The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at

www.emeraldinsight.com/0262-1711.htm

JMD
25,1

An entrepreneurial-directed
approach to entrepreneurship
education: mission impossible?

80

Jarna Heinonen and Sari-Anne Poikkijoki

Small Business Institute, Turku School of Economics and Business Administration,
Turku, Finland
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to explore the entrepreneurial-directed approach to
entrepreneurship education by discussing different teaching techniques aimed at infusing
entrepreneurial skills and behaviour among students in the university setting.
Design/methodology/approach The authors experimented with the entrepreneurial-directed
approach in their university-level teaching, and used a combination of qualitative research methods
and observation techniques to evaluate its feasibility and applicability. Information sources analysed
include written material, e.g. learning diaries provided by the students, teachers observations, and
group discussions during the programme.
Findings The study provides information on recent studies on entrepreneurship emphasising the
core role of opportunity discovering, evaluating and exploiting it and reviews teaching techniques
currently used in entrepreneurship education. The entrepreneurial-directed approach seems to be well
suited to the teaching situation as it encourages students to broaden their perspectives, and also to
develop the entrepreneurial skills and behaviour required for their studies.
Practical implications The paper provides a useful source of information for teachers interested
in developing a more entrepreneurial approach, as well as for academics interested in the substance
and nature of entrepreneurship education. The approach represents an experiential learning challenge
to teachers and students in that it decreases the predictability and control of the teaching situation, on
the other hand, increases the interest in learning and teaching.
Originality/value The value of the approach is in integrating knowledge, experience and action
within one entrepreneurship programme.
Keywords Entrepreneurialism, Education, Experiential learning
Paper type Research paper

Journal of Management Development

Vol. 25 No. 1, 2006
pp. 80-94
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited
0262-1711
DOI 10.1108/02621710610637981

Introduction
Entrepreneurship has been recognised as being of fundamental importance for the
economy (Bruyat and Julien, 2000) due to its considerable macro- and micro-level
effects (Henry et al., 2003). It is maintained to be essential in giving birth to new ideas,
creating new enterprises and jobs, and nurturing the economy as a whole (Hisrich and
OCinneide, 1985).
In describing various changes that have taken place at the global, societal,
organisational and individual levels, Gibb (2002) supports the idea of a macro-micro
spectrum of benefits to be gained from entrepreneurship. Globalisation and global
pressures such as the reduction of trade barriers and advanced telecommunications and
Numerous courses and training programmes attended by one of the authors have inspired and
encouraged them to use the entrepreneurial-directed approach in their entrepreneurship studies.

technology provide more opportunities as well as more uncertainty in the world, and
thus shape government/societal institutions, corporate and independent business, and
individual actors. On the societal level, the dominance of the market paradigm (e.g.
privatisation, deregulation, the creation of markets in public services) implies a stronger
culture of self-help in society. On the organisational level, the impact of restructuring,
downsizing, and the development of strategic partnerships and supply chains, for
example, call for widening the responsibility of management and contribute to the
uncertain climate. Individuals as workers are also facing more responsibility, greater
complexity and more uncertainty. Entrepreneurship and entrepreneurial behaviour thus
touch on a wide range of different actors and stakeholders in the community, and are not
the sole prerogative of business (Gibb, 2002).
Entrepreneurial behaviour has become more and more common, calling for better
entrepreneurial skills and abilities for dealing with current challenges and an uncertain
future. An innovative approach to problem solving, high readiness for change,
self-confidence, and creativity all attributes related to entrepreneurship constitute
a viable platform for economic development in any society. Therefore it has been
maintained that the need for entrepreneurship education has never been greater, and
the opportunities have never been so abundant (Henry et al., 2003).
This structural and attitudinal change has made educational institutions, including
universities, reconsider their role as promoters of entrepreneurship and entrepreneurial
ventures. The objective of this article is to explore the entrepreneurial-directed
approach to entrepreneurship education in the university setting. The learning
objectives of the study programme discussed and analyzed are focused on increasing
understanding and knowledge of entrepreneurship among the students, and thus
infusing their entrepreneurial skills and behaviour as a prerequisite for an
entrepreneurial process. We acknowledge the confusion over entrepreneurship
education and its neighbouring concepts. For the purpose of this article,
entrepreneurship education refers to activities aimed at developing enterprising
or entrepreneurial people and increasing their understanding and knowledge about
entrepreneurship and enterprise (see, for example, Garavan and OCinneide (1994);
Kyro (2003a) for a more detailed discussion). Following Garavan and OCinneide (1994),
we called our experiments the entrepreneurial-directed approach, which depicts best
what we have actually been doing. Our approach is influenced by several other
techniques, including the discovery, experiential, participative and action methods.
The paper is structured as follows: first we discuss entrepreneurial opportunity and
the process as the core of the conceptual framework of entrepreneurship (Shane and
Venkataraman, 2000), and continue by briefly presenting the methodology used in this
case study. Then, given the considerable confusion as to what entrepreneurship
education is (Garavan and OCinneide, 1994; Gorman et al., 1997; Hytti and OGorman,
2004), we review the existing literature in order to understand the aims, objectives and
challenges involved in teaching entrepreneurship as well as the entrepreneurial skills
and behaviour. Bearing in mind these opportunities and challenges, we describe and
examine the entrepreneurial-directed approach we have used in the university setting
by discussing the theoretical basis of the learning objectives, the applications used, and
the results obtained. We conclude by considering the possibilities and constraints of
teaching entrepreneurship in terms of our own experience, and suggest some directions
for new experiments and further research.

