Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 7(C) (2010) 470–479

International Conference on Learning Diversity 2010

Entrepreneurial Leadership Learning: In Search of Missing Links

Afsaneh Bagheria,*, Zaidatol Akmaliah Lope Pihiea

a
Faculty of Educational Studies,Universiti Putra Malaysia, 43300, Serdang, Selangor, Malaysia

Abstract

The main purpose of this study was to identify the processes of entrepreneurial learning that contribute to university students’
entrepreneurial leadership learning and development. Fourteen undergraduates were purposefully selected as the participants.
Analysis of the data obtained through semi-structured interviews indicated entrepreneurial leadership learning diversity among
the students. Furthermore, social interaction, observation, and reflection emerged as the processes that significantly contribute to
students’ entrepreneurial leadership learning.

© 2010 Published by Elsevier Ltd. Open access under CC BY-NC-ND license.

Key words: Entrepreneurship; Entrepreneurial learning; Entrepreneurial leadership; University students; Interviews

1. Introduction

There exist enormous research findings on providing various learning opportunities in order to develop
entrepreneurial capabilities specifically, entrepreneurial leadership competencies in students (Fayolle & Gailly,
2008; Heinonen & Poikkijoki, 2006; Okudan & Rzasa, 2006; Zhao, Seibert & Hills, 2005). However,
entrepreneurial learning has been mostly limited to learning entrepreneurship theories and at most running small
simulated or real businesses (Plumly et al., 2008; Fayolle, Gailly & Lassas-Clerc, 2006; Zhao, Seibert & Hills,
2005). This is partially due to the lack of specific definition and theoretical foundation for entrepreneurship and
entrepreneurship education (Fayolle & Gailly, 2008; Heinonen; 2007; Hannon, 2006; Henry, Hill & Leitch, 2005).
As such, entrepreneurship has been considered as self-employment. While, there is a consensus among
entrepreneurship scholars on that entrepreneurship is not just running a small business that already exists (Man &
Yu, 2007; Fayolle, Gailly & Lassas-Clerc, 2006; Heinonen & Poikkijoki, 2006; Kuratko, 2005). Rather, it is change
management, creative thinking, opportunity seeking, and innovativeness (Mattare, 2008; Fernald, Solomon &

* Corresponding author. Tel.: 03-89468217; Fax: 03-89435386.

E-mail address: bagheri20052010@hotmail.com

1877-0428 © 2010 Published by Elsevier Ltd. Open access under CC BY-NC-ND license.
doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.10.064
 Afsaneh Bagheri and Zaidatol Akmaliah Lope Pihie / Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 7(C) (2010) 470–479 471

Tarabishy, 2005). Furthermore, this reflects paucity of empirical research on various aspects of entrepreneurial
learning particularly, diversity of entrepreneurship students’ learning processes (Fuchs, Werner & Wallau, 2008;
Heinonen, 2007). As a result, entrepreneurship pedagogy methods are still underdeveloped (Fayolle & Gailly,
2008).
On the other hand, entrepreneurial leadership competencies, defined as the specific leadership capabilities
required for successfully leading competitive and challenging activities, recently emerged as vital in success of
entrepreneurial activities, both in new ventures and in established organizations (Yang, 2008; Fernald, Solomon &
Tarabishy, 2005; Cogliser & Brigham, 2004; Gupta, MacMillan & Surie, 2004). However, there is not enough
information on various learning processes through which individuals learn entrepreneurial leadership competencies
(Kempster & Cope, 2010). In response, this study aimed to explore the neglected aspects of entrepreneurial learning
that contribute to university students’ entrepreneurial leadership learning. This paper begins by describing
entrepreneurial learning definition and nature. It will go on to discuss various components of entrepreneurial
learning. Then, the research methodology and findings are presented. In conclusion, implications of the findings and
areas for further research are detailed.

2. Entrepreneurial learning definition and nature

A review of the literature on entrepreneurial learning indicates that the concept has been defined based on the
acquired knowledge and skills in two stages of entrepreneurship process. First stage is pre-launching where
individuals learn requisite knowledge and competencies for new venture creation and leadership (Heinonen &
Poikkijoki, 2006; Erikson, 2003). Therefore, entrepreneurial learning in this stage is the cognitive processes of
gaining and structuring entrepreneurial knowledge and skills (Rae & Carswell, 2000) and educators attempt to
effectively equip students with theoretical knowledge and practical skills of entrepreneurship (Fayolle & Gailly,
2008; Plumly et al., 2008). Second stage is post-launching where entrepreneurs learn and develop their
competencies through performing different tasks and roles involved in entrepreneurship and facing the challenges
and problems of leading entrepreneurial activities (Kempster & Cope, 2010; Cope, 2005; Politis, 2005; Corbett,
2005; Erikson, 2003; Minniti & Bygrave, 2001). In effect, entrepreneurial learning in post-launching stage reflects
the dynamic processes of acquiring, assimilating, and organizing new information and knowledge and incorporating
them with pre-existing structures in order to successfully leading entrepreneurial routine and strategic tasks and
roles (Holcomb et al., 2009; Rae, 2006; Harrison & Leitch, 2005; Minniti & Bygrave, 2001). Therefore, learning
encompasses acquiring knowledge from past experiences, combining learning from various resources, and
transferring the knowledge and skills to effectively leading entrepreneurial activities (Politis, 2005).
Entrepreneurship training programs at this stage concentrate on equipping entrepreneurs with competencies to
analyze their past experiences specifically their failures and transfer the information and knowledge to effectively
leading their new businesses (Politis & Gabrielsson, 2009).
There is a strong belief among entrepreneurship scholars that entrepreneurial learning is experiential in nature
(Holcomb et al., 2009; Politis & Gabrielsson, 2009; Anderson & Jack, 2008). Meaning that individuals learn
entrepreneurial abilities through directly performing the roles and tasks associated with starting-up and leading
entrepreneurial activities (Kempster & Cope, 2010; Holcomb et al., 2009). Accordingly, most of the entrepreneurial
learning definitions are based on different components of the Kolb’s (1984) experiential learning model including
experimentation, conceptualization, reflection, and experience (Pittaway & Cope, 2007; Cope, 2005; Politis, 2005).
However, there is still little knowledge about different aspects of entrepreneurial learning (Cope, 2005; Corbett,
2005; Harrison & Leitch, 2005; Politis, 2005; Rae & Carswell, 2000) and specifically leadership learning in
entrepreneurial contexts (Kempster & Cope, 2010).

3. Entrepreneurial learning components

While most of entrepreneurship scholars constrained entrepreneurial learning to the knowledge and competencies
acquired from experience, some others considered entrepreneurial learning as a complex process which occurs
472 Afsaneh Bagheri and Zaidatol Akmaliah Lope Pihie / Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 7(C) (2010) 470–479

through various processes such as social interaction and reflection (Pittaway & Cope, 2007). In effect,
entrepreneurial learning happens in a dynamic process of personal interaction with one’s environment (Rae, 2007;
Cope, 2005). This complex interaction shapes and develops entrepreneurial perceptions, attitude, and abilities (Rae
& Carswell, 2000). Similarly, entrepreneurial leadership learning occurs through a social process of acquiring
entrepreneurial qualities (Kempster & Cope, 2010; Gupta, MacMillan & Surie, 2004).
Social interactive learning has influential impacts on enabling entrepreneurs to explore opportunities and cope
with crises of the new business management (Pittaway & Cope, 2007; Heinonen & Poikkijoki, 2006; Corbett, 2005).
Social interaction has also prominent contributions in developing students’ entrepreneurial qualities in pre-launching
stage of new venture creation in many ways. First, social interaction improves students’ self-awareness of their
entrepreneurial capability, their maturity in communication skills and networking, and their ability to apply acquired
knowledge and skills to solve problems (Fuchs, Werner & Wallau., 2008). Second, social interactive learning
enhances students’ entrepreneurial creativity and innovativeness (Ko & Butler, 2007; Rae, 2006). Third, knowledge
and skills acquired from social interactions between various students having different experiences and perspectives
are of a higher level than knowledge and skills acquired by individuals (Pittaway & Cope, 2007). Furthermore,
social interaction creates a synergy between individual and collective learning which makes entrepreneurial learning
more in-depth and longer-lasting (Man & Yu, 2007; Smith, Collins & Hannon, 2006).
Entrepreneurship education programs provide students with various social interaction opportunities through
which they can develop their entrepreneurial competencies in general and entrepreneurial leadership in particular
(Peterman & Kennedy, 2003; Vecchio, 2003). The programs involve students in interaction with teachers and peers
in group activities that improve their affection for entrepreneurial activities and strengthen their perceptions of their
entrepreneurial capabilities (Man & Yu, 2007; Pittaway & Cope, 2007; Heinonen & Poikkijoki, 2006). Accordingly,
Heinonen (2007) emphasizes “it seems extremely useful to have students from different backgrounds in order to
enhance social learning” (p. 319).
In addition to social interaction learning, it is argued that a significant amount of entrepreneurial learning happens
through reflection (Pittaway & Cope, 2007; Heinonen, 2007; Cope, 2005; Cope & Watts, 2000). Reflective learning
is a process of analyzing, interpreting, linking, and consolidating the acquired knowledge and skills from various
resources such as past experiences and social interactions (Pittaway & Cope, 2007). It enables entrepreneurs to
assimilate, reframe, and restructure their vague understanding from different events, gain a higher level of
knowledge through exploring the relationships among various events, and apply the learning outcomes to effectively
managing entrepreneurial activities (Holcomb et al., 2009; Cope, 2003; Cope & Watts, 2000). Reflective learning
creates fundamental changes in entrepreneurs’ self-awareness and management competencies and thereby has the
most significant impact on entrepreneurial learning (Cope, 2003; Cope & Watts, 2000). Therefore, it seems urgent to
improve reflective learning capabilities of entrepreneurs in order to enhance their abilities to successfully lead their
new business venturing (Kempster & Cope, 2010). However, developing students’ abilities to learn through
reflection is one of the most neglected aspects of entrepreneurial learning and has only recently emerged in
entrepreneurship education programs (Pittaway & Cope, 2007; Heinonen, 2007; Smith, Collins & Hannon, 2006).
Drawing upon the literature on entrepreneurial learning and entrepreneurial leadership, this study focused on
identify various entrepreneurial learning processes which contribute to university students’ entrepreneurial
leadership learning and development.

