Technology Analysis & Strategic Management Vol. 18, No.

1, 39 56, February 2006

Entrepreneurial Learning: A Conceptual Framework for Technologybased Enterprise

DAVID RAE
The Derbyshire Business School, University of Derby, UK

ABSTRACT Entrepreneurial learning has emerged as an important yet insufciently understood area of enquiry. This paper develops new understanding in this area from a social constructionist perspective by using narratives elicited from technology-based entrepreneurs to explore their learning experiences and behaviours. The unit of analysis is the emergent entrepreneur in the technology-based enterprise. The paper develops a framework for analysing entrepreneurial learning through in-depth analysis of entrepreneurial experiences by using discourse analysis based on a social learning perspective. This conceptual framework includes three major themes of personal and social emergence, contextual learning and the negotiated enterprise, and 11 related sub-themes. These demonstrate connections between the emergence of entrepreneurial identity, learning as a social and contextual process, opportunity recognition, and venture formation as a negotiated activity.

Introduction and Rationale Entrepreneurial learning has emerged as an important area of enquiry in relation to both the academic study of entrepreneurship and the practical development of new entrepreneurs, yet it is an area that is not well understood.1 Learning is of increasing importance in technology-based enterprises, given the growing signicance of science and technology innovation in new venture creation.2 This paper explores the question of how entrepreneurial behaviours are learned by formative technology-based entrepreneurs, and aims to identify signicant processes and experiences in their learning. From these it develops a conceptual framework that can be used to interpret entrepreneurial learning experiences. The study is undertaken by means of a social constructionist methodology, making use of narrative and discourse analysis.3 This provides an alternative and equally valid perspective to the entitative ontology that has prevailed in entrepreneurship research, yet is gaining in acceptance for the new insights into the entrepreneurial experience that can be produced.4 This approach is used to interpret the learning experiences of a group of
Correspondence Address: Dr David Rae, Centre for Entrepreneurial Management, The Derbyshire Business School, University of Derby, Kedleston Rd., Derby, DE22 1GB, UK; Tel: 44 1332 591400; Fax: 44 1332 622741. E-mail: d.rae@derby.ac.uk 0953-7325 Print=1465-3990 Online=06=01003918 # 2006 Taylor & Francis DOI: 10.1080=09537320500520494

40

D. Rae

technology-based entrepreneurs (TBEs) and to develop a conceptual framework of the signicant themes in their learning experiences. The paper offers two propositions. The rst is that entrepreneurial learning is a fundamental and integral part of the development of the technology-based enterprise, and therefore the human, social and behavioural aspects of learning are as much of a concern as the economic aspects that are often highlighted.5 The second proposition is the conceptual framework that sets out three major themes through which entrepreneurial learning can be understood. Entrepreneurship is dened for the purpose of this study as the inter-related processes of creating, recognising and acting on opportunities, which combine innovating, decisionmaking and enaction.6 Learning is dened an emergent, sense-making process in which people develop the ability to act differently, through knowing, doing, and understanding why.7 By learning, people construct meaning through experience and create new reality in a context of social interaction.8 The term entrepreneurial learning is dened as learning to recognise and act on opportunities, through initiating, organising and managing ventures in social and behavioural ways. The paper aims to explore entrepreneurial learning as dynamic social processes of sensemaking, which are not only cognitive or behavioural but also affective and holistic.9 The Theoretical Basis for the Study A summary of the key assumptions and theoretical underpinnings for the study from relevant literature is set out in this section. The lack of accepted unifying theoretical assumptions of entrepreneurship, combined with a wide diversity of perspectives and lack of congruence in the literature, continues to constrain its theoretical development.10 Entrepreneurship theory has traditionally been dominated by economics-based thinking,11 and both Schumpeter12 and Kirzner13 observed the importance of learning in the entrepreneurial process, but the contribution of economics to understanding the human and social processes of entrepreneurship and learning is limited,14 while human, sociological and psychological sciences have started to make important contributions to the understanding of entrepreneurial behaviour.15 However recent studies of entrepreneurial cognition have been limited by the cognitivist paradigm of individual (rather than social) and cerebral (rather than behavioural) conceptualisation.16 The cognitive paradigm, which concentrates on the individual acquisition and comprehension of knowledge, has dominated the study of learning, but has limitations in using the metaphor of man as computer as a means of understanding the human mind, the ability to learn, and social interaction.17 The understanding of entrepreneurial learning has been constrained by the divide between cognitivist methods that propose routinised conceptualisations related to cognitive theory,18 generally from an entitative perspective, and interpretive methods that aim to create dynamic approaches based on inductive inquiry into the entrepreneurial experience.19 Approaches based on cognitive science have emphasised the role of entrepreneurial knowledge20 and rational decision-making,21 with some development of learning within a social or team-based context22 and of the contextual application of experience.23 Interpretive approaches have sought to understand the situated24 nature of the entrepreneurial experience in a lifeworld25 perspective by using a range of qualitative research methods within a social and behavioural conception of learning.26 There is a corresponding need to move beyond this divide between entitative and interpretive approaches in order to create fresh understanding of what is learned as well as how

Entrepreneurial Learning

41

this is learned through the human processes of entrepreneurship.27 Beyond cognitivism, experiential28 and social29 theories of learning have been developed which combine action, conceptualisation and social practice, while the study of language and discourse30 has also contributed to understanding learning. Wenger31 has developed a comprehensive social and behavioural theory of learning as a transformational process of identity creation, including dimensions of meaning, practice, identity and community. This provides a conceptual foundation for understanding learning that accommodates social participation and human action as well as cognition, enabling advanced learning theory to be applied to the subject of entrepreneurship. There has been extensive writing on entrepreneurship education,32 from which it can be concluded that, while such education can provide cultural and personal support, knowledge and skill development about and for entrepreneurship, the art of entrepreneurial practice is learned mainly in the business environment through inductive, practical and social experience rather than in the educational environment.33 This must lead to the exploration of learning as a situated and active experience, rather than as a purely educational and theoretical process, in which considerations of emergent social identity and becoming an entrepreneur are included as well as the social and contextual experiences that shape identity and learning.34 The focus of this study is therefore on work-based learning in the business environment rather than on educational practice, which has been thoroughly explored. Table 1 illustrates the development of theories concerning entrepreneurial learning. Signicant progress has been made recently in developing new theoretical perspectives

Table 1. Conceptualisations of entrepreneurial learning Author(s) & year Schumpeter (1934) Kirzner (1973) Reuber & Fischer (1993) Young & Sexton (1997) Deakins & Freel (1998) Minitti & Bygrave (2001) Rae & Carswell (2001) Gibb (2001) Hartshorn (2002) Mitchell et al; Shepherd & Krueger (2002) Cope (2005) Politis (2005) Dutta & Crossan; Lumpkin & Lichtenstein; Corbett (2005) Contribution Imagination & innovation resulting from natural & social learning Creative discovery learning generating alertness to opportunities Value of recent concrete experience related to context of use Acquisition storage & use of entrepreneurial knowledge as expert resource Five key learning abilities within the small rm Algorithmic model of entrepreneurial decision-making based on experience Condence & self-belief connect learning resources with achievement Lifeworld of the small rm as a dynamic entrepreneurial learning environment Rational models of knowledge structures, cognition & decisionmaking applied to stages of the entrepreneurial process Dynamic learning process with phases, processes & characteristics Dynamic framework of career, transformation & knowledge, distinguishing learning process & knowledge outcomes Connections between organisational learning, opportunity recognition, creativity and entrepreneurial learning processes

42

D. Rae

on entrepreneurial learning, which can be summarised in the following ve observations.35 Entrepreneurial learning is a dynamic process of awareness, reection, association and application that involves transforming experience and knowledge into functional learning outcomes. It comprises knowledge, behaviour and affective or emotional learning.36 It is affected by the context in which learning occurs and it includes the content of what is learned as well as the processes through which learning takes place.37 It is both individual, with personal differences in ability producing different learning outcomes, as well as social and organisational.38 Finally there are close connections between the processes of entrepreneurial learning with those of opportunity recognition,39 exploitation, creativity and innovation.40 These conceptualisations provide a basis for the further development of a framework through which entrepreneurial learning can be understood, both generally and in relation to the technology-based enterprise. This will be demonstrated after providing a summary of the methodology used in this study. Methodology The methodology used in this study is social constructionist,41 narrative42 and interpretive.43 Social constructionism afrms that we construct our selves and worlds through discourse, the linguistic resources and concepts with which we frame reality,44 and therefore analysis of the discourse people use affords interpretation of their world-making and learning. This study aims to explore the entrepreneurial learning process in the lifeworld45 of the entrepreneur, by interpreting their narrative accounts of their personal and business venturing in their social and contextual environment and interactions with others. This position argues that the voice of the entrepreneur, together with the interpretation of the researcher, are vital aspects of understanding the entrepreneurial experience in ways that enable this to be shared with the reader. The study takes as its unit of analysis entrepreneurs who were in the rst ve years of establishing a technology-based business venture and who had varying degrees of prior experience. The criteria for selection were emerging entrepreneurs who aimed to achieve signicant business growth, and whose business ventures were developing or applying new technologies to business opportunities in innovative ways. The study followed their personal and business development over a two year period, and conducted a series of in-depth life story interviews in which the researcher acted as co-author with each participant to create an account of their experiences. A range of related information on the entrepreneur and the business was also gathered from other sources in order to conrm supplementary and corroborative detail. Table 2 lists the entrepreneurs and types of business selected. Each interview was transcribed and coded against a set of 29 categories generated from consideration of the literature previously cited and through discourse analysis procedures, and which are shown in Appendix 1.46 This allowed the comparison of similarly coded speech extracts from the same account and from other accounts. The narratives were analysed using the coding structure and the number of signicant categories was reduced by further analysis by eliminating overlapping and redundant categories to establish a total of three dominant themes that were derived from sociological concepts in the literature and 11 subsidiary themes that were derived from discourse analysis and are also supported by theoretical literature. The material from each narrative was interpreted and edited into a draft case study by using this structure.

Entrepreneurial Learning
Table 2. Case studies and types of business Case A B C D E F G H I j Name Mark Guy Mike Tony Rob Ed Alan Derek George Greg Type of business Aluminium building systems Online news service FM & DAB radio stations Design & internet marketing IT security services Prenatal medical product IT metrological systems Industrial cryogenics Turbine heat exchangers Nanotechnology Prior experience

43

Employee in family business Founder of trade journal Radio station manager Marketing executive Graduate Corporate executive Graduate in family business Manager of engineering rm Engineer Founder of technology based rm

Findings The conceptual framework for entrepreneurial learning was developed from the themes identied through discourse analysis. This comprises three major themes of personal and social emergence of the entrepreneur, contextual learning and the negotiated enterprise. Together these three related concepts constitute the triadic model of entrepreneurial learning that is shown diagrammatically in Figure 1. It is proposed that entrepreneurial learning occurs and can be interpreted by reference to these themes. Within each of these major themes, a number of subsidiary themes, in total 11, were identied and are described in the following section. Table 3 demonstrates the connections between the themes with reference to relevant theoretical literature from the domains of entrepreneurship, management and social sciences. Each of the major themes is illustrated in the following section by extracts from one of the case studies that provides a description and narrative evidence of the sub-themes. Personal and

Figure 1. Triadic model of entrepreneurial learning

44

D. Rae
Table 3. Theoretical connections of the entrepreneurial learning framework

Concept Personal and social emergence Narrative construction of identity Identity shaped by family background & experiences Identity is shaped by practice learned from experience Entrepreneurial action arises from tension between experienced current & desired future identity Contextual learning Learning through experience & immersion within an industry context Opportunity recognition & innovation through participation Development of practical theories of entrepreneurial action Negotiated enterprise Participation and joint enterprise Negotiated meaning, structures and practices Changing roles over time Engagement in external networks

Theoretical links Social identity theory - Abrams & Hogg Emergence in management learningWatson & Harris Identity expressed through narrativeBruner Entrepreneurial narrativesHjorth & Steyaert Interaction between family & enterpriseFletcher Entrepreneurial learning in family businessHamilton Identity through social participationWenger Experiential & entrepreneurial learningCope Cognitive dissonanceFestinger Critical events in entrepreneurial learningCope Entrepreneurial lifeworld learningHartshorn SME as a learning environmentGibb Assimilate contextual experienceDeakins & Freel Contextual experience in industryReuber & Fischer Contextual opportunity recognitionLumpkin & Lichtenstein Innovation arising from contextual knowledgeCorbett Entrepreneurial theories of actionPitt Sensemaking - Weick Negotiated enterpriseWenger Entrepreneurial teams social cognitionShepherd & Krueger Negotiated orders in organisationsWatson Abilities of the entrepreneurial team Deakins & Freel Development of managers in SMEsDevins & Gold Entrepreneurship through social networksAldrich & Zimmer Networking in the industry sectorDeakins & Freel

social emergence is illustrated by case A (Mark); the negotiated enterprise by case B (Guy); and the negotiated enterprise by case C (Mike). Salient issues regarding the application to technology-based enterprises are identied in relation to each theme. Personal and Social Emergence The rst concept is the personal and social emergence of entrepreneurial identity. The development of entrepreneurial identity is the outcome of a process of personal and social emergence, which generally includes the narrative construction of identity; identity as practice; the entrepreneurs role in relation to family; and tension between current and future identity. As people become entrepreneurs, their identity47 of how they see themselves and how others see them changes through a process of personal learning and emergence,48 including the sense of self and of future aspirations. Simply acquiring

Entrepreneurial Learning

45

entrepreneurial skills and knowledge is not sufcient; the person who begins to act as an entrepreneur is assuming the identity of an entrepreneur. The development of entrepreneurial identity can be expressed through the narrative life story,49 including early life and family experiences, education and career formation, and social relationships. In becoming recognised as an enterprising person, people renegotiate their personal and social identities that express who they are, who they want to be, and how they prefer to be recognised within their social context. This theme is illustrated by the case of Mark, the founder of an aluminium building systems company. Narrative Construction of Identity Mark presents the story of his business as a successful venture that has grown rapidly over ve years, winning awards and high-prole projects by designing and manufacturing anything in aluminium: I wanted to take the companys perception from a one-man band metal basher to a company that builds a strong image and uses technology to compete with its peers. People construct their entrepreneurial identity through autobiographical stories in which they are the protagonist, as well as narrator and author. Change and development occurs over time as learning experiences shape their personal and social identity. This identity is socially negotiated: as they develop an entrepreneurial identity they are renegotiating or re-inventing themselves in their self-perceptions and the eyes of others through their stories. Role of the Family Mark started his career in the family business, which manufactured bespoke fabrications for the construction industry, gaining experience in the industry and in the routines of small business management. However, the business became tired, failing to innovate and to compete while prot margins declined and Mark felt constrained by the lack of dynamism. The family environment shapes attitudes and expectations towards entrepreneurship, and can encourage or constrain these by shaping identities and actions. Entrepreneurial stories are constructed with reference to personal relationships with spouses, parents and children. In turn, the relationship with the family members is changed through entrepreneurship, especially within the family business.50 It is apparent that the negotiation of roles and expectations, in which cultural and social traditions, such as gender roles, play an important part in the construction of familial and business identities. This family dimension cannot be omitted from a consideration of entrepreneurial development, although the dynamic changes according to specic family circumstances.51 Identity as Practice Marks personal values are enacted in the identity of his business, displaying practices of constant innovation in technology, an extroverted approach to marketing with visual

