subsequent chapters
in order to focus on the strategic nature of entrepreneurship.
000 Entr_Theory.indb 9 17/8/08 12:55:42
10
ENTREPRENEURSHI P: THEORY I N PRACTI CE
Pro?le in entrepreneurship
Read the scenario below in conjunction with the chapter text:
Bulelwa Qupe: Cape ?sherwoman nets it big
Bulelwa Qupe couldn’t ?nd enough hake on the wholesale market for her township ?sh and
chips shop. So she bought shares in a boat and hired a crew to catch ?sh for her – becoming
the ?rst black woman in the Eastern Cape to win a ?shing quota. But the Port Elizabeth
mother of four found she had too much to sell when her skipper returned with 65 tons of
white hake. Now Qupe has opened her own export company, launching her on a path to
becoming ‘a big ?sh’ in a world heavily dominated by white males. This weekend Qupe
surrendered her 2002 Technology for Women in Business Award at an event in Mpumalanga,
but told this year’s nominees to ‘use challenges as your propeller’.
‘I intend being a shark on the global market, going into the Far East and Europe,’ said
Qupe, 44. ‘People in the ?shing industry couldn’t accept me. They said, ‘What does she know
about ?sh?’ But I never lost hope, and now I am in a position to create employment – and
that, more than anything, is success.’
Boya Chetty, secretary of the Eastern Cape Fishing Forum, said Qupe knew ‘absolutely
nothing’ about the industry when she approached him for advice on a quota application in
1998. So Qupe took a course in mariculture at the University of Port Elizabeth in 2000. Chetty
added: ‘What’s so interesting about Bulelwa is that she is not renting her quota out, as many
people do – she is directly involved in the ?shing itself. She had no idea what long-line ?shing
was when I ?rst met her, and now she’s using that and other methods as well.’ A hospital
nurse for most of her adult life, Qupe decided to boost her income in 1995 by taking a food
outlet franchise in Motherwell Township. Needing a steady supply of hake, she formed a close
corporation with seven other women – called Ezabantu Fishing – to apply for a 33-ton quota.
Qupe bought a 14 per cent stake in a 29 metre boat and employs 24 crew members. ‘I
wanted to train for emergencies with the crew – to show them how important it is for me that
they are safe – but I am not a good swimmer, so it was a big challenge,’ she said. Now she
has formed Buntu Marketing and Exporting, which is to export white hake to Spain from this
month and, eventually, abalone to Asia. ‘Other areas like tuna ?shing are for the big boys. I’m
not ready for that scale yet. But who knows? You have to dream big.’
Source: Rowan Philp, Sunday Times, 10 August 2001
1.3

The evolution of entrepreneurship
Industrial history, speci?cally through studying early the 17th and 18th
century industrialists such as Cantillon and Say, con?rms the birth of new
industries, which have always depended upon the revolutionary skills of
innovators (Filion 1997). During the industrial revolution, entrepreneurs,
although traditionally trained as professional engineers, instinctively taught
themselves to become expert business professionals (Oakey 2003).
000 Entr_Theory.indb 10 17/8/08 12:55:43
11
ENTREPRENEURI AL PROCESS DYNAMI CS
1.3.1

Origins of entrepreneurship
Filion (1997) interrogates the origin and development of the term ‘entre-
preneur’, revealing that it acquired its meaning in the 17th century,
with Richard Cantillon being the ?rst to offer a clear conception of the
entrepreneurial function and its relation to innovation.
Entrepreneurs have existed throughout history. At various times,
individuals spotted an opportunity and set up a structure to exploit it. They
mobilised resources and traded or manufactured something for pro?t. Then
– as now – they faced risk to create employment (however modest) and add
value (through pro?tability). Societies with more entrepreneurs have tended
to economically outperform those with a relative scarcity.
The modern interpretation of entrepreneurship derives from the French
verb entreprendre, which means ‘to undertake’. In this interpretation, the
entrepreneur is seen as a ‘go-between’. Such, for example, was the case with
Marco Polo, the Italian adventurer and trader who, between 1271 and 1295
AD, consolidated a trade route between Genoa (in Italy) and China. He
borrowed money to buy and sell goods along the way, thereby assuming
the trading and emotional risks. His pro?ts were eventually shared with the
original funder (Hisrich & Peters 1998:7).
In Europe during the Middle Ages, entrepreneurs played the role of
today’s project managers: building castles, cathedrals and other monuments.
Later in South Africa, pioneering European entrepreneurs radiated
outwards from Cape Town to exploit commercial and farming opportunities
inland.
1.3.2

The renaissance and industrial revolution periods
The Renaissance in Europe took some years to come to fruition and has been
described as the origin of a distinctive new Western personality ‘[m]arked
by individualism, secularity, strength of will, multiplicity of interest
and impulse, creative innovation, and a willingness to defy traditional
limitations on human activity’ (Bolton & Thompson 2004:16).
This is not unlike a description of an entrepreneur, and may explain the
remarkable economic growth seen in the western world.
Not until the 18th century did the link between entrepreneur and
risk emerge, as investors contracted with government to supply goods
and services. With a ?xed contractual price, the entrepreneur gained all
pro?ts and suffered all losses. The onus lay with the entrepreneur to ensure
pro?tability or suffer the consequences. Frenchman Richard Cantillon
was one of the ?rst to associate entrepreneurship with risk bearing among
farmers, craftsmen, merchants and others. The entrepreneur’s role, which
gained currency during the Industrial Revolution, was seen as one of
organising, managing, and assuming the risks of a business (Hisrich &
Peters 1998:7). In all probability, the Industrial Revolution popularised
entrepreneurship, since the factory system shaped circumstances and
000 Entr_Theory.indb 11 17/8/08 12:55:43
12
ENTREPRENEURSHI P: THEORY I N PRACTI CE
broadened the need for an entrepreneurial class. Around 1800, Jean-Baptiste
Say described anyone transferring resources from a low- to a high-
yielding venture as an entrepreneur. In his view, the entrepreneur thrived
under conditions of change, as change provided space for innovation.
His sentiments were later echoed by, among others, economist Joseph
Schumpeter (1947), who posited that a changing environment (symbolised
by ‘dynamic disequilibrium’) signalled a healthy economy and improved
prospects for innovation and value creation, despite attendant risks
(Zimmerer & Scarborough 1996:2).
1.3.3