Entrepreneurship
education

81

JMD
25,1

82

This article is targeted at teachers interested in developing a more entrepreneurial

approach, as well as at academics considering the substance and nature of
entrepreneurship education.
Entrepreneurship and the entrepreneurial process
There is no single theory of entrepreneurship and the research conducted in the field
has touched on several themes: the theory, types of entrepreneurs, the entrepreneurial
process, organisational forms, the external environment, and outcomes (Ucbasaran
et al., 2001). Researchers have recently shifted their attention away from identifying
people with certain characteristics and personality traits who prefer to become
entrepreneurs, towards understanding the nexus of enterprising individuals and
valuable opportunities (Venkataraman, 1997). This focus demands a deeper
understanding of opportunity in the entrepreneurial process (Eckhardt and Shane,
2002) on which the entire concept is assumed to be based (Shane and Venkataraman,
2000). Entrepreneurship is a process of becoming, and the change involved usually
takes place in quantum leaps in a holistic process in which existing stability
disappears (Bygrave, 1989b). According to Schumpeter (1934), who gave us the modern
version of the entrepreneur as the person destroying the economic order (Bygrave,
1989a), entrepreneurship is about identifying opportunities, creatively breaking
patterns, taking and managing risk, and organising and co-ordinating resources
(Landstrom, 1998; Gibb, 2002). Schumpeter referred to a process one of acting in an
entrepreneurial way not to a person. The process is also emphasised in definitions of
an entrepreneur as a person who perceives an opportunity and creates an organisation
through which to pursue it (Bygrave and Hofer, 1991). Entrepreneurship is about
entrepreneurial individuals interacting with their environment, thus discovering,
evaluating and exploiting opportunities (Shook et al., 2003).
We maintain that entrepreneurship and opportunity exploitation do not necessarily
imply the creation of new firms, but can also take place in existing organisations (see
Shane and Venkataraman, 2000). This brings us to the concept of intrapreneurship,
which is closely related to entrepreneurship, and emphasises the entrepreneurial
process (carrying out new combinations) and innovativeness (Guth and Ginsberg,
1990). Intrapreneurship is defined as entrepreneurship within an existing organisation
regardless of its size referring to emergent intentions and behaviours that deviate
from the customary way of doing business. This process in an existing organisation
creates not only new business ventures, but also other innovative activities (Antoncic
and Hisrich, 2001, 2003, 2004). Even though this article focuses on teaching
entrepreneurship and fostering entrepreneurial skills and behaviour among students,
intrapreneurship is at least implicitly included, as the entrepreneurial process per se is
more or less the same for entrepreneurship and intrapreneurship.
Methodology
This case study is based on one particular programme within university-level
entrepreneurship studies. The authors have experimented with the
entrepreneurial-directed approach in their teaching. A combination of qualitative
research methods and observation techniques were used during and after the
programme in order to evaluate the feasibility and applicability of the approach. All
evaluations even those that appear very objective at the outset are subjective.

