Small Business Economics

, Volume 36, Issue 2, pp 135–150 | Cite as

Towards a practice theory of entrepreneuring

  • Bengt JohannissonEmail author


Adopting a process perspective on entrepreneurship, captured by the notion of “entrepreneuring,” the emerging practice-theory approach in the social sciences is proposed as an appropriate frame of reference. Entrepreneuring as a practice is ontologically/epistemologically qualified by presenting phronesis as the relevant guiding intellectual virtue in the knowledge-creating process. A constructionist view invites different modes of coping with an ambiguous environment, including the use of analogizing and bricolage when enacting entrepreneuring by way of improvisation and personal networking. The notion of “organizing context” is introduced to grasp how collective support for entrepreneuring may be mobilized. Enactive research as an interactive way for doing field research is outlined and illustrated in order to complete the paradigmatic and theoretical arguments for a practice-theory approach to entrepreneuring with an adequate methodology.


Enactive research Entrepreneuring Phronesis Practice-theory Organizing context 

JEL Classifications

L14 L26 Z17 


  1. Aagaard Nielsen, K., & Svensson, L. (Eds.). (2006). Action and interactive research. Beyond practice and theory. Maastricht: Shaker Publishing.Google Scholar
  2. Alvesson, M. (2003). Methodology for close-up studies—struggling with closeness and closure. Higher Education, 46(2), 167–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Baker, T., & Nelson, R. (2005). Creating something from nothing: Resource construction through entrepreneurial bricolage. Administrative Science Quarterly, 50(3), 329–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Barrett, F. J. (1998). Creativity and improvisation in jazz and organizations: Implications for organizational learning. Organization Science, 9(5), 605–622.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bourdieu, P. (1977). Outline of a theory of practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Bourdieu, P. (1992). The logic of practice. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  7. Bouwen, R., & Steyaert, C. (1990). Construing organizational texture in young entrepreneurial firms. Journal of Management Studies, 26(6), 637–649.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brunsson, N., & Sahlin-Andersson, K. (2000). Constructing organizations: The example of public sector reforms. Organization Studies, 21(4), 721–746.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Burrell, G. Morgan, G. (l979) [l988]. Sociological paradigms and organisational analysis. Aldershot: Gower.Google Scholar
  10. Castells, M. (1996). The rise of the network society. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  11. Chia, R. (1995). From modern to postmodern organizational analysis. Organization Studies, 16(4), 579–604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Chia, R., & Holt, R. (2006). Strategy as practical coping: A Heideggerian perspective. Organization Studies, 39(2), 635–655.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cyert, R. M., & March, J. G. (1963). A behavioral theory of the firm. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  14. Czarniawska-Joerges, B., & Wolff, R. (1991). Leaders, managers, entrepreneurs on and off the organizational stage. Organization Studies, 12(4), 529–546.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. de Certeau, M. (1984). The practice of everyday life. London: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  16. Dreyfus, H. L., & Dreyfus, S. E. (1986). Mind over machine. The power of human intuition and expertise in the era of the computer. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
  17. Drucker, P. F. (1985). Innovation and entrepreneurship. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
  18. Eccles, R. G., & Nohria, N. (1992). Beyond the hype. Rediscovering the essence of management. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.Google Scholar
  19. Ellis, C. (1995). Final negotiations. A story of love, loss, and chronic illness. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Flyvbjerg, B. (2001). Making social science matter. Why social inquiry fails and how it can succeed again. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Fuller, T., & Warren, L. (2006). Entrepreneurship as foresight: A complex social network perspective on organisational foresight. Future 2006, 38(10), 959–971.Google Scholar