Modern-era entrepreneurship
Aspects of entrepreneurship have developed over time with the seminal
works of Weber, McClelland, and Schumpeter being considered the major
contributors to this ?eld in the last century.
Max Weber was perhaps the ?rst theorist to indicate that ideological
values lead directly to entrepreneurial behaviour (Jennings 1994:123).
One of the earliest and most familiar attempts to link entrepreneurship
to the larger social context was Weber’s classic work The Protestant Ethic
and the Spirit of Capitalism. Weber argued that the rise of Protestantism
encouraged hard work, thrift and striving for material advancement, which
in turn gave rise to Capitalism.
An important social aspect of Weber’s model is the ‘Protestant
work ethic’ which demanded a life of good works and the avoidance of
spontaneous, impulsive self-enjoyment. This belief in a life of good works
produced an intensive exertion in occupational pursuits and became a
motivating factor in entrepreneurial activity. The Protestant work ethic
correlates with the virtue of industriousness contained in the Spirit of
Capitalism.
During his visit to America, Weber was ‘impressed by the grandiose
ef?ciency of a type of man bred by free association in which the individual
had to prove himself before his equals, where no authoritative commands,
but autonomous decisions, good sense and responsible conduct train for
citizenship’ (Weber 1958).
David McClelland (1965, 1976, 1986) identi?ed three basic needs of an
individual, normally considered as a content motivational theory: the need
for achievement, the need for af?liation, and the need for power.
The need for achievement (n ach) can be de?ned as accomplishment
of something dif?cult to master, to overcome obstacles, to attain a high
standard, and to rival and surpass others, but mainly to compete with
oneself.
The n ach has been recognised as a dominant factor in describing
or characterising entrepreneurs, speci?cally because they exhibit such
behaviours to start-up ventures. Moreover, on a national level the n
ach is closely associated with higher successful economic development
000 Entr_Theory.indb 12 17/8/08 12:55:44
13
ENTREPRENEURI AL PROCESS DYNAMI CS
in countries, whose citizens would be predisposed to a high n ach.
McClelland will be discussed again, as his theory plays an integral part in
entrepreneurial human capital.
Schumpeter (1947) categorically launched the ?eld of entrepreneurship,
not only by associating entrepreneurs with innovation, but also by
demonstrating the importance of entrepreneurs in creative destruction
(radical improvements and changes that make old technology obsolete), and
hence economic development.
Schumpeter (1947) left the legacy of revolutionary concepts such as
dynamic circular ?ow and creative destruction, both of which have been used to
explain entrepreneurship. His concept of economic development in terms of
the circular ?ow model has ?ve phases, which are listed as:
The introduction of a new good
?
The introduction of a new method of production
?
The opening of a new market
?
The conquest of a new source of supply of raw materials
?
The carrying out of the new organisation of an industry.
?
Today, entrepreneurs are conventionally viewed as movers and shakers
– people who challenge convention in pursuit of new venture creation.
Through innovation they guide ‘the way people live, work, learn, play, and
lead’ (Timmons 1999:17). The products, services and processes they pioneer
or bene?ciate afford consumer convenience in all walks of life and bene?t
consumers and investors alike.
Radical innovations like the Internet have transformed the way we
communicate, trade, and live. Electronic mail, commerce, and the plethora
of entertainment choices available on the Internet demonstrate this point.
But even more modest, incremental innovation helps growth – provided
consumers consider it bene?cial. Revamped products and services boost
pro?ts while fending off competitors. In this way, investors gain from
enhanced pro?tability and consumers enjoy improved products and
services. Dynamic growth is accomplished by inventively combining
human, material, ?nancial, and physical resources. Risk is diminished
through contingency planning, under which alternative plans are prepared
for various eventualities. Entrepreneurs, not bureaucrats, are the engine
of economic growth and job creation. Their organisations become major
tax payers, employers, charity donors, and architects of economic wealth.
Without them, America, for example, would have fallen far short of the
34 million new jobs created between 1980 and 1998 (Timmons 1999:4).
Through innovation, entrepreneurs present pro?table products
and ventures that did not exist before. In this sense, they add value.
Entrepreneurs generate innovations, ?ll market gaps, and increase
competition, consequently promoting economic ef?ciency. As a global
phenomenon, it has been estimated that about 73 million people are active
entrepreneurs in 34 nations (Minniti et al 2005).
000 Entr_Theory.indb 13 17/8/08 12:55:44
14
ENTREPRENEURSHI P: THEORY I N PRACTI CE
1.4

The entrepreneurial process
Figure 1.1 Model of the entrepreneurship process
Introducing
entrepreneurship
Chapter 1
Entrepreneurial process
dynamics
Chapter 2
Entrepreneurial human
capital
Chapter 3
Entrepreneurial social
capital
Chapter 4
Entrepreneurial
environment
Chapter 5
Entrepreneurial
intentions and
opportunities
Pre-establishment
phase
Chapter 6
Preparing a business
plan
Chapter 7
Selecting a venture form
Chapter 8
SA policy framework for
start-ups
Chapter 9
Financing new ventures
Chapter 10
Ethics and social
responsibility
Establishment phase
Chapter 11
Strategic
entrepreneurship
Chapter 12
Techno-
entrepreneurship
Chapter 13
E-commerce and
entrepreneurship
Chapter 14
Corporate
intrapreneurship
Chapter 15
Social entrepreneurship
Chapter 16
International
entrepreneurship
000 Entr_Theory.indb 14 17/8/08 12:55:44
15
ENTREPRENEURI AL PROCESS DYNAMI CS
A framework is proposed to approach the interaction between the
individual entrepreneur and the venture context more systematically. Such
a framework will ultimately ful?l the purpose of this book by integrating
various aspects of entrepreneurship into one cohesive framework.
Figure 1.1 presents an original organising framework that serves as a
guide for navigating this entrepreneurial process. Subsequently each chapter
represents a core component of the entrepreneurial process, and is brie?y
outlined here.
Chapter 1 =
?
Entrepreneurial process dynamics: An overview of
entrepreneurship and related terms is introduced.
Chapter 2 =
?
Entrepreneurial human capital: Our model starts with
human capital. Entrepreneurial human capital is largely acquired on an
individual basis, and consists of a combination of skills, knowledge and
resources that distinguish an entrepreneur from his or her competitors.
Human capital represents the individuals experience, intelligence,
training, education, and skills.
Chapter 3 =
?
Entrepreneurial social capital: The second component is social
capital. Social capital is explained as it refers to cultural values which
shape entrepreneurs. Networking is also referred to as the entrepreneur’s
social capital base and social capital is crucial to entrepreneurs to build
on social habits reinforcing entrepreneurship.
Chapter 4 =
?
Entrepreneurial environment: The environmental context
is an important part of the process and can be conducive or hostile
towards environmental activity. The business regulatory environment
and the broader institutional environments are examined in context
of entrepreneurial activity in South Africa. The macro-environmental
in?uences are then explained in terms of implications for
entrepreneurship.
Chapter 5 =
?
Entrepreneurial intentions and opportunities: These represent
the individual’s conscious state of mind that precedes any action but
directs his or her focus towards the goal of starting a new business. The
placement of the intentions and opportunity constructs in this model
is consistent with the notion that an individual’s intention to create a
venture precedes the search for new venture opportunities.
Chapter 6 =
?
Preparing a business plan: The pre-establishment phase is
primarily concerned with planning and preparing for venture start-
ups. It involves detailed business planning, selection of venture types,
and understanding of the policy framework which the entrepreneur is
operating within.
Chapter 7 =
?
Selecting a new venture form: The establishment phase is the
actual opening up for business – the launch of the venture so to speak.
Here strategy and ?nance are discussed. Through strategising, the
venture grows towards sustainability. Most importantly to maintain
sustainability, entrepreneurs must preclude others from imitating the
business idea and allow the entrepreneur to capture the pro?ts from
exploiting the opportunity.
000 Entr_Theory.indb 15 17/8/08 12:55:45
16
ENTREPRENEURSHI P: THEORY I N PRACTI CE
Chapter 8 =
?
South African policy framework for start-ups: Venture
performance and outcomes are based on successful venture growth and
focus on key performance areas. These include control of resources,
establishment of barriers to imitation, and establishing a reputation to
maintain high growth and performance.
Chapter 9 =
?
Financing new ventures: This deals with sources of ?nance for
entrepreneurial ventures.
Chapters 10 to 16: These chapters represent various entrepreneurial
?
outcomes which are the result of the entrepreneurial process and include:
Ethics and social responsibility

Strategic entrepreneurship

Techno-entrepreneurship

E-commerce entrepreneurship

Corporate intrapreneurship

Social entrepreneurship

International entrepreneurship

.
1.4.1

The entrepreneurial process as interrelated parts
The model in this book outlines the different components in the
entrepreneurial process so that readers may see the process holistically as
interrelated parts (chapters) which make sense only together, as a whole,
rather than as unrelated fragments.
Though the process has many components, it remains important
to remember that individuals are ?rst-order forces explaining
entrepreneurship, and environmental forces second-order. Why, when and
how certain individuals exploit opportunities appears to be a function of
the environment, opportunity, and the nature of the individual (Shane &
Venkataraman 2000).
The creation of a new venture is a multidimensional phenomenon;
each component describes only a single dimension of the phenomenon and
cannot be taken alone. There is a growing awareness that the process of
starting a business is not a single well-worn route marched along again and
again by identical entrepreneurs.
The conceptual framework provided can be seen as a kaleidoscope, as
an instrument through which to view the enormously varying patterns of
new venture creation (Gartner 1985).
Any new venture is a gestalt of variables. No new venture creation
can be comprehensively described, nor can its complexity be adequately
accounted for unless all of its variables are investigated and an attempt is
made to discover how variables interact with each other.
New venture creation must be viewed as a process, which means
that the aims and motivations of (potential) entrepreneurs can operate at
different levels, including deep-seated antecedent in?uences as well as
immediate triggers. The entrepreneurship literature contains numerous
000 Entr_Theory.indb 16 17/8/08 12:55:45
17
ENTREPRENEURI AL PROCESS DYNAMI CS
models and frameworks developed to analyse the process of starting
a business, most of which have been based on research undertaken in
developed market economies. Nonetheless, in the context of a transition
environment, such frameworks are potentially useful for analysing the
barriers faced by entrepreneurs and potential entrepreneurs, since it is
likely that these barriers will vary at different stages of market development
(Smallbone & Welter 2005).
In considering models and concepts of entrepreneurship in a different
(transitional or developmental) context, it may be helpful to discuss
brie?y a number of de?nitional issues that are potentially relevant to any
process. Entrepreneurship involves both inputs and outputs. Inputs involve
entrepreneurial skills and qualities, with participation in the competitive
process as the main output. An organisation is a vehicle for transforming the
personal qualities and ambitions of entrepreneurs into actions and outputs.
Context may be viewed as a third dimension of entrepreneurship, since the
speci?c internal organisational and external operating contexts provide the
framework within which the input and output dimensions can take place.
Entrepreneurship is also a multidimensional concept, which can be
analysed at different levels. Firstly, entrepreneurship is concerned with
individuals in terms of their roles, traits and actions, integral to which are
their learning abilities and behaviours (Pedler et al 1998).
Individual entrepreneurs can operate on their own or in teams. The
second dimension is at the organisational level (corporate entrepreneurship)
and the third at the aggregate level of industries, regions and nations.
A consideration of the role and characteristics of entrepreneurship in a
transition context involves linking the individual level to the aggregate level,
as the context for entrepreneurship is a distinctive one, with a much stronger
in?uence on entrepreneurship compared to mature market economies. The
broader South African context will be discussed in Chapter 4, Entrepreneurial
environment to elucidate the need for entrepreneurship to be analysed as a
reciprocal process between an individual entrepreneur or organisation and
the external environment, with the entrepreneur and his or her environment
interacting and in?uencing each other (Smallbone & Welter 2005).
1.4.2

