The Language of Entrepreneurship in Social Sciences

Transcript

1. Aspect ENT CoP – November 2020 Workshop
   The Language of
   Entrepreneurship in Social
   Sciences
   

   View Slide

2. Research Aims
   • Assess the status and
   understanding of
   entrepreneurship in the social
   sciences.
   • Point at gaps and
   approaches to build a
   dialectic within the social
   sciences to encourage more
   multi-disciplinary embrace of
   entrepreneurial activities.
   • Understand the role that
   language plays in the
   engagement of students in
   entrepreneurship: examples
   from Aspect members.
   

   View Slide

3. 1-2 minutes to type in
   the chat:
   •Your own short (one
   sentence) definition of
   “entrepreneurship”
   •Five words you
   associate with
   “entrepreneurship”
   Quick Thoughts!
   

   View Slide

4. • Assumption of a set/uniform definition of
   entrepreneurship = wrong!
   • Definitions and conceptualisations are
   as diverse, ambiguous and complex as
   entrepreneurial activities in themselves.
   • The importance of language goes beyond
   communication:
   • Discourse analysis studies view
   language as not only communicating an
   idea or reality, but also as constructing,
   producing and reproducing the idea in
   itself.
   • The language of entrepreneurship
   (e.g. terms, definitions, visions) not only
   communicates entrepreneurship as a
   practice, but directly constructs and
   shapes entrepreneurship as a
   practice (Berglund and Johansson,
   2007).
   • A discourse analysis study of academic
   publications on entrepreneurship by
   Berglund and Johansson (2007) shows that:
   • Entrepreneurship is spoken of (and
   constructed) as something inherently
   good and also inherent in the human
   spirit/ability towards creativity and
   innovation.
   • There is dominant idealised /
   stereotypical view of the
   “entrepreneur”, automatically ascribing
   to this individual assets and qualities like
   networking, social capital, resources,
   efficiency, managerial etc.
   • Issues: these discourse can alienate
   people who might fill ill-suited and/or
   who can’t resonate with the highlighted
   skills/qualities/assets.
   Literature Review: The Importance
   Language in Entrepreneurship
   

   View Slide

5. • Entrepreneurial language, and
   discourse in general, changes over
   time.
   • On common words over the years:
   ▪ “Opportunity/ies” remains dominant
   ▪ “Marketing” has grown
   ▪ “Bootstrap” has decreased
   ▪ “Big data” and “social media” have
   emerged
   • Notable shifts in overall discourse:
   ▪ From just emphasizing “financial
   value” to also considering “social
   value”
   ▪ From centring the individual to
   underscoring “communities” /
   ”ecosystems”
   Literature Review: Status of Entrepreneurship
   Language
   Source: Roundy, P.T. and Asllani, A., 2019. Understanding the
   language of entrepreneurship. Journal of Economic and
   Administrative Sciences.
   

   View Slide

6. • Original rise of “entrepreneurship” as a set concept was in the 80s in the USA (Pawar, 2013).
   • Reagan era: pro-market values, economic liberalisation trends, individualism.
   • Potentially exported abroad through development finance (re: structural adjustment era) and/or
   through globalisation.
   • The leading social sciences involved in entrepreneurship (i.e. economics) can underestimate the
   importance of contextualised practical knowledge (and by extension, contextualised practical
   language) (Swedberg, 2000).
   • Social sciences like anthropology can provided more grounded knowledge (and by extension,
   language) that resonates with entrepreneurs on-the-ground and their lives.
   • Cultural factors, structural conditions and social values shape engagement and interest in
   entrepreneurship, thus will/should shape its communicative language too.
   • Issue: these trends, factors, conditions and values are not experienced homogenously within
   countries or local communities (i.e. diversity & exclusion issues).
   Literature Review: The Importance of Social,
   Cultural and Political-economic Trends
   

   View Slide

7. Parkinson and Howorth (2018) find that:
   • Social entrepreneurs in the UK
   reappropriate and repackage the
   mainstream language of
   entrepreneurship.
   • Avoid fully adopting the language
   of efficiency, business discipline,
   managerial competence and
   financial independence.
   • Align their language with moral,
   social and local concerns, as well
   as collective action, geographical
   community and local power
   struggles.
   Rindova, Barry and Ketchen (2009) argue
   that:
   • Entrepreneurship functions as an
   “emancipatory process”, and not
   just as a profit-seeking activity.
   • Includes:
   • Pushing to change and create
   new economic, social and
   cultural environments.
   • Seeking autonomy and
   authoring, and making
   declarations.
   • Goals:
   • Break free from authority.
   • Remove perceived constraints.
   Literature Review: Alternative Discourses
   in Entrepreneurship
   Implications: How do students speak about entrepreneurship themselves? Do they use
   mainstream language/discourse, or their own? How does this affect promotional efforts?
   How does it vary across universities?
   

   View Slide

8. Aspect Partner Example: Sussex Start-up
   

   View Slide

9. Aspect Partner Example: LSE Generate
   

   View Slide

10. Any
    questions
    

    View Slide

11. • Berglund, K. and Johansson, A.W., 2007. Constructions of
    entrepreneurship: a discourse analysis of academic publications. Journal of
    Enterprising Communities: People and Places in the Global Economy.
    • Parkinson, C. and Howorth, C., 2008. The language of social
    entrepreneurs. Entrepreneurship and regional development, 20(3), pp.285-
    309.
    • Pawar, P., 2013. Social sciences perspectives on entrepreneurship. Social
    Sciences, 3(9).
    • Roundy, P.T. and Asllani, A., 2019. Understanding the language of
    entrepreneurship. Journal of Economic and Administrative Sciences.
    • Swedberg, R. ed., 2000. Entrepreneurship: The social science view.
    Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    References
    

    View Slide