Change search
Refine search result
1 - 6 of 6
CiteExportLink to result list
Permanent link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Rows per page
  • 5
  • 10
  • 20
  • 50
  • 100
  • 250
Sort
  • Standard (Relevance)
  • Author A-Ö
  • Author Ö-A
  • Title A-Ö
  • Title Ö-A
  • Publication type A-Ö
  • Publication type Ö-A
  • Issued (Oldest first)
  • Issued (Newest first)
  • Created (Oldest first)
  • Created (Newest first)
  • Last updated (Oldest first)
  • Last updated (Newest first)
  • Disputation date (earliest first)
  • Disputation date (latest first)
  • Standard (Relevance)
  • Author A-Ö
  • Author Ö-A
  • Title A-Ö
  • Title Ö-A
  • Publication type A-Ö
  • Publication type Ö-A
  • Issued (Oldest first)
  • Issued (Newest first)
  • Created (Oldest first)
  • Created (Newest first)
  • Last updated (Oldest first)
  • Last updated (Newest first)
  • Disputation date (earliest first)
  • Disputation date (latest first)
Select
The maximal number of hits you can export is 250. When you want to export more records please use the Create feeds function.
  • 1.
    Davidsson, Per
    Jönköping University, Jönköping International Business School, JIBS, Business Administration. Australian Centre for Entrepreneurship Research, Queensland University of Technology, Australia.
    Entrepreneurial opportunities as propensities: Do Ramoglou & Tsang move the field forward?2017In: Journal of Business Venturing Insights, ISSN 2352-6734, Vol. 7, p. 82-85Article in journal (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    Ramoglou & Tsang's (R&T) article “A realist perspective of entrepreneurship: Opportunities as propensities” is a recent, potentially influential addition to the literature on “entrepreneurial opportunities”. This short communication argues that R&T's intellectual exercise largely fails to move matters forward on the two most central problems with prior research on “entrepreneurial opportunities”, namely 1) lack of construct clarity and 2) slow progress regarding how characteristics of “entrepreneurial opportunities” give shape to entrepreneurial action and outcomes. I suggest that entrepreneurship researchers should avoid the detour of conceptually dichotomizing complex and empirically non-tractable sets of external circumstances into “opportunities” vs. “non-opportunities” and instead direct attention to multi-dimensional and continuous variation in “those [evolving] entities which entrepreneurs actually evaluate and [sometimes] act upon” (and which should not be mislabeled as “opportunities”). For this endeavor, the notion of “agency-intensity” is the primary take-away from R&T's study.

  • 2.
    Davidsson, Per
    Jönköping University, Jönköping International Business School, JIBS, Business Administration. Australian Centre for Entrepreneurship Research, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
    Opportunities, propensities, and misgivings: Some closing comments2017In: Journal of Business Venturing Insights, ISSN 2352-6734, Vol. 8, p. 123-124Article in journal (Other academic)
  • 3.
    Davidsson, Per
    Jönköping University, Jönköping International Business School, JIBS, Business Administration. Australian Centre for Entrepreneurship Research, QUT, Australia.
    Reflections on misgivings about “dismantling” the opportunity construct2017In: Journal of Business Venturing Insights, ISSN 2352-6734, Vol. 7, p. 65-67Article in journal (Refereed)
  • 4.
    Honig, Benson
    et al.
    McMaster University, DeGroote School of Business, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
    Samuelsson, M.
    Stockholm School of Economics, Stockholm, Sweden.
    Data replication and extension: A study of business planning and venture-level performance2014In: Journal of Business Venturing Insights, ISSN 2352-6734, Vol. 1, no 1-2, p. 18-25Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    We longitudinally examine outcomes of entrepreneurial business planning to assess effectiveness. Both data replication and extension are used to examine previously published research. Our sample consists of 623 nascent ventures that we follow for more than ten years - from 1998 to 2010. Our findings highlight the importance of data replication, data extension, and sample selection bias. We not only add to the debate regarding the merits or liabilities of planning, but also contribute to evaluating normative research and publication standards by reexamining past research using more comprehensive data and an extended time frame.

  • 5. Honig, Benson
    et al.
    Samuelsson, Mikael
    Stockholm School of Economics, Stockholm, Sweden.
    Replication in entrepreneurship research: A further response to Delmar2015In: Journal of Business Venturing Insights, ISSN 2352-6734, Vol. 3, p. 30-34Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    This paper continues our debate examining pertinent issues related to scholarship, in particular, whether matters related to technical rigor eclipse the importance of causality, replicability, or that of underlying statistical and methodological assumptions. We report on specific data findings to further stimulate discussion of these important matters.

  • 6.
    Shim, Jaehu
    et al.
    Australian Centre for Entrepreneurship Research, QUT Business School (Management), Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
    Davidsson, Per
    Jönköping University, Jönköping International Business School, JIBS, Business Administration. Australian Centre for Entrepreneurship Research, QUT Business School (Management), Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
    Shorter than we thought: The duration of venture creation processes2018In: Journal of Business Venturing Insights, ISSN 2352-6734, Vol. 9, p. 10-16Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    This study aims to discern the duration of venture creation processes that end in successful venture emergence as well as those ending with abandonment. Discerning duration is essential to understand a process since every process unfolds over time. However, identifying correct venture creation duration is tricky because available panel data sets in entrepreneurship are length biased toward long duration due to left truncation. In order to adjust this problem, we applied Inverse Probability Weighting (IPW) and analyzed the venture creation duration of 1673 nascent ventures in the Harmonized PSED (Panel Study of Entrepreneurial Dynamics). The weighting analyses for the duration show that the emergence chance is maximized around three months after inception of the process, implying that venture creation in the typical case is faster and simpler than previously believed. Past three months the emergence chance decreases, whereas the abandonment hazard constantly increases over time and surpasses the emergence chance after seven months. The results show that weighing strongly influences duration time estimates and also can influence other estimates based on samples using the same type of sampling mechanism. Thus we conclude that IPW should be considered for all analyses using this type of data. Our study offers a possible interpretation of the different mechanisms of emergence and abandonment and provides guidance and insights for future studies.

1 - 6 of 6
CiteExportLink to result list
Permanent link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf