The context of this study is the southwest of Finland and the attempts to create a regional innovation system enabling an increased rate of venture development and emergence of high growth high technology firms based on a triple helix model. The area has a science park, which was established 2002, three universities and four polytechnic colleges and a strong concentration of industry in particular in the pharmaceutical and ICT sectors. There is also a strong shipbuilding industry, which produces most of the world’s luxury cruise lines. Hence this area seems like a typical example of a regional agglomeration that should show strong entrepreneurial vitality.
However, there is a consensus among governmental officials, local business leaders, and academics that not enough firms are founded in the region and that there are far too few growth companies. This is a problem that seems to plague Finland as a whole. Moreover, there is an understanding that a much larger number of ideas and innovations that potentially could generate firms should emerge from the concentration of research universities and technology institutions. Somehow, despite numerous governmental agencies providing counseling and financial support for persons willing to start companies, these persons do not appear nor do the universities appear to produce ideas and innovations at a desirable rate.
On a national level numerous initiatives and instruments to boost technology development and innovations has taken place since 1983 when the National Technology Agency (TEKES) was founded with primary objective to promote the competitiveness of Finnish industry and the service sector through technological means. In 1987 The Science and Technology Policy Council (STPC) was established. During the 1990s major reforms were conducted: (i) a regional innovation policy was established through an act enforced at the beginning of 1994 leading to the creation of regional centers of expertise, (ii) a cluster programme was launched in 1997 to reinforce the utilization and commercialization of technology by established technology centers and incubators and licensing offices in the universities. 8 cluster programmes were formed under six ministries and one national cluster, The Finnish Pharma Cluster was formed, and (iii) venture capital activity started with Sitra as a pioneer. Apparently, some of these measures have paid off as Finland was for the fourth consecutive year regarded as the most competitive nation (Global Competitiveness Report, 2005). Yet, entrepreneurial activity in Finland is remarkably low. Technology-based new venture creation is low and has dropped in Finland since 2000 (Table 1) despite policy measures aiming for an opposite trend. In 2003 it looked as if measures would pay off, but results from 2004 follow a downward trend since 2000. Opportunistic entrepreneurship does not keep pace with the level of technology development. It decreased from 600 new ventures in 1995 to only 350 in 2002 (Reynolds 2005).
Wednesday, September 26, 2007
Tuesday, September 25, 2007
Entrepreneurship, adult education & HRD
I think the endeavor for our program should be entrepreneurship, transformative learning and career development. More in the field of adult education than in the HRD. I say this because the problem of business schools today is how to increase students' intention to become business owners. A number of authors proposed a link between entrepreneurship education and entrepreneurial intention or action, but no empirical proof have been found. I think the problem is the content of the entrepreneurial programs not the entrepreneurial education per se. Business school's professors have little background on adult education literature and, to encourage the transformative learning sought, they only know methods such as entrepreneur guest-speakers or mentoring, these methods are expensive. In consequence, courses and resources are utilized by curious students that are not seriously thinking in starting a business someday. A first course on entrepreneurship, transformative learning and career development could trigger a deeper and serious reflection from the students about whether they really want to become business owners. This process not only could trigger an experience that would increase the desire of starting a business but also could help an student to focus earlier on a professional career within a multinational company. At the end of the day, students stop by in entrepreneurship classes but most of them will pursue careers in big companies.
Entrepreneurship education
Based on descriptions of entrepreneurship programmes in the literature (e.g. Gartner and Vesper, 1994) and on a search of current offerings in major universities, we suggest that balanced, ‘good practice’ programmes offer activities grouped under four components: (a) a ‘taught’ component, with one or more modules; (b) a ‘business-planning’ component, which can include business plan competitions and advice on developing a specific business idea; (c) an ‘interaction with practice’ component, which can include talks from practitioners and networking events; (d) a ‘university support’ component, which can include market-research resources, space for meetings, a pool of technology with commercial potential and even seed funding to student-teams.
Al-Laham A., Souitaris V., & Zerbinati S., (2007) Do entrepreneurship programmes raise entrepreneurial
intention of science and engineering students? The effect of learning, inspiration and resources.
Journal of Business Venturing Volume 22, Issue 4, July 2007, Pages 566-591
Al-Laham A., Souitaris V., & Zerbinati S., (2007) Do entrepreneurship programmes raise entrepreneurial
intention of science and engineering students? The effect of learning, inspiration and resources.
Journal of Business Venturing Volume 22, Issue 4, July 2007, Pages 566-591
Thursday, May 31, 2007
Prophet of Innovation: Joseph Schumpeter and Creative Destruction By Thomas K. McCraw (Harvard University Press, 719 pp., $35) Click here to purchase
Innovation is not the same thing as invention.
