wright 2012 isbj

8/10/2019 Wright 2012 ISBJ

1/9

http://isb.sagepub.com/International Small Business Journal

http://isb.sagepub.com/content/30/2/107Theonline version of this article can be found at:

DOI: 10.1177/0266242611432793

2012 30: 107 originally published online 5 January 2012International Small Business JournalMike Wright and Susan Marlow

Entrepreneurial activity in the venture creation and development process

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

can be found at:International Small Business JournalAdditional services and information for

http://isb.sagepub.com/cgi/alertsEmail Alerts:

http://isb.sagepub.com/subscriptionsSubscriptions:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navReprints:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navPermissions:

http://isb.sagepub.com/content/30/2/107.refs.htmlCitations:

What is This? -Jan 5, 2012OnlineFirst Version of Record

- Mar 8, 2012Version of Record>>

at Curtin University Library on August 11, 2012isb.sagepub.comDownloaded from
http://isb.sagepub.com/http://isb.sagepub.com/http://isb.sagepub.com/content/30/2/107http://isb.sagepub.com/content/30/2/107http://isb.sagepub.com/content/30/2/107http://www.sagepublications.com/http://www.sagepublications.com/http://isb.sagepub.com/cgi/alertshttp://isb.sagepub.com/cgi/alertshttp://isb.sagepub.com/subscriptionshttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navhttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navhttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navhttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navhttp://isb.sagepub.com/content/30/2/107.refs.htmlhttp://isb.sagepub.com/content/30/2/107.refs.htmlhttp://online.sagepub.com/site/sphelp/vorhelp.xhtmlhttp://online.sagepub.com/site/sphelp/vorhelp.xhtmlhttp://isb.sagepub.com/content/early/2012/01/03/0266242611432793.full.pdfhttp://isb.sagepub.com/content/early/2012/01/03/0266242611432793.full.pdfhttp://isb.sagepub.com/content/30/2/107.full.pdfhttp://isb.sagepub.com/http://isb.sagepub.com/http://isb.sagepub.com/http://online.sagepub.com/site/sphelp/vorhelp.xhtmlhttp://isb.sagepub.com/content/early/2012/01/03/0266242611432793.full.pdfhttp://isb.sagepub.com/content/30/2/107.full.pdfhttp://isb.sagepub.com/content/30/2/107.refs.htmlhttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navhttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navhttp://isb.sagepub.com/subscriptionshttp://isb.sagepub.com/cgi/alertshttp://www.sagepublications.com/http://isb.sagepub.com/content/30/2/107http://isb.sagepub.com/

8/10/2019 Wright 2012 ISBJ

2/9

International Small Business Journal

30(2) 107114

The Author(s) 2011

Reprints and permission: sagepub.

co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav

DOI: 10.1177/0266242611432793

isb.sagepub.com

mall Firms

sbj

Corresponding author:

Mike Wright, Centre for Management Buy-out Research, Imperial College Business School, Exhibition Road, London,SW7 2AZ, UK

Email: [email protected]

Entrepreneurial activity in the

venture creation and developmentprocess

Mike WrightImperial College Business School, UK and University of Ghent, Belgium

Susan MarlowUniversity of Birmingham, UK

Abstract

This special edition editorial notes the complex and dynamic nature of the new venture creationprocess. Although the growing body of work which explores discrete elements of this process is

acknowledged, in-depth analyses of the black box of new venture creation remain scarce. Thus,this special edition features articles that recognize and explore how entrepreneurial actors andtheir ventures progress within and between the various phases necessary to establish viable new

firms within differing and uncertain contexts. Three articles are featured offering a diverse rangeof perspectives upon the challenges encountered during new venture creation and the strategiesadopted to address these issues. Drawing from these articles, a more nuanced processual viewof entrepreneurial activity in the venture creation and development process is presented and in

addition, pathways are suggested for future research to develop this debate.

