Entrepreneurship Analysis

PART 1: Critical Review

The success of entrepreneurship depends on the creativity and innovativeness of the entrepreneur to provide solutions to an existing problem. In this way, the entrepreneur needs to integrate specific laid out guidelines that define the process of innovation. This section of the paper will critically review two journal articles in entrepreneurship namely, “Bing your breakthrough ideas to life” by Bouquet et al. and “At the Crossroads. Management and Business History in Entrepreneurship Research.” By Lopez et al.

First, Bouget et al. (2018, p. 102), begins the article by describing the problem where is a drop in the level of the underground water table, which is the primary source of water for domestic, industrial, and agricultural purposes. He looks for the cause of the problem and realizes that the abandoning of millet farming and switching to rice by farmers is the main cause. As an environment conservative, Peesapaty looks for ways of enticing farmers to reconsider millet farming. Consequently, he looked for a market niche for millet by developing an idea of using millet to make edible cutleries. His idea worked, and farmers returned to millet farming. According to Bouget et al. (2018, p. 102), his concept was aimed at solving two main significant issues all related to environmental degradation. Apart from restoring the water table to normal levels, the edible cutlery would eliminate plastic and polythene cutlery products, which pollute the environment and are non-biodegradable. In this Indian scenario, the article provides some of the basic principles that entrepreneurs should consider to develop viable ideas such as problem identification and provision of viable ideas. Another strategy highlighted by the case is the attractiveness if the target market where the entrepreneur is urged to look for a large market for the product, and one with few competitors (Baker & Nelson 2005, p. 340). From the case, the authors state that the innovator falls short of supplies when he first rolled out his products. This means that he identified a market niche with no competitors and thus he set the trend, which is a vital characteristic of an entrepreneur (Baker & Nelson 2005, p. 340).

The authors go ahead to highlight the significance of integrating digital tools to facilitate the success of innovations. First, the article emphasizes on the need of being a good observer by blocking preconception that may cloud one’s thinking. In this way, the article advice prospective entrepreneurs to consider their ideas with an open mind free of emotions to be able to make a clear judgment on whether the situation warrants the introduction of an alternative solution. According to Bouget et al. (2018, p. 109), the level of attention changes when viewing a situation with a neutral, and sober mind. Additionally, the article emphasizes the role of technology in improving observation and attention. Today, we are in a digital era, and the position of technology can be undermined. Most business operations have been computerized. For instance, in international conferences, there are headphones fitted with translators for non-common languages to enhance attention and understanding. Secondly, it states that one needs to detach oneself to have proper knowledge of a situation. This enables an innovator to view the problem in a bigger picture and different perspectives (Baker & Nelson 2005, p. 340). Again, it proposes the use of technology to help one take some time off.  By mentioning this, the article advocates for technology in creating pace to enable one to reflect on problems and provide several alternative solutions before deciding on the best. The third significance of technology according to the article is its ability to create room for imagination. Imagination is an essential element in entrepreneurship because it expands the creativity of the entrepreneur (Bouget et al., 2018, p. 110). By posting extraordinary alternatives, one expands the possibility of improving the situation through suggested solutions. An organization can reach many individuals to provide their imaginative perspectives through technology by using platforms such as social media. Another entrepreneurial strategy mentioned in the article is experimenting with the suggested solution to test its viability. Testing can be performed through digital simulation (Bouget et al., 2018, p. 110). By so doing, the authors acknowledge the significance of technology today, where most innovations are technology-based (Baker & Nelson 2005, p. 340). Through experimentation, one identifies the strengths and weaknesses of a solution that requires improvement for proper performance. The article cautions entrepreneurs to desist from investing much money in testing because it may fail to produce desired results. Lastly, the article encourages entrepreneurs to use technology to maneuver their solutions. In so doing, the article argues that entrepreneurs can identify the challenges that the solution is likely to face. This can be achieved by inviting positive criticism from trusted critics (Cardon et al., 2009, p. 525). This is common with disruptive technologies that act as total game changers in a particular industry. The article has managed to highlight and expound on the role of technology in promoting entrepreneurship through innovation. Besides, the authors have used practical case studies to emphasize their points and provide sufficient evidence to support their claims.

Another article by Lopez et al. (2016, p. 160), analyzes the role of history and theoretical framework in shaping and transforming entrepreneurship. The article begins by focusing on entrepreneurship as a research field, which has been existing for close to four decades. Within this period, the article argues that the research has played a significant role in expanding the understanding of innovation and its economic significance in organizations. In support of this claim, the article provides evidence of previous studies that have come to the same conclusion after incorporating various approaches. The author’s decision to define entrepreneurship and provide alternative definitions by other scholars, whose opinions on its definition differ theirs is an indication that the authors are mature enough to accommodate diversity (Cardon et al., 2009, p. 514). However, it also shows that entrepreneurship has no standard definition, thus making it difficult to distinguish an entrepreneur from non-entrepreneur (Cardon et al., 2009, p. 520).