Anyone can invent a new product or a new technique of production. The entrepreneur is the one who first sees its economic viability, bucks the odds, fights or worms his way into the market, and eventually wins or loses. Each win means profit for the entrepreneur and his backers, and it also means a jog upward for the whole economy. In the course of this process, which cannot possibly run smoothly, many businesses, individuals, and institutions, themselves founded on earlier successful innovations, will be undermined and swept away.
Schumpeter called this birth-and-death process "creative destruction," and realized before anyone else that it was the main source of economic growth. There is no feasible alternative for capitalism; this is capitalism. Here is a characteristically strong statement: "Without innovations, no entrepreneurs; without entrepreneurial achievement, no capitalist returns and no capitalist propulsion. The atmosphere of industrial revolutions--of 'progress'--is the only one in which capitalism can survive."
The picture generated by classical and
neoclassical economics had none of this dynamism, turbulence, and intrinsic uncertainty. (Malthus was perhaps a partial exception.) Smooth trends and stationary states, equilibria of one kind or another, predominated. There is a sense in which Schumpeter could claim to have been the progenitor of a torrent of modern research that analyzes the dynamics of profit-driven innovation and innovation-driven economic growth. Even creative destruction has been translated into equations. (The pioneers were Philippe Aghion and Peter Howitt, and others have followed.)
Schumpeter derived from this analysis a lasting bias in favor of big business. "American opinion is so antibig business," he wrote, "precisely because big business has made the country what it is now and in doing so it has set the standard of the American soul: who is not a part of big business feels he does not meet the standard and by compensation turns against it." Clearly a successful innovation confers, in his view, at least a temporary monopoly. Without the lure of those monopoly profits, there would be no incentive for anyone to bear the risks of entrepreneurship. Schumpeter believed that large firms were both the source and the result of successful innovation; and so tampering with them would be dangerous. But the issue is more subtle than that. The English economist John Hicks once remarked that "the best of all monopoly profits is a quiet life," meaning that a seller with monopoly power might settle for less than the largest possible profit in order to avoid attracting rivals who would have to be beaten off amid turmoil and uncertainty. There is much evidence that having to compete with best practice is itself an important spur both to innovation and to other aspects of industrial performance. Maybe there is an optimal intensity of competition.
I think that this is Schumpeter's main legacy to
economics: the role of technological and organizational innovation in driving and shaping the growth trajectory of capitalist economies.
Whole subfields of economics now pursue the subject of the care, feeding, and consequences of innovation, using qualitative and quantitative, historical and mathematical methods. McCraw gives only a few pages to Theory of Economic Development. He certainly understands that it is fundamental, but he does not place it as the summa that it is.
Anyone can invent a new product or a new technique of production. The entrepreneur is the one who first sees its economic viability, bucks the odds, fights or worms his way into the market, and eventually wins or loses. Each win means profit for the entrepreneur and his backers, and it also means a jog upward for the whole economy. In the course of this process, which cannot possibly run smoothly, many businesses, individuals, and institutions, themselves founded on earlier successful innovations, will be undermined and swept away.
Schumpeter called this birth-and-death process "creative destruction," and realized before anyone else that it was the main source of economic growth. There is no feasible alternative for capitalism; this is capitalism. Here is a characteristically strong statement: "Without innovations, no entrepreneurs; without entrepreneurial achievement, no capitalist returns and no capitalist propulsion. The atmosphere of industrial revolutions--of 'progress'--is the only one in which capitalism can survive."
The picture generated by classical and
neoclassical economics had none of this dynamism, turbulence, and intrinsic uncertainty. (Malthus was perhaps a partial exception.) Smooth trends and stationary states, equilibria of one kind or another, predominated. There is a sense in which Schumpeter could claim to have been the progenitor of a torrent of modern research that analyzes the dynamics of profit-driven innovation and innovation-driven economic growth. Even creative destruction has been translated into equations. (The pioneers were Philippe Aghion and Peter Howitt, and others have followed.)
Schumpeter derived from this analysis a lasting bias in favor of big business. "American opinion is so antibig business," he wrote, "precisely because big business has made the country what it is now and in doing so it has set the standard of the American soul: who is not a part of big business feels he does not meet the standard and by compensation turns against it." Clearly a successful innovation confers, in his view, at least a temporary monopoly. Without the lure of those monopoly profits, there would be no incentive for anyone to bear the risks of entrepreneurship. Schumpeter believed that large firms were both the source and the result of successful innovation; and so tampering with them would be dangerous. But the issue is more subtle than that. The English economist John Hicks once remarked that "the best of all monopoly profits is a quiet life," meaning that a seller with monopoly power might settle for less than the largest possible profit in order to avoid attracting rivals who would have to be beaten off amid turmoil and uncertainty. There is much evidence that having to compete with best practice is itself an important spur both to innovation and to other aspects of industrial performance. Maybe there is an optimal intensity of competition.
