Search results

When it comes to undergraduate education, the terms “innovation” and “entrepreneurship” are often used interchangeably with respect to curricular practices and their associated learning and developmental outcomes. The purpose of this paper is to chart a course through the vast and growing multidisciplinary literature covering both topics to argue that innovation and entrepreneurship are not only different concepts, but they also play out in postsecondary institutional contexts in different and important ways.

Based on these differences, the authors propose that developing innovators must precede teaching future entrepreneurs and that the home of innovation education is not necessarily in the business school at all. Ideally, the authors believe innovation should be taught separately from any one disciplinary context. To illustrate the concept, the authors point to an existing program where professors and students from different disciplines work together on actual problems provided by external clients from both the public and private sectors.

Based on the authors’ rationale and approach, the authors propose an agenda that would allow for a deep analysis of the interaction between organizational behaviors and student outcomes, providing insight into effective practices and strategies for mobilizing institutional efforts aimed at teaching innovation and better aligning innovation with entrepreneurship education.

The authors provide a clear rationale for separating innovation and entrepreneurship pedagogy in higher education, terms that have been conflated in literature and in practice for nearly a century. The authors do this in an original way by pairing a theoretical framework with a short case study of an education program that has developed innovation pedagogy at the undergraduate level.

Leader self-efficacy (LSE) is a construct studied in adults and college students which is associated with leader emergence, individual performance, and group performance.However, to date, it has not been heavily examined in youth.Therefore, a five-item youth LSE scale was created which can aid in further research of this construct.This holds significant implications for future educational initiatives, research, and the development of the next generation of leaders.

This paper provides an analytical theory of appropriateness judgments that introduces structural dimensions in the study of social rationality of organization members. This approach helps explore the coevolution of members’ relative position in structure and normative choices in their organization. Illustration of this approach is based on the study of controversial judicial decisions and dynamics of advice networks in a courthouse where lay judges have to choose between punitive and nonpunitive awards in cases of unfair competition in business. In this case, coevolution is facilitated by an endogenous process of centralization–decentralization–recentralization of advice networks over time, and by use of a procedural “weak legal culture” that helps align and homogenize conflicting normative choices among organization members. It is suggested that this approach to social rationality helps revisit our understanding of social processes, in this case collective learning and secondary socialization in organizations and flexible labor markets.

This chapter describes current trends in academic leadership in the Nordic context, also prevalent in other Western societies. There has been a gradual but steady move toward more top-down leadership approaches resulting in the erosion of collegiality and decentralized decision-making. This is a paradox given the increasing complex and volatile environment under which higher education institutions operate, where more rather than less decentralization is thought to be beneficial in fostering responsiveness and agility. By drawing upon developments in Nordic higher education, this chapter sheds light on the consequences associated with the widespread and uncritical adoption of individual leadership approaches and provides conceptual insights and empirical evidence toward embracing more systemic and organic approaches centered on resilient or adaptive leadership postures and structures.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate how technological innovations mitigate inefficiencies in marketing channels in the context of microfinance markets in emerging markets. By examining in detail, specific market inefficiencies that inhibit the efforts of micro and small enterprises to access microfinance in emerging markets and the use of technology to alleviate these failures, the authors bridge the literatures on marketing channel inefficiencies and technological innovation relevant to emerging markets.

The authors use a qualitative method in the form of phenomenological interviews and participant observation in Ghana, West Africa, to investigate the research question.

The three themes that arise from the findings are: channel structure and structure selection; power-dependence relationships and relational outcomes; and conflict mechanisms and control behaviors. Customerization of technology is observed to mitigate inefficiencies in mobile marketing channels by facilitating data sharing, reminders, peer referencing and other marketing strategies of awareness, affordability, access and scalability.

The limitations of this study are the fact that the context of the study is only one emerging market country – Ghana. This market is however experiencing dynamic changes in mobile technology innovations that is revolutionizing the microfinance industry.

Mobile money innovations have advanced the scope of marketing channels to the point that an updated perspective of the role of mobile technology in mitigating marketing channels inefficiency is both appropriate and timely.

The authors make the contribution of customerization as an aspect of mobile technology that is a key enabler in microfinance marketing channels, serving to mitigate microfinance market inefficiencies. Additionally, the study augments theories on the marketing channels framework by contributing perspectives on mobile technology.

Organization theory seeks to explain how people coordinate their behaviors to achieve common objectives, but it has offered little insight into how organizations emerge from such coordination. Fully understanding entities requires knowing their origins. The purpose of this paper is to draw attention to and to suggest an approach for fortifying a foundational weakness in organization theory: pre-organization theory.

To develop pre-organization theory, this paper employs an evolutionary approach that integrates three theories. This paper first employs memetics to articulate a unit of selection, the i-memeplex, and next introduces inducement-contribution theory to tailor the i-memeplex to pre-organization, yielding a founder’s mental map for exchanges of inducements and contributions. It then applies generalized Darwinism to complete its evolutionary theory of pre-organization.

Memetics, inducement-contribution theory, and generalized Darwinism can be integrated to create a promising theoretical solution, but further investigation is needed to assess the empirical and practical value of pre-organization theory.

This paper contributes to organization theory by (1) explicating a foundational weakness in organization theory – its lack of pre-organization theory – and (2) integrating a novel set of theories to develop an evolutionary theory of pre-organization.

This paper develops a framework for understanding history as a source of competitive advantage. Prior research suggests that some firms enjoy preferential access to resources as a result of their past. Historians, by contrast, understand past events as more than an objective account of reality. History also has an interpretive function. History is a social and rhetorical construction that can be shaped and manipulated to motivate, persuade, and frame action, both within and outside an organization. Viewed as a malleable construct, the capacity to manage history can, itself, be a rare and inimitable resource.