Entrepreneurial process dynamics
New ventures are not random events of environmental in?uences. Rather,
they are direct outcomes of individuals’ intentions and consequent
behaviours. This creation of a venture is a process of conceptualisation and
execution.
Broadly, the entrepreneurial process involves founding (or re-inventing)
a business venture and growing it into a thriving, agile enterprise. Speci?c
steps based on similar processes, include:
Identifying, measuring and re?ning an opportunity from multiple ideas
?
Formulating a business plan
?
000 Entr_Theory.indb 17 17/8/08 12:55:45
18
ENTREPRENEURSHI P: THEORY I N PRACTI CE
Marshalling the resources
?
Organising and mobilising the entrepreneurial team, and
?
Overseeing new venture creation and growth.
?
Performing these functions better than competitors confers competitive
advantage, something that distinguishes an organisation from competitors
(Coulter 2001:15).
For example, someone who wants to launch a new soft drink needs
to improve on the taste of Coca-Cola
®
or Pepsi
®
, or come up with an idea
that generates a more emotive response than these brands do, at a more
competitive price. Successful ventures add value by meeting consumer
needs competitively. Adding value means offering a product of which the
customer value – that is, how desirable the product is to the consumer – and
the price it commands exceed the cost of production. So, if a customer is
prepared to pay R15 for a product that costs R10 to produce, value is added.
Therefore, adding value produces pro?ts, which sustain growth.
The entrepreneur is the galvanising force behind the venture,
blending opportunity, resources, and the team to produce something
new or distinctive in the marketplace, to add value in the face of dynamic
competition and a volatile environment. Even to maintain competitive edge
requires continuous innovation in our hypercompetitive world. Then again,
entrepreneurs are adept networkers and readers, who keep themselves
abreast of developments. Building a sustainable, high growth venture that
meets market needs demands alertness and continual innovation. Products,
processes and skills must keep up with market tastes and economical,
cultural, technological and other changes. Entrepreneurs act as agents of
change. Managing change means anticipating, executing, and monitoring
it. This requires proactive engagement with the external environment from
which opportunities, resources, and the team emanate.
The entrepreneur must exercise leadership in raising capital and needs a
business plan for this. The business plan communicates the manner in which
resources, opportunity, and team will be harnessed.
New venture creation is a complex phenomenon. It is not enough to
seek out and focus on some concept of the ‘average’ entrepreneur and
the ‘typical’ venture creation. New organisational forms evolve through
variation, and this variation in new venture creation needs to be captured.
What is the value of comparing the creation of a pet store by two
unemployed physical therapists to the creation of a 2 000-hectare business
park by four real estate developers? The goal is not to smooth over any
differences that might exist among these new ventures or to throw these
very different individuals into the same pot in order to extract the typical
qualities of the typical entrepreneur. The goal is to identify the speci?c
variables that describe how each new venture was related, in order that
meaningful contrasts and comparisons among new ventures can be made
(Gartner 1985:69).
000 Entr_Theory.indb 18 17/8/08 12:55:46
19
ENTREPRENEURI AL PROCESS DYNAMI CS
1.5

Relevance of entrepreneurship in South Africa
Entrepreneurship is often associated with facilitating national economic
growth, creation of new ventures, re-orientation of existing business
toward more entrepreneurial goals, and even the redirection of national
institutional infrastructure. There are substantial national consequences
for entrepreneurial activity and as a global phenomenon entrepreneurial
activity absorbs a substantial amount of human and ?nancial resources
(Minniti et al 2005:14).
South Africa’s entrepreneurs have played, and continue to play, a
seminal role in economic vitality. Such names as Oppenheimer (mining and
numerous other ?elds), Donald Gordon (insurance), Anton Rupert (tobacco
and luxury goods), Sol Kerzner (hospitality) and Jeremy Ord (information
technology), to name a few, loom large in the annals of South African
entrepreneurship. Not only did their organisations create thousands of jobs,
earn foreign exchange, and pay millions in taxes and fund social investment;
they also served as models for innovation and change. So did many of
their distributors and suppliers. Through the decades, entrepreneurial
organisations have inspired and funded myriad start-ups. Cumulatively,
entrepreneurial ventures have served as South Africa’s economic bedrock.
Nowadays, the economic growth of nations is intertwined with
the volume and calibre of its entrepreneurs. Whole industries (e.g.
biotechnology, personal computers, software, and health-enhancing
products) have been popularised by entrepreneurs. New or revamped
products, services and processes have spawned new markets and revived
old ones (Timmons 1999:17). Fledgling start-ups have been known to
employ thousands and earn billions annually within a decade or two – as
this book will show. Innovative start-ups create wealth that trickles into the
general economy, triggering secondary growth.
From humble beginnings have emerged such giants as Anglo American,
De Beers, Rembrandt, Southern Sun Hotels and, more recently, Dimension
Data. Some earn revenues and have assets matching – if not exceeding –
those of small countries. These high-?ying start-ups are popularly termed
‘gazelles’. Kuratko and Hodgetts (1998:11) describe a gazelle as a ‘leader of
innovation’ – typically a creative start-up that offers exciting new products
and services, therefore growing rapidly and creating disproportionate
wealth. A famous example of a gazelle is Microsoft, which was only a dream
in the mind of Bill Gates three decades ago. Locally, Southern Sun originated
in the fertile mind of Sol Kerzner and has grown into an economic force in
South and southern Africa. The pro?les in this book show how Raymond
Ackerman transformed four retail stores into South Africa’s largest chain
and how Herman Mashaba founded and grew Black Like Me against all
odds into a vibrant producer of niche cosmetics.
These examples illustrate a general point: high growth ventures often
have modest origins but with a strong-minded, inventive entrepreneur
000 Entr_Theory.indb 19 17/8/08 12:55:46
20
ENTREPRENEURSHI P: THEORY I N PRACTI CE
behind them, they can have tremendous lasting impact on economic growth
and job creation in a country where unemployment, poverty, and inequality
are rife. For instance, 77 per cent of the 34 million new jobs created in the
United States between 1980 and 1998 can be attributed to ?ve per cent
of the country’s small organisations (Timmons 1999:5). Those few had a
disproportionate impact on jobs and economic growth. It can be described
as America’s ‘entrepreneurial revolution’ (Kuratko & Hodgetts 1998:4).
In South East Asia, erstwhile ‘tigers’ (Singapore, Malaysia, South Korea,
and Taiwan) were propelled to their pinnacle by thousands of gazelles.
While new-venture statistics are lacking for South Africa, the meteoric
rise of companies like Dimension Data, Nando’s, and hundreds of others
(some still out of the public eye) illustrates the impact of entrepreneurship
on wealth and job creation. In little over a decade, Nando’s had expanded
from one restaurant to 271 stores by August 2001, and currently operates in
twelve countries. Jeremy Ord developed Dimension Data from a R1-million
data communications consultancy in 1983 to a diversi?ed information
technology organisation with R7-billion in turnover by the year 2000. Since
then, it has expanded to the London Stock Exchange, joining the 100 selected
stocks of the prestigious Financial Times Securities Exchange (FTSE).
As subsequent case studies will illustrate, many budding entrepreneurs
are starting exciting new ventures out of the public eye, some of which
could become tomorrow’s titans. Their success will determine our
economy’s job creating and growth potential. Such is the speed and impact
of the ‘entrepreneurial revolution’ those countries, regions, and cities
are scrambling to lure entrepreneurial organisations. Those who nurture
entrepreneurs are likely to generate a larger pool of sustainable ventures
than those who don’t. The supply of entrepreneurs will determine the
difference between growth and stagnation or decay. Unless South Africa (or
any other country) can replenish its entrepreneurial stock, it will suffer the
same fate as an organisation that ignores its assets. As Kuratko & Hodgetts
(1998:7) point out: ‘Entrepreneurs will continue to be critical contributors
to economic growth through their leadership, management, innovation,
research and development effectiveness, job creation, competitiveness,
productivity, and formation of new industry’.
Although generally studied in the context of business, knowledge
of entrepreneurship can be applied to all walks of life. It is as relevant
to government departments, parastatals, the arts, non-government
organisations (NGOs), farmers, informal businesses, and other pursuits.
In an increasingly globalised world, survival depends on people who
are driven by opportunity and who seek to maximise their goals in a
sustainable way. While goals and missions may vary, entrepreneurial (and
intrapreneurial) skills apply universally. Entrepreneurship has a social
and an economic dimension. Even in business, entrepreneurial inspiration
transcends mere money-making. The desire to improve one’s community is
frequently cited.
000 Entr_Theory.indb 20 17/8/08 12:55:46
21
ENTREPRENEURI AL PROCESS DYNAMI CS
Pro?le in entrepreneurship
Read the scenario below in conjunction with the chapter text:
Sisa Bikitsha’s irrepressible spirit makes him a winner
KwaZulu-Natal businessman Sisa Bikitsha was chosen as the winner of the Entrepreneur of
the Year Award.
Bikitsha, whose business empire includes eight Kentucky Fried Chicken (KFC) outlets and
generates sales of R27-million a year, represents ‘the irrepressible spirit of entrepreneurship
from which will spring the new economy’, say the organisers.
He came to Johannesburg from the Transkei in the 1960s to seek his fortune, but found
himself up against apartheid and on one occasion was told he had 72 hours to return to his
‘homeland’. ‘I was unemployed and alone in Johannesburg, and I could have become a tsotsi,
but I decided to beat the system,’ says Bikitsha.
Short on cash but not on chutzpah, he set himself up as an informal undertaker,
escorting bereaved families through funeral parlour showrooms and collecting a commission
on sales. He later returned to KwaZulu-Natal and then the Transkei, where he landed the KFC
franchise. When KFC disinvested in 1986, he snapped up the Durban franchise and gradually
built up a network.
‘I hope in winning this award I can show black people that they must take their destinies
into their own hands and stop waiting for someone else to provide a living for them,’ he says.
Source: Ciaran Ryan, Business Times, 12 October 1997
1.5.1

