CAPÍTULO 6: APLICACIÓN NORMATIVA EINSTEIN
6.2 Comparación
6.2.2 Metodología Norma Auditorías Energéticas y EINSTEIN
This section (section 2) explores the definition of entrepreneurship and aims at bringing a useful and pertinent definition for the concept of innovative entrepreneurship. However, there seems to be a persistent disagreement between scholars that see the definition based on firm creation and decisions or undertakings that bring change to the economy. This section then aims at summarising the different views of entrepreneurship discussed above, and then gives a definition of entrepreneurship that is applicable to our work, which is the basis on which our analysis will be built.
33 The definition of entrepreneurship has previously been based on the entrepreneurial action (firm organisation or opportunity exploitation). The literature defining entrepreneurship as firm creation define the notion of entrepreneurship as a permanent function that is usually related to the head of a newly created organisation. This vision defines the entrepreneur as a permanent function in the firm. The defi itio of e t ep e eu i e o o i theo , in its simplest form could be defined as the de isio aki g esulti g i hu a a tio 13 which is common to most theorists in the field. Here the human action resides firstly in the act of creation and secondly in the action of opportunity exploitation. In most of the theoretical contributions (Say 1803; Mill 1900; Schumpeter 1951), the action required to be done by the entrepreneur somehow defines the entrepreneurial abilities. The entrepreneur is seen as an agent with extra-ordinary capacities as a superintendent for Mill (1900), having superior qualities for Say (1803) o ei g a U e e s h fo “ hu peter (Steinmueller 2010).
Regarding theories dealing with economical change, the definition of entrepreneurship can be seen as different functions in the economy responding to different types of opportunity: innovation opportunities or competitive opportunities. In this literature the notion of entrepreneurship is only related to the exploitation of opportunities (competitive or innovative) and thus not defined by the notion of firm creation (as the literature presented earlier was). This definition of entrepreneurship has given rise to new contributions in contemporary entrepreneurship literature that do not involve firm creation but rather focus on the development of innovative projects inside existing organisations.
The different definitions are not mutually exclusive since they overlap in some ways. Hence, it is useful to differentiate types of entrepreneurship using the definition discussed above. To summarise the different types of entrepreneurship one can encounter in the actual literature, based on the literature described above, we can introduce a taxonomy as follows:
13 This definition is taken from earlier theories of entrepreneurship as much as contemporary ones. This
definition is first in line with the argument of Von Mises (Von Mises & Greaves 1949, pp.251–254) and Kirzner (Kirzner 1978, p.35) of an active acting agent following decision making, which is the essence of the entrepreneurial action. These action are to put in contrast with passive actions such as mechanical actions which are considered as passive. Schumpeterian theory (1934, p.75), apart from the characterisation of new opportunity creation, includes in its definition the initiative authority and foresight which can be represented by decision making and action stemming from it. In later contributions this definition is still referred to by Gartner (1989; 1994). He refers to it in his definition of entrepreneurship first as an acting man but also later as an agent that involves doing and thinking.
34
Table 1.1: Entrepreneurship types14
Type of opportunity
Firm creation
Inside an existing
organisation
Change function Innovative Innovative entrepreneurship Intrapreneurship Competitive Imitative entrepreneurship Diversification Organisation function Managerial Classical EntrepreneurshipThe literature on entrepreneurship therefore displays a variety of definitions that are regrouped by the different functions that are showed in the Table 1.1 by the light grey area, which includes the definition covering the entrepreneurial function of change and the organising function at firm creation (which was described in section 2 of this chapter). Toda s definition of entrepreneurship does not only include contributions about firm creation, but also about opportunity exploitation, which can be done inside an existing organisation. The definition therefore includes both aspects developed in entrepreneurship theory. The theory on the change function of entrepreneurship does not only deal with exploitation of opportunities through firm creation but also opportunity exploitation through firm creation. To be complete, the concept of entrepreneurship in existing organisations should therefore also be included in our definition and overview of the entrepreneurship theory (last column in Table 1.1). Theoretically, the notion of diversification could then also be included under the umbrella of entrepreneurship, but in practice the literature dealing with diversification is rather restricted towards organisational theory or firm growth and thus is not included in our definition of entrepreneurship (the light grey area of the table).
Innovative entrepreneurship (Baumol 1993; Baumol 2010; Schumpeter 1934) and intrapreneurship (Antoncic & Hisrich 2003; Antoncic & Hisrich 2001) are both included under the umbrella of entrepreneurship as a function of change described in the Schumpeterian theory, which has been recently recast by Baumol (Baumol 2010; Baumol 1993). It can include innovative actions such as new combination of productive assets but is not limited to a newly created firm. However, for sampling reasons, authors often prefer to study one or the other phenomena separately. Firm creation is often easier to identify on a quantitative scale. There may also be a great deal of difference in the process of implementing the entrepreneurial idea (in terms of access to resources such as financing and human capital).
35 The imitative entrepreneurship theory relate by the Austrian view (Kirzner 1997; Kirzner 1978; Mill 1900)of is here represented through the competitive opportunity in the table. This can also be associated with the X-efficiency theory (Leibenstein 1966; Leibenstein 1987). Here the entrepreneurship is seen as a competitive force, which is mainly due to discovered opportunities for profit. The two first views are then considered to have an impact over economic processes as the two last ones are focused more on a firm level view.
The definition of entrepreneurship in some literature remains as referring sometimes only to firm creation as following the classical view of entrepreneurship in economic theory (Cantillon 1755a; Say 1803). In toda s lite atu e, this can include views such as managerial views of firm creation, or studies that consider the choice of agents to go towards self-employed positions. The managerial view (Penrose 1959; Garnsey 1998; Chandler & Hanks 1994; Helfat & Lieberman 2002) of the firm creation relates more to an organisational view of the firm. A founding director usually has a role oriented towards the efficiency of the use of the fi s resources (Penrose 1959). The organisation of resources is then what differentiates the founding director to the self-employed entrepreneur. This category can also include self-employment, but is not often considered as part of the entrepreneurial function. However, it can be considered so when one focuses on the decision towards engaging in new venture creation, or the choice for an individual to change from an employment status to self-employed. Entrepreneurship in this case can also include classes of occupation (such as craftsmanship, independent occupation) that are often self-employed due to this being the normal occupational structure in the industry. In some empirical studies of firm creation, these occupations are considered as entrepreneurship.
This section has aimed at drawing a general picture of the state of the definition of entrepreneurship, and has shown the existing array of contributions in the entrepreneurship literature that can create confusion. The discussion of this definition aims primarily to obtain a deeper understanding of the entrepreneurship literature in order to place this thesis within it and to clearly define the notion of entrepreneurship that is used in this work. As explained in the introduction, the thesis focuses on innovative entrepreneurship and aims at understanding the early evolution of the entrepreneurial function and those performing it. The concept of innovative entrepreneurship has two components: firstly the component of the innovative project which spans the process from opportunity recognition to the development of the project and realisation of the innovation, and secondly it involves organisation creation, which also induces a transfer of the project between the incubating (or nascent association) status to a newly created organisation. Our definition of innovative entrepreneurship is the action of exploiting an opportunity of innovation
36
through the creation of a firm. Our study of innovative entrepreneurship therefore implies the study
of the co-evolution of these two processes (which we also refer to as the entrepreneurial process). This definition of innovative entrepreneurship must be extended to discuss its associated timeframe. Returning to the elements of the definition of entrepreneurship, while the organisational process behind firm creation can be considered as entrepreneurship, in this work we follow the Schumpeterian (1934) view about the distinction of entrepreneurs and managers and the consideration that the entrepreneurial function is temporary. Thus, we define the end of the entrepreneurial process as being at a time when the a age ial outi e do i ates the management of the firm. The end point is defined as the time at which a stable management team is in place in the newly created company, and the strategy and early activities are defined and under development. At this point, our study examines the entrepreneurial process in terms of the transition of an innovative opportunity through its early development in a newly created organisation, while the transition from entrepreneurial to managerial focus of the firm is a subject for future research.
In order to explain the organisational and macro processes of economic change, the above theories introduced the entrepreneur as an agent responsible for these dynamic processes. All of the theories included the presence of this agent, because of the need for an agent to make decisions and actions towards that change. In these theories the notion of human action through the entrepreneur is a central feature in order to explain the dynamics of economic change. However, these early theoretical contributions with different frameworks have raised confusion and prevented the emergence of a unified definition of the entrepreneur. The next section looks deeper into the variables necessary to study the e t ep e eu s decision making and his action that is central in
entrepreneurship literature. This is achieved by looking at the central place of the entrepreneur and his power of agency.