46

D. Rae

identity, website and brochures projecting a strong, corporate image, and an inclusive approach to managing people which aims to instil the feelgood factor at work. As Mark says: they work with you, not for you, they need to shine in their own roles. Identity as practice is developed from the activities and roles that people develop in social interactions. People discover from experience their natural talents and abilities and learn how these can be of value and be applied, nding out the interface between their abilities and negotiated applications within networks of social relationships. Practice is developed by discovery and experience, from education, hobbies or interests, and from developing and gaining condence in abilities in early employment. Identity based on practice is both personal and social, often situated within social or industry contexts. The abilities, skills and know-how are often applied in the core activity of the new enterprise which practitioners form. Tension between Current and Future Identity Mark left employment in the family business, frustrated by the lack of innovation and development, and started his own venture as a career move. He had realised that there was a growing demand for architectural fabrications but existing manufacturers had not kept pace with designers and he saw the opportunity to bridge this gap, realising his modest but realistic ambition to start his own company in 1999. The point at which the person becomes an entrepreneur is signicant. The cases show critical episodes during which each participant changed their existing social identity through entrepreneurial action. These episodes include unsatisfactory or unfullling employment, conict with personal values, or more positively the recognition of opportunities or ambition to innovate. The dissatisfaction with existing reality is often connected with the initiation of a new venture and with it a changed identity. There can be an emotional recognition that the experienced reality did not feel right, which is not only a cognitive dissonance but also conative and affective.52 It is clear that such decisions to create new ventures may, in some cases, be connected with the rejection of an unsatisfactory present, the urge to create a new reality and changed identity. This represents a move from being dissatised employees, in work roles where practices and identities are dened socially by others and are increasingly at odds with what feels right, to create a new reality in constructing new business ventures, enabling people to work in ways more consistent with their personal values and practices. Faced with similar circumstances, people will respond differently as their individual and social construction of present and future reality affects their actions. In terms of identity, the entrepreneurial act is creating what could be and translating imagined possibilities into enacted reality, taking responsibility for shaping future events. It is a move from assuming an identity dened by others, such as through work and family roles, into creating, changing and renegotiating a new identity. This can involve experiencing emotional uncertainties, which require resources of self-belief and personal condence to accomplish the shift from being an employee to becoming an entrepreneur.

Entrepreneurial Learning

47

The implications for technology-based entrepreneurs are to recognise that personal and social emergence is an inherent aspect of becoming an entrepreneur and involves social as well as cognitive learning. Finding practical ways of learning entrepreneurial skills in early life, family and education, through projects, personal interests, and work experience, in formative years is likely to be inuential and helpful.

Contextual Learning The second concept is contextual learning. The recognition and enaction of opportunities in specialised situations is an outcome of a process of contextual learning, which includes learning through immersion within an industry, opportunity recognition and innovation through participation, and the formation of practical theories of entrepreneurial action. There is strong support for the view that entrepreneurial learning is formed through the social, environmental and economic context in which it takes place, and that context governs what is learned as people become entrepreneurs, how this learning takes place and how it is used.53 Contextual learning includes social participation in community, industry and other networks through which individual experiences are related, compared and shared meaning is constructed. Through situated experience and social relationships people learn intuitively and may develop the ability to recognise opportunities. Such learning connects personal emergence with the negotiation of the enterprise; people are in process of learning in their social context who they can become and how to work with others to achieve their ends as well as the realism of what can and cannot be. This theme is demonstrated by Guy who developed an online news service from career experience in news media.

Learning through Immersion within the Industry Guy used his skills and experience gained in industry journalism and public relations to start a new type of media service that he termed press marketing for corporate organisations. This innovated by applying leading edge technology to match company news with interest from trade press: I made an applied process out of a black art. We used technology, skill and expertise to manage this and made it measurable, so businesses could see the return they got for their media spend. Contextual learning includes the development of skills, expert knowledge and social contacts from employment, experience and know-how in industry.54 This learning is social and relational, gained from interpersonal participation.55 Much of the learning is functional, technical and problem-solving, nding out by discovery and experiential learning how things are done, and establishing routines and practices that work in given situations. It occurs through intuitive practice, often providing the skills and insights people use in creating their own businesses.56 The inuence of contextual career experience on entrepreneurial formation is often profound.57

48

D. Rae

Opportunity Recognition and Innovation through Social Participation In the early 1990s the company started to lose customers and turnover. Guy realised that the Internet would revolutionise the media industry: I wanted to innovate where nobody had been before. I was intrigued by how technology could impact on my sector of the market. We carried out a survey to nd out the demand for an online news service. This showed a very clear requirement for a service which was not available then and which personalised news as its broken to meet journalists requirements. I knew I had to get into the market quickly, and re-engineered my business because technology was moving so fast. I realised that the business was chicken and egg you had to attract both the journalists and the companies to put news onto the network to get the other party. Guys opportunity recognition arose from fear of loss of business combined with curiosity about technical innovation. Opportunities are apparent to those who learn to recognise them, using knowledge, cognition and behaviour.58 By being active within industry and social networks, people can recognise future possibilities, identify and act on an opportunity to create a new venture by drawing on their deep knowledge of an industry context; this goes beyond both Kirznerian alertness and rational information search.59 Creative imagination, or prospective sensemaking, is necessary to envisage the future and imagine how the venture can be created, before all the necessary knowledge, circumstances or conditions exist. This is a creative process of associative learning and innovation, of putting ideas, opportunities, technologies and resources together in new ways, and acting at a time when the market opportunity and the other extrinsic factors such as regulation and the absence of competition provide advantage.60 It involves converging resources people and their expertise, nance, technologyto develop the business idea into reality.

