Benoît Gailly

Assessing the impact of entrepreneurship education programmes: a new methodology

Purpose – Facing the multiplication of entrepreneurship education programmes (EEP) and the increasing resources allocated, there is a need to develop a common framework to evaluate the design of those programmes. The purpose of this article is to propose such a framework, based on the theory of planned behaviour (TPB).Design/methodology/approach – TPB is a relevant tool to model the development of entrepreneurial intention through pedagogical processes. The independent variables are the characteristics of the EEP and the dependent variables are the antecedents of entrepreneurial behaviour. To illustrate and test the relevance of the evaluation methodology, a pilot study is conducted.Findings – Data are consistent and reliable, considering the small scale of this experiment. The EEP assessed had a strong measurable impact on the entrepreneurial intention of the students, while it had a positive, but not very significant, impact on their perceived behavioural control.Research implications/limitations – This...

From craft to science: Teaching models and learning processes in entrepreneurship education

Purpose – The aim of this article is to offer a conceptual framework in entrepreneurship education largely inspired by education sciences and discuss its two main levels, the ontological and educational levels. This framework is then used to discuss various types of entrepreneurship teaching programs, focusing on three broad categories of learning processes.Design/methodology/appraoch – This article uses intensive reviews of literature in the fields of education and entrepreneurship. The teaching framework and the derived propositions are intended to provide a bridge between education sciences and the field of entrepreneurship and seeks to stress the scientific legitimacy of entrepreneurship education.Findings – Finds that there is a need to reconsider entrepreneurship education in its wide diversity, both from an ontological and pedagogical point‐of‐view. The range of theoretical choices, objectives, publics, pedagogical methods and institutional context should be approached through the lenses of multipl...

The Impact of Entrepreneurship Education on Entrepreneurial Attitudes and Intention: Hysteresis and Persistence

Do entrepreneurship education programs (EEPs) really influence participants’ attitudes and intention toward entrepreneurship? How is this influence related to past experience and how does it persist? Researchers and entrepreneurship education stakeholders alike have been looking into this question for quite a while, with a view to validating the efficacy of such programs. The authors of this paper propose to operationalize the concept of entrepreneurial intention and its antecedents in an attempt to address those issues. In particular, we propose an original research design where (1) we measure the initial state and persistence of the impact and not only short‐term effects; (2) we deal with a compulsory program, allowing to avoid self‐selection biases; and (3) we deal with an homogeneous “compact” program rather than programs combining multiple teaching components whose effects cannot be disentangled. Our main research results show that the positive effects of an are all the more marked when previous entrepreneurial exposure has been weak or inexistent. Conversely, for those students who had previously significantly been exposed to entrepreneurship, the results highlight significant countereffects of the on those participants.

International Analysis of Venture Capital Programs of Large Corporations and Financial Institutions

In this article, we investigate what drives large companies (nonfinancial corporations and financial institutions) worldwide to run venture capital (VC) programs, specifically targeting Fortune Global 500 companies. Such a decision involves trade–offs between expected strategic and financial benefits and costs of managing and financing a portfolio of ventures, which are influenced by the institutions and regulations that affect innovation–oriented entrepreneurship. We determine that companies are more likely to run a program if they are based in countries in which the market for early–stage investments is well developed and innovation–related resources are more widely available. Moreover, companies based in countries with costly personal bankruptcy regulations are less likely to run a VC program, which is consistent with the prediction that these regulations discourage entrepreneurial initiatives. These findings emphasize the importance of favorable local conditions for an affiliated VC program. We observe no evidence, however, that unfavorable local conditions affect the degree of internationalization of programs, suggesting that running international programs entails significant extra costs. Finally, no significant difference emerges between U.S.–based and Western European–based companies.

An Empirical Taxonomy of Start-Up Firms Growth Trajectories

This article provides a method that can accommodate, in a systematic way, the analysis of new firm growth trajectories. Exploiting longitudinal data of 741 promising firms, we used a multiple indicator measure of growth, financial and productivity performance as well as firm demographic profile, as a foundation of a multidimensional construct of firm development process. In addition to graphical approach, cluster analysis based on State Sequences Analysis is developed from a combination of Principal Component Analysis and Markov Chain Model to drive taxonomy of new firm growth trajectories. Findings show that new firm growth trajectories are nor linear neither a random phenomenon. While the strategy of growth of promising firm are very heterogeneous, our approach allows us to develop a typology of growth paths based on four states of which three are stable.

Interdisciplinarity in Cross-Campus Entrepreneurship Education

This Handbook explores the current state of university-wide entrepreneurship education programs and provides a comprehensive reference guide for the planning and implementation of an entrepreneurship curriculum beyond the business school environment. A variety of authors spanning five countries and multiple disciplines discuss the opportunities and universal challenges in extending entrepreneurship education to the sciences, performing arts, social sciences, humanities, and liberal arts environments. The Handbook is designed to assist educators in developing new programs and pedagogical approaches based upon the previous experiences of others who have forged this exciting new path.

Develop a Balanced Portfolio of Business Models

Most innovation ideas do not lead to robust business opportunities, and most organizations try to pursue more business opportunities than they can actually successfully handle. In order to effectively manage innovation, firms must therefore select the opportunities for which a convincing business model can be designed and which collectively form a balanced and consistent portfolio.

Conclusion: More Brain, Less Storming

Managing innovations requires understanding what innovation means, why an organization needs and wants to innovate and the capabilities it should develop as a consequence. This might imply that your organization should implement the latest fad or emulate Apple and Uber. Or that it should not.

Identify Attractive Innovation Opportunities

Innovation opportunities do not magically “pop up” out of the blue, be it in R&D laboratories or brainstorming sessions. They emerge when organizations “learn to learn” from multiple internal and external sources, increasing their knowledge and intellectual capital by “thinking in new boxes”, mixing, maturing and combining multiple insights and inspirations.

Build a Shared Strategic Vision of Innovation

Innovation is today seen by many organizations as a key strategic issue. These organizations, however, often embark on costly innovation initiatives, without having any clear idea of what they want to achieve (thus they are inefficient) or why (thus they are ineffective). Too often, they do not understand or do not agree on what innovation is or why and how they want to innovate.