Learning about entrepreneurship and learning to become entrepreneurial represent

individual decisions that are always more or less subjective, and a qualitative approach
is needed when programmes are assessed (Hytti and Kuopusjarvi, 2004).
The students were asked at the outset to fill in a form describing their learning
objectives as concretely as they could, as well as to list the potential outcomes that
would indicate that the objectives had been met. They were given these forms back at
the end of the programme, and were asked to reflect on how well the objectives had
been achieved. The writing of personal learning diaries was also an integral part of the
programme, and the diaries gave important information about their learning as well as
about the approach. Finally, the group discussions and exercises that were conducted
during the sessions enabled us to observe the reactions and self-reflection of the
students. All these observations and written material were carefully analyzed in the
context of our approach, and are presented in the following section in order to capture
the subjective mindset of the individual students participating in the programme.
Teaching entrepreneurship and entrepreneurial skills and behaviour
The domain of entrepreneurship education
The growing number of courses and seminars offered by practitioners and universities,
as well as the variety of academic literature and articles that have appeared, are
indicative of the current interest in entrepreneurship and related education (Vesper and
Gartner, 1997; Klofsten, 2000; Solomon et al., 2002; Katz, 2003; Henry et al., 2003).
However, the extent to which entrepreneurship is teachable, or even worth teaching, is
a matter of debate among scholars (Fiet, 2000a; Hynes, 1996). The teaching involves
both arts (e.g. creative and innovative thinking) and sciences (e.g. business and
management competencies) (Rae, 2004; Jack and Anderson, 1999). This suggests the
need for a shift from teaching to learning in an environment as close to real life as
possible. Concrete experience gained through the active participation of students
should be part of the curriculum (Solomon and Fernald, 1991; Gorman et al., 1997).
Given agreement about and understanding of the essence of entrepreneurship, and
the belief that it is possible, at least to some extent, to teach students to become
entrepreneurial, the next step is to recognise the opportunities that open up and the
aims that might be achieved through relevant education (Gorman et al., 1997). The
following objectives have been identified:
.
learn to understand entrepreneurship;
.
learn to become entrepreneurial; and
.
learn to become an entrepreneur.
They usually overlap, but all have their implications in terms of teaching approaches
(Klofsten, 2000; Hytti and OGorman, 2004). Other researchers have suggested similar
categorisations (see Henry et al., 2003). Our attempts to infuse entrepreneurial skills
and behaviour into our students mostly fall into the second category learning to
become entrepreneurial but are also meant to increase their understanding of
entrepreneurship (see Rae, 2000). In the long term, this kind of education may influence
the process of becoming an entrepreneur, but this has not been an explicitly stated
objective in our courses.
Shane and Venkataraman (2000) emphasise the role of opportunity discovering,
evaluating and exploiting it at the core of entrepreneurship. Subsequently Shook

Entrepreneurship
education

83

JMD
25,1

84

Figure 1.
The entrepreneurial
process: behaviours, skills
and attributes

et al. (2003) focused on the individuals role in the entrepreneurial process. Gibb (1993),
on the other hand, defines entrepreneurship as a set of behaviours, skills and attributes
that someone may exhibit. The aim of our entrepreneurship education, as described in
this article, is to integrate the skills and attributes of an entrepreneurial individual with
the entrepreneurial process and related behaviour (Figure 1).
Our entrepreneurial-directed approach
The special challenge of entrepreneurship education is in the facilitation of learning to
support the entrepreneurial process. A typical university setting is unlikely to include
many entrepreneurial elements. Traditional teaching methods, lectures, literature
reviews, examinations and so on do not activate entrepreneurship (see Gibb, 2002;
Sogunro, 2004). Education is often focused on supporting the development of
knowledge and the intellect, whereas entrepreneurship education concentrates on the
human being as a whole (including his or her feelings, values and interests), even in
terms of taking irrational decisions and as part of society at large (Kyro, 2003b). The
budding entrepreneur needs not only knowledge (science), but also new ways of
thinking, new kinds of skills and new modes of behaviour (arts). Traditional teaching
methods have to be complemented with entrepreneurial approaches (Gibb, 1993, 1996,
2002), which essentially include learning by doing and providing opportunities for
students to actively participate in as well as control and mould the learning situation
(Gorman et al., 1997; Fiet, 2000a). The traditional lecture format with all its
predictability may not be the most effective method as it ignores the essence of the
phenomenon, i.e. the entrepreneurial process. Traditional approaches to teaching may,
in fact, inhibit the development of the requisite entrepreneurial attitudes and skills
(Kirby, 2002).
The teaching of entrepreneurship in the university context is based on theoretical
and practical knowledge. What is equally important, however, is the active role of the

student in the learning process. Kyro (2003b) suggests that the bridges between
entrepreneurship and education (pedagogics) should be stronger in order to make the
latter as relevant to the process as to the subject. This individual process is being
encouraged and supported in our teaching within the group context. In the following
section we discuss how our students, through their own insights, learn to understand
and apply theories of entrepreneurship. This discussion is based on the examples that
are more thoroughly presented in the appendices. We think of our teaching of
entrepreneurship as a process that includes different phases (Figure 2). In the
background is Kolbs (1984) experiential learning model, according to which reflective
observation through abstract conceptualisation and active experimentation leads to
concrete personal experience.
In following the ideas of Gibb (2002) promoting multidisciplinary approaches
outside business schools in entrepreneurship education, we have searched for new
teaching techniques and have found an interesting possibility in the
entrepreneurial-directed approach. This involves co-learning between teachers and
students: the student has ownership of her or his learning and the teacher acts as a
supporter and facilitator of the process, a catalyst (Fiet, 2000b). Experience can be
organised on the basis of the theory, and learning will take place as a combination of
theory and experience. Theory can bridge the art and science of entrepreneurship (Jack
and Anderson, 1999). The approach used is not just a technique: it is considered an
elementary part of the experiential learning process (see Rodrigues, 2004). The task of
the teacher is to develop the students abilities to reflect on their own experiences and
put them in a wider context, and to give them the opportunity to make their own
theoretical interpretations (Gibb, 2002).
In the following we take a closer look at our experiments in entrepreneurship
education. As teachers, we have thrown ourselves into the deep end and have trusted
the process.