Practical Theories of Entrepreneurial Action The business was complex because it meant balancing the revenue-generating part of the business with the non-earning part of the community, how does that all work? No-one knew. We gured it out and gave the journalists what they wanted. We had to sell this new service to the key movers and shakers in the market, so we went to the big early adopters at the top of the pyramid and got IBM, Hewlett Packard, Microsoft interested in using us. Once you get those signed up they bring in the whole market. We demonstrated our online service on the trade show oor at the big IT network trade shows and demonstrated to journalists how it worked. We put a modem into a laptop and walked round remotely accessing news on the internet without any connection. We were changing the paradigm of the industry, eliminating the need to distribute news in hard-copy format.

Entrepreneurial Learning

49

Entrepreneurs, through their experience and contextual learning within the industry, develop routines and ways of working that they nd are effective. The knowledge, gained from experience, intuition and sense-making61 of what works, why, how and with whom, constitute practical theories.62 These practical theories enable people to reduce risk through using prior experience because they know what they are doing. Practitioners produce practical theories in their own words from their own experience, observation and social exchanges with other practitioners.63 These theories, developed from experience, remain tacit and intuitive unless they are verbalised and shared. Shotter64 described practical theories of action as analytical tools that enable people to see connections and create meaning between aspects of their lives and practices, and to account for their actions. He proposed that the manager is a practical author who develops knowledge in practice, resulting in special, contextualized forms of knowing and practical theories of action. Guys case demonstrates that contextual learning has important implications for technology-based entrepreneurship, because innovations, opportunities and entrepreneurial skills are developed through contextual learning and this cannot occur without participation. The value of prior work and career experience provides a richness of experience in research and innovation, production and customer-facing roles, in both corporate and small business contexts.

The Negotiated Enterprise The third concept is the negotiated enterprise.65 The enaction and growth of a business venture is an outcome of negotiated enterprise, which includes processes of participation and joint enterprise; negotiated meaning, structures and practices; changing roles over time; and engagement in networks of external relationships. The notion of the negotiated enterprise is that a business venture is not enacted by one person alone, but is dependent on the outcome of negotiated relationships with other parties.66 The ideas and aspirations of individuals are realised through interactive processes of exchange with others within and around the enterprise, including customers, investors and co-actors such as employees or partners. This theme is illustrated by the case of Mike, founder of a group of independent radio stations.

Participation and Joint Enterprise Where Id grown up there was no commercial radio station. I was working for another radio station and I was getting increasingly frustrated and agreed to leave because I found there was too much contradiction to what I believed. Along with one of the directors I put in an application for a licence when the Radio Authority offered it. He came in as a backer, I found the shareholders and I persuaded them that they wanted to invest 500,000 in the operation. In radio you start big time, you have to win an audience, they dont pay you a penny to listen and its only when you can say to advertisers all these people listen and they will listen to you if you advertise.

50

D. Rae

As illustrated here, the actors involved in creating the enterprise are joint participants, in which the founder(s) could not achieve the outcome of creating the venture unaided. A vital aspect of the learning process of entrepreneurship is the ability to engage others constructively towards creating the venture. It is necessary for the entrepreneur to convey a shared belief in the new reality of the venture, and for this to become a means of realising personal dreams and aspirations through collective action. There is a sublimation of individual identity to the collective identity of the enterprise as a project of shared signicance. This is accompanied by a social learning process in which people learn to work together.67 Shared interest, for example wealth creation, economic survival or the desire to enact a particular activity, is a necessary condition for joint enterprise. Negotiated Meaning, Structures and Practices In this business, like so many, it is about people, you dont own them, but while theyre working for you, you owe them something. They owe you something and its getting that balance right, in everything we do. I think that if we dont enjoy what were doing then its very much like hard work. Its the responsibility to the staff, responsibility to the listeners, that drives me. This sub-theme considers the emergence of a distinctive culture within the business. As described, people develop practical theories. In the joint enterprise, these theories, practices and routines become a shared repertoire of what works within the business; as in a community of practice, what is learned does not belong to any single person, but rather is dispersed among the community.68 The enterprise is dependent on these negotiated ways of working that reect both the founders style, language, ambitions and ways of working, and those of the employees. The lives, interests and aspirations of people within the business must be recognised by the founders who hold formal power and ownership of the business, yet this requires the participation of the employees. Conict and disagreement are from time to time inevitable and should be seen as an integral aspect of this negotiation. In a successful enterprise, there is an emotional, affective engagement between the people and the business, in which its distinctive culture is expressed through the style, language, behaviours, and feeling between people. Terms such as passion, buzz, excitement and fun are used to describe the emotional life and energy of the enterprise that goes beyond rationality, for people are expressing themselves, their identities and their abilities, in the production of the business. Changing Roles over Time This station, right down to the last dot of the i in the prospectus was me. I was the nance director, the company secretary, it really was me and to a certain extent it still is but its grown a lot and that has necessitated changes. I sit down with the senior managers once a week. At that meeting we review sales, expenditure, we talk about the overall strategy. My role has become more Chief Executive than ever before and I have to resist getting involved too directly in the

Entrepreneurial Learning individual station operations, that was right at the launch but now Ive had to step back from being involved in meetings with individual stations.

