Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Failing firms and successful entrepreneurs: serial entrepreneurship as a temporal portfolio

  • Published:
Small Business Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Entrepreneurial performance is almost always confounded with firm performance. In this paper we argue for an instrumental view of the firm by formally showing that entrepreneurs can amplify their expected success rates by designing their careers as temporal portfolios that exploit contagion processes embedded in serial entrepreneurship. The advantages to holding concurrent portfolios that exploit heterogeneity are well known. The same advantages may be achieved in the serial context through contagion. Our model exploits an observation due to William Feller on the near equivalence of the two, statistically speaking. It also leads to empirically plausible implications about the size distribution of firms in the economy and illustrates the relevance of considering firms and entrepreneurs as distinct loci of analysis.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Quoted in Sarasvathy (2000, p.14).

  2. We abuse notation slightly in that we do not explicitly indicate the dependence of the p.m.f on the firm success probability. Also, there are a great many different equivalent formulae for the negative binomial; for a survey of the mess, see (Ross and Preece 1985). The above formulation may be found in (Feller 1968, section VI.8).

  3. Typically, processes such as the Yule process, Polya urn processes, epidemic processes, etc. are pointed to, or specific distributions such as the Pareto, power law, negative binomial, Zipf’s law, etc. are held up as exemplars (Feller 1943; Greenwood and Udny 1920; Xekalaki 1983). The study of contagion originated in the classic analysis of industrial accidents by Greenwood and Yule (1920). Not only has much of the work on contagion remained confined to this literature, but contagion has usually been studied in the context of counting processes. While it is natural to think of contagion as an increase in the number of something or the other, it is also limiting in that it forces a frequentist flavor onto events that may be best described otherwise (for example, belief contagion). Growth is not to be confused with contagion. In the Polya urn, the number of marbles of either color is a non-decreasing function of time, but what makes the process contagious is the conditional increase in numbers.

  4. The events, \( E(0),E(1), \ldots \) etc. are considered as the same event occurring at different time instants.

References

  • Acs, Z., & Armington, C. (2006). Entrepreneurship, geography and American economic growth. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Acs, Z., Parsons, W., & Tracy, S. (2008). High impact firms: gazelles revisited. small business research summary, No. 328. Office of advocacy, U. S. small business administration. http://www.sba.gov/advo/research/rs328tot.pdf. Accessed 19 March 2010.

  • Aldrich, H. E., & Fiol, C. M. (1994). Fools rush in? The institutional context of industry creation. Academy of Management Review, 19, 645–670.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aldrich, H. E., & Martinez, M. A. (2001). Many are called, but few are chosen: An evolutionary perspective for the study of entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 25, 41–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Almus, M., & Nerlinger, E. A. (2000). Testing ‚Gibrat’s Law’ for young firms–empirical results for west Germany. Small Business Economics, 15, 1–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alsos, G. A., & Kolvereid, L. (1999). The business gestation process of novice, serial, and parallel business founders. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 22(4), 101–114.

    Google Scholar 

  • Amaral, M., Baptista, R., & Lima, F. (2009). Serial entrepreneurship: impact of human capital on time to re-entry. Small Business Economics, doi: 10.1007/s11187-009-9232-4.

  • Audretsch, D. B., Klomp, L., Santarelli, E., & Vivarelli, M. (2004). Gibrat’s Law: Are services different? Review of Industrial Organization, 24(3), 301–324.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bahadur, R. R. (1960). Stochastic comparisons of tests. Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 31, 276–295.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baird, D. G., & Morrison, E. R. (2005). Serial entrepreneurs and small business bankruptcies. Columbia Law Review, 105, 2310–2368.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baron, R. A. (1998). Cognitive mechanisms in entrepreneurship, why and when entrepreneurs think differently than other people. Journal of Business Venturing, 13, 275–294.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baron, R. A. (2000). Psychological perspectives on entrepreneurship: Cognitive and social factors in entrepreneurs’ success. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 9, 15–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barron, D. N., West, E., & Hannan, M. T. (1994). A time to grow and a time to die: Growth and mortality of credit unions in New York City, 1914–1990. American Journal of Sociology, 100, 381–421.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bates, T. (1990). Entrepreneur human capital inputs and small business longevity. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 72, 551–559.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baum, J. A. C. (1989). Liabilities of newness, adolescence, and obsolescence: Exploring age dependence in the dissolution of organizational relationships and organizations. Proceedings of the Administrative Science Association of Canada, 1095, 1–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baum, J. R., Frese, M., & Baron, R. (2007). The psychology of entrepreneurship. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • BERR. (2008). High growth firms in the UK: Lessons from an analysis of comparative UK performance. BERR Economics paper No. 3, Nov 2008. http://www.berr.gov.uk/files/file49042.pdf. Accessed 19 March 2010.

