Applying the Practice–Based Method in Teaching Entrepreneurship: The Case of the MSc in Business & Entrepreneurship at TU Dublin

‘Since we live in an age of innovation, a practical education must prepare a [wo]man for work that does not yet exist and cannot yet be clearly defined’ - Peter Drucker Following reviews of the relevant IEET (Innovation, Entrepreneurship Education & Training) literature and after assessing current thinking and practice in the domain, it was concluded that, in the absence of empirical evidence in favour of a particular pedagogical approach, that a portfolio of coordinated practice-based methods is an appropriate approach for developing value-based learning outcomes at this time (2019). These pedagogical approaches focus on students’ attempts to discover, create and capture value by experiencing, playing, observing, creating and thinking reflectively and not just understanding, knowing and talking as in more traditional approaches (Neck & Greene, 2011). This innovative approach will be demonstrated (in terms of specifying learning outcomes) utilising the flagship MSc (Business & Entrepreneurship) programme in the Technological University Dublin which has adopted this approach successfully since 2014. The paradigmatic approach applies equally to novice and expert and thus applies across student populations. It is inclusive and therefore success is both idiosyncratic and multidimensional. It requires continuous practice; do – reflect - learn and not learn-do as in traditional approaches. Reflective practice thus becomes increasingly important for developing learning outcomes. The approach proposed is therefore particularly suitable for unpredictable environments .The teacher is empowered to experiment with a pedagogical portfolio that emphasises diverse tools and techniques. These approaches are broken down into five discrete primary pedagogies – Starting Businesses (Practice – experiencing/feeling); Serious Games and simulations (Play); Observation (Field trips and research); Design – based learning (Create, Co-create) and Reflective Practice (Deep learning, Marton, 1975) (i.e. reflection - on - practice, reflection- in- practice (Schon, 1987). Expected learning outcomes then are based on the students’ attempts to create value by experiencing, playing, observing, creating and thinking. Each learning outcome depending on the pedagogical approaches utilised. Learning outcomes can be stated in tangible terms. These learning outcomes can be delivered on other programmes by improved Programme/Course design, support for staff (upskilling) and appropriate value-based assessment criteria

Beyond Beautiful*- Why Citizens are Comparatively Happier, More Prosperous, More Peaceful, More Democratically Engaged and Less Selfish Living in Smaller States

Half of all sovereign states in the world have a population of less than 6.2m (World Bank, 2014). The mainstream literature in most academic disciplines has chosen, by accident or design, to neglect the unique determinants of small state growth and development (Armstrong & Read, 2003; Read, 2014). These are extraordinary omissions when the collective evidence on the performance of smaller states on a wide range of economic, political, cultural and social indices is considered. Apart from the disproportionate representation that small states enjoy in the World Banks Upper-Middle and High Income categories, many small states also feature in the higher reaches of the World Banks Human Development Indicators (HDI) (Read, 2014). Indeed smaller developed states, particularly northern European ones dominate the top rankings in the more specific development indices such as those in Knowledge economy, peace, contribution to the planet, wellbeing and globalisation. The evidence is suggesting that there is something unique about the growth and development model of the smaller state. Indeed smaller states possess levels of social capital which positively impact on the quality of governance, allowing for proactive and inclusive policy formulation and execution. Successful small sovereign states have accepted that history and geography is not necessarily destiny as they exploit the strategic flexibility afforded by small size (Breznitz & Zimmerman, 2008; Baldacchino & Bertram, 2009). The inferences drawn from the current body of evidence, particularly the worldwide governance indicators (World Bank, 2014) and the work of Rodrik, (2008); Acemoglu et al, (2012) for example is that good governance and institutional quality are important factors driving the smaller states high performance thereby helping the smaller state to compensate for its small size, insularity and peripherality. Other salient factors differentiating between the performance of smaller states (and under- performing larger states) is the greater separation of the governed from the government (Kohr, 1957), the lower levels of exposure in larger states to global economic changes and the opportunity for small states to benefit from ‘free riding’ on defence spending (Read, 2014). Politicians, policy makers and citizens in larger states, autonomous regions and sub-national jurisdictions should take cognisance of the significance of the data ‘hidden in plain view’ (Tobin & Dobard, 2011). *The title in this proposal is derived from the title of the seminal book by Schumacher (1973). Schumacher, E. F. (1973). Small is beautiful: a study of economics as if people mattered. Blond & Briggs Ltd. However it is important to record that the term ‘Small is Beautiful’ is attributed to Leopold Kohr (1909-1994) Schumacher’s mentor and friend. http://www.nytimes.com/1994/02/28/obituaries/dr-leopold-kohr-84-backed-smaller-states

