Re= view of Paper
Lans et =
al (2011) - Analysing, pursuing and networking.
Lans, T., Verstegen, J.,
& Mulder, M. (2011). Analysing, pursui=
ng and
networking: Towards a validated three-factor framework for entrepreneurial
competence from a small firm perspective. International Small Business
Journal, 29(6), 695-713.
Abstract (abridged)
Moving beyond general personal trai=
ts as
predictors for success, a growing volume of research acknowledges that
entrepreneurial core processes are enabled by specific competencies which c=
an
be learned, refined and developed. The research objective of this article i=
s to
develop a framework for entrepreneurial competence in a well-defined small =
firm
sector by elaborating and empirically validating an existing categorization=
of
entrepreneurial competence. The dataset includes 348 SME owner-managers who
participated in an educational programme to pursue new business opportuniti=
es
in the Dutch agri-food sector. [The study] reve=
aled
that three domains constitute the heart of entrepreneurial competence in th=
is
SME context: ‘analysing’, ‘pursuing’ and ‘networking’. They provide
professionals in the sector with a valid framework of elements of
entrepreneurial competence, which also encompasses insights on education and
learning
Summary (parphrased quo=
tes)
Contemporary r=
esearch
suggests that studying entrepreneurial processes in SMEs is essential to
understanding how they innovate, survive and grow. (Mac=
pherson
and Holt, 2007).
Being entrepreneurially competent does not only refer to writing a
business plan, but also to recognising and acting on opportunities, taking =
initiative
and action. It implies that the entrepreneur is able to identify and exploi=
t an
opportunity within a specific context. (Lans et=
al.,
2008: 365)
Competence can be operationalized as a fit between existing ability =
and
the demands of a task and context (Brinckmann, =
2007).
It is more than just knowledge, skills or attitudes. Studies emphasize the
importance of the malleability of competence (i.e. the possibility to chang=
e or
shape it; Bird, 1995).
This research =
framework
builds on Man et al. (2002)… who connect entrepreneurial behaviour in SMEs =
to competencies
–see below.
The small busi=
ness
owners who followed the ‘new-opportunities’ training programme initially ha=
d to
complete an electronic questionna=
ire
covering (a) SME characteristics (b) 57 items on entrepreneurial competence
developed from Man (2002) (c) personal factors (d) questions relating to the
Smith and Miner’s (1983) opportunistic/craftsman typology. From the answers=
, three
competency groups were identified by statistical analysis – analysing,
pursuing, and networking.
The three ‘mat=
ch quite
well with various schools of thought on competence’.
A ‘well-known
distinction’ is between getting ahe=
ad
competencies and getting along
(social) competencies, and the three identified also ‘suggest that cognitive
and social processes are at least as important to consider as behavioural
aspects of competence’.
Man’s opportun=
ity,
conceptual and strategic domains come together as ‘analysing’ and ‘pursuing=
’, and
underline the distinction between the constructivist/cognitive
and behavioural active-search views on opportunity identification.
Self-reflection, from Man’s ‘commitment’ appears in all three.
The ‘organizing
competences’, eg planning, organization and personnel management, did not
feature in the research outcomes, probably because they were all micro-SMEs=
.
The framework =
will be interesting
for those involved in entrepreneurial skill development programmes in agric=
ultural
and rural settings, as take place all over the EU to encourage a reduction =
in
agricultural dependence on public sector support
So What?
For my PhD thi=
s paper
contains a good literature review on competencies, and I can try coding my =
case
studies using the 3 competencies identified – assisted by the detail factors
above. This will indicate how well my participants compare with the Dutch S=
MEs.
The SMEs studi=
ed were
all micro-SMEs in the Dutch agri-production sec=
tor –
so the results may not be applicable to creative sector nascent entrepreneu=
rs.
However, they do look relevant and are worth pursuing.
A real problem=
with
this otherwise excellent research is that it provides no comparisons with
non-entrepreneurs or any distinction between successful and less successful
SMEs in the study. So we have no idea whether these are distinguishing
characteristics, and/or whether we should try to develop them in our client=
s, in
order to improve their entrepreneurial success.
They are there=
fore not
predictors of success – instead they are characteristics of the members of =
a specific
SME sector who applied to attend a specific course.
The research i=
s also
based on self-perception questionnaires, albeit seemingly well-designed one=
s,
with their inherent weaknesses.
Summary by Richard Hanage Jan 2012=