Sie sind auf Seite 1von 14

Term Paper


Submitted by: Syed AdilMahmood Usman Gulzari Muhammad Junaid

Submitted to: Dr. Kamran Naqi SZABIST, ISLAMABAD

Entrepreneurship & Management Education: A Pakistani Perspective

Purpose - The purpose of this research is to analyze the inclination of entrepreneurs towards management education and how much management education helps entrepreneurs in initiating their business in different phases of their business life. Design/methodology/approach In this study factors such as business environment, traits of entrepreneurs, goal and objective set by the entrepreneur will be measured. In addition to that the other variables which will be gauged are entrepreneurial educational initiaves taken by educational institutions and the methodology used. These variables will be measured to check their impact on entrepreneurial development. Findings- Results show that development of an entrepreneur significantly depends on focus (environment, goals and traits) while education has no significant impact. Research limitations/implications This research is limited by the scope of entrepreneurs included.In this study only entrepreneurs with less than 20 employees are included whereas if the entrepreneurs of bigger companies included will contribute significantly to the result.Moreover the educational institution can be included in the study of their planned programs regarding entrepreneurship in future. Originality/value This study will contribute significantly to the traits measurement and educational capability of entrepreneurs of Islamabad region. Keywords - Entrepreneurship, Students, Education, Training,

Literature Review:
The importance of marketing to successful entrepreneurship and the importance of Entrepreneurship and innovation to successful marketing have led to the merging of the two fields in what is called entrepreneurial marketing (Morris et al., 2002).Small firms are known as backbone of economy and many times these firms started as entrepreneurial ventures & became successful enterprises (Storey et al., 1987; O'Farrell, 1986).However, this growth requires planning, commitment and determined effort in the long run. Relying on short term success will not bring sustainability for the longer run. This paper suggest that the success of any entrepreneurial business is relies heavily on its marketing plan & marketing activities for the promotion of the business. Hill and McGowan suggests that entrepreneurs, if they wish to succeed need a combination of inherent personality traits, a propensity of creativity and innovation and appropriate managerial know how. On other occasions Adams and Chell (1993, p. 147) states Entrepreneurial success appears to derive from two key sources: the first of these is the personality profile of the entrepreneur; with the second being the managerial competence of the entrepreneur. The important point here is how managerial competence of an individual is developed? Some studies shows that it comes with the experience where as other studies shows that proper management education helps in developing the adequate competency required by entrepreneurs. Theories suggest that, as environmental dynamism and hostility increase, successful firms become more entrepreneurial and devote more effort to strategic analysis (Miller, 1983; Miller and Friesen, 1982, 1983). Marketing has been seen as the principal mechanism to deal with environmental uncertainty (Khandwalla, 1977). Jain (1983) argues that environmental dynamics can only be effectively integrated into strategic analysis through marketing input. As Murray (1981) states it, marketing is home to the entrepreneurial process. Given the difficult situation faced by

entrepreneurs in Pakistan, there is special interest to find what factors contributes to their success and may be Pakistani entrepreneurs are working through added factors to cope with the economic & political instability, they might be ready to go across the border. Thus it should not be assumed that entrepreneurial marketing is shorter version of marketing although we can say that it has unique characteristics.First, entrepreneurs thrust is on marketing as a tactic as opposed to marketing as a culture or as a strategy (Webster, 1981, 1992); Second, entrepreneurs focus more on innovations to the product/service and less on customer needs (Stokes, 2000). Hence, the core concept of customer-orientation in marketing is not the primary focus of the entrepreneur (Kotler, 1973). Third, entrepreneurs focus more on interactive marketing methods communicated largely through word of mouth; market monitoring is intuitive, loose, unstructured and based on information gathered through informal networks (Hills, 1994). Fourth, entrepreneurial marketing is short-term focused, changes frequently, and is flexible (Carson, 1993; Carson et al., 1995). Tyebjee et al. (1983) argue that the personal networks of the entrepreneur are the key aspect of entrepreneurial marketing. Harrison and Leitch, (1994) suggested a three stage model of entrepreneurship education development. The first form thought entrepreneurship as a part of general management. The second stage debated it in academic terms and said that entrepreneurship is qualitatively far different from the management of corporate companies. In the third stage. In the third and final stage of evolution, massive reconceptualisation occurred in which based in part on the leadership in changing the organizational structures which setups the reintegration of entrepreneurship education and management education.