  • Bertinelli, L., Cardi, O., Pamukcu, T., & Strobl, E. (2006). The evolution of the distribution of plant size: evidence from Luxemburg. Small Business Economics, 27, 301–311.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Birley, S., & Westhead, P. (1993). A comparison of new businesses established by “novice” and habitual” founders in Great Britain. International Small Business Journal, 12, 38–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Birley, S., & Westhead, P. (1994). A taxonomy of business start-up reasons and their impact on firm growth and size. Journal of Business Venturing, 9(1), 7–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blanchflower, D. G., & Oswald, A. J. (1998). What makes an entrepreneur? Journal of Labor Economics, 16, 26–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bosma, N., Van Praag, M., Thurik, T. & Wit, G. (2004). The value of human and social capital investments for the business performance of startups. Small Business Economics, 23, 227–236.

    Google Scholar 

  • Botazzi, G., Cefis, E., Dosi, G., & Secchi, A. (2007). Invariances and diversities in the patterns of industrial evolution: Some evidence from Italian manufacturing industries. Small Business Economics, 29, 137–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boyd, N. G., & Vozikis, G. S. (1994). The influence of self-efficacy on the development of entrepreneurial intentions and actions. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 18, 63–77.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brandstaetter, H. (1997). Becoming an entrepreneur: A question of personality structure? Journal of Economic Psychology, 18, 157–177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brockhaus, R. H., Sr. (1980). Risk taking propensity of entrepreneurs. Academy of Management Journal, 23, 509–520.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bruderl, J., & Schlussler, R. (1990). Organizational mortality: The liabilities of newness and adolescence. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35, 530–547.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burke, A. E., FitzRoy, F. R. & Nolan, M. A. (2008). What makes a die-hard entrepreneur? Beyond the ‘employee or entrepreneur’ dichotomy. Small Business Economics, 31(2), 93–115.

    Google Scholar 

  • Busenitz, L., & Barney, J. B. (1997). Differences between entrepreneurs and managers in large organizations: Biases and heuristics in strategic decision-making. Journal of Business Venturing, 12, 9–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cader, H. A., & Leatherman, J. C. (2009). Small business survival and sample selection bias. Small Business Economics, 21, 2–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Calvo, J. L. (2006). Testing Gibrat’s Law for small, young and innovating firms. Small Business Economics, 26, 117–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carter, S., & Ram, M. (2003). Reassessing portfolio entrepreneurship: Towards a multi-disciplinary approach. Small Business Economics, 21(4), 371–380.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caves, R. E. (1998). Industrial organization and new findings on the turnover and mobility of firms. Journal of Economic Literature, 36, 1947–1982.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, C. C., Greene, P. G., & Crick, A. (1998). Does entrepreneurial self-efficacy distinguish entrepreneurs from managers? Journal of Business Venturing, 13, 295–316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christensen, L. R. (1971). Entrepreneurial income: How does it measure up? American Economic Review, 61, 575–585.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coleman, J. S. (1964). Introduction to mathematical sociology. London: The Free Press of Glencoe, Collier-Macmillan Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Contini, B., & Revelli, R. (1989). The relationship between firms growth and labor demand. Small Business Economics, 1, 309–314.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cope, J., & Watts, G. (2000). ‘Learning by doing. an exploration of experience, critical incidents and reflection in entrepreneurial learning’. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour and Research, 6, 104–124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cross, M. (1981). New firm formation and regional development. London: Gower.

  • Ericsson, K. A. (2006). Introduction to Cambridge handbook of expertise and expert performance: Its development, organization and content. In K. A. Ericsson, N. Charness, P. J. Feltovich, & R. R. Hoffman (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of expertise and expert performance (pp. 3–19). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Evans, D. S., & Leighton, L. S. (1989). Some empirical aspects of entrepreneurship. American Economic Review, 79, 519–535.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feller, W. (1943). On a general class of contagious distributions. Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 14, 389–400.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feller, W. (1968). An introduction to probability theory and its applications, Vol. 1 (3rd ed.). New York: Wiley Eastern.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feltovich, P. J., Prietula, M. J., & Ericsson, K. A. (2006). Studies of expertise from psychological perspectives. In K. A. Ericsson, N. Charness, P. J. Feltovich, & R. R. Hoffman (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of expertise and expert performance (pp. 41–67). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Fichman, M., & Levinthal, D. A. (1991). Honeymoons and the liability of adolescence: A new perspective on duration dependence in social and organizational relationships. Academy of Management Review, 16, 442–468.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flajolet, P., Gabarró, J., & Pekari, H. (2005). Analytic urns. Annals of Probability, 33, 1200–1233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Forbes, D. P. (1999). Cognitive approaches to new venture creation. International Journal of Management Reviews, 1, 415–439.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gartner, W. B. (1988). Who is an entrepreneur is the wrong question. American Journal of Small Business, 12(4), 11–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Geroski, P. A. (1995). What do we know about entry? International Journal of Industrial Organization, 13, 421–440.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gimeno, J., Folta, T. B., Cooper, A. C., & Woo, C. Y. (1997). Survival of the fittest? Entrepreneurial human capital and the persistence of underperforming firms. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42, 750–783.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gompers, P., Kovner, A., Lerner, J., & Scharfstein, D. (2007). Performance persistence in entrepreneurship. Journal of Financial Economics, 62, 731–764.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenwood, M., & Yule, G. U. (1920). An inquiry into the nature of frequency distributions representative of multiple happenings with particular reference to the occurrence of multiple attacks of disease or of repeated accidents. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 83, 255–279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griffin, D. W., & Varey, C. A. (1996). Towards a consensus on overconfidence. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 65, 227–231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton, B. H. (2000). Does entrepreneurship pay? An empirical analysis of the returns to self-employment. Journal of Political Economy, 108, 604–631.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hannan, M. T., & Freeman, J. (1984). Structural inertia and organizational change. American Sociological Review, 49, 149–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haunsperger, D. B., & Saari, D. G. (1981). The lack of consistency for statistical decision procedures. The American Statistician, 45, 252–255.

    Google Scholar 

  • Headd, B. (2003). Redefining business success: Distinguishing between closure and failure. Small Business Economics, 21(1), 51–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henderson, A. D. (1999). Firm strategy and age dependence: A contingent view of the liability of newness, adolescence, and obsolescence. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44, 281–314.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holmes, T. J., & Schmitz, J. A., Jr. (1995). On the turnover of business firms and business managers. Journal of Political Economy, 103, 1005–1038.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ijiri, Y., & Simon, H. A. (1975). Some distributions associated with Bose-Einstein statistics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 72, 1654–1657.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Irwin, J. O. (1941). Discussion on chambers and Yule’s paper. Supplement to the Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, 7, 101–107.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jain, G. C., & Consul, P. C. (1971). Generalized negative binomial distribution. SIAM Journal on Applied Mathematics, 21, 501–513.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kane, T. (2010). The importance of startups in job creation and job destruction. Kauffman Foundation Research Series: Firm Formation and Economic Growth.

  • Kirchhoff, B. A. (1997). Entrepreneurship economics. In W. Bygrave (Ed.), The portable MBA in entrepreneurship (2nd ed., pp. 444–474). New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klotz, J. (1973). Statistical inference in Bernoulli trails with dependence. The Annals of Statistics, 1, 373–379.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kolvereid, L., & Bullvag, E. (1993). Novices versus experienced business founders: An exploratory investigation. In S. Birley, I. C. MacMillan, & S. Subramony (Eds.), Entrepreneurship research: Global perspectives (pp. 275–285). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lotti, F., Santarelli, E., & Vivarelli, M. (2009). Defending Gibrat’s law as a long-run regularity. Small Business Economics, 32, 31–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Low, M. B., & MacMillan, I. C. (1988). Entrepreneurship: Past research and future challenges. Journal of Management, 14, 139–161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacMillan, I. C. (1986). To really learn about entrepreneurship, let’s study habitual entrepreneurs. Journal of Business Venturing, 1, 241–243.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mansfield, E. (1962). Entry and market contestability: An international comparison. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mata, J. (1994). Firm growth during infancy. Small Business Economics, 6, 27–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGrath, R. G. (1996). Options and the entrepreneur: Towards a strategic theory of entrepreneurial wealth creation. Academy of Management Proceedings, Entrepreneurship division, 101–105.