Towards Entrepreneurial Learning Outcomes in Business Education and Beyond – Next Practice? Design & Guidance

High growth economies can be differentiated from low growth economies by their high investment in knowledge, low knowledge filter and high levels of entrepreneurial capital. These states help create entrepreneurial capital by providing their citizens with opportunities to learn to be more enterprising in their pursuit of value creation and capture. What should be taught, how and what are the appropriate learning outcomes of entrepreneurship education and training (EET) then become the relevant questions. This paper reviews the relevant EET literature, assesses current thinking and practice and concludes, in the absence of empirical evidence in favour of a particular pedagogical approach, that a portfolio of practicebased methods is an appropriate approach to developing value-based learning outcomes at this time. These pedagogical approaches focus on students’ attempts to create and capture value by experiencing, playing, observing, creating and reflective thinking, and not just understanding, knowing and talking as in more traditional approaches (Neck and Greene 2011). The paper concludes by suggesting a framework for assisting the leadership group in DIT in developing appropriate entrepreneurial learning outcomes at Institute, College, School, Programme and Module levels

Towards Entrepreneurship Learning Outcomes in Business Education and Beyond: Next Practice? Design and Guidance

High growth economies can be differentiated from low growth economies by their high investment in knowledge, low knowledge filter and high levels of entrepreneurial capital. These states help create entrepreneurial capital by providing their citizens with opportunities to learn to be more enterprising in their pursuit of value creation and capture. What should be taught, how and what are the appropriate learning outcomes of entrepreneurship education and training (EET) then become the relevant questions. This paper reviews the relevant EET literature, assesses current thinking and practice and concludes, in the absence of empirical evidence in favour of a particular pedagogical approach, that a portfolio of practicebased methods is an appropriate approach to developing value-based learning outcomes at this time. These pedagogical approaches focus on students’ attempts to create and capture value by experiencing, playing, observing, creating and reflective thinking, and not just understanding, knowing and talking as in more traditional approaches (Neck and Greene 2011). The paper concludes by suggesting a framework for assisting the leadership group in DIT in developing appropriate entrepreneurial learning outcomes at Institute, College, School, Programme and Module levels

University-based Technology Start-up Incubators – Evaluating their contribution to the co-production of knowledge, innovation and growth. Experience from the Edge

Policy makers in developed economies see merit in supporting the innovative abilities of technology entrepreneurs. It is hoped that from these highly–educated entrepreneur(s), new technology and service–based firms (NTBFs) can emerge. Indeed empirical evidence suggests that it is fast-growing young innovative firms which provide the bulk of new employment growth (Henrekson & Johansson, 2010; Storey & Greene, 2010). Start-up incubators are one of a number of micro-policy interventions with which states attempt – primarily through publically funded higher education Institutions - to support technology entrepreneurs to develop and commercialise their innovations. Incubator numbers have grown globally from their first appearance in the US in the 1950’s (for urban renewal purposes) to over 2,300 in the US and Europe currently. Since 2000, the number of incubators in US has almost trebled whilst the number in Europe has more than doubled (Bruneel et al, 2012). This latter growth has been driven primarily by technology start-up incubators, with these university – based incubators seen as important growth engines for developing knowledge economies and local and regional economic development (Etzkowitz et al. 2000, Link & Siegel, 2007). Technology start –up incubators are typically located in or near universities as they generally fall under the universities knowledge transfer remit. They typically focus on the research strengths of the university and offer a range of services to academic entrepreneurs and other incubatees such as shared office accommodation, shared support services, business support (hard), business advice (soft) and network provision (Bergek & Norman, 2008). Incubation programmes attempt to contribute to enterprise sustainability and the professional and entrepreneurial development of participants through buffering, which protects participants from the external environment (for a defined period), enabling them to develop their own internal resources; and bridging, which facilitates firms in building sustainable competitive advantage through the acquisition of external resources and networks (Amezcua et al. 2013). ). This paper outlines the methodological and data-related challenges associated with attempting to evaluate the contribution of start-up incubator services and supports to value-adding outputs, outcomes and impact. It advocates theory-based evaluation (TBE) methodology as a possible solution for effective evaluation (and policy learning) in complex research settings such as this, where a study is unable for a variety of reasons, to meet the stringent requirements of an experimental design e.g. random assignment, establishment of counterfactuals, control groups etc. TBE will deliver findings on the contribution of the multiple factors influencing a result showing whether the incubation process in a study made a contribution to an observed result and in what way? Mixed methods research designs and data analysis approaches are particularly suitable for TBE studies. An exploratory case study is used to illustrate the proposed TBE approach

The contribution of higher education-based technology start-up incubators to the co-production of knowledge, innovation and growth: Experiences from the edge

Start-up incubators are one of a number of micropolicy interventions used by states to support their technology entrepreneurs. Since 2000, the number of incubators in the United States has almost trebled while that in Europe has more than doubled. This article outlines the challenges involved in attempting to evaluate the contribution of the higher education technology start-up incubator process. It advocates theory-based evaluation (TBE) methodology as a possible solution for effective evaluation (and policy learning) in complex research settings such as this, where a study is unable, for myriad reasons, to meet the stringent requirements of experimental research design. TBE delivers findings on the contribution of the multiple factors influencing a result, thus showing whether the incubation process made a contribution to an observed result and in what way. An exploratory case study is used in this article to illustrate how the proposed TBE approach could work

Teacherpreneurs: From Vocation to Innovation

The global market for e-learning is projected to reach $255 billion by 2017 with a compound growth average of 23% since 2012 (GSV Advisors, 2012). The shift towards digital learning has attracted a wave of digital entrepreneurs who are creating e-learning content, learning platforms, educational apps and online marketplaces. Nowhere is this more evident than in the online \u27K-12\u27 market (50 per cent share of the global e-learning market). The term K-12 refers to 12 years of formal primary and secondary education from kindergarten (K) or nursery – essentially pre-university level education. The purpose of this paper is to investigate the motivations and processes underpinning the launch of online ventures by enterprising teachers in the K-12 industry. Teacherpreneurship (teacher-driven entrepreneurship) is yet to attract significant academic interest and this exploratory study hopes to contribute to knowledge in this emerging field by considering the knowledge from a value creation and capture perspective. The research utilises a multiple case studies approach (Yin, 2014) to try and identify patterns that underlie the practice of teacherpreneurship. The importance of studying this phenomenon lies in the pursuit of solutions to problems of access to K-12 education for children in developing and developed worlds. It also comes at a critical time when internet and communication (Digital) technologies are irreversibly disrupting the traditional education landscape for good. Simply put, learning is increasingly moving online and teacherpreneurs – with their knowledge and experience of curriculum development, learning/teaching methodologies, assessment strategies and learning outcomes – are seen as important conduits of innovation in this new education landscape. The study finds that intrinsic motivation is a major influence on teacherpreneurial behavior. Push factors such as dissatisfaction with the state of the traditional education industry are found to be a contributing influence but not a dominant one. In terms of the entrepreneurial process then, the cross-case analysis also finds that the discovery of opportunities is in all cases fortuitous and that the opportunity is exploited using an effectual approach. Finally, the research offers pragmatic guidance for nascent teacherpreneurs contemplating a start-up venture in the e-learning market space