Entrepreneurship
education

85

Figure 2.
Teaching
entrepreneurship our
entrepreneurial approach

JMD
25,1

86

Experiences from the classroom

Different studies have identified the role of networks, clients and other stakeholders of
an entrepreneur as an important source of learning (Gibb, 1993; Taylor and Thorpe,
2004). The entrepreneurial-directed approach views learning as a process of
co-participation (Taylor and Thorpe, 2004) among entrepreneurial individuals.
Active student participation is a prerequisite, as students are considered subjects
doers and actors: it is supported through the creation of a secure and familiar
atmosphere within the group. Security is fostered through familiarisation and it can be
promoted by different warming-up and group-formation techniques. The activity is
based on the presumption that if you want to make a difference in the classroom, you
need to start differently. For example, the aim of the Morning-carpet activity is to
acquaint the group members with one another and to raise awareness of
entrepreneurship (see Appendix 1). If you are able to get the students moving, you
are likely to move their thoughts as well. It is a question not only of tuning into the
group, but also of introducing basic theories and preconceived ideas about
entrepreneurship and even the feelings it arouses (see Carayannis et al., 2003).
Various sociometric exercises serve this purpose (see Williams, 1995).
Intention is a necessary but not sufficient condition for entrepreneurship, thus some
kind of a triggering event is needed. This may be internal or external, it may be
opportunity- or threat-related, it may originate in technology push or market pull, it
may be transferred from the top down or the bottom up within an organisation, and it
may be the result of conscious search or pure coincidence (Schindehutte et al., 2000). In
the university setting, the triggering event in most cases is an external opportunity of a
certain kind, coming top down from teacher to student. In our view, the acquisition of
deeper knowledge about entrepreneurship and its general relevance in modern society
is a triggering event that gives intention to entrepreneurial endeavours.
In terms of passing down knowledge, we have used more traditional methods:
group work, guest lectures and summary writing. Our students have studied the
literature on changes in the entrepreneurial society from different angles, and have
reflected on the concept of entrepreneurship, the forms it takes and its effects.
Discussions based on guest lectures are also part of our knowledge-based teaching,
making the theory visible in practice (Fiet, 2000a). It is essential to address the question
of what entrepreneurship and entrepreneurial skills and behaviours are. At the same
time this encourages the students to ask: What could this offer me?.
Bearing in mind that entrepreneurship is about exploiting opportunities, we have
risen to the challenge of creating an atmosphere that fosters interest and creativity in
order to give students the possibility to exploit the opportunity to find something new.
By introducing the entrepreneurial-directed approach we have specifically offered
them experiences of what could be open to each and everyone. If we succeed in the
earlier phases in fostering a strong enough intention and a satisfactory knowledge
level, we can move on to the experiential stage. We are aware that there will always be
a number of students who cannot be reached by experiential methods. According to
Blatner (1996), this applies to as many as one fifth of the student population. On the
other hand, we could ask how far and to whom traditional teaching extends (see
Rodrigues (2004) for more on differences between students in learning techniques).
We have used a symbol technique as a test of the understanding of
entrepreneurship (Appendix 2) (see Williams, 1995). The Symbols (e.g. toys, cards)

offer the students a taste of the entrepreneurial process and the possibility to identify
themselves as an entrepreneur of some sort, in that they lead to action and activate
intuitive and innovative thinking (see, for example, Carayannis et al. (2003) on
experimenting creativity and individuality). Careful setting of the questions makes it
possible to assess how the students have adopted the concept of entrepreneurship and
entrepreneurial behaviour, and how the theory works in practice. Judging by the
results, it is then easy later to take up the missing themes, and to reinforce those
already covered.
The entrepreneurial-directed approach gives the student the opportunity to take a
new kind of role and to probe hidden aspects of the self, as role-playing encourages
people to view situations from new perspectives (Sogunro, 2004). The basic idea is that
anyone is capable of entrepreneurial activity once she/he has given her/himself
permission to be brave, creative and innovative. In the classroom situation, students
can test the necessary skills and abilities (see Fiet, 2000b). The selection of techniques
is made according to the objectives, and may have a considerable effect on the learning
results. There are many to choose from. We have used the Aquarium activity to look at
and evaluate entrepreneurial skills, attributes and behaviour, as well as to enable
students to experience different roles (Appendix 3). We also use the Building activity to
explore themes that are closely related to entrepreneurship (e.g. change and
uncertainty), and to exercise getting organised as a team and experiencing the feeling
of achievement (Appendix 4).
The entrepreneurial-directed approach is based on the idea of circles of experiential
learning, in which new activity produces a new experience and new thinking through
reflection. A lesson or teaching period consists of a series of different activities,
between which the instigation of reflection, assessment and thinking are of vital
importance (Jarvinen and Poikela, 2001). According to Mezirow (1991), reflection, as the
basis of adult learning, is a precondition for the formation of ideas and thoughts that
will produce new activity. Assessment can be a joint effort in the form of rounds, pair
discussion or learning diaries. What did I learn? How did the learning happen? What
new questions did it raise? (van Houten, 1995; Petaja and Koponen, 2002). We
encourage students to include reflection in their personal learning diaries, but while the
diaries contain valuable ideas and indispensable feedback to the teachers, individual
reflection is often too shallow and it does not influence, and is not influenced by, the
group.
It is of vital importance to include the sharing and drawing of conclusions in the
entrepreneurial-directed approach, and thus to discuss the learning objectives, the
process, the experience and the results in a final group session. The final group
debriefing is an essential element: What was it all really about? What then? (Fiet,
2000b). The discussions pave the way for the next action phase. We have not yet gone
as far as assessment of the action phase because this would mean observing student
behaviour over a longer time-span, preferably in work life. We have, however, asked
the students to make an action plan for themselves indicating the steps they would
now take in their attempts to act in a more entrepreneurial way.
According to the student feedback, the entrepreneurial-directed approach is well
suited for gaining a better understanding of the concept of entrepreneurship, especially
about the importance of the entrepreneurial process. Perhaps the most interesting
finding is that students consider entrepreneurial behaviour to be useful in their current

