1042-2587© 2009 Baylor University
Commentary: On theIntegration of StrategicManagement andEntrepreneurship: Viewsof a Contrarian
G. Dale Meyer
“Nescire autem quid ante quam natus sis acciderit, id est semper esse puerum. Quidenim est aetas hominis, nisi ea memoria rerum veterum cum superiorum aetatecontexitur? (To be ingorant of what occurred before you were born is to remainalways a child. For what is the worth of human life, unless it be woven into the life of our ancestors by the records of history?)” —Cicero: Oratur ad M. Brutum
A new generation now leads. President Barack Hussein Obama straddles what Tom Brokawcalled the “greatest generation” and the Baby Boomers (b. 1946–1964). Academia is nowpopulated by “Millenials” (b. 1980–2000) and increasingly led by Generation X (b. 1960–1980). This Commentary purposively intends to create deeper conversation about the originsand tendencies in the small but interesting academic discipline of entrepreneurship. I acceptmy role as an aging curmudgeon and hope that you will also. My intent is to surface severaloperative ideologies, reveal a few egoistic tendencies, and perfectly (quack, quack) predictthe future of academic entrepreneurship. Please place this Commentary in your 2039 tickler file titled “foolhardy predictions from 2009.”
“One must be as humble as the dust before he can discover truth.” —Mahatma Ghandi
I
nitially, there was a laconic discussion on the relationship between strategic man-agement (SM) and entrepreneurship. But the conversation rose to a high pitch after theturn of the twenty-first century. An assiduous strategy was designed and implemented toincorporate entrepreneurship as the province of SM. Baker and Pollock in 2007 argue the
fait accompli
as follows:It appears to us that strategy is succeeding in its
takeover
of the academic field of entrepreneurship. It is doing this by
acquiring
entrepreneurship’s most importantassets—faculty members. . . Following on the heels of a popular edited volume titled
Strategic Entrepreneurship: Creating a New Mindset in 2002
(Hitt, Ireland, Camp, &Sexton, 2002), the Strategic Management Society (SMS) announced a new journal
Please send correspondence to: G. Dale Meyer, tel.: 303-442-4319;e-mail: g_dalemeyer@yahoo.com.
January, 200985
ET
&
titled
Strategic Entrepreneurship
. . . Others have expressed outrage and argued for establishing entrepreneurship as a research domain that is distinct from other socialsciences—especially strategy (e.g., Shane & Venkataraman, 2000; Venkataraman,1997). But we are less worried by such concerns and doubtful anyway that such handwringing, however theoretically nuanced, is likely to have much effect (Baker &Pollock, 2007, pp. 297–298).As the author Kurt Vonnegut said so often, “and so it goes.”As mentioned by Baker and Pollock previously, the SMS earlier created a newStrategic Entrepreneurship Division, the membership of which overlaps with the leader-ship of the Strategy and Policy Division of the Academy of Management (AOM). Thearticles for the first three volumes of the new
Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal
(SEJ) are papers that were presented at an invited entrepreneurship research conference in May2007 from which papers presented were chosen for the first three volumes of the SEJ in2008. The first two issues have hit the academic mailboxes. Editors Schendel and Hittwrote the introduction to Volume One stating “In particular, the SEJ as a sister publicationof the SMJ [Strategic Management Journal], will use the same standards that have movedthe SMJ to the forefront of management publications” (Schendel & Hitt, 2007, p. 1). Iassume that these standards are the normal science-logical positivist paradigm.My design for this essay is to place the SMS actions in a historical context and tostimulate discussion on how the SMS “takeover” will affect the academic field of entre- preneurship in the future. First, my antithetical essay will set the scene by highlightinghistorical events and a few of the many courageous pioneers who have forged the present academic entrepreneurship revolution. Obviously something of significant valuewas created by pathfinding entrepreneurship scholars that motivated the current SMSleadership to mobilize their “acquisition.” Next, I will elucidate the persistent strategiesthat have been implemented by the SMS to “acquire” the domain of entrepreneurship.Then, I will apply a dose of common sense to reason through what could be the para-digmatic and epistemic outcomes of the SMS decisions. After that, I will present evi-dence that in the past SM and entrepreneurship have shared several research andteaching “intersections” (interfaces), but that
integration
has been the exception rather than the rule. Finally, my crystal ball will be utilized to predict (perfectly, of course)what the next 20 years of academic entrepreneurship teaching and research willengender.
A Selective Overview of Historical Events That EstablishedEntrepreneurship as an Attractive Takeover Target for the StrategicManagement Nobility
Entrepreneurship scholarship is
not
a recent phenomenon (examples, Cole, 1968;Collins & Moore, 1970). The historical interest in entrepreneurs and entrepreneurship isvast. This overview of the courage and dedication that established the foundation of academic entrepreneurship exists in numerous documents available to all. My intention inthis section of my essay is to focus on the academic entrepreneurs who were the firstmovers and who, while often jeopardizing their careers, persisted in nurturing the bountythat SM scholars have allegedly “acquired.” My idealistic hope is that the SMS takeover team will internalize Newton’s humble assertion “If I have seen further it is by standingon the shoulder of giants.” I apologize in advance to those academic entrepreneurship
86
ENTREPRENEURSHIP
THEORY and PRACTICE
pioneers who are not mentioned in this essay. I respect each and every founder who made
of 00
Meyer ETP Article January 2009(3)
211 Reads
Info and Rating
| Category: | Uncategorized. |
| Rating: | |
| Upload Date: | 12/01/2009 |
| Copyright: | Attribution Non-commercial |
| Tags: |
Leave a Comment