Start-Up and Small Business Life

Reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-15347-6_466
  • 32 Downloads

Synonyms

General Look

Start-ups and small businesses (SU&SB) refer to entrepreneurial businesses, with a focus on the early stages that hinge on innovation and provide new, wide-ranging value to their environment, including customers, suppliers, community, investors, etc. SU&SB are deemed promising trajectories to development and growth in business terms as well as within communities, both regional and global, by introducing innovation, creating new jobs, using advanced technology, facilitating upward social mobility, and stimulating innovative strategies and technologies. These are typically carried out by small teams, with constrained resources in a highly competitive environment.

SU&SB develop in dynamic environments with changing needs, among them unmet problems and new desires. Tackling such needs and desires invigorates the search for opportunities.An opportunity is a...
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Alvarez SA, Young SL, Woolley JL. Opportunities and institutions: a co-creation story of the king crab industry. J Bus Ventur. 2015;30(1):95–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Arend RJ. Entrepreneurship and dynamic capabilities: how firm age and size affect the ‘capability enhancement–SME performance’relationship. Small Bus Econ. 2014;42(1):33–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Arend RJ, Sarooghi H, Burkemper A. Effectuation as ineffectual? Applying the 3E theory-assessment framework to a proposed new theory of entrepreneurship. Acad Manag Rev. 2015;40(4):630–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Austin J, Stevenson H, Wei-Skillern J. Social and commercial entrepreneurship: same, different, or both? Entrep Theory Pract. 2006;30(1):1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Baker T, Nelson RE. Creating something from nothing: resource construction through entrepreneurial bricolage. Adm Sci Q. 2005;50(3):329–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Barney J. Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. J Manag. 1991;17(1):99–120.Google Scholar
  7. Baron RA, Mueller BA, Wolfe MT. Self-efficacy and entrepreneurs’ adoption of unattainable goals: the restraining effects of self-control. J Bus Ventur. 2016;31(1):55–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Boeker W, Wiltbank R. New venture evolution and managerial capabilities. Organ Sci. 2005;16(2):123–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bullough A, De Luque MS, Abdelzaher D, Heim W. Developing women leaders through entrepreneurship education and training. Acad Manag Perspect. 2015;29(2):250–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Colombo MG, Piva E. Strengths and weaknesses of academic startups: a conceptual model. IEEE Trans Eng Manag. 2008;55(1):37–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Deligianni I, Voudouris I, Lioukas S. Do effectuation processes shape the relationship between product diversification and performance in new ventures? Entrep Theory Pract. 2017;41(3):349–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Desa G, Basu S. Optimization or bricolage? Overcoming resource constraints in global social entrepreneurship. Strateg Entrep J. 2013;7(1):26–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Eisenhardt KM, Martin JA. Dynamic capabilities: what are they? Strateg Manag J. 2000;21:1105–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Fisher G. Effectuation, causation, and bricolage: a behavioral comparison of emerging theories in entrepreneurship research. Entrep Theory Pract. 2012;36(5): 1019–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Frederiksen SH. Entrepreneurship education as identity workspace. Acad Manag Proc. 2016;2016(1):12509. Academy of ManagementCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Garcia-Castro R, Aguilera RV. Incremental value creation and appropriation in a world with multiple stakeholders. Strateg Manag J. 2015;36(1):137–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Granovetter M. The impact of social structure on economic outcomes. J Econ Perspect. 2005;19(1):33–50. Hanks, 2015CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hanks GF, Bonaparte ES. Sbdc Maximum Business Series: A Framework for Developing a Successful Innovative Entrepreneur Education Program. J Bus and Entrep. 2015;26(3):163–187.Google Scholar
  19. Hashai N, Buckley PJ. Is competitive advantage a necessary condition for the emergence of the multinational enterprise? Glob Strateg J. 2014;4(1):35–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Huang L, Knight AP. Resources and relationships in entrepreneurship: an exchange theory of the development and effects of the entrepreneur-investor relationship. Acad Manag Rev. 2017;42(1):80–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Huang KF, Dyerson R, Wu LY, Harindranath G. From temporary competitive advantage to sustainable competitive advantage. Br J Manag. 2015;26(4):617–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kellermanns F, Walter J, Crook TR, Kemmerer B, Narayanan V. The resource-based view in entrepreneurship: a content-analytical comparison of researchers’ and entrepreneurs’ views. J Small Bus Manag. 2016;54(1):26–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Keyhani M, Lévesque M, Madhok A. Toward a theory of entrepreneurial rents: a simulation of the market process. Strateg Manag J. 2015;36(1):76–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kuratko DF. The emergence of entrepreneurship education: development, trends, and challenges. Entrep Theory Pract. 2005;29(5):577–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lechner C, Dowling M. Firm networks: external relationships as sources for the growth and competitiveness of entrepreneurial firms. Entrep Reg Dev. 2003;15(1): 1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lofstrom M, Bates T, Parker SC. Why are some people more likely to become small-businesses owners than others: entrepreneurship entry and industry-specific barriers. J Bus Ventur. 2014;29(2):232–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Mankevich V, Holmström J. Gateways to digital entrepreneurship: investigating the organizing logics for digital startups. Acad Manag Proc. 2016;2016(1):13995. Academy of ManagementCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Matlay H. Researching entrepreneurship and education: Part 2: what is entrepreneurship education and does it matter? Educ Train. 2006;48(8/9):704–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. McMullen JS, Kier AS. Trapped by the entrepreneurial mindset: opportunity seeking and escalation of commitment in the Mount Everest disaster. J Bus Ventur. 2016;31(6):663–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Miller D, Le Breton-Miller I. Underdog entrepreneurship: A model of challenge-based entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice 2017;41(1):7–17.Google Scholar
  31. Nabi G, Liñán F, Fayolle A, Krueger N, Walmsley A. The impact of entrepreneurship education in higher education: a systematic review and research agenda. Acad Manag Learn Educ. 2016;  https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2015.0026.
  32. Nambisan S, Baron RA. Entrepreneurship in innovation ecosystems: entrepreneurs’ self-regulatory processes and their implications for new venture success. Entrep Theory Pract. 2013;37(5):1071–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Partanen J, Chetty SK, Rajala A. Innovation types and network relationships. Entrep Theory Pract. 2014;38(5):1027–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Perry JT, Chandler GN, Markova G. Entrepreneurial effectuation: a review and suggestions for future research. Entrep Theory Pract. 2012;36(4):837–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Peteraf M, Di Stefano G, Verona G. The elephant in the room of dynamic capabilities: bringing two diverging conversations together. Strateg Manag J. 2013;34(12): 1389–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Politis D. The process of entrepreneurial learning: a conceptual framework. Entrep Theory Pract. 2005;29(4): 399–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Ray G, Barney JB, Muhanna WA. Capabilities, business processes, and competitive advantage: choosing the dependent variable in empirical tests of the resource-based view. Strateg Manag J. 2004;25(1):23–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Sarasvathy SD. Causation and effectuation: toward a theoretical shift from economic inevitability to entrepreneurial contingency. Acad Manag Rev. 2001;26(2): 243–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Sarasvathy S, Kumar K, York JG, Bhagavatula S. An effectual approach to international entrepreneurship: overlaps, challenges, and provocative possibilities. Entrep Theory Pract. 2014;38(1):71–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Sarooghi H, Libaers D, Burkemper A. Examining the relationship between creativity and innovation: a meta-analysis of organizational, cultural, and environmental factors. J Bus Ventur. 2015;30(5):714–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Shaikh F. The benefits of new online (digital) technologies on business: understanding the impact of digital. Digit Entrep Global Innov. 2016;1:1–17Google Scholar
  42. Shane S, Venkataraman S. The promise of entrepreneurship as a field of research. Acad Manag Rev. 2000;25(1):217–26.Google Scholar
  43. Shepherd DA. Learning from business failure: propositions of grief recovery for the self-employed. Acad Manag Rev. 2003;28(2):318–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Stinchfield BT, Nelson RE, Wood MS. Learning from Levi-Strauss’ legacy: art, craft, engineering, bricolage, and brokerage in entrepreneurship. Entrep Theory Pract. 2013;37(4):889–921.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Suddaby R, Bruton GD, Si SX. Entrepreneurship through a qualitative lens: insights on the construction and/or discovery of entrepreneurial opportunity. J Bus Ventur. 2015;30(1):1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Teece DJ, Pisano G, Shuen A. Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strateg Manag J. 1997;18: 509–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Townsend DM, Busenitz LW. Turning water into wine? Exploring the role of dynamic capabilities in early-stage capitalization processes. J Bus Ventur. 2015;30(2):292–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Ucbasaran D, Westhead P, Wright M, Flores M. The nature of entrepreneurial experience, business failure and comparative optimism. J Bus Ventur. 2010;25(6): 541–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Welter C, Mauer R, Wuebker RJ. Bridging behavioral models and theoretical concepts: effectuation and bricolage in the opportunity creation framework. Strateg Entrep J. 2016;10(1):5–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Wincent J, Thorgren S, Anokhin S. Costly ties: social capital as a retardant of network-level entrepreneurial orientation. J Small Bus Manag. 2016;54(1):229–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Witt P. Entrepreneurs’ networks and the success of start-ups. Entrep Reg Dev. 2004;16(5):391–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Zahra SA. Entrepreneurship and disciplinary scholarship: return to the fountainhead. In: Handbook of entrepreneurship research. New York: Springer; 2005. p. 253–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Zahra SA, Gedajlovic E, Neubaum DO, Shulman JM. A typology of social entrepreneurs: motives, search processes and ethical challenges. J Bus Ventur. 2009;24(5):519–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Zhang SX, Cueto J. The study of bias in entrepreneurship. Entrep Theory Pract. 2017;41(3):419–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Zollo M, Winter SG. Deliberate learning and the evolution of dynamic capabilities. Organ Sci. 2002;13(3): 339–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Entrepreneurship and InnovationThe College of Management, Academic StudiesRishon LezionIsrael

Section editors and affiliations

  • Evangelos (Vangelis) Grigoroudis
    • 1
  1. 1.Decision Support Systems Laboratory, School of Production Engineering and ManagementTechnical University of CreteChaniaGreece