Entrepreneurship
education

87

JMD
25,1

88

studies regardless of the subject, as it is considered a useful way of working in any

context. This gives us some indication that our programme has been able to guide the
students along the road to entrepreneurship.
Discussion
This article discusses entrepreneurship education in the university context. As far as
we are concerned, entrepreneurship is based on the entrepreneurial process and on the
prerequisite individual entrepreneurial behaviours, skills and attributes. We have tried
to facilitate in the classroom the kind of learning that would support the
entrepreneurial process by integrating the entrepreneurial-directed approach into
traditional ways of learning working alongside or even replacing them. Our starting
point is that the teacher also has to act in an entrepreneurial way in discovering
opportunities and innovatively exploiting them.
We have noticed during our experiments that the phases are not sporadic, but are
integral parts of three processes: the entrepreneurial process, the experiential-learning
process and the entrepreneurial-directed approach. We have recognised the
organisation and integration of these processes only by throwing ourselves into the
experiments. The separate exercises have become gradually interlinked in a holistic
learning process in which both teacher and students can together show active goal
consciousness, discover opportunities and meet challenges, and learn to enjoy
uncertainty. Teaching and learning entrepreneurial behaviour is not only about and for
entrepreneurship (i.e. understanding and acting), but also about having an opportunity
to experience it in the classroom setting. The value of our approach is in integrating
knowledge, experience and action within one entrepreneurship programme.
Our programme is one of evolution and dynamism. The process of throwing oneself
in at the deep end is a challenge of experiential learning to all involved (Leitch and
Harrison, 1999). However, these are at best only flimsy experiences of the
entrepreneurial process, and there will be a need in the future to discover and use a
wider selection of exercises to support the different phases, especially that of
entrepreneurial action. The emphasis should be on the exploitation of opportunities to
promote long-lasting entrepreneurial behaviour rather than one-off experiences.
So far, our work has been restricted to producing the triggering event and the basic
knowledge of entrepreneurship, and to offering experience of the entrepreneurial
process. Our experiments do not cover assessment of whether our teaching has been
able to produce entrepreneurial activity, since we have rather been involved in actions
promoting opportunity search and discovery, and the decision to exploit it. The
integration of the exploitation phase and, in particular, deeper evaluation of the results
would be interesting, particularly in the light of the discussion initiated by
Czarniawska (2003). She looks critically at the relation between the knowledge taught
in universities (the rationality myth) and the polyphonic reality by constructing a
typology of elements of the controlled and desirable reality and the perceived and
ambiguous reality. Her ideas are also applicable to the teaching of entrepreneurship.
How can we get students to understand the entrepreneurial way and to distinguish
between that and the perceived ideals? Gibb (2002) presents a corresponding typology
of how bodies teaching entrepreneurship aim at analytical and rational problem
solving through which they describe the ideal reality of entrepreneurship. In practice,
however, it emerges as the ambiguous and individually constructed reality that

Czarniawska describes, in which the individuals own assessment and interpretation

have a decisive role (see also Shook et al., 2003). Supporting the ideas, assessments and
interpretations of students is the core challenge for the teacher. This inevitably leads to
the loss of predictability and, to some extent, of control of the teaching situation, and is
a courageous leap away from the traditional approach. On the other hand, interest in
learning and teaching increases (Fiet, 2000b).
On the basis of our experiments, the entrepreneurial-directed approach would seem
to be well suited to the teaching of entrepreneurship and entrepreneurial skills and
behaviour. Encouraging and positive feedback from the students have justified the
approach. In addition, it would seem that it clearly enhances group formation, thus
providing a solid basis for further action in terms of getting entrepreneurially
organised within a team. Individual learning does not take place in a vacuum, and is
usually associated with the activities of the group, the organisation, and even of society
(Jarvinen and Poikela, 2001). Thus far our experiments have been mainly restricted to
the individual level, although in the group setting. The organisational setting, i.e.
getting organised within a team as a small business, is a tempting area for further
experimentation.
Entrepreneurship, entrepreneurial behaviour and related theories have comprised
the learning objectives of our students. Intrapreneurship, as a closely related concept, is
also built on the entrepreneurial process. This is why we assume that the approach and
techniques we have used might also be suited to the teaching of intrapreneurship. We
will continue our experiments in the belief that they will carry us through and bring
added value and enjoyment to learning and its facilitation. Critical assessment and
reflection in terms of the results achieved will direct our work and open up new
educational avenues. Are we embarking upon a mission impossible in trying to foster
entrepreneurship among the students by infusing their entrepreneurial skills and
behaviour in the university setting? We do not think so, but it is definitely an
entrepreneurial mission.
References
Antoncic, B. and Hisrich, R.D. (2001), Intrapreneurship: construct refinement and cross-cultural
validation, Journal of Business Venturing, Vol. 16 No. 5, pp. 495-527.
Antoncic, B. and Hisrich, R.D. (2003), Clarifying the intrapreneurship concept, Journal of Small
Business and Enterprise Development, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 7-24.
Antoncic, B. and Hisrich, R.D. (2004), Corporate entrepreneurship contingencies and
organizational wealth creation, Journal of Management Development, Vol. 23 No. 6,
pp. 518-50.
Blatner, A. (1996), Acting-in. Practical Applications of Psychodramatic Methods, 3rd ed., Springer
Publishing, New York, NY.
Bruyat, C. and Julien, P.-A. (2000), Defining the field of research in entrepreneurship, Journal of
Business Venturing, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 165-80.
Bygrave, W.D. (1989a), The entrepreneurship paradigm (I): a philosophical look at its research
methodologies, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Vol. 14 No. 1, pp. 7-26.
Bygrave, W.D. (1989b), The entrepreneurship paradigm (II): chaos and catastrophes among
quantum jumps?, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Vol. 14 No. 2, pp. 7-30.
Bygrave, W.D. and Hofer, C.W. (1991), Theorizing about entrepreneurship, Entrepreneurship
Theory and Practice, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 13-22.

Entrepreneurship
education

89

JMD
25,1

90

Carayannis, E.G., Evans, D. and Hanson, M. (2003), A cross-cultural learning strategy for
entrepreneurship education: outline of key concepts and lessons learned from a
comparative study of entrepreneurship students in France and the US, Technovation,
Vol. 23 No. 9, pp. 757-71.
Czarniawska, B. (2003), Forbidden knowledge. Organization theory in times of transition,
Management Learning, Vol. 34 No. 3, pp. 353-65.
Eckhardt, J.T. and Shane, S.S. (2002), Opportunities and entrepreneurship, Journal of
Management, Vol. 29 No. 3, pp. 333-49.
Fiet, J.O. (2000a), The theoretical side of teaching entrepreneurship, Journal of Business
Venturing, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 1-24.
Fiet, J.O. (2000b), The pedagogical side of entrepreneurship theory, Journal of Business
Venturing, Vol. 16 No. 2, pp. 101-17.
Garavan, T.N. and OCinneide, B. (1994), Entrepreneurship education and training programmes:
a review and evaluation part 1, Journal of European Industrial Training, Vol. 18 No. 8,
pp. 3-12.
Gibb, A.A. (1993), The enterprise culture and education. understanding enterprise education
and its links with small business, entrepreneurship and wider educational goals,
International Small Business Journal, Vol. 11 No. 3, pp. 11-34.
Gibb, A.A. (1996), Entrepreneurship and small business management: can we afford to neglect
them in the twenty-first century business school?, British Journal of Management, Vol. 7
No. 4, pp. 309-21.
Gibb, A.A. (2002), In pursuit of a new enterprise and entrepreneurship paradigm for learning:
creative destruction, new values, new ways of doing things and new combinations of
knowledge, International Journal of Management Review, Vol. 4 No. 3, pp. 233-69.
Gorman, G., Hanlon, D. and King, W. (1997), Some research perspectives on entrepreneurship
education, enterprise education and education for small business management: a ten-year
literature review, International Small Business Journal, Vol. 15 No. 3, pp. 56-77.
Guth, W.D. and Ginsberg, A. (1990), Guest editors introduction: corporate entrepreneurship,
Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 11 No. 4, pp. 5-15.
Henry, C., Hill, F. and Leitch, C. (2003), Entrepreneurship Education and Training, Ashgate,
Aldershot.
Hisrich, R.D. and OCinneide, B. (1985), The Irish Entrepreneur: Characteristics, Problems and
Future Success, University of Limerick, Limerick.
Hynes, B. (1996), Entrepreneurship education and training introducing entrepreneurship into
non-business disciplines, Journal of European Industrial Training, Vol. 20 No. 8, pp. 10-17.
Hytti, U. and Kuopusjarvi, P. (2004), Evaluating and Measuring Entrepreneurship and Enterprise
Education: Methods, Tools and Practices, Small Business Institute, Turku School of
Economics and Business Administration, Turku.
Hytti, U. and OGorman, C. (2004), What is enterprise education? An analysis of the objectives
and methods of enterprise education programmes in four European countries, Education
Training, Vol. 46 No. 1, pp. 11-23.
Jack, S.L. and Anderson, A.R. (1999), Entrepreneurship education within the enterprise culture:
producing reflective practitioners, International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour
& Research, Vol. 5 No. 3, pp. 110-25.
Jarvinen, A. and Poikela, E. (2001), Modelling reflective and contextual learning at work,
Journal of Workplace Learning, Vol. 13 Nos 7/8, pp. 282-9.