  22. Gartner, W. B. (1993). Words lead to deeds: Towards an organizational emergence vocabulary. Journal of Business Venturing, 8, 231–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Gartner, W. B. (2007). Entrepreneurial narrative and a science of the imagination. Journal of Business Venturing, 22(5), 613–627.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Geertz, C. (1983). Local knowledge. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  25. Gentner, D., & Holyoak, K. J. (1997). Reasoning and learning by analogy. American Psychologist, 52(1), 32–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Gergen, K. J. (1999). An invitation to social construction. Thousands Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  27. Giddens, A. (1991). Modernity and self-identity. Self and society in the late modern age. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  28. Grabher, G. (2001). Ecologies of creativity: The village, the group, and the heterarchic organisation of the British advertising industry. Environment and Planning, 33(2), 351–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Granovetter, M. (1985). Economic action and social structure: The problem of embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology, 91(3), 481–509.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Hayano, D. M. (1982). Poker faces. The life and work of professional card players. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  31. Hernes, T. (2003). Organization as evolution of space. In B. Czarniawska & G. Sevón (Eds.), Northern light—organization theory in Scandinavia (pp. 267–289). Malmö: Liber.Google Scholar
  32. Hjorth, D., Johannisson, B., & Steyaert, C. (2003). Entrepreneurship as discourse and life style. In B. Czarniawska & G. Sevón (Eds.), Northern light—organization theory in Scandinavia (pp. 91–110). Malmö: Liber.Google Scholar
  33. Hjorth, D., & Steyaert, C. (Eds.). (2004). Narrative and discursive approaches in entrepreneurship. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  34. Jarzabkowski, P., & Wilson, D. C. (2006). Actionable strategy knowledge. A practice perspective. European Management Journal, 24(5), 348–367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Johannisson, B. (2000). Networking and entrepreneurial growth. In D. Sexton & H. Landström (Eds.), Handbook of entrepreneurship (pp. 368–386). London: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  36. Johannisson, B. (2005). Entreprenörskapets väsen. Lund: Studentlitteratur.Google Scholar
  37. Johannisson, B. (2007). Enacting local economic development—theoretical and methodological challenges. Journal of Enterprising Communities: People and Places in the Global Economy, 1, 7–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Johannisson, B. (2008). The social construction of the disabled and unfashionable family business. In V. Gupta, N. Levenburg, L. L. Moore, J. Motwani, & T. V. Schwarz (Eds.), Culturally-sensitive models of family business in Nordic Europe: A compendium using the globe paradigm (pp. 125–144). Hyderabad: ICFAI University.Google Scholar
  39. Johannisson, B., & Lindholm Dahlstrand, Å. (Eds.). (2008). Bridging the functional and territorial rationales in regional entrepreneurship and development. Örebro: FSF.Google Scholar
  40. Johannisson, B., & Olaison, L. (2007). The moment of truth—reconstructing entrepreneurship and social capital in the eye of the storm. Review of Social Economy, 65(1), 55–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Johannisson, B., Ramirez-Pasillas, M., & Karlsson, G. (2002). Institutional embeddedness of inter-firm networks: A leverage for business creation. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 14(4), 297–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Johnson, G., Langley, A., Melin, L., & Whittington, R. (2007). Strategy as practice. Research directions and resources. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Kuhn, T. S. (1996). The structure of scientific revolutions (3rd ed.). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  44. Levi-Strauss, C. (1966). The savage mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  45. Macneil, I. R. (1980). The new social contract: An inquiry into modern contractual relations. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  46. Macquarrie, J. (1972). Existentialism. London: Penguin.Google Scholar
  47. Maskell, P., Eskelinen, H., Hannibalsson, I., Malmberg, A., & Vatne, E. (1998). Competitiveness, localised learning and regional development. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Massarik, F. (1983). Searching for essence in executive experience. In S. Srivastva (Ed.), The executive mind. New insights on managerial thought and action (pp. 243–268). San Fransisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  49. Meyerson, D., Weick, K. E., & Kramer, R. M. (1996). Swift trust and temporary groups. In R. M. Kramer & T. R. Tyler (Eds.), Trust in organizations (pp. 166–195). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  50. Mintzberg, H., & Waters, J. A. (1982). Tracking strategy in an entrepreneurial firm. Academy of Management Journal, 25(3), 465–499.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Morgan, G. (1980). Paradigms, metaphors and puzzle solving in organization theory. Administrative Science Quarterly, 25(4), 605–622.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Morgan, G. (1986). Images of organization. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  53. Nilsson, A. (1998). The analogy as a management tool. Luleå: Luleå University of Technology.Google Scholar
  54. Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, G. R. (1978). The external control of organizations. New York, NY: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
  55. Pinchot, G., I. I. I. (1985). Intrapreneuring. New York, NY: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
  56. Polanyi, M. (1974). Personal knowledge. Towards a post-critical philosophy. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  57. Putnam, H. (1995). Pragmatism. An open question. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  58. Quinn, J. B. (1978). Strategic change: Logical incrementalism. Sloan Management Review, Fall, 1–28.Google Scholar
  59. Reason, P., & Bradbury, H. (2001). Introduction. In P. Reason & H. Bradbury (Eds.), Handbook of action research. Participative inquiry and practice (pp. 1–14). Thousands Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  60. Sarasvathy, S. D. (2001). Causation and effectuation: Toward a theoretical shift from economic inevitability to entrepreneurial contingency. Academy of Management Review, 26(2), 243–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Schatzki, T. R. (2001). Introduction: Practice theory. In T. R. Schatzki, K. K. Cetina, & E. von Savigny (Eds.), The practice turn in contemporary theory (pp. 1–14). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  62. Schön, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner. How professionals think in action. New York, NY: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  63. Schön, D. (1986). Educating the reflective practitioner. San Fransisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  64. Smircich, L., & Morgan, G. (1982). Leadership: The management of meaning. Journal of Applied Behavioural Science, 18(3), 257–273.Google Scholar
  65. Smircich, L., & Stubbart, C. (1985). Strategic management in the enacted world. Academy of Management Review, 10(4), 724–736.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Spinosa, C., Flores, F., & Dreyfus, H. (1997). Disclosing new worlds—entrepreneurship. Democratic action and cultivation of solidarity. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  67. Stacey, R. D. (1996). Complexity and creativity in organizations. San Francisco, CA: Berret-Koehler.Google Scholar
  68. Starr, J. A., & MacMillan, I. C. (1990). Resource cooption via social contracting: Resource acquisition strategies for new ventures. Strategic Management Journal, 11(1), 79–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Stewart, A. (1989). Team entrepreneurship. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  70. Steyaert, C. (2004). The prosaics of entrepreneurship. In D. Hjorth & C. Steyaert (Eds.), Narrative and discursive approaches in entrepreneurship (pp. 8–21). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  71. Steyaert, C. (2007). Entrepreneuring as a conceptual attractor? A review of process theories in 20 years of entrepreneurship studies. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 19(6), 453–477.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Steyaert, C., & Katz, J. (2004). Reclaiming the space of entrepreneurship in society: Geographical, discursive and social dimensions. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 16(3), 179–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Stinchcombe, A. L. (1965). Social structure and organizations. In J. G. March (Ed.), Handbook of organizations (pp. 142–193). Chicago: Rand McNally.Google Scholar
  74. Storper, M. (1995). The resurgence of regional economies, ten years later: The region as a nexus of untraded interdependencies. European Urban and Regional Studies, 3(2), 191–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Swedberg, R. (1991). Schumpeter. A biography. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  76. Van de Ven, A. H., & Poole, M. S. (1995). Explaining development and change in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 510–540.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Van de Ven, A. H., & Poole, M. S. (2005). Alternative approaches for studying organizational change. Organization Studies, 26(9), 1377–1400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Van Maanen, J. (1988). Tales of the field. On writing ethnography. Chicago: University of Chicago.Google Scholar
  79. Weick, K. E. (1976). Educational organizations as loosely coupled systems. Administrative Science Quarterly, 21(1), 1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Weick, K. E. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  81. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice. Learning, meaning and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  82. Williamson, O. E. (1979). Transaction-cost economics: The governance of contractual relations. Journal of Law and Economics, 22(2), 233–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Winnicott, D. W. (1971). Playing and reality. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
  84. Yin, R. K. (1994). Case Study Research. Design and Methods. Revised edition. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  85. Young, M. (1991). An inside job. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Växjö UniversityVäxjöSweden
  2. 2.Jönköping International Business SchoolJönköpingSweden

Personalised recommendations