Entrepreneurship and job creation
In South Africa, the role of small business is pivotal. Not all small-scale
businesses are entrepreneurial, but collectively they make a signi?cant
economic contribution. In South Africa (SA), the growth and development
of the small and micro-enterprise business sector, in particular, has been
identi?ed by many stakeholders as being of the utmost importance in an
effort to create employment and address poverty (South African Survey
2006/2007).
The growth in the number of entrepreneurs in both the formal and
informal sectors re?ects the accelerated growth rate experienced by the
South African economy.
The higher growth rate of formal sector entrepreneurs bodes well for
the economy as formal small enterprises are generally acknowledged to
have a higher propensity for employment creation than their informal
counterparts, which are characterised by numerous one-person enterprises.
The latest Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM) 2007 report on high-growth
entrepreneurship ?nds that of all regions, entrepreneurial activity in Africa
is heavily skewed toward low-rate expectation activity (Autio 2007:5).
Similarly, SA’s Total Entrepreneurial Activity (TEA) rate is dominated by
000 Entr_Theory.indb 21 17/8/08 12:55:47
22
ENTREPRENEURSHI P: THEORY I N PRACTI CE
necessity entrepreneurs with low expectations of growth and job creation
(Autio 2550:23), that is, entrepreneurs who say they are involved in an
entrepreneurial effort because they have no other choice, where returns are
low and intermittent and motivation is personal survival.
Survivalist enterprises are typically informal and have limited growth
prospects, despite occasional exceptions. It is among the larger – but still
small-scale – ventures that employment prospects are more promising. For
example, 338 000 enterprises employed 734 000 people in 2001 – an average
of 2,2 employees apiece. Based on these ?gures, it is safe to assume over
three million employees (including the self-employed) in small and micro
enterprises. This amounts to nearly 30 per cent of the 10,8 million people
employed in 2002.
In 2002, unemployment stood at between 30 per cent (those looking for
employment) and 41 per cent (if we include those who, at the time, had not
job-hunted for four weeks). It is estimated that 300 000 jobs must be created
annually just to halt growing unemployment. Not surprisingly, 3,3 million
South Africans are eking out a living in the informal sector (South Africa at
a Glance 2003:126). Many take up informal trading as a last resort. The bulk
of these traders are young South Africans. Those between 15 and 34 years
comprised 73 per cent of the unemployed by February 2001 (Statistics SA 2001,
2002).
So bleak a scenario underscores the need for entrepreneurship and the
role it must play in South Africa. Under the right conditions, a few small-
scale businesses may grow into giants with a disproportionate impact on
employment and wealth creation. Without a steady supply of entrepreneurs,
South Africa is likely to stagnate and decline economically.
1.5.2

Entrepreneurship and education
In South Africa, entrepreneurial education is partially institutionalised as
part of the new outcomes-based education (OBE) school curriculum; and
entrepreneurial education forms part of academic offerings at several higher
education institutions. As entrepreneurial knowledge proliferates, so do
schools, universities, and other educational institutions. In industrialised
countries, entire schools exist for entrepreneurship.
The trend is gaining momentum in South Africa, too. Over the
past decade, entrepreneurship has increasingly been taught as a stand-
alone module or as a major subject. With the spread of capitalism and
globalisation, entrepreneurship continues to gain importance. Globalisation
exposes entrepreneurs everywhere to merciless competition (actual and
potential) from 190-odd countries. As tariffs reduce and trading straddles
national borders, survival will depend upon the creativity and resilience of a
country’s entrepreneurs.
Differences in levels of entrepreneurship can be explained in that
individuals with more education and from households with higher incomes
are more likely to pursue opportunity entrepreneurship (high-growth
000 Entr_Theory.indb 22 17/8/08 12:55:47
23
ENTREPRENEURI AL PROCESS DYNAMI CS
ventures), than those with less education and from poor households who
are more likely to pursue necessity entrepreneurship (survivalist ventures).
Perhaps more relevant in terms of education is the positive impact of
greater post-secondary educational activity on increases in opportunity
entrepreneurship. Identifying business opportunities and having con?dence
in personal skills to implement a business may be enhanced through
education and training with evidence suggesting that those with more
education are more likely to pursue opportunity entrepreneurship, which
may have overall bene?ts for national growth (Reynolds et al 2003).
Entrepreneurial education is growing fast not only in the US and Europe
but also in South Africa, Australia, New Zealand, Japan, Canada, China and
Brazil, with the number of schools in the hundreds, and dozens of programs
offered by top business schools at the graduate and undergraduate levels.
Katz (2003:279) puts it succinctly: ‘there are too many academics, too much
established infrastructure and too much demand from students , organisations
and governments to let entrepreneurship fall into disuse or disarray’.
1.5.3

