David L.

Deeds Page 1 1/9/2007

Syllabus for PhD Seminar on Entrepreneurship

The School of Management
The University of Texas at Dallas
Prof. David Deeds
Spring 2007

Course Requirements and Grading

This course is a seminar. This implies that all students must be thoroughly prepared for each
class. This implies reading and analyzing each reading assignment carefully prior to the meeting.
The following assignments are required:

1. Article Leader (25%). Each seminar, each article will be discussed by one student
randomly selected through a lottery. This student should begin by offering a 5-10 minute
overview of what was interesting about the article – not a recap or summary of the major
parts of the article but an informed, insightful, elucidation of the major themes the author
was attempting to develop.
a. More specifically, the discussion of each article should center on the
i. scope of the research (research question)
ii. theoretical motivations
iii. research techniques and methodology (sample, data, analysis, etc.)
iv. findings and interpretation thereof
v. positioning in the literature and contributions to literature
vi. future research opportunities
vii. strength of the article
viii. shortcomings, flaws, etc.
b. At the beginning of the following session, each article leader will hand a 1-2
page summary of the assigned article covering the points above, as well as an
endnote file of 3-4 recent articles that have cited the article and extended the
work in the area and a 1 paragraph summary of the paper. You may circulate the
summary and endnote file via email.

2. Participation (15%). Weekly contributions to the overall seminar discussion. Here the
emphasis is on quality rather than quantity, on insight rather than summary.

3. Research Paper Proposal (10%). A 3-5 page research paper proposal and presentation
is due in class on 2/28/2007. The proposal should include the following:

a. Clear statement of the research question(s)

b. Statement of motivation – why is this an interesting question for the field of
entrepreneurship and why is it an interesting question for you
c. Background literature including a summary of the key articles and their insights
for the proposed study.
4. Research Paper (50%). You are required to submit a research paper relating to a topic
covered in the course. The purpose of this paper is to as develop your ability to carry out
research in the strategy field. This paper should, at a minimum,
a. Discover and motivate a research question germane to strategic management.
This should be done in the introduction, where you identify the research question,
briefly describe what prior work has done and what is missing, and indicate what
David L. Deeds Page 2 1/9/2007

you will do to ameliorate the problem. Each of these issues should be addressed
in one paragraph.
b. Review and synthesize the literature in strategy and other fields related to the
question. A literature review should be held in a persuasive argument fashion.
c. Develop testable (non-obvious) hypotheses,
d. Outline a plan for a research design in the methods section
e. If possible, collect and analyze data, and report the results, and add a conclusion
section where you focus on literature contribution, limitations, and future
research; and
f. Prepare the paper for submission to the Academy of Management annual
conference (use AMJ style guide, to be found in first issue of each year or on the
AOM website http://aom.pace.edu/AMJ/).
g. The paper is due at the beginning of the last day of class, April 24 (max. 30
pages all inclusive, double-spaced, hard copy [no email attachments]). At
this day, you will take 15 minutes to present the paper, and we’ll discuss it
thereafter. Use overheads or power points. Make sure that equipment is
available and up and running in the seminar room.

The Readings

Day 1 – Defining the field and its domain (1/10/2007)

1) Schildt, Zahra & Sillenpaa (2006). Scholarly Communities in Entrepreneurship Research:

A Co-Citation Analysis. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice May 2006.
2) Schumpeter, J.A. (1946) – “Comments on a plan for the study of entrepreneurship” in R.
Swedberg (ed.) Joseph A. Schumpeter: The Economics and Sociology of Capitalism
(1991) Princeton University Press, Princeton NJ
3) Shane, S. & Venkataraman, S. (2000). The promise of entrepreneurship as a field of
research, Academy of management review, Vol. 25, No. 1, pp. 217-226.
4) Alvarez & Barney, 2004. Organizing rent generation and appropriation: Toward an
entrepreneurial theory of the firm. Journal of Business Venturing 19 (2004) 621–635.