I think that this is Schumpeter's main legacy to
economics: the role of technological and organizational innovation in driving and shaping the growth trajectory of capitalist economies.
Whole subfields of economics now pursue the subject of the care, feeding, and consequences of innovation, using qualitative and quantitative, historical and mathematical methods. McCraw gives only a few pages to Theory of Economic Development. He certainly understands that it is fundamental, but he does not place it as the summa that it is.
Wednesday, May 09, 2007
entrepreneurship education and training
Gorman et al (1997)
there has been an increase in the amount of empirical research conducted, specially in the areas of educational process and structure
Vesper (1982) demonstrated that entrepreneurship can be taught
there has been an increase in the amount of empirical research conducted, specially in the areas of educational process and structure
Vesper (1982) demonstrated that entrepreneurship can be taught
Pablo Turner
De no ser por su encanecida cabellera, el gerente general de Viña San Pedro, Pablo Turner, se habría confundido entre los universitarios que el viernes miraban el partido de tenis de Fernando González, en el coffe break del foro con que los convocó Icare. Porque su atuendo usualmente informal se acerca más al de un estudiante que al protipo de gerente.
Turner expuso a los alumnos de los últimos años de las carreras de ingeniería y derecho de distintas universidades, que concurrieron a escuchar experiencias de vida de empresarios y ejecutivos, una especie de decálogo de cómo tener éxito. Pero de seguro quienes escucharon más atentamente su exposición fueron su mamá y su hija Catalina, sentadas casi en la última fila.
Después de comentar su paso por la universidad - donde lo que más estudiaba era finanzas porque sus habilidades iban por el lado comercial- y que tras pasar de la gerencia general de Falabella a la viña se siente como partiendo de nuevo, les dio sus consejos:Hay que ser optimista y persistente. Tener iniciativa y seguridad en sí mismo.Mantenerse atento a los cambios que experimentan los consumidores, para adelantar hacia dónde van.
Turner expuso a los alumnos de los últimos años de las carreras de ingeniería y derecho de distintas universidades, que concurrieron a escuchar experiencias de vida de empresarios y ejecutivos, una especie de decálogo de cómo tener éxito. Pero de seguro quienes escucharon más atentamente su exposición fueron su mamá y su hija Catalina, sentadas casi en la última fila.
Después de comentar su paso por la universidad - donde lo que más estudiaba era finanzas porque sus habilidades iban por el lado comercial- y que tras pasar de la gerencia general de Falabella a la viña se siente como partiendo de nuevo, les dio sus consejos:Hay que ser optimista y persistente. Tener iniciativa y seguridad en sí mismo.Mantenerse atento a los cambios que experimentan los consumidores, para adelantar hacia dónde van.
Saturday, March 31, 2007
Business plan competition
Dear NVC Challenge Participants:
(Please READ this e-mail in its entirety and REPLY directly to the
e-mail with the following information:
TEAM NAME:
TEAM LEADER:
This is to ensure that we know we have your correct e-mail address.)
CONGRATULATIONS for having the courage and commitment to compete in the
2007 New Venture Challenge (NVC)! You have decided to take what will be
a difficult journey, but the rewards at the end will be well worth your
efforts! Below is all the information you and your team will need to
compete in this year’s Challenge. If at any point you have any
questions, please feel free to call our offices: 305-348-7156 and ask to
speak to someone about the New Venture Challenge.
If you are receiving this e-mail, it is because we have received your
team’s application and you are now accepted as a New Venture Challenge
Competitor. (If there are any problems with your application, you will
be contacted separately.)
From this point forward, please note that ALL correspondence from our
offices will be in the form of an e-mail and will ONLY be sent to the
Team Leader.
It is the Team Leader’s responsibility to communicate effectively to his
or her teammates.
RULES:
Please re-review the procedures and reprint the pages if you had
previously viewed or printed the rules. Among two of the key changes
from last year are presentation length and the addition of a second
business plan deadline.
DEADLINES:
April 16, 2007 at 5 p.m.- Deadline to submit Business Plan in PDF format
– ONE file only
April 23, 2007 at 5 p.m. - Deadline to submit hard copies of Business Plan
Each team must submit the "Official Business Plan Submission Form" along
with one bound (no spirals please) hard copy and ten (10) additional
hard copies (three-hole punched and individually shrink-wrapped for
insertion into standard notebooks for judge's review) of their written
business plans.
May 7, 2007 at 5 p.m.- Deadline to submit Revised Business Plan hard
copies and PDF format
The “Official Business Plan Submission Form” has not yet been posted on
the web site, but all of the processes and requirements are posted.