  • Miner, J. B. (1997). The expanded horizon for achieving entrepreneurial success. Organizational Dynamics, 25, 54–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miner, J. B., & Raju, N. S. (2004). Risk propensity differences between managers and entrepreneurs and between low- and high-growth entrepreneurs: A reply in a more conservative vein. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 3–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moskowitz, T. J., & Vissing-Jorgensen, A. (2002). The returns to entrepreneurial investment: A private equity premium puzzle? American Economic Review, 92, 745–778.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oliveira, B., & Fortunato, A. (2006). Firm growth and liquidity constraints: A dynamic analysis. Small Business Economics, 27, 139–156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palich, L. E., & Bagby, D. R. (1995). Using cognitive theory to explain entrepreneurial risk-taking: Challenging conventional wisdom. Journal of Business Venturing, 10, 425–439.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petrunia, R. (2008). Does Gibrat’s Law hold? evidence from Canadian retail and manufacturing firms. Small Business Economics, 30, 201–214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, B., & Kirchhoff, B. A. (1989). Formation, growth and survival; Small firm dynamics in the U.S. economy. Small Business Economics, 1, 65–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Plehn-Dujowich, J. (2009). A theory of serial entrepreneurship. Small Business Economics, doi:10.1007/s11187-008-9171-5.

  • Reid, G. C. (1995). Early life-cycle behaviour of micro-firms in Scotland. Small Business Economics, 7, 89–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rerup, C. (2005). Learning from past experience: Footnotes on mindfulness and habitual entrepreneurship. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 21, 451–472.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rodriguez, A. C., Molina, M. A., Perez, A. L. G., & Hernandez, U. M. (2003). Size, age and activity sector on the growth of the small and medium firm size. Small Business Economics, 21, 289–307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ronstadt, R. (1986). Exit, stage left: Why entrepreneurs end their entrepreneurial careers before retirement. Journal of Business Venturing, 1(3), 323–338.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ross, G. & D. Preece. (1985). The negative binomial distribution. Statistician, 34, 323–335.

    Google Scholar 

  • Samuelson, P. A. (1967). General proof that diversification pays. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 2, 1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sarasvathy, S. D. (2000). Seminar on research perspectives in entrepreneurship (1997). Journal of Business Venturing, 15, 1–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sarasvathy, S. D. (2001). Causation and effectuation: Toward a theoretical shift from economic inevitability to entrepreneurial contingency. The Academy of Management Review, 26, 243–263.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sarasvathy, S. D., Simon, H., & Lave, L. B. (1998). Perceiving and managing business risks: Differences between entrepreneurs and bankers. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 33(2), 207–226.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schollhammer, H. (1991). Incidence and determinants of multiple entrepreneurship. In N. C. Churchill, W. D. Bygrave, J. G. Covin, D. L. Sexton, D. P. Slevin, K. H. Vesper, & W. E. Wetzel Jr. (Eds.), Frontiers of entrepreneurship research (pp. 11–24). Wellesley: Babson College.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, M., & Rosa, P. (1996). Opinion: Has firm level analysis reached its limits? Time for rethink. International Small Business Journal, 14, 81–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H. A. (1955). On a class of skew distribution functions. Biometrika, 42, 425–440.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H. A., & Bonini, C. P. (1958). The size distribution of business firms. American Economic Review, 58, 607–617.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stam, E., Audretsch, D. B., & Meijaard, J. (2008). Renascent entrepreneurship. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 18(4), 493–507.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stangler, D. & Litan, R. E. (2009). Where will the jobs come from? Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation. http://www.kauffman.org/uploadedFiles/where_will_the_jobs_come_from.pdf. Accessed 23 July 2010.

  • Starr, J., & Bygrave, W. (1991). The assets and liabilities of prior start-up experience: An exploratory study of multiple venture entrepreneurs. In N. C. Churchill, W. D. Bygrave, J. G. Covin, D. L. Sexton, D. P. Slevin, K. H. Vesper, & W. E. Wetzel Jr. (Eds.), Frontiers of entrepreneurship research (pp. 213–227). Wellesley: Babson College.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stewart, W. H., & Roth, P. L. (2001). Risk propensity differences between entrepreneurs and managers: A meta-analysis review. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 145–153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stinchcombe, A. L. (1965). Social structure and organizations. In J. G. March (Ed.), Handbook of organizations (pp. 142–193). Rand McNally: Chicago.

    Google Scholar 

  • Storey, D. (1989). Firm performance and size: Explanations from the small firm sectors. Small Business Economics, 1, 175–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sutton, J. (1997). Gibrat’s legacy. Journal of Economic Literature, 35, 40–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taibleson, M. H. (1974). Distinguishing between contagion, heterogeneity and randomness in stochastic models. American Sociological Review, 39, 877–880.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, R. (1999). The small firm as a temporal coalition. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 11, 1–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ucbasaran, D., Wright, M., & Westhead, P. (2003). A longitudinal study of habitual entrepreneurs: Starters and acquirers. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 15(3), 207–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ucbasaran, D. (2004). Business ownership experience, entrepreneurial behavior and performance: Novice, serial and portfolio entrepreneurs. Unpublished doctoral thesis, Nottingham University Business School.