Just like research in management, research in entrepreneurship has entered into different avenues (Block and Stumpf, 1992; Vesper et al., 1988; Gorman et al., 1997).However when conducting research on management education and entrepreneurship, the most costly and difficult research is one in which teaching programs and methodologies are being gauged (Block and Stumpf, 1992, pp. 38-9). According to Schumpeter (1934), who gave us the modern version of the entrepreneur as the person disrupting and destroying the economic order(Bygrave, 1989a), entrepreneurship is about identifying new chances, creatively breaking patterns, taking and managing risk, and organizing and co-coordinating resources (Landstrom, 1998; Gibb, 2002). The teaching involves both arts (e.g. creative and innovative thinking) and sciences (e.g. business and management competencies) (Rae, 2004; Jack and Anderson, 1999).Shane and Venkataraman (2000) emphasize the role of opportunity discovering, evaluating and exploiting it at the core of entrepreneurship.

Kyro (2003b) suggests that the link between entrepreneurship and education should be stronger in order to make the latter parts of the above process as relevant to the education as possible. Intention is as necessary as education. But education is what pushes the individual to take initiative with confidence. The triggering can be due to external opportunities such as technological advancement in local markets or self driven. The entrepreneurial directed approach of learning is based on series of experiential learning, in which every new activity gives birth to new idea and whole new approach to reach that idea; this is also known as reflective learning. According to Mezirow (1991), reflection, as the basis of learning, is the antecedent and a condition for ideas and thoughts which will initiate new activity. Though assessment can be in a joint form. What did I learn? How did the learning happen? What questions did it raise? (van Houten, 1995; Petaja and Koponen, 2002). The educational initiatives should urge the students to lead by example by developing the entrepreneurial orientation through innovative revenue generating initiatives like summer school & grants for ground breaking initiatives (Doane and Pusser, 2005; Miclea, 2004; Peltier et al., 2007).Business programs also help develop the needed networks for the entrepreneurs for future just like alumni, which helps the students in years to come.The National Business Education Association (2001) recommends EEPs incorporate content from nine disciplines including entrepreneurial opportunity discovery, marketing, economics, finance, accounting, management, global markets, legal, and business plans. Interestingly, an explicit, sequential approach to these subjects typical of business education and single discipline majors fail to provide students with the messiness and ambiguity found in the real world (Kennedy et al., 2001). More integrated

approaches within EEPs help students build the knowledge base to better solve complex, unstructured problems experienced in real world entrepreneurial activities. Entrepreneurship relies heavily on the personal mental model of the initiative take and how he perceive reality related to entrepreneurial orientation (Van Eeden et al., 2005).One of the way to gauge entrepreneurial thrust is to see how the individual is competing with self-imposed goals (Frank et al., 2007; Shane and Venkataraman, 2000) and the knowledge seeking ability is to continually enroll yourself into different programs,skill and experiences in the entrepreneur (Chen et al., 1998; Krueger and Carsrud, 1993)

Theoretical Framework:

Focus i-Environment ii-Traits iii-Goals Entrepreneur Development Educations IEntrepreneuria l programs. ii-Methodology used

H1: There is positive relationship between education of entrepreneur and his approach towards entrepreneurial development H2: There is positive relationship between entrepreneurial mindset and entrepreneurial development activities.

Analysis and Interpretation

Following are the results of analysis

Model Summaryb Adjusted R Model 1 R .558a R Square .312 Square .231 Std. Error of the Estimate .65656 Durbin-Watson 1.303

a. Predictors: (Constant), Education, Focus b. Dependent Variable: Entrprenur

ANOVAb Model 1 Regression Residual Total Sum of Squares 3.316 7.328 10.644 df 2 17 19 Mean Square 1.658 .431 F 3.846 Sig. .042a

a. Predictors: (Constant), Education, Focus b. Dependent Variable: Entrepreneur

Coefficientsa Standardized Unstandardized Coefficients Model 1 (Constant) Focus Education B -2.043 2.043 -.428 Std. Error 3.728 .775 1.126 .590 -.085 Coefficients Beta t -.548 2.636 -.380 Sig. .591 .017 .709

a. Dependent Variable: Entrepreneur

Results show that development of an entrepreneur significantly depends on focus (environment, goals and traits) while education has no significant impact. R square shows that independent variables explain 23% of dependent variable.

References Bjerke, B. and Hultman, C.M. (2002), Entrepreneurial Marketing, Edgar Elgar, Cheltenham. Kotler, P. (1973), The major tasks of marketing management, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 45, October, pp. 42-9. Bygrave, W.D. (1989a), The entrepreneurship paradigm (I): a philosophical look at its research methodologies, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Vol. 14 No. 1, pp. 7-26.

Carson, D. (1993), The philosophy for marketing education in small firms, Journal of Marketing Management, Vol. 9, pp. 189-204. Carson, D., Cromie, S., McGowan, P. and Hill, J. (1995), Marketing and Entrepreneurship in SMEs, Prentice Hall, London. Chen, C.C., Greene, P.G. and Crick, A. (1998), Does entrepreneurial self efficacy distinguish entrepreneurs from managers?, Journal of Business Venturing, Vol. 13 No. 4, pp. 295-316. Doane, D.J. and Pusser, B. (2005), Entrepreneurial organization at the academic core: the case of summer sessions, New Directions for Higher Education, Vol. 129 No. 1, pp. 43-54. Gibb, A.A. (1993), The enterprise culture and education. understanding enterprise education and its links with small business, entrepreneurship and wider educational goals, International Small Business Journal, Vol. 11 No. 3, pp. 11-34.

Gibb, A.A. (2002), In pursuit of a new enterprise and entrepreneurship paradigm for learning: creative destruction, new values, new ways of doing things and new combinations of knowledge, International Journal of Management Review, Vol. 4 No. 3, pp. 233-69.

Kotler, P. (1973), The major tasks of marketing management, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 45, October, pp. 42-9. Harrison, R.T. and Leitch, C.M. (1994), Entrepreneurship and leadership: the implications for education and development, Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, Vol. 6, pp. 111-215.

Jack, S.L. and Anderson, A.R. (1999), Entrepreneurship education within the enterprise culture: producing reflective practitioners, International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research, Vol. 5 No. 3, pp. 110-25.

Jimmy Hill, Pauric McGowan, (1999),"A qualitative approach to developing small firm marketing planning competencies", Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, Vol. 2 Iss: 3 pp. 167 175

Kotler, P. (1973), The major tasks of marketing management, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 45, October, pp. 42-9.

Khandwalla, P. (1977), The Design of Organizations, Harcourt, Brace, Javanovich, New York, NY. Jain, S.C. (1983), The evolution of strategic marketing, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 11, pp. 409-25. Kennedy, E.J., Lawton, L. and Walker, E. (2001), The case of using live cases: shifting the paradigm in marketing education, Journal of Marketing Education, Vol. 23 No. 2, pp. 145-51 Kyro, P. (2003b), Entrepreneurship pedagogy the current state and some future expectations, paper presented at the 3rd European Summer University, Paris, 26 June-3 July.

Landstrom, H. (1998), The roots of entrepreneurship research, paper presented at the RENT XII Conference, Lyon, 26-27 November.

Miller, D. and Friesen, P.H. (1983), Strategy-making and environment: the third link, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 4, pp. 221-35.

Morris, M.H., Schindehulte, M. and LaForge, R.W. (2002), Entrepreneurial marketing: a construct for integrating emerging entrepreneurship and marketing perspectives, Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, Vol. 10 No. 4, pp. 1-19. National Business Education Association (2001), Achievement Standards for Entrepreneurial Content Areas, National Business Educational Association, Reston, VA, available at: (accessed 10 June 2010).

Storey, D. Watson, R. and Wynarczyk, P. (1987), ``Fast growth small businesses: case studies of 40 small firms in North East England'', Department of Employment, London, Research Paper No. 67. Stokes, D. (2000), Entrepreneurial marketing: a conceptualization from qualitative research, Qualitative Market Research, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 47-56. Schumpeter, J.A. (1934), The Theory of Economic Development, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA

Shane, S. and Venkataraman, S. (2000), The promise of entrepreneurship as a field of research, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 217-26.

Shook, C.L., Priem, R.L. and McGee, J.E. (2003), Venture creation and the enterprising individual: a review and synthesis, Journal of Management, Vol. 23 No. 3, pp. 379-99.

Tyebjee, T.T., Bruno, A.V. and McIntyre, S.H. (1983), Growing ventures can anticipate marketing stages, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 61 No. 1, January-February, pp. 62-6.