Entrepreneurship Development - Literature review Example

Entrepreneurship development Entrepreneurship is essentially is the willingness existing within an individual to innovate, take risks and efficiently manage a business venture within a competitive environment. Entrepreneurs are required to possess the fervour to pioneer different organizational activities and to lead the entire institution towards success. They are considered to be the motivators of social and technological changes. The aspiration to push the envelope and forward mindedness are essential qualities possessed by an entrepreneur. They possess the zeal to transform dreams into reality (Kanungo, 1998). The concept of entrepreneurship however is understood differently by different individuals. Some believe that it is essentially the ability to lead and motive subordinates, while others consider it to be ability to innovate and develop new products and technologies. In the business context, an entrepreneur is required to streamline different processes using innovative or existing processes so that new avenues of opportunities can be conquered (Brown and Ulijn, 2004). Entrepreneurs must also possess the ability to identify issues existing or likely to emerge within an organization through their far sightedness and develop pro active measures for resolving the same. The concept of entrepreneurship traditionally means the ability to do something different. The development of the concept can be traced back to the twelfth century where it was commonly used in association with political economy. Individuals belonging to this field were presumed to have the quality of farsightedness and leadership. The diverse approaches towards understanding the concept of entrepreneurship mainly arises out of the differences in filed. Based upon the stream and area of study, the characteristics of entrepreneurship can be understood differently (Ray, 1988). From the economic point of view, entrepreneurs are agents who focus upon the market and thereby add value to the organization. From the management point of view, entrepreneurship qualities determine the success or failure of a firm. The importance of entrepreneurship qualities have become so essential in modern day business that it is viewed as a subject of study and training. However the economic sense of understanding entrepreneurship has been widely accepted. Researchers such as Hebert and Link (1989) have analyzed that the Richard Cantillon was one of the first businessmen to have developed the concept of entrepreneurship in the early eighteenth century (Arogundade, 2011). Cantillon recognises an entrepreneur as a risk taker. He predominantly viewed an entrepreneur as a self employed individual who had the strong quality of farsightedness and confidence to sustain losses. Cantillon had stated that an entrepreneur plays a significant role in creating competitive advantages within an industry. He was more focussed upon the economic contribution of an entrepreneur rather than the personal traits existing within him. He also stated that economic standing or the position held by individuals in the society had no direct relations with entrepreneurial abilities (Ács, Audretsch and Strom, 2009). Hence it was not necessary that entrepreneurial features were required to be present only with business owners. A cobbler or even a street sweeper may also posses’ entrepreneurial qualities. Joseph Schumpeter was the first to associate innovation with entrepreneurship (Gnyawali and Fogel, 1994). Modern theorist however has come up with the idea that it is not necessary that an entrepreneur must innovate something new. Any task he does which adds value to the organization can be considered as entrepreneurial. It has also been seen that the manner in which a firm acquires different types of sources. J.B. Say has stated that an entrepreneur is an individual who brings together different factor of production and combines them strategically for developing products and services (Powell, 2008). Entrepreneurial characteristics are related to success factors such as being target oriented and energetic. He is essentially viewed as a business leader. In many societies, entrepreneurs are viewed as agents of change who not only bring about change economically but in the entire society through the creation of job opportunities, valuable products and services. Entrepreneurs are essentially considered to be catalysts of change. The ability to take risks and being action oriented are also essential features possessed by an entrepreneur. He accepts challenges with enthusiasm and is ready to endure any type of outcome. In order to be able to add value to the organization, an entrepreneur is required to plan for the future and estimate the potential risks set to arise. The process of becoming a successful entrepreneur is laden with a number of risks. The four important types of risks which an entrepreneur is likely to face are financial, personal, carrier and psychological risks. The financial risks may arise out of insufficient profits and loss of investments. Personal risks are attached with losing one social life. Carrier risks occur when an individual decides to leave a successful carrier so as to start a new business venture. Psychological risks are often associated with the high amount of stress and mental agony which an entrepreneur is required to bear while running a business. In the current paper, the researcher has tried to identify the roles and characteristics associated with three important types of entrepreneurship and how their specific personal characteristics affect the type of responsibilities undertaken by them (Kuzilwa, 2005). The first important kind is the social entrepreneur. A social entrepreneur possesses the strong desire to induce a change in the society. He is driven by a fierce ambition to change an existing reality of the society by considering it to be unacceptable. He is pushed towards altering existing norms which simply rationalize the existing conditions and is not considered justifiable. The primary personality trait of a social entrepreneur is the overwhelming social consciousness and sense of social responsibility. They are driven to undertake activities not by expecting profits but to cause something beneficial to the society. In the paper ‘Social entrepreneurship research: A source of explanation, prediction, and delight’ written by the authors Mair and Marti (2006), it was identified that social entrepreneurship is an essential quality for the overall development of a nation. The authors had identified through vivid analysis of different social settings that social entrepreneurship is the primary reason behind economic growth and prosperity. In their elaborate studies, Mair and Marti had developed the understanding that social entrepreneurs are essentially idea champions who advance chance. Idea champions are individuals who possess a distinct ability to transform the social setting by working within and outside an organization. To become agents of social change, entrepreneurs must strive towards developing a broad spectrum idea regarding the society in which they thrive. They must assess the potential causes behind a social drawback and strategically analyse how the same can be removed through intelligent use of resources. A strong attachment towards ones society and on a broader scale mankind is an important characteristic feature of social entrepreneurs. Social entrepreneurs have the strong ability to think beyond their personal needs and think about the wellbeing of the society as a whole. Martin and Osberg (2007) have identified that social entrepreneurs also have essential motivational and role model features which direct others towards social wellbeing as well. They generate the necessary enthusiasm and the passion amongst individuals to recognize their potentials and become visionaries of new possibilities. Social entrepreneurs are required to dedicate themselves continuously towards the wellbeing of the society. Hence it is essentially a long term dedication and therefore entrepreneurs must get used to facing set backs occasionally. Such individuals acquire the profound ability to transform behaviour and mobilize political will so that the needs of the society can be met. Social entrepreneurs yearn to obtain autonomy. As per the studies conducted by Perrini and Vurro (2006), social entrepreneurial qualities can be seen to exist in historical figures such as Mahatma Gandhi and Abraham Lincoln who were responsible for advancing important social changes. Experts in the field of social entrepreneurship such as Weerawardena and Mort (2006) prefer to consider such individuals as a mechanism for advancement. They create patterns which have transformed the way people live across the world. The development of the private sector, industrialization and urbanization are all results which have emerged from the social entrepreneurial visions of motivated individuals. Thompson, Alvy and Lees (2000) have suggested that although social and business entrepreneurs are similar in a number of ways, considering skills, the difference rests is their specific motives. While business entrepreneurs are profit minded and seek organizational growth explicitly, social entrepreneurs are keener upon the advancement of the society or meeting an urgent social requirement. Social entrepreneurs also differ from the government, although both work towards the betterment of a nation. Government bodies follow a top down strategy for effecting social change. However, a social entrepreneur brings about change in the bottom strata of the society and works his way up. Hence the work of a social entrepreneur begins at the grass root level. Moreover government bodies are bound by legal rules and procedures, compared to which social entrepreneurs have more flexibility. The government of a nation cannot take risks as easily as a social entrepreneur. Social entrepreneurs are often required to work as activists so that they are able to influence others. They vigorously interact with both internal and external factors of an organization to effect changes. Brinckerhoff (2000) had pointed out in his book entitled ‘Social entrepreneurship: The art of mission-based innovation’ that a social entrepreneur is faced with a number of challenges. A significant challenge is in respect of financing. The changes and ideas of social entrepreneurs are mass scale and require large funding. Philanthropy is seen to be one of the most commonly sought sources of finance. Low standardization and too much fragmentation can make this method time consuming. Another suitable technique sorted by social entrepreneurs is to influence investors strongly. However it is observed by Brinckerhoff that the markets of social development investing are less developed in parts of the world. Earned revenues are also the most sought after way for social entrepreneurs for financing their ventures. Whether a social entrepreneur requires being innovative and develop something new is a matter of debate. According to Mair, Robinson and Hockerts, (2006) social entrepreneurs need not necessarily create something new. A reform in existing systems or persuading the masses to do something which is left neglected can be considered as a social entrepreneurial characteristic. Contrarily Nicholls and Cho (2006) have opined that influential and successful social entrepreneurs are those who have induced a new idea, a product or a service which has reformed lifestyle or the manner of thinking. Such individuals are considered to be more able to solve the needs of the society and have greater power to lead. Another crucial challenge faced by social entrepreneurs is that of attracting talent. Much of the ventures undertaken by social entrepreneurs is risky and does not guarantee successful results. In general most individuals would remain hesitant to participate in such activities. Future social entrepreneurs are required to provide compensation which are comparable with that which general business institution provide. Since compensation is an important factor, many successful and strategic social entrepreneurs have aligned their social goals with general business goals and accordingly developed organizations which not only generate revenue but also fulfil social goals. Dees and Anderson (2006) gained the understanding through their research work entitled ‘Framing a theory of social entrepreneurship: Building on two schools of practice and thought’, that social entrepreneurs are often viewed upon as combiners of the society. Specialization and divisions have isolated each societal group form the other. In order to impact a mass change, it becomes essential that individuals belonging from different stratum of the society develop familiarity and unity amongst each other. Social entrepreneurs are seen to be able to creatively combine people together creating exposure between different societies. They facilitate carving out spaces within an institution where individuals are able to interact and develop understandings. Social entrepreneurs are seen to believe in the concept of integrating labour rather than dividing the same. According to the studies conducted by P. A. Dacin, M. T. Dacin and Matear (2010) in order to become a successful social entrepreneur, it is essential for an individual to understand what his potential strengths and weaknesses are. Knowledge about oneself is a key element for becoming a successful social entrepreneur. It is not necessary for one to have high knowledge about the subject of social entrepreneurship; however it is essential for an individual to know societal condition and be aware of its needs. In the last decade, globalization of the economy and increasing concerns for sustainability has made business organizations to combine their objectives with that of the society. An increasing presence of social entrepreneurship in the private sector is being witnessed (Hockerts, 2006). Nurturing social entrepreneurship skills is also considered to be an essential aspect form many universities and educational institutions. Every society for its maintaining its growth requires individuals who can rise above their self needs and work towards fulfilling different societal goals. A concern for the social environment therefore requires to be developed from a young age. Social entrepreneurs while assessing the impact of their actions upon the society are required to assess the scale of the organization and its impact upon the society (Phills, Deiglmeier and Miller, 2008). A successful social entrepreneur is seen to be able to impact the society beyond the span of the organizations reach. Additionally modern social entrepreneurs are required to be able to meet societal needs in a sustainable manner, so that the requirement of the future generations can also be met in a suitable manner. Serial entrepreneur are the second most important type of entrepreneurs discussed in the current paper. A serial entrepreneur consistently strives to execute business models and established plans so that the needs of business stakeholders can be met adequately. Serial entrepreneurs function in the business sector. Their prominent characteristic feature is the relentless ability of taking risks and stress (Stokes and Blackburn, 2002). They are usually seen to be able to adapt to changing business condition and thereby remain flexible towards a wide number of factors. Serial entrepreneurs are not required to display a consistent pattern of success. Serial entrepreneurs can easily recover from downfalls due to their high levels of confidence (Ucbasaran, Westhead and Wright 2011). The ability to recover fast economically is the crucial factor which enables such entrepreneurs to remain successful and consistently innovate. Wright, Robbie and Ennew (1997) had opined that serial entrepreneurs are essentially those who enter and exit entrepreneurship roles on a repeated basis. They develop a business and after considerable passage of time sell it off or leave it for developing a new venture. Serial entrepreneurs possess a never ending strive to innovate and develop new businesses. Researchers such as Zhang (2011) have provided the understanding that serial entrepreneurs are in a position to perform better than novice entrepreneurs. A significant part of the businesses across the world have been established through serial entrepreneurship. This is one reason why policy makers and scholars are seen to be giving serial entrepreneurs a significant amount of importance as they are considered to be important agents of economic growth and development (Chen 2013). Serial entrepreneurs utilize their past experiences to perform better or to utilize resources more efficiently. Serial entrepreneurs are considered to be financially more capable than other types of entrepreneurs. It is also seen that their skill set and knowledge possessed by serial entrepreneurs are higher than first time entrepreneurs. Hence the growth prospects associated with such entrepreneurship practices are high (Cowe, 1998). Serial entrepreneurs are also in a position to take higher risks and undertake innovative practices more often. The experiences from the past and a strong exposure of the business environment facilitate serial entrepreneurs to take intelligent decisions. Serial entrepreneurs are able to utilize their knowledge gained from past ventures and utilize the same in current projects. This makes such entrepreneurs more risk aware. In the paper ‘Decisions, Actions, and Performance: Do Novice, Serial, and Portfolio Entrepreneurs Differ?’ written by Westhead, Ucbasaran and Wright (2005), the authors have gained the valuable insight that serial entrepreneurs are more acceptable in existing firms so that the resource pool in term of talent and finance can be expanded. Nascent entrepreneurs are often not included in an existing organization due to their lack of financial capabilities. Additionally experts such as Tihula and Huovinen (2010) have stated through the research work that serial entrepreneurs have a higher ability of assessing market conditions. This facilitates them to start new ventures at the right time in the right kind of industry. Serial entrepreneurs, unlike others, have the distinct ability to consistently develop new ideas and start ventures with lesser concern for incurring losses. There is an undying spirit existing amongst them, to develop new business ventures. Serial entrepreneurs do not believe in stagnating themselves in one business area. They prefer to explore new avenues of commercialization (Parker, 2013). So as to be able to shift from one business to the other, serial entrepreneurs are required to remain consistently innovative. La Pira and Gillin (2006) in their studies conducted upon serial entrepreneurship have reached the conclusion that the goals of such individuals are relatively closer to that of the organization. The third important kind of entrepreneur to be analyzed in the current paper is the lifestyle entrepreneur. A lifestyle entrepreneur strives to make a living out of his or her own passion. For instance, an individual who has interest towards home decor and furnishing may consider developing his own business in the interior decorations industry. Hence when individuals take tap business opportunities based upon their interests, they are essentially termed as lifestyle entrepreneurs. They relentlessly try to device innovative ways by which it becomes possible for them to fulfil their personal passions. A lifestyle entrepreneur aims to remain self employed. Lifestyle entrepreneurs do not associate themselves with complex business models and instead try to break away from the traditional mainstream business forms top develop their own innovate ideas. Lifestyle entrepreneurs prefer to be the rule makers rather than the rule followers. Modern lifestyle entrepreneurs are seen to develop business models in a manner such that the sustainability needs of the society can be met. In general lifestyle entrepreneurs are those who develop successful business models based upon their lifestyle interests and choices. As per the studies conducted by Schine (2003), a lifestyle entrepreneur has a strong liking towards living their life to the fullest. They possess a strong desire towards stepping up to their needs and take serious steps towards fulfilling their needs. They are seen to embrace the culture of being able to acquire knowledge over their entire lifetime so that their set goals can be fulfilled. Pollak (2001) has given the opinion that lifestyle entrepreneurs develop business acumen at a very young age. They develop a passion regarding something and as they mature in age, they set plans so that their passions can be used as a lifestyle options. According to Marcketti, Niehm and Fuloria (2006) lifestly entrepreneurs are those who pursue their dreams in a creative manner. They learn through their own experiences and follow their own heart in terms of taking decisions. They essentially embrace a culture of being able to fulfil one own aspiration through undying efforts. Lifestyle entrepreneurs try to influence others through their strong will. Technological innovations have opened up greater avenues for lifestyle entrepreneurs to develop passions for new types of products and services. They also utilize the advancement which the society has made for fulfilling their own passions. Lifestyle entrepreneurs also possess the characteristic of remaining self employed just like serial entrepreneurs. They prefer to set trends rather than following others and taking orders. If such entrepreneurs take up jobs as employees, they are likely to remain unsuccessful and de-motivated. Andersson Cederholm and Hultman (2010) have supported the notion by further stating that lifestyle entrepreneurs creatively, efficiently and sustainably sought out ways through which their passion can be fulfilled. Such individuals are usually seen to remain highly creative and easily tap any opportunity which is put forth in their way. Lifestyle entrepreneurs are often seen to motivate others by sending out the message that hard work and consistent faith in ones abilities can help them fulfil any dream that they possess. The need for earning profits is a secondary concern for lifestyle entrepreneurs. Delivering the desired services to the society is their primary motive. The level of profits earned depends upon the scope existing in the external environment. Such individuals also have the ability to keep trying until and unless the set goals are met. According to Morrison and Teixeira (2004) lifestyle entrepreneurs may consider fulfilling the objectives envisioned by them in innovative ways so that they are aligned with the present needs of the society. An individual may set his dreams regarding a particular business at an early age but with the passage of time such business ideas may become obsolete. Under such circumstances, a lifestyle entrepreneur aims to fulfil his set goals by altering his earlier set business goals in a manner such that they suitable meet the needs of the changing society. In other words, a lifestyle entrepreneur is never discouraged by external environmental conditions. Instead he is seen to adjust his life goals in a manner such that both the individual and societal requirements are met. As per the studies conducted by lifestyle entrepreneur researchers such as Ateljevi and Doorne (2000), the characteristics of a lifestyle entrepreneur exist in all entrepreneurs at some part of their life. The experts are of the opinion that strong will of achieving ones dreams are the motivating factors for almost all types of entrepreneurs. Walters (2001) has opined that lifestyle entrepreneurs just like other forms of entrepreneurship are required to be risk friendly. The path of fulfilling ones dreams are often laden with a number of different obstacles. Walters has also opined that lifestyle entrepreneurs have a greater inclination towards the quality of their life rather than their carrier. The carrier goals are often set in a manner such that they do not hinder meeting ones lifestyle choice. Top do so, lifestyle entrepreneurs are seen to integrate the objective of their carrier with their personal needs and accordingly develop new ventures. Researchers such as Marchant (2010) have conversely stated that lifestyle entrepreneurs are so keen upon achieving their dreams that they neglect using resources in a proper manner. Underutilization of capital is therefore a common phenomenon associated with lifestyle entrepreneurs. It is also observed that in pursuit of meeting their own life objectives, lifestyle entrepreneurs often waste precious resources and neglect meeting the sustainable needs of the society. In order to increase the overall level of investments made in the assets of the firm, Lifestyle entrepreneurs are less concerned about the overall industry growth and prefer involving in the same at a lower frequency. They usually develop self sustained business models so that reliance upon external factors remains low. This gives such business models maximum autonomy to grow at its own pace. Pikkemaat (2008) have further stated that lifestyle entrepreneurs often are seen to neglect their personal skills and knowledge and pursue their desired objectives even if they are short of adequate business acumen. On the basis of the above discussed aspects, it is understood that risk taking ability and a strong motivation to move ahead in life are the most essential qualities of a successful entrepreneur. The motivation for becoming an entrepreneur may arise from different factors either spontaneous or induced. Leadership and the ability t mange resources profitably are also essential. Although entrepreneurs enjoy the power to control all activities of the business and are essentially not required to take order s from others, they are required to make a considerable amount of sacrifices in their personal life. In order to meet the goals of their life, individuals with entrepreneurship goals are required to sacrifice much of their social life. The entrepreneurial way of thinking is the primary agent of success for almost all successful firms, irrespective of their nature and type of activities. On the other hand modern researchers prefer addressing the concept of entrepreneurship as a complex phenomenon involving the firm, the individual and the environment in within which the organization operates. Reference List Ács, Z. J., Audretsch, D. B. and Strom, R. J., 2009. Entrepreneurship, growth, and public policy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Andersson Cederholm, E. and Hultman, J., 2010. The value of intimacy–negotiating commercial relationships in lifestyle entrepreneurship. Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism, 10(1), pp. 16-32. Arogundade, B. B., 2011. Entrepreneurship education: An imperative for sustainable development in Nigeria. Journal of Emerging Trends in Educational Research and Policy Studies, 2(1), pp. 26-29. Ateljevic, I. and Doorne, S., 2000. Staying Within the Fence: Lifestyle Entrepreneurship in Tourism. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 8(5), pp. 378-392. Brinckerhoff, P. C., 2000. Social entrepreneurship: The art of mission-based innovation. New Jersey: John Wiley. Brown, T. E. and Ulijn, J. M., 2004. Innovation, entrepreneurship and culture: the interaction between technology, progress and economic growth. Massachusetts: Edward Elgar Publishing. Chen, J., 2013. Selection and serial entrepreneurs. Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, 22(2), pp. 281-311. Cowe, R., 1998. Serial entrepreneurs. Management today, 32(1), pp. 90-93. Dacin, P. A., Dacin, M. T. and Matear, M. (2010). Social entrepreneurship: why we dont need a new theory and how we move forward from here. The academy of management perspectives, 24(3), pp. 37-57. Dees, J. G. and Anderson, B. B., 2006. Framing a theory of social entrepreneurship: Building on two schools of practice and thought. Research on social entrepreneurship: Understanding and contributing to an emerging field, 1(3), pp. 39-66. Gnyawali, D. R. and Fogel, D. S., 1994. Environments for entrepreneurship development: key dimensions and research implications. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 18(1), 43-43. Hebert, R. F., & Link, A. N. (1989). In search of the meaning of entrepreneurship. Small Business Economics, 1(1), 39-49. Hockerts, K., 2006. Entrepreneurial opportunity in social purpose business ventures. Social entrepreneurship, 1(1), pp. 142-154. Kanungo, R. N., 1998. Entrepreneurship and innovation: Models for development. California: Sage Publications Pvt. Ltd. Kuzilwa, J. A., 2005. The Role of Credit for Small Business Success A Study of the National Entrepreneurship Development Fund in Tanzania. Journal of entrepreneurship, 14(2), pp. 131-161. La Pira, F. and Gillin, M., 2006. Non-local intuition and the performance of serial entrepreneurs. International journal of entrepreneurship and small business, 3(1), pp. 17-35. Mair, J. and Marti, I., 2006. Social entrepreneurship research: A source of explanation, prediction, and delight. Journal of world business, 41(1), pp. 36-44. Mair, J., Robinson, J. and Hockerts, K., 2006. Social entrepreneurship. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Marchant, B., 2010. The case of lifestyle entrepreneurs in Ireland; an examination of surf tourism entrepreneurs in Bundoran and Lahinch. In Tourism and Hospitality Research in Ireland Conference, Clare, June, 1(1), pp. 15-16. Marcketti, S. B., Niehm, L. S. and Fuloria, R., 2006. An exploratory study of lifestyle entrepreneurship and its relationship to life quality. Family and Consumer Sciences Research Journal, 34(3), pp. 241-259. Martin, R. L. and Osberg, S., 2007. Social entrepreneurship: The case for definition. Stanford social innovation review, 5(2), pp. 28-39. McGehee, N. G. and Kline, C. S., 2008. Entrepreneurship and the rural tourism industry: A primer. Building community capacity for tourism development, 1(1), pp. 123-141. Morrison, A. and Teixeira, R., 2004. Small business performance: a tourism sector focus. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 11(2), pp. 166-173. Nicholls, A. and Cho, A. H., 2006. Social entrepreneurship: The structuration of a field. Social entrepreneurship: New models of sustainable social change, 1(1), pp. 99-118. Parker, S. C., 2013. Do serial entrepreneurs run successively better-performing businesses? Journal of Business Venturing, 28(5), pp. 652-666. Perrini, F. and Vurro, C., 2006. Social entrepreneurship: Innovation and social change across theory and practice. Social entrepreneurship, 1(1), 57-85. Phills, J. A., Deiglmeier, K. and Miller, D. T., 2008. Rediscovering social innovation. Stanford Social Innovation Review, 6(4), pp. 34-43. Pikkemaat, B., 2008. Innovation in small and medium-sized tourism enterprises in Tyrol, Austria. The International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation, 9(3), pp. 187-197. Pollak, J., 2001. Soul proprietor: 101 lessons from a lifestyle entrepreneur. Berlin: Springer Science & Business. Powell, B., 2008. Making poor nations rich: Entrepreneurship and the process of economic development. California: Stanford University. Ray, D., 1988. The role of entrepreneurship in economic development. Journal of development planning, 18(1), pp. 3-18. Schine, G. L., 2003. How to succeed as a lifestyle entrepreneur: Running a business without letting it run your life. Chicago: Dearborn Trade Publishing. Stokes, D. and Blackburn, R., 2002. Learning the hard way: the lessons of owner-managers who have closed their businesses. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 9(1), pp. 17-27. Thompson, J., Alvy, G. and Lees, A., 2000. Social entrepreneurship–a new look at the people and the potential. Management decision, 38(5), pp. 328-338. Tihula, S. and Huovinen, J., 2010. Incidence of teams in the firms owned by serial, portfolio and first-time entrepreneurs. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 6(3), pp. 249-260. Ucbasaran, D., Westhead, P. and Wright, M., 2011. Why serial entrepreneurs dont learn from failure. Harvard Business Review, 89(4), pp. 26-26. Walters, J. S., 2001. Big vision, small business: the four keys to finding success & satisfaction as a lifestyle entrepreneur. California: Ivy Sea Inc. Weerawardena, J. and Mort, G. S., 2006. Investigating social entrepreneurship: A multidimensional model. Journal of world business, 41(1), pp. 21-35. Westhead, P., Ucbasaran, D. and Wright, M., 2005. Decisions, Actions, and Performance: Do Novice, Serial, and Portfolio Entrepreneurs Differ? Journal of small business management, 43(4), pp. 393-417. Wright, M., Robbie, K. and Ennew, C., 1997. Venture capitalists and serial entrepreneurs. Journal of Business Venturing, 12(3), pp. 227-249. Zhang, J., 2011. The advantage of experienced start-up founders in venture capital acquisition: evidence from serial entrepreneurs. Small Business Economics, 36(2), pp. 187-208. Read More