Business plan requirements and submission process can be found here:
http://entrepreneurship.fiu.edu/nvc_submission_judging_rules.htm
An online business plan guide can be found here:
http://entrepreneurship.fiu.edu/nvc_business_plan_guide.htm
Please submit all plans to:
Attn: New Venture Challenge
FIU Pino Global Entrepreneurship Center
11110 Southwest 11th Street, University Park - VH 130
Miami, Florida 33199-0001
REQUIRED EVENTS:
April 27, 2007 - Presentation Rehearsals for Semi-Finalists
9 a.m. to 5 p.m. (by appointment only)
May 2, 2007 - Semi-Final Oral Presentation Rounds
Morning Session 7:00 a.m. – 12:00 p.m. (times subject to change)
FIU University Park Campus MARC 125
Afternoon Session 12:00 p.m. – 5:00 p.m. (times subject to change)
May 15, 2007 - Final Oral Presentation Rounds
8:00 a.m. – 3:00 p.m.
FIU University Park Campus MARC 125
May 16, 2007 - FIU College of Business Administration’s Annual
Entrepreneurship
Hall of Fame Induction Ceremony and Luncheon (NVC winners announced)
11:00 a.m. – 2:30 p.m.
Parrot Jungle Island
More details will follow as the semester progresses, but should you have
any questions at any time, please feel free to contact us.
Best of luck and good wishes,
New Venture Challenge and Pino Entrepreneurship Center Support Team
(Please READ this e-mail in its entirety and REPLY directly to the
e-mail with the following information:
TEAM NAME:
TEAM LEADER:
This is to ensure that we know we have your correct e-mail address.)
CONGRATULATIONS for having the courage and commitment to compete in the
2007 New Venture Challenge (NVC)! You have decided to take what will be
a difficult journey, but the rewards at the end will be well worth your
efforts! Below is all the information you and your team will need to
compete in this year’s Challenge. If at any point you have any
questions, please feel free to call our offices: 305-348-7156 and ask to
speak to someone about the New Venture Challenge.
If you are receiving this e-mail, it is because we have received your
team’s application and you are now accepted as a New Venture Challenge
Competitor. (If there are any problems with your application, you will
be contacted separately.)
From this point forward, please note that ALL correspondence from our
offices will be in the form of an e-mail and will ONLY be sent to the
Team Leader.
It is the Team Leader’s responsibility to communicate effectively to his
or her teammates.
RULES:
Please re-review the procedures and reprint the pages if you had
previously viewed or printed the rules. Among two of the key changes
from last year are presentation length and the addition of a second
business plan deadline.
DEADLINES:
April 16, 2007 at 5 p.m.- Deadline to submit Business Plan in PDF format
– ONE file only
April 23, 2007 at 5 p.m. - Deadline to submit hard copies of Business Plan
Each team must submit the "Official Business Plan Submission Form" along
with one bound (no spirals please) hard copy and ten (10) additional
hard copies (three-hole punched and individually shrink-wrapped for
insertion into standard notebooks for judge's review) of their written
business plans.
May 7, 2007 at 5 p.m.- Deadline to submit Revised Business Plan hard
copies and PDF format
The “Official Business Plan Submission Form” has not yet been posted on
the web site, but all of the processes and requirements are posted.
Business plan requirements and submission process can be found here:
http://entrepreneurship.fiu.edu/nvc_submission_judging_rules.htm
An online business plan guide can be found here:
http://entrepreneurship.fiu.edu/nvc_business_plan_guide.htm
Please submit all plans to:
Attn: New Venture Challenge
FIU Pino Global Entrepreneurship Center
11110 Southwest 11th Street, University Park - VH 130
Miami, Florida 33199-0001
REQUIRED EVENTS:
April 27, 2007 - Presentation Rehearsals for Semi-Finalists
9 a.m. to 5 p.m. (by appointment only)
May 2, 2007 - Semi-Final Oral Presentation Rounds
Morning Session 7:00 a.m. – 12:00 p.m. (times subject to change)
FIU University Park Campus MARC 125
Afternoon Session 12:00 p.m. – 5:00 p.m. (times subject to change)
May 15, 2007 - Final Oral Presentation Rounds
8:00 a.m. – 3:00 p.m.
FIU University Park Campus MARC 125
May 16, 2007 - FIU College of Business Administration’s Annual
Entrepreneurship
Hall of Fame Induction Ceremony and Luncheon (NVC winners announced)
11:00 a.m. – 2:30 p.m.
Parrot Jungle Island
More details will follow as the semester progresses, but should you have
any questions at any time, please feel free to contact us.
Best of luck and good wishes,
New Venture Challenge and Pino Entrepreneurship Center Support Team
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