Going by their definition of an entrepreneur as a change-oriented innovative agent to make a profit, the authors view an entrepreneur as an agent of change. In this way, they broaden the perspective of entrepreneurship but go ahead to specify that he must be innovative and able to make a profit from the venture. Again, the authors have gone ahead to support this claim by evidence. In their explanation of approaching entrepreneurship historically, the authors argue that entrepreneurship has undergone a constructive transformation over the years. For instance, they argue that historians such as Max Weber gave entrepreneurship its economic direction and packaged it as a researchable field. The authors identify various historians and their contributions in entrepreneurship through their influence in prominent business schools such as Harvard. The historians identified and defined and entrepreneurship determinants that constitute institutional, cultural, and social factors. This article provides relevant evidence arranged chronologically to support their argument on the role of historians in shaping entrepreneurship over the years. Besides, they identify various approaches used by different historians to study and shape entrepreneurship. For instance, they argue that Chandler’s approach was useful in shaping organizational entrepreneurship (p. 165).

The second approach fronted by Lopez et al. (2016), is Management of entrepreneurship. Under this category, the authors identify four main areas of focus which include entrepreneur’s trait, behavior, internal and external environment, and the ability to explore opportunities. All four focal points formed the basis for developing approaches to understanding entrepreneurship by management theorists (Lundmark, 2017, p. 20). There are specific key points evident from the article concerning the four approaches. First, according to the trait theory, entrepreneurs exhibit a certain personality that can only be found on a few individuals by birth. The entrepreneurial trait cannot be learnt or acquired. Second, entrepreneurs behave in a particular way and have certain capabilities of starting up a business as per the behavioral approach. For instance, Lopez et al. (2016, p. 168) argue that Ajzen’s planned behavior theory was developed as a result of this approach. According to the theory, the intention of the entrepreneur plays a significant role in determining the success of the business. Thirdly, the external environment such as geographical location, technological change, government policy, and industrial structure determine the success of entrepreneurship. Some of these approaches have been in force to date even though some such as the trait theory have faced criticism from various quarters as lacking in evidence and narrow in scope. Other than the approaches, the article highlights some of the recommended entrepreneurial practices such as networking to expand businesses, corporate entrepreneurship, and international entrepreneurship. This article does not only enlighten on the role of history and management approaches in expounds on various useful entrepreneurial practices. By understanding the various entrepreneurial operations, one can venture into business fully aware of the challenges and how to overcome them (Lundmark, 2017, p. 11)

PART II: Interview Analysis


From the interview, it is evident that Kogan is an entrepreneur according to the information provided. First, he identified a market niche which he felt he could fill. His business idea was as a result of a problem he experienced and used generalization to relate it to the wider population. One of the traits exhibited in his case is paying attention to detail which Bouget et al. (2018, para. 14) identify as one of the best qualities of a good entrepreneur.  According to Bouget et al. (2018, para. 14) attention enables one to view an issue critically. Additionally, Kogan believes in the ability of technology to promote entrepreneurial practices. He is categorical that his business grew because of technology specifically the internet, where he learnt the art of entrepreneurship promoted his business using social media platforms. This is in line with Bouget et al. (2018), argument throughout the text that technology can be used to promote practices. For instance, for every practice mentioned such as attention, which enhanced by observation, taking time off, imagination, and experimentation, Bouget et al. (2018) highlighted the role of technology by providing interesting examples on how technological integration in each stage transformed each company’s entrepreneurial strides positively. For instance, Bouget et al. (2018, p.113), argues that digital technologies are essential in tracking organizational trends, especially in healthcare settings. Similarly, Bouget et al. (2018, p. 113) add that digital platforms enable companies to interact with trendsetters. Bouget et al. (2018, p. 112) also state that even though technology cannot eliminate observation, it plays a significant role in enabling access to sufficient information that is essential for developing entrepreneurial ideas. Similarly, Lopez et al. (2016), identified technology as one of the external business environment factors that determine the success of entrepreneurship (p. 169). Going by trait theory mentioned by Lopez et al. (2016, p. 168), Kogan was born an entrepreneur. He experienced frustration once and decided to change it into a business opportunity. Something most people never do. His way of thinking that he can change his frustration into a profitable venture tells it all.  According to Lopez et al. (2016, p. 168), an entrepreneur is unique in his characteristics such as creativity, risk-taking, and creativity, which is exactly the traits exhibited by Kogan. Moreover, Kogan appreciates the role of external environmental factors such as competition, which he views positively but stating that it has made the industry vibrant. Lopez et al. (2016, p. 169), states that the external environment plays a significant role in shaping entrepreneurship. In this way, an individual who can accommodate the pressure emanating from the external environment is a good entrepreneur. Currently, Kogan is practicing corporate entrepreneurship where he is coming up with new ideas to solve his customer’s problems. For instance, Lopez et al. (2016, p. 177), states that one can be innovative within an already established business.