Research practices in entrepreneurship: problems of definition, description and meaning.

Anderson, Alistair R.; Starnawska, M.

Abstract

The dominant paradigm of entrepreneurship research practices, positivism, has brought about a fundamental paradox: researchers often try to analyse a phenomenon that cannot properly be defined. As a result, much entrepreneurship research is fragmentary and focuses narrowly on aspects of entrepreneurship. Nonetheless, there are very rich descriptive data on what people mean when they talk about enterprise. The argument is developed that interpretative methodologies - new lenses for seeing entrepreneurship - such as social constructionism, are required to extend people's understanding. If the fragmentary positivistic approaches are imagined as pieces of a jigsaw, it can be seen how a social constructivist approach can provide an overview of how the pieces match, fit and come together. Following this way of thinking, the authors propose Giddens structuration as an orienting framework for these interpretative lenses.

Citation

ANDERSON, A.R. and STARNAWSKA, M. 2008. Research practices in entrepreneurship: problems of definition, description and meaning. International journal of entrepreneurship and innovation [online], 9(4), pages 221-230. Available from: https://openair.rgu.ac.uk/handle/10059/674

• Journal Article Type: Article
• Acceptance Date: Dec 31, 2008
• Online Publication Date: Dec 31, 2008
• Publication Date: Nov 30, 2008
• Deposit Date: Oct 31, 2011
• Publicly Available Date: Oct 31, 2011
• Journal: International journal of entrepreneurship and innovation
• Print ISSN: 1465-7503
• Electronic ISSN: 2043-6882
• Publisher: SAGE Publications
• Peer Reviewed: Peer Reviewed
• Volume: 9
• Issue: 4
• Pages: 221-230
• Keywords: Entrepreneurship research; Positivism; Interpretative methodologies; Constructionism; Giddens' structuration
• Public URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10059/674
• Publisher URL: http://www.ippublishing.com