Entrepreneurship in government and parastatals
Entrepreneurship is commonly discussed in the context of private business,
but government departments, parastatals, and other organs of state have as
pressing a need to think and act entrepreneurially. Faced with dwindling
subsidies, public scrutiny, and privatisation, their need may even be greater.
In government, one is used to lumbering bureaucracies, funded from
the public ?scus (tax revenue) and often deaf to public service. Their
mission is largely unde?ned or unful?lled. Instead, it is replaced with
inordinate reverence for rules and procedures, and contempt for civilian
concerns. Success is de?ned in terms of organisational stability and not
‘rocking the boat’. This depiction is admittedly overstated and stereotypical,
but nonetheless largely true. Organisations such as these are condemned to
permanent dependence on public funding because they create little value
and eschew innovation in the face of changing times.
Gradually, many are waking up to the chilly winds of change. In
South Africa and internationally, government departments face shrinking
budgets and growing public expectations. As a result, they have to compete
for legitimacy and funding in the same market as private organisations
and non-governmental organisations. To survive, most are turning to
intrapreneurship in the hope of staying competitive. Not surprisingly,
bosberade have turned into one of South Africa’s more lucrative industries as
civil servants seek to establish themselves as intrapreneurs. Essentially, they
are seeking to identify and acquire entrepreneurial skills with which to turn
their organisations around.
To these organisations, the integration of opportunity, resources, and a
dynamic team applies every bit as strongly as it does in the private sector.
Activity similar to that in government is occurring in parastatals such
as Eskom, Telkom, Transnet, and others who are facing unprecedented
000 Entr_Theory.indb 23 17/8/08 12:55:47
24
ENTREPRENEURSHI P: THEORY I N PRACTI CE
competition. Resting on their laurels is unthinkable, and most are rising to
the challenge, with varying degrees of success. This trend will culminate in
the reorientation of the public sector along basic entrepreneurial principles.
Government ministers repeatedly stress movement towards a leaner,
more ef?cient public service. Considering the long-standing inertia and
trade union opposition, this will not happen overnight. Turning these
organisations around involves a change of culture, which takes time.
However, it is possible to predict with some con?dence that winners will
emerge from among those who choose the entrepreneurial path rather than
dig in their heels.
1.5.4

Entrepreneurship in NGOs and social entrepreneurs
Similar sentiments apply to non-government organisations (NGOs).
Many sprang up during the 1980s, to oppose apartheid. Foreign funding
was fairly abundant for those with connections. Post-1994, many found
themselves without a cause, and folded. Others underwent transformational
change to survive in this ‘brave new world’. Success has varied, as it has
in the business sector, but many are ?ourishing. For example, IDASA (the
Independent Democratic Association of South Africa) has moved on to
greener pastures as political analysts and development experts. They sought
and developed new opportunities.
With dwindling funds, NGOs now ?nd themselves even more pressed
to ?nd new niches and compete in a ?erce market.
Over the last decade, a critical mass of foundations and non-pro?t
organisations has emerged. Worldwide policy-makers are using the
language of local capacity building as a strategy to assist impoverished
communities become self-reliant (Peredo & Chrisman 2006).
To a large extent social entrepreneurs are reformers and revolutionaries,
as described by Schumpeter (1947), but with a social mission, they affect
fundamental changes in the way things are done in the social sector.
Social entrepreneurs are perceived as mission-based businesses rather
than as charities, they seek to create systemic changes and sustainable
improvements, and they take on risks on behalf of the people their
organisation serves. Though they may act locally, their actions have the
potential to stimulate global improvements in various ?elds, whether that is
education, health care, economic development, the environment, the arts, or
any other social ?eld.
The contribution of social entrepreneurs is increasingly celebrated as
was witnessed at the World Economic Forum’s conference on Africa in
Cape Town recently. Correspondingly, Warren Buffett’s recent $30,7 billion
donation to the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation indicates that venture
philanthropy means a signi?cant change in how people think about
transferring wealth.
Many dedicated centres have also evolved, for instance, the Skoll Centre
for Social Entrepreneurship at Oxford University. Created by Jeff Skoll, the
000 Entr_Theory.indb 24 17/8/08 12:55:48
25
ENTREPRENEURI AL PROCESS DYNAMI CS
foundation’s mission is to advance systemic change to bene?t communities
around the world by investing in, connecting with and celebrating social
entrepreneurs (Kramer 2005; Dees 2001). An entire chapter is dedicated in
this book to this phenomenon of social entrepreneurship.
1.5.5

Entrepreneurship in politics
The impact of change and the need for entrepreneurship is pertinent in
education, sport, charity work, law – virtually every aspect of life, including
politics. Coping with change, although stressful, is potentially rewarding.
Those who analyse the situation accurately and reposition strategically,
change the odds in their favour. In every threat lies an opportunity.
Voters can be ?ckle and parties that take them for granted may ?nd
themselves without an electorate. Already certain South African parties have
shrunk to the verge of extinction in only nine years. A case in point is the
Pan African Congress, particularly after the departure of Patricia de Lille.
The party is thought to have no apparent strategy and weak leadership. By
contrast, the ANC appears to have refocused itself from merely opposing
apartheid to running a modern state.
In the United States and other industrialised western nations, parties are
run on business principles, parlaying their leaders as marketable ‘products’.
In late 2003, less than a year before the next election was to take place,
parties like the ANC and Democratic Alliance (DA) began to follow suit.
They had to create value for voters (by meeting new or existing needs better
than the competition) or face losing electoral support.
Various South African political parties are trying to reposition
themselves in a post-democratic world as new opportunities and dangers
arise. Merging, down-sizing and other formations are popular reactions to
changing times. By 2003, the ANC had an electoral alliance with the DA in
KwaZulu-Natal. In Western Cape, the ANC and National Party, traditional
nemeses, ruled jointly. While some alliances were electorally driven, some
re?ected a search for relevance.
Those organisations and politicians who continually apply
entrepreneurial skills may weather the storm much more easily than those
who cling to the status quo. Entrepreneurial leadership therefore remains
relevant in the political arena, non-pro?t organisations, social and cultural
ventures, and in other areas. In short, entrepreneurship is pertinent to every
endeavour. Its principles apply wherever people aspire to manage change.
1.5.6

Entrepreneurship in the arts
The legacy of great artists is their work. The ability of some artists to
exploit the far more limited opportunities that were available to them – in
order that they might utilise and exploit their natural gifts and talents – is
testimony to the fact that many artists do possess a number of critically
000 Entr_Theory.indb 25 17/8/08 12:55:48
26
ENTREPRENEURSHI P: THEORY I N PRACTI CE
important entrepreneur character themes. Typically they would have to
look for commissions and patrons – which demanded networking skills
and emotional intelligence. In reality, many of them had to overcome a
wide range of obstacles, especially the envy and hostility of their rivals, in
order to pursue and complete their work – indicating the presence of ego,
dedication and courage. In fact most great artists are the ones that surpass
what is currently accepted as great art and innovate to create a new art
form. Many did not attain wealth when they were alive – although some of
them did become wealthy, but it seems achievement was the driving motive
that led them to overcome material poverty and mental anguish to pursue
their art. Their creations, simply, help us to see things differently (Bolton &
Thompson 2004:16).
Pro?le in entrepreneurship
Read the scenario below in conjunction with the chapter text:
Adrian Gardiner
A decade ago, a piece of land somewhere between Port Elizabeth and Grahamstown was
made up of 14 degraded, overgrazed farms. Only one was occupied, although all were
farmed by herdsmen. Together, the farms, on 20 000 hectares, employed about 15 people.
Today this land has been consolidated into one unit where the word ‘ecosystems’ is heard a
lot. Shamwari employs 250 people, mostly from local communities, and turns over more than
R30-million a year. If you include the multiplier effect – things like airfares – it is generating
business worth more than R100-million a year. The development demanded vision and
courage from Adrian Gardiner and his team.
That vision recently won Gardiner South Africa’s highest conservation accolade, the
Audi Terra Nova award. He points out that Shamwari has won 15 international awards, but
this is the ?rst accolade it has been given in South Africa. ‘We tend to take what we have
for granted,’ says Gardiner. He joined the ranks of previous winners: Robert Mazibuko,
who spread the message of deep-trench farming to combat soil erosion; Nan Rice, tireless
campaigner for marine conservation; Credo Mutwa, whose mission it was to create African
cultural villages around the country; and Dr Sue Hart, who founded EcoLink, which helps
communities to use and conserve natural resources. Signi?cantly, this was the ?rst time the
award had been made to a businessman. Gardiner may be a conservationist at heart – and
he is at pains to point out that wildlife comes ?rst at Shamwari – but he runs the reserve
as a business. It’s a thriving concern with conservation at its core. ‘It has to be a proper
commercial enterprise if it is to succeed,’ he says.
The Shamwari dream started when Gardiner bought a 1 200 hectare farm near
Grahamstown to be close to his children, who were at school in the city. ‘I started reading
about what kind of animals had occurred there ... it became a passion to put back what
people had destroyed over the past 150 years,’ he says. Slowly, Gardiner began buying
up surrounding farms, reintroducing game (Shamwari is now home to the Big Five) and
implementing a strict land management programme. Shamwari added ?ve upmarket guest
lodges, an African arts and culture village, and the Born Free Foundation. Somehow Gardiner
000 Entr_Theory.indb 26 17/8/08 12:55:49
27
ENTREPRENEURI AL PROCESS DYNAMI CS
persuaded the foundation, which supports a big cat sanctuary, to relocate to Shamwari from
Kent in England. The sanctuary doubles as an education tool for about 300 children who
visit each month. Gardiner has also persuaded his friend and mentor, Dr Ian Player, to move
the headquarters of his Wilderness Foundation from KwaZulu-Natal to Shamwari. Gardiner’s
goals for Shamwari include drawing in as much as possible the communities who live close to
the reserve, as well as having Africa’s ?rst privately owned wilderness area proclaimed. With
education and tourism as his big focus now, he is behind plans to offer a hotel management
and hospitality degree. The campus will be Port Alfred’s Halyards Hotel and Cowie Grand.
‘Economic success in the Eastern Cape has to be around tourism. But what we lack most are
skills.’ Gardiner’s hand is evident – with that of Dr Player – in the decision to hold the World
Wilderness Congress in Port Elizabeth in November. It’s only ever been held in South Africa,
in Johannesburg, once before. ‘It will pro?le this province like it’s never been pro?led before,’
says Gardiner.
The Mantis Collection, part of the Gardiner Group, has equity stakes or management
contracts at Steenberg Country Hotel in Constantia Valley, the Lake Pleasant Hotel on the
Garden Route, The Saxon in Johannesburg, The Stanley and Livingstone at Victoria Falls, and
Indigo Bay on Bazaruto Island off Mozambique. The group’s interests spread across tourism
services, such as travel agents, property companies, transport (Material Handling Consultants)
and crane hire (Castle Crane Hire). ‘Yes, it’s a very diverse portfolio. I think that is a result
of where I live [Port Elizabeth] and not wanting to move to Johannesburg,’ says Gardiner.
He took four years full time and three years part time to earn his B Com. ‘I had dif?culty
understanding the theory without the practical,’ he explains. After six years of ‘working for
other people’, Gardiner stepped out on his own, in 1969, with R10 000. He bought a pool-
building franchise. Soon, he owned all the franchises in Port Elizabeth and became involved in
construction. Next came a crane and plant hire business, which collapsed in 1979 owing to a
bad debt and bad judgement. ‘It was probably the best experience of my life. It taught me that
you have very few real friends in life. And it taught me about gearing in a business.’ Gardiner
managed to buy it all back within two years. Like a true entrepreneur, he took his lessons into
the future. And does the future include a listing? ‘That has crossed my mind,’ he says. ‘But I
think I’m too old to chase that now. I’ll leave that to my children.’
Source: Janette Bennett, Business Times, 19 August 2001
1.6

Dynamics of entrepreneurial change
By all accounts, it seems the pace, magnitude and direction of change will
continue to accelerate in this 21st century, with entrepreneurs assuming
a more powerful and prominent role (Shaker 1999). Not only will the
entrepreneurial process unfold under conditions of rapid change in the
technological, economic, customer, legal and social environments, but it
will be vital for entrepreneurs to understand the dynamics of this process
and nature of change, so that they can shape the impact thereof instead of
passively succumbing to it.
000 Entr_Theory.indb 27 17/8/08 12:55:49
28
ENTREPRENEURSHI P: THEORY I N PRACTI CE
The entrepreneurial economy is becoming embedded in many countries
and economies around the globe. Governments and public policy makers
have enacted laws encouraging entrepreneurship and are capacity building
for entrepreneurial activity. They have also improved the economic and
technological infrastructures necessary to undertake entrepreneurship.
Improvements in telecommunications and transportations have contributed
to enhancing entrepreneurial activity. Participation in the global economy
requires keeping abreast with constant innovation and entrepreneurial risk-
taking (Shaker 1999).
One of the most important lessons of the past decades is that intellect
and knowledge are the fuel of global competitiveness and growth.
Developing, nurturing, sustaining, and cultivating this knowledge are
among the most important ways societies can achieve economic growth and
social development.
Patents have exploded from an overwhelming 4 000 applications in 1991
to 22 000 in 1995, but one year later they mushroomed to 500 000 per year,
with such exceptional growth expected to continue (Whetten & Cameron
2005:491).
In order to capitalise on such changing and shifting conditions,
individuals will be more likely to change based on the degree to which the
process of change meets the following criteria:
Change must be a pre-planned process.
?
The availability and amount of information regarding the process must
?
be adequate.
The change must satisfy all relevant needs.
?
The expectation must be created that the change will be positive
?
experience.
It must be the choice of the individual to experience change.
?
Moreover, change requires consideration of:
The factors that promote change
?
What changes are required (that is, the nature of change)
?
The magnitude thereof – whether it should be radical or marginal
?
Timing – when to change (this is crucial since delays can be costly)
?
Mitigation of any negative impacts of change – for example, reversing
?
undesirable trends.
1.6.1

Frameworks to support change
Frameworks often help provide stability and order in the midst of constant
change. They clarify complex or ambiguous situations. Individuals who
are more familiar with frameworks can adapt better to complex scenarios
more effectively because they can respond to fewer exceptions. Individuals
without frameworks are left to react to every piece of information as a
unique and novel event. Nobel Laureate Herbert A. Simon demonstrated
the importance of frameworks by conducting a simple experiment. Subjects
000 Entr_Theory.indb 28 17/8/08 12:55:49
29
ENTREPRENEURI AL PROCESS DYNAMI CS
were shown a chess board and pieces as it appeared in mid-game. Some
of the subjects were experienced players, some were novices. They were
allowed to observe the chess board for 10 seconds, and then the board was
wiped clean. The subjects then had to replace the pieces exactly as they had
been before the board was wiped clean. Multiple trials were run, since the
experiment was computer generated. The results of this experiment were
remarkable: novices accurately replaced the pieces less than ?ve per cent
of the time and experienced players were accurate more than 80 per cent of
the time. These experienced players looked at the board and saw familiar
patterns or what might be called frameworks. The experienced players
were able to interpret the arrangement of game pieces and patterns quickly,
and then pay attention to the few exceptions on the board. The novices, on
the other hand, needed to pay attention to every single piece as if it was
an exception, since no pattern or framework was available to guide their
decision (Whetten & Cameron 2005:491–492).
This analogy has relevance not only to established organisations which
are purposively structured and organised to create stability, steadiness and
certainty, but also to entrepreneurship and the way this book is structured
to explain this phenomenon. Based on the framework proposed earlier
in this chapter this book attempts to explain the many variables which
past research has identi?ed, and to provide a comprehensive framework
to describe entrepreneurship coherently. This view will provide valuable
insight into the process of entrepreneurship and offer a supporting
framework, allowing ‘patterns’ to emerge and allow decisions to be made
from a more solid foundation.
1.6.2

Change barriers
Change is often talked about and conceptually entertained but not
implemented by individuals. The reason is that change is often seen as a
foreign element intruding into what is a relatively stable mindset. Many
people perceive changes as a threat for their personal status. Changes move
the person out of their ‘comfort zone’. One must move out of such a comfort
zone to change; this disruption from an established status quo meets often
meets with resistance. Different defence mechanisms are responsible for
resisting change. These include, but are not limited to:
Cognitive barriers
?
: lack of complete and correct information. Probably
the best solution is a balanced mix of information and creative ideas.
Alternatively, sticking to predetermined plans and strategies may over-
emphasise what has worked in the past and cause an individual to
become too rigid to past behaviours. Here one is not open to the ebb and
?ow of change.
Environmental barriers
?
: lack of institutional support or co-operation,
for example, too much bureaucracy in place to launch a venture.
Typically the environment is conducive or hostile to entrepreneurial
activities. Different scenarios are discussed in Chapter 4, Entrepreneurial
000 Entr_Theory.indb 29 17/8/08 12:55:50
30
ENTREPRENEURSHI P: THEORY I N PRACTI CE
environment, with speci?c reference to the South African entrepreneurial
environment.
Conceptual barriers
?
: dif?culties in identifying and analysing the
core issue. The issue is viewed too narrowly or alternatives are not
provided. Problems are approached with a one-sided view that focuses
on particular aspects only, and individuals fail to look at problems
holistically.
Cultural barriers
?
: tradition and change may hinder change. It is a
challenging task to overcome ingrained traditions. Often traditions can be
a major obstacle, particularly when traditions prevent an individual from
being enterprising. For instance, in many societies women are precluded
from entrepreneurial activities.
1.6.3