  • Ucbasaran, D., Westhead, P., Wright, M., & Binks, M. (2006). Habitual entrepreneurs. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ucbasaran, D., Wright, M., & Westhead, P. (2008). Opportunity identification and pursuit does an entrepreneur’s human capital matter? Small Business Economics, 30(2), 153–173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ucbasaran, D., Westhead, P., Wright, M. & Binks, M. (2009). The nature of entrepreneurial experience, business failure and comparative optimism. Journal of Business Venturing, doi: 10.1016/j.jbusvent.2009.04.001.

  • Van Gelderen, M., Van der Sluis, L., & Jansen, P. (2005a). Learning opportunities and learning behaviors of small business starters: Relations with goal achievement, skill development and satisfaction. Small Business Economics, 25, 97–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Gelderen, M., Van der Sluis, L., & Jansen, P. (2005b). Learning opportunities and learning behaviors of small business starters: Relations with goal achievement, skill development and satisfaction. Small Business Economics, 25, 97–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vaupel, J. W., & Yashin, A. I. (1985). Heterogeneity’s ruses: some surprising effects of selection on population dynamics. The American Statistician, 39, 176–185.

    Google Scholar 

  • Viveros, R., Balasubramanian, K., & Balakrishnan, N. (1994). Binomial and negative binomial analogues under correlated Bernoulli trials. The American Statistician, 48, 243–247.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wagner, J. (1992). Firm size, firm growth, and persistence of chance: Testing GIBRAT’s Law with establishment data from Lower Saxony, 1978–1989. Small Business Economics, 4, 125–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weiss, C. R. (1998). Size, growth and survival in the upper Austrian farm sector. Small Business Economics, 10, 305–312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Westhead, P., & Wright, M. (1998). Novice, serial and portfolio founders: Are they different? Journal of Business Venturing, 13, 173–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Westhead, P., Ucbasaran, D., Wright, M., & Martin, F. (2003). Habitual entrepreneurs in Scotland: Characteristics, search processes, learning and performance. Glasgow: Scottish Enterprise.

    Google Scholar 

  • Westhead, P., Ucbasaran, D., Wright, M., & Binks, M. (2005). Novice, serial and portfolio entrepreneur behaviour and contributions. Small Business Economics, 25, 109–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Woo, C. Y., Daellenbach, C, & Nicholls-Nixon, C. (1994). Theory building in the presence of randomness: the case of venture creation and performance. Journal of Management Studies, 31(4), 507–524.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wright, M., Robbie, K., & Ennew, C. (1997a). Serial entrepreneurs. British Journal of Management, 8(3), 251–268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wright, M., Robbie, K., & Ennew, C. (1997b). Venture capitalists and serial entrepreneurs. Journal of Business Venturing, 12(3), 227–249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xekalaki, E. (1983). The univariate generalized Waring distribution in relation to accident theory: proneness, spells or contagion? Biometrics, 39, 887–895.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yang, C., & Huang, C. (2005). R&D, size and firm growth in Taiwan’s electronics industry. Small Business Economics, 25, 477–487.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, J. (2009). The advantage of experienced start-up founders in venture capital acquisition: evidence from serial entrepreneurs. Small Business Economics, doi:10.1007/s11187-009-9216-4.

  • Zhao, H., Seibert, S. E., & Hills, G. E. (2005). The mediating role of self-efficacy in the development of entrepreneurial intentions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 1265–1272.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Professor James G. March for taking the time to give us detailed comments on feedback on an earlier version of this paper and the Darden School Foundation and Batten Institute for funding.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Virginia, Charlottesville, USA

    Saras D. Sarasvathy & Anil R. Menon

  2. Basque Institute of Competitiveness, University of Deusto, Mundaiz 50, 20012, San Sebastián, Spain

    Graciela Kuechle

Authors
  1. Saras D. Sarasvathy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Anil R. Menon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Graciela Kuechle
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Saras D. Sarasvathy.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Sarasvathy, S.D., Menon, A.R. & Kuechle, G. Failing firms and successful entrepreneurs: serial entrepreneurship as a temporal portfolio. Small Bus Econ 40, 417–434 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-011-9412-x

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-011-9412-x

Keywords

JEL Classifications

Search

Navigation