An Exploratory Study of the Role and Contribution of University Knowledge Transfer Offices (KTOs) in Knowledge Transfer and Value Creation

Developed European countries place emphasis on innovation as an important growth driver. Higher educational institutions, within these developed countries, actively participate in regional economic initiatives to proactively transfer and commercialise knowledge to business and society. This knowledge transfer is now performed in a more direct way than heretofore and the commercialization remit is now regarded as the Universities 3rd mission. This is in addition to its traditional remits of education and research. This study explores the effectiveness of the University knowledge transfer process and the contribution that knowledge transfer offices play in knowledge transfer and commercialisation (Value creation). This study uses exploratory in-depth interviews of selected knowledge transfer professionals across the EEA (European Economic Area) to identify the perceived value contributing aspects of the knowledge transfer process and also to evaluate the role and contribution of the Knowledge Transfer office itself in that process.The research finds that: Research institutions in the EEA have between 10 and 25 years in knowledge and technology transfer utilising a systematic approach through a KTO system. The research suggests that the time is appropriate for Universities to recognise knowledge transfer as a ‘mission critical’ activity (3rd mission) in their wider societal remit and that they should therefore prioritise funding for these activities accordingly. Evidence so far suggests that this 3rd mission has yet to achieve’ parity of esteem’ within Universities. The more successful KTOs perform important boundary–spanning roles for the University by marketing the knowledge production skills and abilities in their HEI whilst establishing deep links with indigenous industry and also by attracting multinational clients and projects. This requires the leadership and staff in successful KTOs to possess high levels of cognitive, contextual and organisational ambidexterity. Although difficult, there is also a need to develop appropriate transnational evaluative measures of the output, outcomes and impact for University knowledge transfer processes in the short, medium and long term. Theory–based evaluation utilising a balanced scorecard of evaluative measures (Hard & Soft, Short & Long term) is a methodological approach which can help policymakers and University management to obtain a ‘true and fair’ view of the contribution of the knowledge transfer process to value creation

Using Sequential Mixed Methods to Evaluate the Contribution of Absorptive Capacity (ACAP)

How might Absorptive Capacity (ACAP) (Cohen & Levinthal 1990,,Song et al. 2018) contribute to indigenous firm innovation and growth and how might the effects of this construct be evaluated at both firm and policy level? This paper demonstrates how a mixed methods research design and data analysis strategy can address the research question outlined above. Within the ‘mixed methods’ research genre, the design approach argued for here is for a ‘sequential mixed methods research’ approach. This is where one methodology is followed sequentially by another to add robustness to the overall findings from a study. The approach can also be described as a multi-phase research design depending on the number and type of research techniques utilised. Adopting this methodology however allows for data triangulation possibilities as the combination of archival data (secondary) and interview data (primary) gives complementary perspectives on the same proprietary dataset of cases (n=20)(Eisenhardt1989). Combining this triangulation of data with the proposed methodological triangulation can further strengthen the internal validity of the overall findings in the study. The data analysis strategy suggested here employs firstly an exploratory cross – case analysis (Yin 2018), using thematic coding (Saldana 2013) to identify the underlying ACAP mechanisms at play. This is then followed sequentially by a Qualitative Comparative Analysis (Rihoux and Ragin 2009). QCA is a data analysis technique which is used for determining which logical conclusions a data set supports. This proposed research design is applicable to complex research settings where a study can deliver findings on the ‘contribution’ of mechanisms underpinning ACAP (Cordero & Ferreira 2019), to the innovation and growth performance of the firm rather than assigning precise ‘attribution’ or impact measures to individual factors or variables