Katz, J.A. (2003), The chronology and intellectual trajectory of American entrepreneurship
education 1876-1999, Journal of Business Venturing, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 283-300.
Kirby, D. (2002), Entrepreneurship education: can business schools meet the challenge?, paper
presented at the RENT XVI Conference, Barcelona, 21-22 November.
Klofsten, M. (2000), Training entrepreneurship at universities: a Swedish case, Journal of
European Industrial Training, Vol. 24 No. 6, pp. 337-44.
Kolb, D. (1984), Experiential Learning. Experience as the Source of Learning and Development,
Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Kyro, P. (2003a), Conceptualising entrepreneurship education the current state and some
future expectations, paper presented at the Internationalizing Entrepreneurship
Education and Training Conference, Grenoble, 7-10 September.
Kyro, P. (2003b), Entrepreneurship pedagogy the current state and some future expectations,
paper presented at the 3rd European Summer University, Paris, 26 June-3 July.
Landstrom, H. (1998), The roots of entrepreneurship research, paper presented at the RENT XII
Conference, Lyon, 26-27 November.
Leitch, C.M. and Harrison, R.T. (1999), A process model for entrepreneurship education and
development, International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research, Vol. 5 No. 3,
pp. 83-109.
Mezirow, J. (1991), Transformative Dimensions of Adult Learning, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco,
CA.
Petaja, M. and Koponen, E. (2002), Muutosprosessin ohjaaminen (Facilitating Change Process),
Dialogia, Helsinki.
Rae, D. (2000), Understanding entrepreneurial learning: a question of how, International
Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research, Vol. 6 No. 3, pp. 145-59.
Rae, D. (2004), Entrepreneurial learning: a narrative-based conceptual model, paper presented
at the Institute for Small Business Affairs 27th National Conference, Newcastle Gateshead,
2-4 November.
Rodrigues, C.A. (2004), The importance level of ten teaching/learning techniques as rated by
university business students and instructors, Journal of Management Development,
Vol. 23 No. 2, pp. 169-82.
Schindehutte, M., Morris, M.H. and Kuratko, D.F. (2000), Triggering events, corporate
entrepreneurship and the marketing function, Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice,
Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 18-30.
Schumpeter, J.A. (1934), The Theory of Economic Development, Harvard University Press,
Cambridge, MA.
Shane, S. and Venkataraman, S. (2000), The promise of entrepreneurship as a field of research,
Academy of Management Review, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 217-26.
Shook, C.L., Priem, R.L. and McGee, J.E. (2003), Venture creation and the enterprising individual:
a review and synthesis, Journal of Management, Vol. 23 No. 3, pp. 379-99.
Sogunro, O.A. (2004), Efficacy of role-playing pedagogy in training leaders: some reflections,
Journal of Management Development, Vol. 23 No. 4, pp. 355-71.
Solomon, G.T. and Fernald, L.W. Jr (1991), Trends in small business management and
entrepreneurship education in the United States, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice,
Vol. 15 No. 3, pp. 25-39.