51

This sub-theme is a process of ongoing learning and negotiation while the business evolves and, if successful, grows, becoming larger and more complex in operation and structure, and employing more people. There is a transition or series of transitions from informal to formal roles of the founder(s) and management team, their relationships and structures that accompany this process, as in staged theories of business growth.69 Signicant changes in the founders and other roles are inevitable over time for the business to develop. Growth can be seen in terms of human and social behaviour and as the outcome of productive interpersonal negotiations around the enterprise, rather than simply as an economic process. This negotiated change in roles can be viewed as a process of entrepreneurial management, in which enterprising skills are applied as normal practices in managing the business, becoming self-sustaining management capabilities which are enacted through people other than the founders progressively taking responsibility for managing the business, as we see with the managers in the radio broadcaster.70 Developing managers, teams and functional experts are mutual learning activities integral to the growth process and depend on managing employee relationships effectively, changing past expectations, sharing practices, and resolving the tensions and conicts in relationships. As people are employed by the business, they become socialised into it and adopt its cultural norms of participation, behaviour and language. This is a learning process of cultural integration and identication by individuals as employees in the business.

Engagement in Networks of External Relationships Enterprises such as the radio stations have to interact effectively with a diverse range of different constituents, including regulators, investors and lenders, commercial advertisers and listeners. This business has learned to be successful in playing the game of applying for and gaining radio licences, while building up advertising and listening gures, and selectively engaging with networks of businesses, customers and the community: We have a tried and tested way of contacting MPs, councillors, the great and good, people on the street, saying this is what were proposing to do, do you like it? and getting people to say yes they like us because were different. The enterprise exists reexively within its environment, and relationships must be developed and maintained with networks of people through whom resources can be accessed, including customers, suppliers, investors, lenders, and others such as technology experts and opinion formers.71 Social capital and the access to resources that it affords in entrepreneurial working importance has an important role in this.72 Entrepreneurs seek to inuence certain groups while choosing not to participate in other groups. This selectivity in developing the social network and perceptions around the business is an integral aspect of entrepreneurial learning.

52

D. Rae

It is necessary to engage the customer as an active participant, not simply as a passive consumer, and to recognise that symbolic as well as economic value is being generated in the interchange; just as the producer is giving something of themselves, so the customer is, by their participation, identifying themselves with the enterprise. Relationships and rapport with certain customers and suppliers are more productive than with others. The skills of listening, understanding the other partys position, negotiating and storytelling are essential in maintaining effective relationships. The identity of the enterprise is formed and enacted through the interactions between it and these external groups. The enterprise depends on its identity, practices and the credibility of its messageits storybeing accepted and understood within its chosen networks. The implications of the negotiated enterprise for technology-based entrepreneurs are to recognise their own distinctive skills, expertise and limitations, understanding the need to interact with people who have complementary skills to optimise their contribution to a venture by forming and working effectively within an entrepreneurial team that has capabilities beyond those of the founder. If skills of interaction, team formation and participation can be developed early, these can be used to advantage. The lone wolf innovator is increasingly disadvantaged, as the ability to develop effective relationships with investors, corporate partners, suppliers and major customers through presentation, negotiation and trust building is essential. An essential activity for potential technology-based entrepreneurs is to be an active member of industry, professional or technical networks, and to develop a wide range of contacts. They will need to participate actively in selected external networks to represent the business and develop new opportunities. Conclusions It is proposed that entrepreneurial learning is a fundamental activity within the development of the technology-based enterprise in its human and social context, and the framework set out in this article may be helpful in understanding this. The framework builds on Wengers social theory of learning,73 emphasising the creation, recognition and development of opportunities and proposes a framework for entrepreneurial learning that is based on social constructionist,74 narrative and antecedent theories such as pragmatism.75 Until now, no theory of entrepreneurial learning based on social constructionist thinking has been proposed. Therefore this framework is proposed as an original and distinctive concept that advances understanding of entrepreneurial learning, using the conceptual tools of narrative and social construction. The framework includes three propositions. First, that the development of entrepreneurial identity is the outcome of personal and social emergence, which generally includes the narrative construction of identity; identity as practice; the entrepreneurs role in relation to family; and tension between current and future identity. Second, that the recognition and enaction of opportunities in specialised situations is an outcome of a process of contextual learning, which includes learning through immersion within an industry, opportunity recognition and innovation through participation, and the formation of practical theories of entrepreneurial action. Third, that the enaction and growth of a business venture is an outcome of negotiated enterprise, which includes processes of participation and joint enterprise; negotiated meaning, structures and practices; changing roles over time; and engagement in networks of external relationships.

Entrepreneurial Learning

53

The methodology adopted in this study has featured the collection and interpretation of entrepreneurial narratives. This has the advantage of gaining in-depth and authentic eld material that uses the voice of the entrepreneur, while having the disadvantages of limiting the scale of the study through the need for in-depth treatment of a small number of narratives; the requirement to analyse the narratives as stories and not as objective truths; and the subjective issues of selecting and managing relationships with subjects in the research process. However the method adopted does permit the development of in-depth inductive case studies that provide considerable insights into the learning experiences of technology-based entrepreneurs. Further research is envisaged in order to validate and apply the framework. One important aspect is the relationship between entrepreneurial learning and career stages, in particular the role of mid-career change and learning that has been observed during this study. Second, it is appreciated that because the concept of technology-based enterprise is very broad, there may well be value in studying certain types of TBE in greater depth, including those using specic technologies and those operating at particular stages of the innovation process.

Notes and References

1. D. Deakins, Entrepreneurship and Small Firms (London, McGraw-Hill, 2000; rst published 1996). 2. Department of Trade and Industry, Innovation report: competing in the global economy: the innovation challenge, DTI, London, 2003. 3. K. Gergen, An Invitation to Social Construction (Newbury Park, CA, Sage, 1999). 4. S. Hjorth & C. Steyaert, Narrative and Discursive Approaches in Entrepreneurship (Cheltenham, UK, Edward Elgar, 2004). 5. J. Hill & P. McGowan, Small business and enterprise development: questions about research methodology, International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour and Research, 5(1), 1999, pp. 518. 6. S. Shane & S. Venkataraman, The promise of entrepreneurship as a eld of research, Academy of Management Review, 25(1), 2000, pp. 217226. 7. A. Mumford, Effective Learning (London, Institute of Personnel & Development, 1995). 8. K. Weick, Sensemaking in Organizations (Newbury Park, CA, Sage, 1995). 9. A. Gibb, Creating conducive environments for learning and entrepreneurship, Address to the Conference of the Entrepreneurship Forum, Naples, 2124 June 2001. 10. Shane & Venkataraman, op. cit., Ref. 6. 11. P. Davidsson, M. Low & M. Wright, Editors introduction: Low and MacMillan ten years on: achievements and future directions for entrepreneurship research, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 25(4), 2001, pp. 515. 12. J. Schumpeter, The Theory of Economic Development (Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press, 1934). 13. I. Kirzner, Competition and Entrepreneurship (Chicago, IL, University of Chicago Press, 1973). 14. M. Binks & P. Vale, Entrepreneurship and Economic Change (Maidenhead, UK, McGraw-Hill, 1990). 15. R. Mitchell, L. Busenitz, T. Lant, P. McDougall, E. Morse & J. Brock Smith, Towards a theory of entrepreneurial cognition, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 27(2), 2002, pp. 93104. 16. M. Minniti & W. Bygrave, A dynamic model of entrepreneurial learning, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 25(3), 2001, pp. 516. 17. Bandura, A., (1986). Social Foundations of Thought & Action: A social cognitive theory. Prentice-Hall, New Jersey 18. Minniti & Bygrave, op. cit., Ref. 16. 19. R. Harrison & C. Leitch, Entrepreneurial learning: researching the interface between learning and the entrepreneurial context, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 29(4), 2005, p. 351. 20. J. Young & D. Sexton, Entrepreneurial learning: a conceptual framework, Journal of Enterprising Culture, 5(3), 1997, pp. 223248. 21. Mitchell et al., op. cit., Ref. 15.

54

D. Rae
22. D. Shepherd & N. Krueger, An intentions-based model of entrepreneurial teams social cognition, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 27(2), 2002, p. 167. 23. R. Reuber & E. Fischer, The learning experiences of entrepreneurs, in: Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research (Mass., Babson, 1993), pp. 234245. 24. D. Deakins & M. Freel, Entrepreneurial learning and the growth process in SMEs, The Learning Organization, 5(3), 1998, pp. 144155. 25. Gibb, op. cit., Ref. 9. 26. D. Rae & M. Carswell, Towards a conceptual understanding of entrepreneurial learning, Small Business and Enterprise Development, 8(2), 2001, pp. 150158. 27. C. Spinosa, F. Flores & H. Dreyfus, Entrepreneurship, Democratic Action and the Cultivation of Solidarity (Cambridge, MA, MIT Press, 1997). 28. D. Kolb, Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development (Englewood Cliffs, NJ, Prentice-Hall, 1984). 29. Mumford, op. cit., Ref. 7. 30. R. Harre, Language Games and Texts of Identity (London, Sage, 1989). 31. E. Wenger, Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning and Identity (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1998). 32. A. Gibb, The enterprise culture and education, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 11(3), 1993, pp. 11 34. 33. G. Gorman, D. Hanlon & W. King, 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), 1997, pp. 5677. 34. S. Jack & A. Anderson, Entrepreneurship education within the enterprise culture, International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour and Research, 5(3), 1999, pp. 110 125. 35. Harrison & Leitch, op. cit., Ref. 19. 36. J. Cope, Toward a dynamic learning perspective of entrepreneurship, Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 29(4), 2005, p. 373. 37. D. Politis, The process of entrepreneurial learning: a conceptual framework, Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 29(4), 2005, p. 399. 38. A. Corbett, Experiential learning within the process of opportunity identication and exploitation, Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 29(4), 2005, p. 473. 39. D. Dutta & M. Crossan, The nature of entrepreneurial opportunities: understanding the process using the 4I organizational learning framework, Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 29(4), 2005, p. 425. 40. G. Lumpkin & B. Lichtenstein, The role of organizational learning in the opportunity-recognition process, Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 29(4), 2005, p. 451. 41. Gergen, op. cit., Ref. 3. 42. D. Polkinghorne, Narrative Knowing and the Human Sciences (New York, State University of New York Press, 1988). 43. T. Schwandt, Constructivist, interpretivist approaches to human inquiry, in: N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds) The Landscape of Qualitative Research (Newbury Park, CA, Sage, 1998). 44. T. J. Watson, In Search of Management: Culture Chaos and Control in Managerial Work (London, Routledge, 1994). 45. C. Hartshorn, Learning from the life-world of the entrepreneur, Paper presented at the Cambridge-MIT Institute Innovative Learning Methods Workshop, University of Durham, March 2002. 46. J. Potter & M. Weatherall, Discourse and Social Psychology (London, Sage, 1987). 47. D. Abrams & M. Hogg, Social Identity Theory: Constructive and Critical Advances (New York, Harvester, 1990). 48. T. J. Watson & P. Harris, The Emergent Manager (London, Sage, 1999). 49. J. Bruner, Actual Minds, Possible Worlds (Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press, 1986). 50. D. Fletcher, Understanding the Small Family Business (London, Routledge, 2002). 51. E. Hamilton, Socially situated entrepreneurial learning in family business, Paper presented at Institute for Small Business Affairs National Conference, Newcastle, 24 November 2004. 52. L. Festinger, A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance (Stanford, CA, Stanford University Press, 1957). 53. A. Gibb, Small rms training and competitiveness. Building on the small business as a learning organisation, International Small Business Journal, 15(3), 1996, p. 13. 54. Reuber & Fischer, op. cit., Ref. 23,

Entrepreneurial Learning

55

55. Deakins and Freel, op. cit., Ref. 24. 56. A. Gibb, Entrepreneurship and small business management: can we afford to neglect them in the twentyrst century business school, British Journal of Management, 7, 1996, pp. 309 321. 57. W. Gibb Dyer, Jr, Toward a theory of entrepreneurial careers, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 19(2), pp. 721. 58. Kirzner, op. cit., Ref. 13. 59. Lumpkin & Lichtenstein, op. cit., Ref. 40. 60. Corbett, op. cit., Ref. 38. 61. Weick, op. cit., Ref. 8. 62. D. Rae, Practical theories from entrepreneurs stories: discursive approaches to entrepreneurial learning, Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 11(2), 2004, pp. 195202. 63. M. Pitt, A tale of two gladiators: reading entrepreneurs as texts, Organization Studies, 19(3), 1998, pp. 3874I4. 64. J. Shotter, The manager as a practical author: a rhetorical-responsive, social constructionist approach to socialorganizational problems, in: D.-M. Hosking, H. P. Dachler & K. J. Gergen (Eds) Management and Organisation: Relational Alternatives to Individualism (Aldershot, UK, Avebury, 1995). 65. Wenger, op. cit., Ref. 31. 66. T. J. Watson, Negotiated orders in organisations, International Encyclopaedia of Social and Behavioural Science (Amsterdam, Elsevier, 2001). 67. Shepherd & Krueger, op. cit., Ref. 22. 68. D. Devins & J. Gold, Social constructionism: a theoretical framework to underpin support for the development of managers in SMEs? Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 9(2), 2002, pp. 111 119. 69. L. Greiner, Evolution and revolution as organisations grow, Harvard Business Review, 78(72), 1972. 70. H. Stevenson & C. Jarillo, A paradigm of entrepreneurship: entrepreneurial management, Strategic Management Journal, 11, 1990, pp. 1727. 71. H. Aldrich & C. Zimmer, Entrepreneurship through social networks, in: D. S. Sexton & R. W. Smilor (Eds), The Art and Science of Entrepreneurship (MA, Ballinger, 1986), pp. 323. 72. D. Gregoire, R. Dery & J-P. Bechard, Evolving conversations: a look at the convergence in entrepreneurship research, Paper presented at the Babson/Kaufman Entrepreneurship Research Conference, Wellesley, MA, 2001. 73. Wenger, op. cit., Ref. 31. 74. Gergen, op. cit., Ref. 3. 75. J. Dewey, Logic: The Theory Of Enquiry, in: J. A. Boydston (Ed) The Collected Works of John Dewey (Carbondale, IL, Southern Illinois University Press, 1991).

Appendix I: Table of discursive categories used in narrative analysis Theme Personal & social emergence Code EL FB ED EC FR SC FG PI EXC FAIL PW Meaning Early life Family of birth Educational Early career Familial relationshipown family Self condence Future goals/direction Personal identity Excitement, emotion Failing Post working (Table continued)

56

D. Rae

Table A1. Continued Theme Contextual learning Code SL PT OR DM CL AL PS TL EM MR INN LE BPS BS BR MR ETH BE Meaning Social learning Personal theory/what works Opportunity recognition Decision making Contextual learning Associative learning/ creativity Problem solving Technical learning Emergent learning/sensemaking Managing relationships Innovating Learning episode Business pre start Business start Business running/managing Managing relationships Ethical considerations Business exiting

Negotiated enterprise