Positive entrepreneurial change
A key to understanding change is recognising the different reasons that
individuals offer when undertaking a new venture decision. Based on
established literature, there are a plethora of reasons offered for start-ups,
which include: the need for personal development, independence, seeking
approval, following others example, ?nancial success, and self-realisation
(Drnovsek & Glas 2002). In a recent study Urban (2007) validated the
following reasons for staring a venture – see Table 1.1 below for a full list of
variables and their scores.
Table 1.1 Reasons for start-ups
Items Mean
Standard
deviation
Reason for start up – I want to be my own boss. 2,48 1,656
Reason for start up – I want freedom at work. 2,43 1,576
Reason for start up – I would like to achieve and get approval. 2,52 1,623
Reason for start up – I will continue family tradition. 2,83 1,458
Reason for start up – I would like to develop a business idea. 2,54 1,488
Reason for start up – I would like to have more in?uence in the
community.
2,50 1,470
Reason for start up – I see a promising opportunity to seize. 2,64 1,299
Reason for start up – I would like to grow as a person. 2,39 1,696
Reason for start up – I want to realise my dreams. 2,24 1,669
Reason for start up – I want to have control of my life. 2,32 1,690
Reason for start up – I want to provide security for my family. 2,30 1,655
Reason for start up – I want to achieve life-time employment. 2,31 1,600
Reason for start up – I see few other possibilities; the only
chance is to work is for myself.
2,85 1,245
000 Entr_Theory.indb 30 17/8/08 12:55:50
31
ENTREPRENEURI AL PROCESS DYNAMI CS
Notes: All the items were measured on a 1–5 Likert scale, where respondents
indicated the most relevant reason for start-up. The highest score was for
the item ‘I see few other possibilities; the only chance to work is for myself’,
followed by ‘I will continue family tradition’.
Many of these reasons mean moving out of a comfort zone and taking a leap
into the unknown. Change is something the entrepreneur must generally be
comfortable with – entrepreneurs have a high tolerance of ambiguity, and
are challenged by change, not paralysed by it. We will discuss this in more
detail in the next chapter.
Case scenario and exercise
Raymond Ackerman
Raymond Ackerman started his business career as an employee of Ackermans, a retail chain
co-founded by his father. His ?rst job involved sorting buttons and welcoming customers.
Later, he took up employment with Greatermans which, in 1955, converted an old store into
the ?rst of what became the Checkers store chain. Eleven years later, Raymond Ackerman
had expanded the chain from two to 85 stores while gaining fame for consumer advocacy
in the media. Uncomfortable with his aggressive marketing and media pro?le, his employers
?red him (Business Times, 18 March 2001:1).
This enabled him to buy four retail stores which he combined into a new chain that
he termed Pick n Pay. The price was R620 000, of which he contributed R10 000 from
his savings. As he recalls it, starting Pick n Pay took ‘ninety per cent guts and ten per cent
capital’ (Sunday Times Millennium Souvenir, 2 January 2000). Founded on the principles of
consumer sovereignty that young Ackerman had learned from Prof. WF Hutt at the University
of Cape Town, Pick n Pay set out ‘to interpret and satisfy customers’ needs by selling quality
products at competitive prices, and providing courteous service in stores which are well
located and pleasing to shop in. A policy of refunding goods without question has enabled
Pick n Pay to establish long-term customer relationships which bring people back into its
stores’ ().
During the early years, Pick n Pay endured targeted competition by the OK Bazaars and
Checkers in Cape Town. Ackerman opened up stores in Johannesburg and Port Elizabeth
instead and the chain has continued to grow countrywide and across southern Africa and
Australia. Over the years, the organisation has grown into ‘one of Africa’s largest and most
consistently successful retailers of food, clothing and general merchandise’ (ibid ). They
also have a 70-store presence in Australia. Their stores are divided into hypermarkets,
supermarkets, family franchises, mini markets, and home shopping. In addition, they own
Score supermarkets, Health-Pharm Pharmacies and Go! Banking. Along the way, Ackerman
pioneered hypermarkets, no-name branding, and price-busting.
000 Entr_Theory.indb 31 17/8/08 12:55:51
32
ENTREPRENEURSHI P: THEORY I N PRACTI CE
The organisation has a history of consumer advocacy. Among its long-term battles has
been its ?ght to deregulate the petrol retail sector, based on the belief that consumers would
pay considerably less without government regulation. The battle goes back to 1976, when the
organisation took advantage of legal loopholes and sold discounted petrol until their petrol
supplies were eventually cut off. Even today, to great public acclaim, Pick n Pay continues
to advocate the deregulation of the industry. Other battles have included the sale of bread
below cost in 1982 and a R3-million subsidy on maize meal, designed to curb price rises
imposed by government (ibid ). Pick n Pay has since created supermarket chains for different
market segments, including Rite Value and others. Their organisation’s customer focus
remains as strong as ever and has included expansion to Internet marketing. Since 1995,
the organisation has added three to six supermarkets annually and had grown by about a
quarter by 2001 (Business Times, 18 March 2001). It employs over 30 000 people in several
countries and had R127 400 000 in capital assets in 2002 ().
So phenomenal has Pick n Pay’s growth been that, reportedly, R100 invested with
Ackerman in 1968 would have grown to R160 000 by 2001. Annual revenues exceeded
R15-billion in 2001 with pro?ts of R475-million (Sunday Times, 11 November 2001). At the
end of 2001, the Sunday Times awarded Raymond Ackerman its Lifetime Achievement Award.
And all this started with a four-store venture founded thirty-six years ago.
Exercise
Based on the case scenario, interpret whether Raymond Ackerman is an entrepreneur,
traditional manager or small business owner. Justify your answer by explaining key
differences. You may make assumptions about Pick n Pay based on your general knowledge
of this organisation (state your assumptions clearly).
Chapter key terms and core concepts
barriers to change
?
creativity
?
dynamics of change
?
entrepreneurship
?
entrepreneurship process
?
evolution of entrepreneurship
?
innovation
?
integrated framework
?
interrelated components
?
job creation, government,
?
politics, education, arts and social
entrepreneurs
reasons for start-ups
?
relevance of entrepreneurship
?
small business
?
traditional management
?
Weber, McClelland and
?
Schumpeter
Chapter summary
This chapter introduced the concept of entrepreneurship and made it
?
clear that the individual is at the beginning of this entrepreneurship
process. In drawing upon various de?nitions, several key terms surfaced.
The ‘who’ in entrepreneurship was conceptualised as a person, and the
000 Entr_Theory.indb 32 17/8/08 12:55:51
33
ENTREPRENEURI AL PROCESS DYNAMI CS
‘what’ as a process that involves creativity and innovation and results in
something of value that can be recognised by others.
To clarify entrepreneurship further, it was contrasted against traditional
?
management and small business management, with the main differences
emphasising entrepreneurship as being preoccupied with the start-up
phase of business, strategic objectives, innovation, and having potential
for growth.
The evolution of entrepreneurship was traced and the major contributors
?
identi?ed as Weber, Schumpeter and McClelland.
The entrepreneurial process was outlined as the underlying structure to
?
this book and the different components were conceptualised holistically
as interrelated parts which only make sense together, as a whole, rather
than as unrelated fragments. Based on the premise that the creation
of a new venture is a multidimensional phenomenon, the conceptual
framework allows one to view the enormously varying patterns of new
venture creation taking into account the entrepreneurial context.
The relevance of entrepreneurship in South Africa was discussed in terms
?
of job creation, education, government and parastatals, NGOs and social
entrepreneurs, politics and arts.
Dynamics of entrepreneurial change revealed that the entrepreneurial
?
process unfolds under conditions of rapid change in the environment,
and it is vital for entrepreneurs to understand the dynamics of this
process and the nature of change, so that they can shape the impact
thereof instead of passively succumbing to it. Individuals who are
more familiar with frameworks can adapt to complex scenarios more
effectively because they respond to fewer exceptions.
Change barriers were brie?y identi?ed and positive entrepreneurial
?
change was discussed, based on different reasons offered for start-ups.
Building on the essential foundations of this chapter, in the next
?
chapter entrepreneurial human capital is interrogated as it relates to an
individual’s experience, intelligence, training, education, and skills.
Chapter review questions
1 Compare different de?nitions of entrepreneurship.
2 Formulate your own de?nition of entrepreneurship.
3 List 5 different activities an entrepreneur performs.
4 Compare and contrast entrepreneurship with (a) small business
management and (b) traditional management.
5 Brie?y outline and describe the entrepreneurial process.
6 Interpret the formula E = f (e).
7 Who are the three major contributors to the ?eld of entrepreneurship in
the modern era?
8 What is the main research ?nding on the relationship between
entrepreneurship and education?
000 Entr_Theory.indb 33 17/8/08 12:55:52
34
ENTREPRENEURSHI P: THEORY I N PRACTI CE
9 Provide typical reasons for business start-ups.
10 Discuss the use of frameworks to assist entrepreneurs and potential
entrepreneurs.
Application questions
1 Identify an entrepreneur who has successfully navigated a process
similar to the one in this book. Describe the different components in this
process as they apply to this entrepreneur.
2 Research a press article exhibiting the relevance of entrepreneurship to
present-day South Africa.
3 Contextualise entrepreneurship in any other ?eld than business or
commerce by describing how entrepreneurship is evident in this ?eld.
4 Survey several entrepreneurs to identify their reasons for starting up
their ventures. Are there any similarities between these reasons?
Relevant chapter web sites
Visit these web sites and report back to your facilitator with team
presentations:

[All web sites accessed on 20 May 2008.]
000 Entr_Theory.indb 34 17/8/08 12:55:52
35
ENTREPRENEURI AL PROCESS DYNAMI CS
References
Autio, E. 2005. ‘Report on high-expectancy entrepreneurship’. Global
Entrepreneurship Monitor Report. Babson College and London Business
School. [Online]. Available: [24 March 2006].
Autio, E. 2007. ‘Report on high-growth entrepreneurship’. Global
Entrepreneurship Monitor Report. Babson College and London Business
School. [Online]. Available: [1 February 2008].
Bartol, KM & Martin, DC. 1998. Management, Third edition. New York:
McGraw-Hill.
Bateman, TS & Snell, SA. 1996. Management: building competitive advantage,
Third edition. Chicago: Irwin.
Boltman, B & Thompson, J. 2004. Entrepreneurs, talent, temperament, technique,
Second

edition. UK: Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann.
Bygrave, WD. 1989. ‘The entrepreneurship paradigm (II). Chaos and
catastrophes among quantum jumps’. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice.
Vol 14:7–26, Winter.
Coulter, M. 2001. Entrepreneurship in action. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Dees, JD. 2001. Entrepreneurship in philanthropy, Centre for advancement of
social entrepreneurship (case), Fuqua School of Business, Duke University.
[Online]. Available: [12 November 2006].
Dollinger, MJ. 1995. Entrepreneurship: strategies and resources. Boston: Austen
Press.
Drnovsek, M & Glas, M. 2002. ‘The entrepreneurial self-ef?cacy of
nascent entrepreneurs: the case of two economies in transition’. Journal of
Enterprising Culture, 10(2):107–131.
Filion, LJ. 1997. Entrepreneurship: entrepreneurs and small business owner
manager. Ecole Des Hautes Etudes Commerciales (HEC): Montreal.
Gaglio, CM & Katz, J. 2001. ‘The psychological basis of opportunity
identi?cation: entrepreneurial alertness’. Journal of Small Business Economics,
16:95–111.
Gartner, WB. 1985. ‘A conceptual framework for describing the phenomenon
of new venture creation’, in Academy of Management Review, 10(4):696–707.
Gartner, WB. 1990. ‘What are we talking about when we talk about
entrepreneurship?’. Journal of Business Venturing, 5:15–28.
000 Entr_Theory.indb 35 17/8/08 12:55:53
36
ENTREPRENEURSHI P: THEORY I N PRACTI CE
Gartner, WB, Bird, BJ & Starr, JA. 1992. ‘Acting as if: differentiating
entrepreneurial from organizational behaviour’. Entrepreneurship Theory and
Practice, 13–31, Spring.
Gorman, G, Hanlon, D & King, W. 1997. ‘Some research perspectives on
entrepreneurship education, enterprise education and education for small
business management: a ten-year literature review’. International Small
Business Journal, 15(3):56–78.
Hisrich, RD & MP Peters. 1998. Entrepreneurship, Fourth edition. New York:
McGraw-Hill.
Jennings, DF. 1994. Multiple perspectives of entrepreneurship: text, readings and
cases. Ohio: South-Western Publishing Co.
Kane-Berman, J (ed). 2007. South African survey. South African Institute of
Race Relations.
Katz JA. 2003. ‘The chronology and intellectual trajectory of American
entrepreneurship education’. Journal of Business Venturing, 8(2):283–300.
Kramer, MR. 2005. Measuring innovation: evaluation in the ?eld of social
entrepreneurship. Palo Alto, Ca: Skoll Foundation (Foundation Strategy
Group).
Kuratko, DF & Hodgetts, RM. 1998. Entrepreneurship: a contemporary
approach, Fourth edition. New York: Dryden Press.
Laukkanen, M. 2000. ‘Exploring alternative approaches in high-level
entrepreneurship education’. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development,
12(1):25–47.
McClelland, D. 1965. ‘Achievement and entrepreneurship: a longitudinal
study’. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1(4):389–392.
McClelland, D. 1976. The Achieving Society. New York: Irvington Publishers
Inc.
McClelland, D. 1986. ‘Characteristics of successful entrepreneurs’. Journal of
Creative Behaviour, 21(3):219–232.
Minniti, M, Bygrave, WD & Autio, E. 2005. Global entrepreneurship monitor,
executive report 2005. USA: Babson and London School of Economics.
Oakey, RP. 2003. ‘Technical entrepreneurship in high technology small
?rms: some observations on the implications for management’. Technovation,
23:679–688.
Peredo, AM & Chrisman, JJ. 2006. ‘Toward a theory of community-based
enterprise’. Academy of Management Review, 31:309–328.
Reynolds, PD, Bygrave WD & Autio, E. 2003. Global entrepreneurship monitor,
executive report 2003. USA: Babson and London School of Economics.
000 Entr_Theory.indb 36 17/8/08 12:55:53
37
ENTREPRENEURI AL PROCESS DYNAMI CS
Rwigema, H & Karungu, P. 1999. ‘SMME development in Johannesburg’s
southern metropolitan local council: an assessment’. Development Southern
Africa, 16(1).
Schumpeter, JA. 1947. ‘The creative response in economic history’. Journal of
Economic History, 7:149–159.
Shaker, Z. 1999. ‘The changing rules of global competitiveness in the 21st
century’. Academy of Management Executive, 13(1):1–9.
Shane, S & Venkataraman, S. 2001. ‘Entrepreneurship as a ?eld of research:
a response to Zahra and Dess, Singh and Erickson’. Academy of Management
Review, 26:13–16.
Shane, S & S Venkataraman. 2000. ‘The promise of entrepreneurship as a
?eld of research’. Academy of Management Review, 25:217–235.
Smallbone, F & Friederike, W. 2006. ‘Exploring the role of trust in
entrepreneurial activity’. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 30(4):465–476.
South Africa at a glance 2003. Online]. Available: [20 May 2008].
Statistics SA. 2002. Key indicators. [Online]. Available: [20 May 2008].
Stoner, A, Freeman, E & Gilbert, D. 1995. Management, Sixth edition. New
York: Prentice Hall.
Timmons, JA. 1999. New venture creation: entrepreneurship for the 21st century,
Fifth edition. New York: McGraw-Hill International Editions (Business
Series).
Urban, B. 2007. ‘Entrepreneurship empowerment: increasing self-
employment intentions’. South African Journal of Economic Management
Sciences, 10(3):313–329.
Weber, M. 1958. The Protestant ethics and the spirit of capitalism. New York:
Scribner’s. (Original edition published 1905.)
Whetten, DA & Cameron, KS. 2005. Developing management skills, Sixth
edition. New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Wickham, PA. 2001. Strategic entrepreneurship: a decision-making approach to
new venture creation and management. London: Pitman.
Zimmerer, TW & Scarborough, NM. 1996. Entrepreneurship and new venture
formation. New Jersey: Prentice Hall International.
000 Entr_Theory.indb 37 17/8/08 12:55:53

doc_288753205.pdf