4. Methods

This study employed qualitative research method to investigate the various learning processes that contribute to
university students’ entrepreneurial leadership development (Hindle, 2004). Bouckenooghe et al. (2007) argue that
“at the heart of entrepreneurship lie disjointed, discontinuous and non-linear events that cannot be studied with
methods designed for continuous and linear processes” (P. 168). Moreover, utilizing qualitative research techniques
to gain deeper understanding of learning entrepreneurial capabilities have been suggested by both entrepreneurial
learning scholars (Pittaway & Cope, 2007; Cope, 2003; Cope & Watts, 2000; Rae & Carswell, 2000) and
entrepreneurial leadership researchers (Kempster & Cope, 2010; Swiercz & Lydon, 2002).
 Afsaneh Bagheri and Zaidatol Akmaliah Lope Pihie / Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 7(C) (2010) 470–479 473

Investigating students’ perceptions of their leadership learning was based on the rational that students’
perceptions are a strong indicator of their entrepreneurial behavior; the processes through which they learn and
develop their entrepreneurial leadership competencies (Souitaris, Zerbinati & Al-Laham, 2007). To our knowledge,
this is the first research of its kind that examines various aspects of entrepreneurial leadership learning and
development in an educational context and through students’ perspectives.

4.1 Participants
Fourteen undergraduate entrepreneurial leaders were purposefully selected to participate in this study (Patton,
1990). Undergraduates were selected as the participants based on two important assumptions. First, they are
involved in the process of learning leadership competencies in entrepreneurial contexts. Second, compared to other
university students, undergraduates are the most interested students in new venture creation in the future (Gupta et
al., 2009; Harris & Gibson, 2008; Wu & Wu, 2008). Therefore, they are more likely to be involved in various
entrepreneurial learning processes.
Student entrepreneurial leaders defined for the purpose of this study as successfully holding leadership position
in university entrepreneurship clubs and projects for at least two semesters. This selection criterion ensured that the
students intended to learn and develop their entrepreneurial leadership competencies through active involvement in
leading university entrepreneurship clubs and activities, where entrepreneurial competencies are developed
(Pittaway et al., 2009; Plumly et al., 2008). Furthermore, they were in a position to speak from considerable
experiences in learning leadership through leading various entrepreneurial projects and activities.
Participants were drawn from both public and private universities (two public and two private universities in
central zone of Malaysia) in order to include variety of leadership learning opportunities provided by different
universities (Matlay, 2006). All of the universities provided entrepreneurship courses and activities both in their
curriculum and co-curriculum where the students could experience leadership practices. All of the universities were
involved in entrepreneurship education for more than five years and had established a specific centre for organizing
entrepreneurial programs and activities. The students were identified and invited to participate in this study by the
university entrepreneurship program coordinators.
The majority of the student entrepreneurial leaders were from different education background including
Computer Science, IT business, Business Administration, Creative Multimedia, Landscape Architecture, and
Telecommunication engineering. The average age of the students was 22 years. Of the fourteen students, two were
female and the rest were male. Eight of the students were selected from public universities and six students were
from private universities.

4.2 Data collection

Semi-structured interviews were selected as the most appropriate method for examining various learning
processes through which students develop their entrepreneurial leadership (Kempster & Cope, 2010). The
interviews were conducted at the participants’ universities and focused on identifying students’ entrepreneurial
leadership learning processes. A list of questions on entrepreneurial leadership learning was developed based on
the literature review. This list was given to an “expert panel” consisting of three local university entrepreneurship
and qualitative research lecturers to ensure the content validity of the questions. Pilot interviews indicated that it
was necessary to direct the students to highlight the specific learning opportunities that helped them to develop
their entrepreneurial leadership competencies. The interviews lasted between 50 to 110 minutes and were recorded
on a digital audio recorder. The interviews were transcribed verbatim within 48 hours of the actual interview. The
transcriptions were sent to the respondents for confirming the content validity.

4.3 Data analysis

Analysis of the data for this study conducted utilizing NVIVO 8 software to facilitate organizing and coding of
the data. We analysed the data based on two main phases proposed by Grbich (2007). The first phase was
“preliminary data analysis or during the data collection analysis”. This phase was carried out after each interview
was conducted and aimed at recognizing the emerging entrepreneurial leadership processes, potential themes, gaps
474 Afsaneh Bagheri and Zaidatol Akmaliah Lope Pihie / Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 7(C) (2010) 470–479

in the data, and future research directions. The second phase was “thematic analysis or post data collection
analysis”. This phase was performed once all of the interviews had been conducted and focused on reducing the
data to manageable and meaningful groups, categories, and themes based on research questions. Doing so, we used
two main approaches including “block and file” and “conceptual mapping”. In first phase, we read all interview
transcriptions and underlined the parts where the students described their entrepreneurial leadership learning. Then,
we read the underlined parts of the transcriptions to identify different processes of students’ entrepreneurial
leadership learning. Afterwards, we looked for similarities and differences in the entrepreneurial leadership
learning across the students. Second phase was conducted by “conceptual mapping” where we labelled emerging
issues and identified interconnections between different themes.

5. Findings

Analysis of the data revealed that the students differ in terms of the processes they go through to learn and
develop their competencies of leading entrepreneurial activities. While a majority of the students learned
entrepreneurial leadership by directly performing the real tasks and roles of the leader in university entrepreneurship
clubs and activities, others highlighted different processes for learning entrepreneurial leadership competencies. An
example of learning entrepreneurial leadership by practicing the roles and tasks of the leader is Fareez. When we
asked how he learned to lead the university entrepreneurship club and projects Fareeze replied:
Basically it is learning by doing. Leading the club and projects actually put me in the situation that, OK,…
Fareez, this is your tasks. There is an event that you have to do. This is the objective. This is what we gonna do. Do
it. That’s when I had to learn many skills…to do it. Akhyar replied the same question by explaining his leadership
tasks and roles in two small companies that he had established with the help of the university:
For example, computer business, I have this company and I learned and get some experiences… and leading my
business with my group in producing air pollution systems. So… from there I got involved with all such activities
[and] I developed my leadership a lot.In addition to experiential learning, some of the students noted other learning
processes for their entrepreneurial leadership development. Three dominant processes emerged from the data for
students’ entrepreneurial leadership learning which are: social interaction, observation, and reflection.

5.1 Social interaction and entrepreneurial leadership learning

One of the important processes through which several students developed their entrepreneurial leadership was
interaction with entrepreneurial-minded people including other students, entrepreneurship educators, entrepreneurs,
company mangers, and sponsors. Describing his leadership learning processes, Zakaria highlighted the influential
role of interactions with people in developing his capability to influence them and lead entrepreneurial activities:
The most important [process] is interaction with people and learning how to cope with them. Because certain
people have certain personalities and by understanding their personality…I can really cope with them and I learned
how to work with them. Eza noted the role of interaction and networking with entrepreneurs, businessmen,
company mangers, and policy makers in learning and developing her entrepreneurial leadership skills: I think it is
important when you meet and network with these people who are already businessman and entrepreneurs, all these
big post people like CEOs of big companies. They are from [the] background that they can tell you how actually
they feel. How their real life is. When we meet real people and… [they] tell us how we can improve ourselves and
also the project. In addition to availability, variety and diversity of social interaction learning opportunities played
a critical role in students’ entrepreneurial leadership learning. This variety and diversity of social interactions with
entrepreneurial-minded people from different background, experience, and knowledge created a dynamic synergy
that highly influenced students’ entrepreneurial leadership learning through a process of socialization and
knowledge sharing. Hakim commented on this point as: Interaction with more people. Because when I interact with
many people, I learn things from them. They experienced something and they are willing to share [it]. It gives me
hint and also knowledge and motivates me because I know these people have done it successfully.
 Afsaneh Bagheri and Zaidatol Akmaliah Lope Pihie / Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 7(C) (2010) 470–479 475

5.2 Observation and entrepreneurial leadership learning

One of the emergent themes related to the processes of students’ entrepreneurial leadership development was
learning through observing entrepreneurial activities. In fact, students learned entrepreneurial leadership skills by
directly observing real life of entrepreneurs and other students leading entrepreneurial projects and activities.
However, only some of the students were provided with the opportunity to learn entrepreneurial competencies
through observation. Clive highlighted the influential role of observing real life of entrepreneurs leading their
businesses in fish breading industry in his learning about entrepreneurship:

We went to visit various fish breading sites and then when we could see the actual thing in front of us, we saw
the fish is this big…so I became more curious and learned how they produce the fish…and lead the business. Ariif
explained that by observing other students who lead university entrepreneurial activities, he learned and applied
their leadership skills to lead his own entrepreneurship club “I can see a lot of students here, how they work, how
they are doing it…in the club. I can simulate this in leading my club”.

5.3 Reflection and entrepreneurial leadership learning

Examination of the data revealed reflective learning as a significant process through which students learned and
developed their entrepreneurial leadership. In effect, reflective learning occurred when the students both
individually and in their groups thought deeply about new business opportunity recognition and solving problems of
their current projects as well as their previous challenges and failures. However, only few of the students had the
chance to learn through reflection. At individual level, the students thought back and analyzed their past
performances, problems, and failures and learned how to lead the entrepreneurial activities more effectively. Clive
descried his learning through reflection as: “[facing] any challenge I just go back to the principles and then think
over and over. Why this happened. So next time I don’t make the same mistake again”. Hisyam also explained a
process of learning and improving his leadership skills through reflection on the reasons behind the problems and
failures:
Overcome the failure, I go back to the basic. I trace it back to the zero. For example, I had a failure in
communicating the objectives with my friends. The Medias didn’t come to the [entrepreneurship] seminar during
that time. So I thought where it comes from. I thought what’s wrong with my organizing. What is wrong with my
committee? So I changed the way. Now I give them one week to do the task. I need to follow them and all that.
At group level, the student entrepreneurial leaders conducted some meetings and discussions with their group
members and the other student leaders about the objectives, advantages and disadvantages of their entrepreneurial
projects and activities. During these group meetings, they thought, discussed, and challenged the emerging ideas in
order to improve them so that the projects worked in practice. This process of collective reflection had a prominent
role in building up the students’ leadership skills through leading the sections of discussion and negotiation.
However, only few of the students were involved in well-organized and systematic opportunities of collective
reflection learning. Zakaria explained his group reflection as “We tell our opinions, every people tell[s] and
argue[s]. This is good. This is bad. So the best idea will come. We combine to make the best idea. So we can make a
good business.” The group discussions not only assisted the students to develop better entrepreneurial ideas, but also
improved their capability to consider their group members’ opinions and look at an idea from different perspectives
as Ariz stated:

I express my ideas to…my friends and then they try to improve them. They give some sort of ideas and I try
to make them much better. We discuss on different, different aspects of the ideas. This makes me better in
looking [at] my ideas [from] different views and to accept others’ opinions when they challenge [what] I
suggested.

In addition to selecting entrepreneurship projects, some of the students spoke out a process of group reflection on
their problems and failures in order to find the best way to cope with them. Saif commented on this issue “Our
476 Afsaneh Bagheri and Zaidatol Akmaliah Lope Pihie / Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 7(C) (2010) 470–479

master plan failed…so we backed to the root. We discussed many sections thinking why this happened. We tried to
change it so that we achieve the goals”

6. Conclusion

Most of the robust studies on entrepreneurial learning defined the concept as learning entrepreneurship theories
and running small simulated businesses. As a result, variety of entrepreneurial learning processes has been mostly
overlooked and current entrepreneurship education does not accommodate diversity of entrepreneurial learning
among students (Heinonen, 2007). While, entrepreneurship scholars emphasize that individuals differ in terms of
their entrepreneurial learning processes (Cope, 2005). Focusing on the neglected aspects of entrepreneurial learning,
Pittaway and Cope (2007) include learning through social interaction, and reflection in conceptualization of
entrepreneurial learning.
The main purpose of this study was to recognize different processes of entrepreneurial learning which contribute
to undergraduates’ entrepreneurial leadership learning development. The findings indicate that students differ in
their processes of learning entrepreneurial leadership competencies. While most of the students highlighted
practicing real tasks and roles of the leader in university entrepreneurship clubs and projects as the most influential
process of their entrepreneurial leadership learning, there were other students who learned entrepreneurial leadership
capabilities through social interaction, observation, and reflection. This finding supports diversity of entrepreneurial
learning among students (Heinonen, 2007; Pittaway & Cope, 2007) and necessitates considering this learning
diversity among entrepreneurship students and providing various entrepreneurial learning opportunities in order to
lessen the difficulties of entrepreneurial learning and enable students to learn entrepreneurial leadership (Fayolle &
Gailly, 2008; Mattare, 2008; Heinonen & Poikkijoki, 2006; Okudan & Rzasa, 2006; Zhao, Seibert & Hills, 2005).
Furthermore, several participants emphasized the influential impacts of social interactions with entrepreneurial-
minded people such as other student entrepreneurial leaders, educators, entrepreneurs, company mangers, and
sponsors on their entrepreneurial leadership learning (Pittaway & Cope, 2007; Heinonen & Poikkijoki, 2006). In
addition to availability, variety and diversity of social interactions played a significant role in students’
entrepreneurial leadership learning. The various interactions with entrepreneurial-minded people from different
background, knowledge, and experience created a dynamic synergy that highly influenced students’ entrepreneurial
leadership learning through a process of socialization and knowledge sharing (Kempster, 2009; Fuchs, Werner &
Wallau, 2008; Plumly et al., 2008; Ko & Butler, 2007; Okudan & Rzasa, 2006; Rae, 2006). Accordingly, students
may need to be provided with opportunities in different occasions and contexts to interact with people involved in
entrepreneurial activities (Heinonen, 2007; Pittaway & Cope, 2007; Souitaris, Zerbinati & Al-Laham, 2007; Zhao,
Seibert & Hills, 2005) and learn leadership through “learning networks” (Kempster & Cope, 2010, p. 5) .
Some of the students under this investigation highlighted learning through directly observing real life of
entrepreneurs as well as other students leading entrepreneurial activities as the significant learning process that
developed their entrepreneurial leadership (Holcomb et al., 2009; Kempster, 2009; Souitaris, Zerbinati & Al-Laham,
2007; Zhao, Seibert & Hills, 2005). This observational learning played a key role in shaping students’ understanding
of leadership in entrepreneurial contexts and developing their entrepreneurial qualities (Kempster, 2009; Fuchs,
Werner & Wallau, 2008). However, only some of the students had the opportunity to learn from direct observation.
Furthermore, the findings of the current study revealed that few of the participants learned entrepreneurial
leadership competencies through individual and collective reflection. Meaning that students thought about and
analyzed their performances, new business ideas, and specifically their past challenges and failures individually and
in group discussions. This process of reflective learning had prominent role in developing their entrepreneurial
leadership capabilities by examining the meaning of events, combining and restructuring knowledge and experience
from different events, and applying the acquired knowledge to improve their leadership practices (Politis &
Gabrielsson, 2009; Holcomb et al., 2009; Pittaway & Cope, 2007; Cope, 2003). This confirms previous research
findings indicating the critical role that group discussions and analyzing and challenging entrepreneurship ideas play
in developing students’ entrepreneurial capabilities (Fuchs, Werner & Wallau, 2008). Accordingly, educators might
need to engage students in “meaningful dialogue” and “critical reflection and purposive action with their peers” in
 Afsaneh Bagheri and Zaidatol Akmaliah Lope Pihie / Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 7(C) (2010) 470–479 477

order to develop their entrepreneurial leadership (Kempster & Cope, 2010, p. 5). However, only very few students
had well-organized and systematic opportunities to learn through reflection. In fact, reflective learning has been one
of the most missing processes of entrepreneurial learning (Heinonen, 2007; Smith, Collins & Hannon, 2006).

6.1 Contributions and areas for further studies

The findings of this study contribute to the body of knowledge in entrepreneurial learning and entrepreneurial
leadership learning through looking at the diversity of entrepreneurial leadership learning processes and highlighting
the overlooked aspects of entrepreneurial learning. The findings also assist developing entrepreneurial leadership
learning and development theory through recognizing different processes that contribute to entrepreneurial
leadership learning. Furthermore, the findings might facilitate designing more purposeful and effective
entrepreneurship education programs through including the diversities of learning entrepreneurial competencies
among students and different processes of entrepreneurial leadership learning emerging from this study. However,
further studies can be undertaken to examine how different processes of entrepreneurial learning develop students’
entrepreneurial leadership competencies. Moreover, developing effective methods for embedding entrepreneurial
leadership learning processes in current entrepreneurship education systems which are highly dominated by
traditional methods of entrepreneurship education can be subjected to further investigations (Plumly et al., 2008;
Heinonen & Poikkijoki, 2006; Henry, Hill & Leitch, 2005).

References

Anderson, A. R., & Jack, S. L. (2008). Role typology for enterprising education: The professional artisan? Journal
of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 15(2), 256-273.
Bouckenooghe, D., De Clercq, D., Willem, A., & Buelens, M. (2007). An assessment of validity in entrepreneurship
research. Journal of Entrepreneurship, 16, 147-171.
Cogliser, C. C., & Brigham, K. H. (2004). The intersection of leadership and entrepreneurship: Mutual lessons to be
learned. The Leadership Quarterly, 15, 771–799.
Cope, J. (2005). Toward a dynamic learning perspective of entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship
Theory and Practice, 29(4), 373–397.
Cope, J. (2003). Entrepreneurial learning and critical reflection: Discontinuous events as triggers for ‘higher-level’
learning. Management Learning, 34(4), 429-450.
Cope, J., & Watts, G. (2000). Learning by doing: An exploration of experience, critical incidents and reflection in
entrepreneurial learning. International Journal of Entrepreneurship Behaviour and Research, 6(3), 104-124.
Corbett, A. C. (2005). Experiential learning within the process of opportunity identification and exploitation.
Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 29(4), 473–398.
Erikson, T. (2003). Towards a taxonomy of entrepreneurial learning experiences among potential entrepreneurs.
Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 10(1), 106-112.
Fayolle, A., & Gailly, B. (2008). From craft to science, Teaching models and learning processes in entrepreneurship
education. Journal of European Industrial Training, 32(7), 569-593.
Fayolle, A., Gailly, B. & Lassas-Clerc, N. (2006). Assessing the impact of entrepreneurship education programmes: a
new methodology. Journal of European Industrial Training, 30(9), 701-720.
Fernald, L. W. Jr., Solomon, G. T., & Tarabishy, A. (2005). A new paradigm: Entrepreneurial leadership. Southern
Business Review, 30(2), 1-10.
Fuchs, K., Werner, A., & Wallau, F. (2008). Entrepreneurship education in Germany and Sweden: what role do
different school systems play? Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 15(2), 365-381.
Grbich, C. (2007). Qualitative Data Analysis: An Introduction. London, Thousand Oaks, New Delhi: Sage
Publications, Inc.
Gupta, V. K., Turban, D. B., Wasti, S. A., Sikdar, A. (2009). The role of gender stereotypes in perceptions of
entrepreneurs and intentions to become an Entrepreneur. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 33(2), 397-417.
478 Afsaneh Bagheri and Zaidatol Akmaliah Lope Pihie / Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 7(C) (2010) 470–479