Entrepreneurship
education

91

JMD
25,1

92

Solomon, G.T., Duffy, S. and Tarabishy, A. (2002), The state of entrepreneurship education in
the United States: a nationwide survey and analysis, International Journal of
Entrepreneurship Education, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 65-86.
Taylor, D.W. and Thorpe, R. (2004), Entrepreneurial learning: a process of co-participation,
Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 203-11.
Ucbasaran, D., Westhead, P. and Wright, M. (2001), The focus of entrepreneurial research.
Contextual and process issues, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, Vol. 25 No. 4,
pp. 57-80.
van Houten, C. (1995), Awakening the Will. Principles and Processes in Adult Learning, Adult
Learning Network, Danewood Press, Haywards Heath.
Venkataraman, S. (1997), The distinctive domain of entrepreneurship research: an editors
perspective, in Katz, J. and Brockhaus, R. (Eds), Advances in Entrepreneurship,
Emergence, and Growth, Vol. 3, JAI Press, Greenwich, CT, pp. 119-38.
Vesper, K.H. and Gartner, W.B. (1997), Measuring progress in entrepreneurship education,
Journal of Business Venturing, Vol. 12 No. 5, pp. 403-21.
Williams, A. (1995), Visual and Active Supervision. Roles, Focus, Technique, W.W. Norton
& Company, New York, NY.
Appendix 1. The Morning-carpet activity
Learning objective
To become visible in the group, to assert the right to be acknowledged in the group as a whole
person (including feelings, values and interests) and to raise self-awareness about
entrepreneurship.
Instructions
Students take their place on the floor on an imagined morning carpet, on an extended
continuum. Question (e.g.): What is your attitude towards entrepreneurship? Those who are
very enthusiastic take their place at one end of the carpet, and those who feel negative or irritated
go to the other end. Everyone is asked briefly to share his or her thoughts. The question ideally
touches on entrepreneurship and entrepreneurial behaviour.
Theoretical basis
The concept and phenomenon of entrepreneurship.
Student experience
The morning carpet is usually well liked because it gives everybody an opportunity to voice their
thoughts and preliminary perceptions about entrepreneurship and to become acquainted with
the group.
Appendix 2. Symbols
Learning target
To show how the concept of entrepreneurship has been internalized and to offer a taste of the
entrepreneurial process to each participant, as throwing oneself into the deep end is part of it: to
offer participants the opportunity to identify themselves as an entrepreneur of some kind.
Instructions
A large number of different small objects (toys, decorations, magnets), post cards or specific
symbol cards are spread on the table, from where, after the briefing, the participants go and pick
their own intuitively. They are briefed to look for something in the objects, that would best

describe them as entrepreneurial actors, for example. Each one gives a short presentation in a
small or the large group on what motivated his or her own choice.

Entrepreneurship
education

Theoretical basis
The concept and phenomenon of entrepreneurship, entrepreneurial behaviour, and
self-identification as an entrepreneur.
Student experience
The task was fun and made everyone in the group participate, which seldom happens in other
lecture courses. . . I think this activity was a nice way of getting something personal out of
everyone and everyones perceptions about entrepreneurship.
Appendix 3. Aquarium
Learning objective
To critically look at and evaluate entrepreneurial skills, attributes and behaviour, to experience
different roles in entrepreneurship, and to get organised in a team.
Instructions
The group is divided into two. One half stays inside the aquarium and the other is sent out. The
group staying inside (the observation group) gets the briefing papers. The other group (the task
group) wait outside. The observation group are asked to choose a fairy tale, story or situation, on
which the other group prepares a presentation. The observation group are briefed about
observing, and each member observes one named person in terms of entrepreneurial skills,
attributes and behaviours. The task group are called in and briefed as follows: You are expected
to prepare a 5-10-minute presentation of X. You have 15 minutes for planning. Our task is to
observe the planning and preparation process, so please speak loudly enough. The time begins
now. The preparation and presentation phases follow and then the observation group gives
tete-a`-tete feedback to the people they have observed. At the end there is a general discussion on
the elements of entrepreneurship, the emergence of leadership, the different roles assumed by
people, the functioning of the group, and the factors that tied people to the group or made them
separate from it.
Theoretical basis
Entrepreneurial skills, attributes and behaviour.
Student experience
I received the kind of feedback on my active participation and generation of innovative ideas that
seemed to fit into the general picture.
Most of all I was impressed by how accurate the personal assessments of my entrepreneurial
behaviour were, even if the time available for observation was only some 15 minutes.
Appendix 4. Building activity
Learning objective
To experience the different roles, skills and behaviours that are required in entrepreneurship
and to understand themes closely associated with it (e.g. change, control of uncertainty, team
work, commitment): getting organised as a team and building up a spirit of achievement
within it.
Instructions
A lot of newspapers and tape are needed. The participants are divided into small groups, each of
which is instructed to build one of the following:

93

JMD
25,1

.
.
.

94

a bridge that can carry a fairly heavy book;

a man-high tower that can stand without support; or
a vessel with a funnel and a bridge.

The groups do not know the others tasks. The facilitator moves the group members randomly
between the teams in order to create feelings of change and uncertainty. Strict time limit is set for
the activity.
Theoretical basis
Entrepreneurial behaviour and skills, change and tolerance of uncertainty, entrepreneurial
teams.
Student experience
This clearly showed that a human being is more committed to a project if she/he has participated
in its planning and realisation her/himself.
Corresponding author
Jarna Heinonen is the corresponding author and can be contacted at: jarna.heinonen@tukkk.fi

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com

Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints