Expanding university entrepreneurial ecosystems to under-represented communities
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/JEPP-03-2019-0025 |
| Published date | 02 September 2019 |
| Pages | 384-407 |
| Date | 02 September 2019 |
| Author | Emma O’Brien,Thomas M. Cooney,Per Blenker |
| Subject Matter | Strategy |
Expanding university
entrepreneurial ecosystems to
under-represented communities
Emma O’Brien and Thomas M. Cooney
College of Business, Technological University Dublin, Dublin, Ireland, and
Per Blenker
Department of Management, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark
Abstract
Purpose –Entrepreneurship education has moved from an elitist view focussing on a start-up and
picking-the-winners philosophy towards a broader enterprising behaviour approach; recognising
entrepreneurship as an activity of relevance for everybody. The purpose of this paper is to extend this
development and identify how university entrepreneurial ecosystems can be expanded to support
communities that are under-represented in entrepreneurship.
Design/methodology/approach –Based on an integrative literature review (Torraco, 2005), this paper draws
together and synthesises literature from the field of entrepreneurship, higher education studies and
under-represented communities in an integrated fashion, leading to the development of a new conceptual model.
Findings –This paper challenges the traditional role of universities in supporting entrepreneurship as
focussing mainly on economic growth and new venture creation, and identifies how universities are also
positioned to provide greater civic support to entrepreneurial learning amongst under-represented
communities. Through a critical analysis of the literature, the conceptual model proposed identifies six key
considerations in the expansion of university entrepreneurial ecosystems for under-represented communities.
Practical implications –There are currently 96.6m people at risk of poverty and social exclusion in the EU
(OECD, 2017) and an estimated 43.1m Americans (US Census Bureau, 2017). This paper explores how
university entrepreneurial ecosystems can be expanded to support minority and disadvantaged communities
who are under-represented in terms of entrepreneurial activity.
Originality/value –Given that there is little research regarding how universities might activate inclusive
entrepreneurship initiatives amongst under-represented communities, this paper expands existingknowledge as it
identifies the key considerations encompassing university-led community collaborative enterprise support.
Keywords Social inclusion, Entrepreneurial education, Public policy, Entrepreneurial ecosystems,
Inclusive entrepreneurship, Enterprising behaviour, University–community engagement,
Under-represented communities
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
Entrepreneurship is frequently identified as playing a critical role in economic and societal
development which has led to the development of a wide range of public policies and
initiatives to support entrepreneurial activity (Lundstrom and Stevenson, 2006; Ahmad
and Hoffman, 2008). Recently, the concept of an “entrepreneurial ecosystem”has been
advanced in the academic literature and generally refers to the dynamic and mutually
reinforcing environment between a community of interdependent actors that supports
entrepreneurship (Isenberg, 2011; Spigel, 2017). Whilst public policy differs between regions
and each national or regional entrepreneurial ecosystem is unique, it is broadly agreed
that there are some common pillars within such entrepreneurial ecosystems which
include: a conducive culture, finance availability, quality human capital, appropriate market
conditions and a wide range of supports. One of the key stakeholders within entrepreneurial
ecosystems is universities, but their traditional approach to enterprise education (which
has largely focussed on Schumpeter’s, 1942 heroic entrepreneur) has frequently been
criticised for being too elitist and neglecting the potential of everyday entrepreneurship
performed by a broad variety of people in society. This critique has been further supported
Journal of Entrepreneurship and
Public Policy
Vol. 8 No. 3, 2019
pp. 384-407
© Emerald PublishingLimited
2045-2101
DOI 10.1108/JEPP-03-2019-0025
Received 28 March 2019
Revised 28 March 2019
Accepted 25 April 2019
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/2045-2101.htm
384
JEPP
8,3
by Sarasavathy and Venkataraman’s (2011) seminal article demonstrating entrepreneurship
as a general method that can be used by anyone who cares to learn it.
There is an underlying assumption within entrepreneurial ecosystem frameworks that
all entrepreneurs will have equal access to resources and support, but evidence suggests
that this may not always be true (Brush et al., 2018). According to the OECD’s (2017)
“Missing Entrepreneurs Report”, many social target groups are under-represented in
entrepreneurship including women, youth, immigrant/ethnic minority groups, unemployed,
seniors and people with disability. Women, for example, are under-represented in successful
entrepreneurial ecosystems (Brush et al., 2018; McAdam et al., 2018) and identify a lack of
entrepreneurship skills or report a fear of failure as a barrier to entrepreneurship (OECD,
2017), whereas ethnic minority groups may experience social and economic disadvantages
which form a barrier to participation in entrepreneurship (Carter et al., 2015). This analysis
suggests that under-represented communities experience entrepreneurship differently to the
mainstream population and highlights the need for inclusive policies and entrepreneurial
support within the ecosystem to be tailored towards their specific needs (Maritz and Foley,
2018). Initiatives oriented towards traditional forms of entrepreneurship, in terms of
start-ups or creating high-growth oriented firms, may not be particularly useful for these
under-represented groups. Furthermore, existing ecosystems may have the unintended
consequence of pushing under-represented groups further away from entrepreneurial
activity and ever closer to becoming marginalised by society.
In recent times, some universities have expanded their entrepreneurial ecosystems to
include the development of tailored enterprise support programmes for under-represented
communities (Haynie and Shaheen, 2011; Kingma, 2014). It is arguable that universities are
ideally positioned to support these initiatives given: the cross-disciplinary knowledge and
expertise that resides on campus; the rise in university–community engagement; and their
position as a link between top-down government and industry policies and practises with
bottom-up civil society and grassroots initiatives and priorities (Hazelkorn, 2016). These
holistic initiatives may have personal, economic and social impact upon under-represented
communities and could address the call for universities to be more inclusive, connected and
engaged with their local communities (European Commission, 2017).
With over 96.6m people at risk of poverty and social exclusion in the European Union
(OECD, 2017) and an estimated 43.1m Americans (US Census Bureau, 2017), there is a real
need for innovative approaches to address the situation. Whilst the expansion of university
entrepreneurial ecosystems into under-represented communities could contribute to the
solution, it is an unfortunate reality that such initiatives are infrequent and there remains a
dearth of research on how universities might best support under-represented communities
through entrepreneurship. This paper addresses this gap in the literature and contributes
new knowledge to the field by developing a conceptual framework that identifies the key
considerations around university-led community collaborative enterprise support.
Inclusive entrepreneurship
It is widely accepted that entrepreneurship plays a crucial role in economic growth and
development as a driver of innovation and job creation (Herrington and Kew, 2017; OECD,
2017). Whilst much of this growth has focussed on technological entrepreneurship and
economic development in large urban cities and regions, Stephens and Partridge (2011)
identified that entrepreneurship may also stimulate economic growth in rural regions.
Recently, a broader view of entrepreneurship has emerged whereby entrepreneurship is
viewed as a way of thinking and behaving that is relevant to all parts of society and the
economy (Cooney, 2012). Sarasvathy and Venkataraman (2011) have suggested that
entrepreneurship is a general method that could and should be learned by everyone. Moberg
et al. (2012, p. 14) defined such a broader view of entrepreneurship as “when you act upon
385
University
entrepreneurial
ecosystems
To continue reading
Request your trial