Day 2 – The Economic perspective of entrepreneurship (1/17/2007)

1) Coase, R.H. 1937. The nature of the firm. Economica 4(16): 386-405.
2) Knight, F. 1964. Risk, uncertainty, and profit. New York. Augustus Kelley, pp. 269-
275.
3) Kirzner, I. 1997. Entrepreneurial discovery and the competitive market process: An
Austrian approach. Journal of Economic Literature, 35:60-85.
4) Baumol, W.J. 1993. Formal entrepreneurship theory in economics: Existence and bounds.
Journal of Business Venturing. 8: 197-210.
5) Demsetz, H.E. 1988. The theory of the firm revisited. Journal of Law, Economics, and
Organization 4(1): 141-161.

Day 3 – The Sociological Perspective (1/24/2007)

1) Aldrich, HE and Martinez, MA. 2001. Many are called but few are chosen ….
Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, Summer 2001.
2) Lie, J. 1997. Sociology of Markets. Annual Review of Sociology. 23: 341-360.
David L. Deeds Page 3 1/9/2007

3) Romanelli, E. 1991. The evolution of new organizational forms. Annual Review of

Sociology. 17-79-103.
4) Thornton, PH. 1999. The sociology of entrepreneurship. Annual Review of Sociology.
25: 19-46.

Day 4 – The Strategy Perspective (1/31/2007)

1) Alvarez S.A. & Busenitz, L.W. 2001. The entrepreneurship of resource-based theory.
Journal of Management. 27: 755-775.
2) Barney, J.B. 1986. Strategic factor markets: Expectations, luck, and business strategy.
Management Science. 32: 1231-1241.
3) Barney, JB. 1991. Firm resources and competitive advantage. Journal of Management,
17:99-120.
4) Teece, D.J, Pisano, G.P, and Shuen, A. 1997. Dynamic capabilities and strategic
management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7): 509.534.
5) Decarolis, D. M. & Deeds, D. L. (1999). The impact of stocks and flows of
organizational knowledge on firm performance: An empirical investigation of the
biotechnology industry, Strategic management journal.

Day 5 – Institutional Theory & Entrepreneurship (2/7/2007)

1) Aldrich, H.E. & Fiol, M. 1995. Fools Rush In. Academy of Management Journal 1994.
2) Oliver, C. 1997. SUSTAINABLE COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE: COMBINING
INSTITUTIONAL AND RESOURCEBASED VIEWS. Strategic Management Journal,
1997.
3) Greenwood, R and Suddaby, R. 2006. INSTITUTIONAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP IN
MATURE FIELDS: THE BIG FIVE ACCOUNTING FIRMS. Academy of Management
Journal
4) DiMaggio, P.J. and Powell, W.W. 1983. The Iron Cage Revisited…, American
Sociological Review 1983.
5) Lounsbury, M. and Glynn, M.A. 2001. CULTURAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP:
STORIES, LEGITIMACY, AND THE ACQUISITION OF RESOURCES. Strategic
Management Journal, 2001.

Day 6 – Cognition & Entrepreneurship (2/14/2007)

1) Kahneman, D & Lovello, D. 1993. Timid choices and bold forecasts: A cognitive
perspective on risk-taking. Management Science. 39: 17-31.
2) Baron, R. A. 1998. Cognitive mechanisms in entrepreneurship: Why and when
entrepreneurs think differently than other people. Journal of Business Venturing, 13: 275-
294.
3) Busenitz, L. & Barney, J. 1997. Differences between entrepreneurs and managers in large
organizations: Biases and heuristics in strategic decision-making. Journal of Business
Venturing. 12: 9-30.
4) Mitchell, R.K., Busenitz, L., Lant, T., McDougall, P.P., Morse, E.A., & Smith, J.B.,
2002. Toward a theory of entrepreneurial cognition: Rethinking the people side of
entrepreneurship research. Entrepreneurship: Theory & Practice, 27(2): 93-105
David L. Deeds Page 4 1/9/2007

5) Sarasvathy, Saras D.2001. CAUSATION AND EFFECTUATION: TOWARD A

THEORETICAL SHIFT FROM ECONOMIC INEVITABILITY TO
ENTREPRENEURIAL CONTINGENCY. Academy of Management Review, April 2001

Day 7 – Networks & Entrepreneurship (2/21/2007)

1) Granovetter, M.S. 1973. The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology. 78:
1360-1380.
2) Walker, G. Kogut, B. Shan, W. 1997. Social capital, structural holes, and formation of an
industry network. Organization Science. 8(2) 109-125.
3) Yli-Renko, Helena; Autio, Erkko; Sapienza, Harry J. 2001. Social capital, knowledge
acquisition and knowledge exploitation in young technology-based firms. Strategic
Management Journal, Vol. 22 Issue 6/7, p587, 27p.

4) Uzzi, B. 1999. Embeddness in the making of financial capital. How social relations and
networks benefit firms seeking financing. American Sociological Review. 64: 481-505.
5) Gimeno, J. Folta, T, Cooper, AC and Woo, C. 1997. Survival of the fittest?
Entrepreneurial human capital and the persistence of underperforming firms.
Administrative Science Quarterly. 42:750-783.
6) Hoang, H. and Antocic, B. Network-based research in entrepreneurship: A critical
review. Journal of Business Venturing, Mar2003, Vol. 18 Issue 2, p165, 23p

Day 8 – Paper proposal presentations (2/28/2007)

Day 9 - Regional Networks, Geography & Entrepreneurship (3/14/2007)

1) Saxenian, A. (1990). Regional networks and the resurgence of Silicon Valley,

California management review, fall, pp. 89-110
2) Almeida, P. & Kogut, B. (1997). The exploration of technological diversity and the
geographic localization of innovation, Small business economics, 9, pp. 21-31.
3) Pouder, R. & ST. John, C. (1996). Hot spots and blind spots: Geographic clusters of
firms and innovation, Academy of management review, Vol. 21, No. 4, pp. 1192-
1225.
4) Zucker, L. G. & Darby, M. R. & Armstrong, J. (1998). Geographically localized
knowledge: Spillovers or markets?, Economic Inquiry, Vol. XXXVI, January, pp. 65-
86
5) Coombs, JE, Mudambi R and Deeds, DL. 2006. An examination of the investments
in U.S. biotechnology firms by foreign and domestic corporate partners. JBV 2006.
6) Stuart, T. E. & Sorenson, O. 2003. liquidity Events …., Administrative Science
Quarterly, 2003

Day 10 – Exploration, Exploitation and Entrepreneurship (3/21/2007)

1) March, J. G. (1991). ‘Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning,’

Organization Science 2, pp. 71-87.
2) Rothaermel, F, and Deeds, D.L. 2004. “Exploration and exploitation alliances in
biotechnology: A system of new product development” The Strategic Management
Journal 25(3) March 2004.
3) Levinthal DA, March JG. 1993. The myopia of learning. Strategic Management
Journal 14: 95-112
David L. Deeds Page 5 1/9/2007

4) Rosenkopf L, Nerkar A. 2001. Beyond local search: boundary spanning, exploration,

and impact in the optical disk industry. Strategic Management Journal 22: 287-306.
5) Nerkar, Atul. 2003. Old Is Gold? The Value of Temporal Exploration in the Creation
of New Knowledge. Management Science, Feb2003, Vol. 49 Issue 2, p211-229

Day 11 – Alliances & New Ventures (3/28/2007)

1) Deeds, David L; Hill, Charles W L. 1999. An examination of opportunistic action

within research alliances: Evidence from the biotechnology industry. Journal of
Business Venturing 14(2)
2) Stuart, T. E., H. Hoang and R. C. Hybels (1999). ‘Interorganizational endorsements
and the performance of entrepreneurial ventures,’ Administrative Science Quarterly
44, pp. 315-349.
3) Simonin, B. L. (1999). ‘Ambiguity and the process of knowledge transfer in strategic
alliances,’ Strategic Management Journal, 20, pp. 595-623.
4) Dyer, J. and H. Singh (1998). ‘The relational view: Cooperative strategy and sources
of interorganizational competitive advantage,’ Academy of Management Review 23,
pp. 660-679.
5) Teece, D. J. (1986). ‘Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for
integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy,’ Research Policy 15, pp. 285-
305.

Days 12 & 13 – Students’ Choice (4/4/2007 & 4/11/2007)

Day 14 – Paper Presentations (4/18/2007)