Gupta, V., MacMillan, I. C., & Surie, G. (2004). Entrepreneurial leadership: developing and measuring a cross-
cultural construct. Journal of Business Venturing, 19, 241–260.
Hannon, P. D. (2006). Teaching pigeons to dance: Sense and meaning in entrepreneurship education. Education +
Training, 48(5), 296-308.
Harris, M. L., & Gibson, S. G. (2008). Examining the entrepreneurial attitudes of US business students. Education +
Training, 50(7), 568-581.
Harrison, R. T., & Leitch, C. M. (2005). Entrepreneurial learning: researching the interface between learning and the
entrepreneurial context. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 29(4), 351-371.
Heinonen, J. (2007). An entrepreneurial-directed approach to teaching corporate entrepreneurship at university level.
Education + Training, 49(4), 310-324.
Heinonen, J., & Poikkijoki, Sari-Anne. (2006). An entrepreneurial-directed approach to entrepreneurship education:
mission impossible? Journal of Management Development, 25(1), 80-94.
Henry, C., Hill, F., Leitch, C. (2005). Entrepreneurship education and training: can entrepreneurship be taught?
Education + Training, 47(2), 98-111.
Hindle, K. (2004). Choosing qualitative methods for entrepreneurial cognition research: A canonical development
approach. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 28(6), 575-607.
Holcomb, T. R., Ireland, R. D., Holmes Jr., R. M., & Hitt, M. A. (2009). Architecture of entrepreneurial learning:
Exploring the link among heuristics, knowledge, and action. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 33(1), 167-
192.
Kempster, S.J. & Cope, J. (2010). Learning to lead in the entrepreneurial context. Journal of Entrepreneurial
behaviour and Research, 16(6), 5-34.
Kempster, S. J. (2009). Observing the invisible: Examining the role of observational learning in the development of
leadership practice. Journal of Management Development, 28(5), 439-456.
Ko, S., & Butler, J. E. (2007). Creativity: A key link to entrepreneurial behaviour. Business Horizons, 50, 365–372.
Kuratko, D. F. (2005). The emergence of entrepreneurship education: development, trends, and challenges.
Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 29(5), 577-597.
Man, T. W. Y., & Yu, C. W. M. (2007). Social interaction and adolescent’s learning in enterprise education: An
empirical study. Education + Training, 49(8/9), 620-633.
Matlay, H. (2006). Researching entrepreneurship and education Part 2: what is entrepreneurship education and does it
matter? Education + Training, 48(8/9), 704-718.
Mattare, M. (2008). Teaching entrepreneurship: The case for an entrepreneurial leadership course. USASBE
Proceedings, 78-93.
Minniti, M., & Bygrave, W. (2001). A dynamic Model of Entrepreneurial learning. Entrepreneurship Theory and
Practice, 25(3), 5-16.
Okudan, G. E., & Rzasa, S. E. (2006). A project-based approach to entrepreneurial leadership education.
Technovation, 26, 195-210.
Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods (2nd ed). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications,
Inc.
Peterman, N. E., & Kennedy, J. (2003). Enterprise Education: influencing students’ perceptions of entrepreneurship.
Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 28(2), 129-145.
Pittaway, L, Hannon, P. Gibb, A. & Thompson, J. (2009). Assessment practice in enterprise education. International
Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research, 15 (1), 71-93.
Pittaway, L., & Cope, J. (2007). Simulating entrepreneurial learning: Integrating experiential and collaborative
approaches to learning. Management Learning, 38(2), 211–233.
Plumly, L. W., Marshall, L. L., Eastman, J., Iyer, Stanley, K. L., & Boatwright, J. (2008). Developing entrepreneurial
competencies: A student business. Journal of Entrepreneurship Education, 11, 17-28.
Politis, D., & Gabrielsson, J. (2009). Entrepreneurs’ attitudes towards failure: An experiential learning approach.
International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research, 15(4), 364-383.
Politis, D. (2005). The process of entrepreneurial learning: A conceptual framework. Entrepreneurship Theory and
Practice, 29(3), 399-424.
 Afsaneh Bagheri and Zaidatol Akmaliah Lope Pihie / Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 7(C) (2010) 470–479 479

Rae, D. (2007). Connecting enterprise and graduate employability: Challenges to the higher education culture and
curriculum? Education + Training. 49(8/9), 605-619.
Rae, D. (2006). Entrepreneurial learning: A conceptual framework for technology-based enterprise. Technology
Analysis and strategic Management, 18(1), 39-56.
Rae, D., & Carswell, M. (2000). Using a life-story approach in entrepreneurial learning: the development of a
conceptual model and its implications in the design of learning experiences. Education + Training, 42(4/5), 220-7.
Smith, A.J., Collins, L.A., & Hannon, P. D. (2006). Embedding new entrepreneurship programmes in UK higher
education institutions, challenges and considerations. Education + Training, 48(8/9), 555-567.
Souitaris, V., Zerbinati, S., & Al-Laham, A. (2007). Do entrepreneurship programs raise entrepreneurial intention of
science and engineering students? The effect of learning, inspiration and resources. Journal of Business Venturing,
22, 566–591.
Swiercz, P. M., & Lydon, S. R. (2002). Entrepreneurial leadership in high-tech firms: a field study. Leadership and
Organization Development Journal, 23(7), 380-386.
Yang, Chung-Wen. (2008). The relationships among leadership styles, entrepreneurial orientation, and business
performance. Managing Global Transitions, 6(3), 257–275.
Vecchio, R. P. (2003). Entrepreneurship and leadership: common trends and common threads. Human Resource
Management Review, 13, 303–327.
Wu, S., & Wu, L. (2008). The impact of higher education on entrepreneurial intentions of university students in
China. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 15(4), 752-774.
Zhao, H., Seibert S. E., & Hills, G. E. (2005). The mediating role of self-efficacy in the development of
entrepreneurial intentions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(6), 1265–1272.