Upgrade to Pro — share decks privately, control downloads, hide ads and more …

The Language of Entrepreneurship in Social Sciences

Aspect Network
January 24, 2021
460

The Language of Entrepreneurship in Social Sciences

Aspect Network

January 24, 2021
Tweet

Transcript

  1. Aspect ENT CoP – November 2020 Workshop The Language of

    Entrepreneurship in Social Sciences
  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.
  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!
  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
  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.
  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
  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?
  8. Aspect Partner Example: Sussex Start-up

  9. Aspect Partner Example: LSE Generate

  10. Any questions

  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