Keywords

entrepreneurship, new venture creation and development

IntroductionAn important feature of economic change is the diffusion of entrepreneurship across cultures,

economies and continents. The entrepreneurial process is essential to this diffusion: this includes

the personal, sociological and organizational factors that influence the birth of enterprises and their

ensuing development. It encompasses a number of key stages including pre-start, start up, reorien-

tation, establishment of legitimacy, professionalization, growth, initial public offering, etc. Despite

discrete elements of this process being subject to theoretical and empirical scrutiny (see for

example, work by De Clercq and Voronov (2009) on entrepreneurial legitimacy), models of the

Article

http://isb.sagepub.com/http://isb.sagepub.com/http://isb.sagepub.com/http://isb.sagepub.com/

8/10/2019 Wright 2012 ISBJ

3/9

108 International Small Business Journal30(2)

entrepreneurial process remain fragmented (Moroz and Hindle, 2011) and often lack explicit theo-

retical and empirical underpinnings (Ucbasaran et al., 2001). While there may be calls to harmo-

nize models of the entrepreneurial process rather than attempt a universalistic synthesis (Moroz

and Hindle, 2011), there remains a need to develop coherent understanding of the heterogeneity of

the entrepreneurial process and the context in which it occurs.

Entrepreneurial processes are likely to differ across the various phases of development, with major

challenges to be addressed when moving across and between these phases (e.g. Vohora et al., 2004);

failure to recognize and address this complex and dynamic process may frustrate and constrain sub-

sequent development. In addition, it is becoming apparent that entrepreneurial ventures may grow in

different ways. Some firms seek to build revenue, some may seek first to develop their technological

capability before introducing products to the market which may only occur after initial public offer-

ing or strategic sale, and others may adopt hybrid strategies (Clarysse et al., 2011). Although there has

been some attention focused on different measures of entrepreneurial firm growth and performance,

and on the economic impact of different types of support programmes or initiatives (Davidsson et al.,

2009; Delmar et al., 2003), theorizing and exploration of the processes behind these different growth

paths is lacking. Entrepreneurial activities may take place in both new firms and established firms,

such as those recently listed on a stock market, private equity-backed leveraged buy-outs, mature

corporations and social enterprises. Finally, the contexts in which entrepreneurial activities take place

are heterogeneous (Zahra and Wright, 2011), differing in the manner in which they facilitate or con-

strain entrepreneurship; for example, there are variations across both developed and emerging econo-

mies in the nature and extent of entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurs may need to adopt different processes

to deal with these institutional contingencies which are, as yet, little understood.

This special issue centres on the entrepreneurial process with a particular focus upon contributing

to the understanding of various dimensions of the heterogeneity of entrepreneurial activity in ven-

ture creation and development. We commence by providing an overview of the contribution of each

article to the special issue, then outline suggestions for a future research agenda aimed at better

understanding the role of entrepreneurial activity in the venture creation and development process.

Articles in this special issue

Following a general call, 22 submissions were received and seven authors were invited to revise

and resubmit their work; from these, three papers were accepted for publication. Each submission

was reviewed according to standard ISBJprocedures; Table 1 summarizes those which success-

fully negotiated this process.

The articles each encompass a particular aspect of the role of entrepreneurs in the venture cre-

ation and development process, adopting a variety of theoretical perspectives. For example, Corner

and Wu draw upon the notion of dynamic capabilities and Perks and Medway utilize a resource-

based perspective. These approaches contribute to an emerging literature that considers the origins

of resources and in addition, how they are assembled (Barney et al., 2011; Sirmon et al., 2011). In

contrast, Greenman adopts a pragmatist perspective on entrepreneurial activity, exploring how

founders use occupational resources to support their legitimacy.

In their recent review of the entrepreneurship field, Blackburn and Kovalainen (2009) note the

need for greater methodological pluralism and longitudinal work to generate greater insight into

how processes unfold over time and within specific contexts. These articles offer a valuable con-

tribution to addressing this particular gap in the contemporary research agenda as they adopt a

variety of methodological approaches to enhance our understanding of the venture creationand development process. Importantly for process research, there is a prevalence of longitudinal

http://isb.sagepub.com/http://isb.sagepub.com/http://isb.sagepub.com/

8/10/2019 Wright 2012 ISBJ

4/9

Wright and Marlow 109

Table

1.

Summary

Aut

hor(s)

Researc

hquestions

Theoretica

l

perspect

ive

Dataan

dmet

hods

Key

findings

Greenman

How

doesexperience

derive

dfrom

occupat

ionsenab

lean

d

constrainentrepreneurial

activities

?

Pragmat

istviewo

f

entrepreneursh

ip

Ethnograp

hica

l

studyo

fowner-

foun

derso

f

micro-an

dsmal

l

businesses

inthe

cultural

industries

overtwoyears

Thesearch

foroccupat

iona

lautonomy,occupat

iona

lcentral

ityan

d

buildingcomm

itmentthroug

hlegitimacyan

daccounting

forthe

deve

lopmento

focc

upat

iona

lresources

Demonstrat

ingabil

ityto

deve

lopanorgan

izat

ion

fro

moccupat

iona

l

boun

daryworkthat

influencesentrepreneur

ialactiv

ities

Corner

andW

u

Whatsu

b-processes

areusedtoensurenew

venturesurv

ivalan

d

enab

leentrepreneursto

reapthe

bene

fitso

ftheir

innovations

?

Dynam

ic

entrepreneur

ial

capa

bilities

Long

itudina

l,

qual

itative

multiple

case

studyin

China,1

8

conversations

withpractitioners,

emai

ls,arch

ival

dataand

theory-

building

Importanceo

fthec

apac

ityto

identi

fypro

blems

inin

dustrial

sett

ingsthatacommercial

lyuntr

iedtechno

logymigh

tso

lve

before

deve

lopingpro

ducts

Revea

lingtechno

logy

invo

lvedopenlyshar

ingthetec

hno

logy

s

featuresw

ithprosp

ectivecustomers

inorderto

join

tly

design

prototypepro

ducts

Revea

lingtechno

logy

helpedensurenewventuresurv

ival,i

n

contrastw

ithconventiona

lwisdom,t

hat

linksfirmsurviva

lto

insu

latingan

dprote

ctingtechno

logy

Perksan

d

Medway

What

isthenatureo

f

resource-b

asedprocesses

inthe

deve

lopmento

f

newventures,i

nthe

contexto

fbusiness

duality

whereanewventure

is

deve

lope

dalongsi

dean

existing

business

?

Resource-b

ased

perspect

ive

Multiple

case

study(1

0cases),

withmu

ltiple

part

icipantsan

d

somelo

ngitud

inal

aspect,

farm

ing,

theory-

building

Resourceties,a

ssem

blyan

ddeploymentan

dtheircore

dimensions

andsu

b-dimensions

varyoverthe

fourstageso

fthe

newventure

deve

lopmentproce

ss

Consciousexploitationo

fex

istingtiescanprovi

deim

med

iate

accesstocr

iticalresources,

but

later-stageexplo

itationmust

be

accompanied

bypla

nnedan

dcare

fuladaptat

iono

fbo

thbusinesses

toenab

leef

fect

iveresource

deployment

Rat

herthanexpand

ingnetworks

inanad

hoc

fash

ion

,attention

shoul

dbepa

idtoc

hoosingse

lectednetworks

from

bothex

isting

andnew

ly-d

evelope

dnetworkcommun

ities.

Therea

rethree

genericapproac

hes

tomanag

ingresource-b

asedprocesses

in

the

deve

lopmento

fnewventures

inthe

farm

ingsector:

holistic

innovators,r

eactive

innovatorsan

dcaut

ious

innovators


8/10/2019 Wright 2012 ISBJ

5/9


studies with multiple respondents in each case. Greenman presents rich insights using an ethno-

graphical approach over a two-year period and Corner and Wu and Perks and Medway adopt a

multiple case study design, with Corner and Wu employing a longitudinal perspective.

Themes for a future research agendaIn Table 2, we offer an overview of potential themes for a future research agenda. In compiling

these suggestions, we note how discrete thematic pathways might be articulated through specific

approaches which acknowledge differing contexts and units of analyses (the firm, the entrepre-

neur). In addition, we outline particular issues underpinning entrepreneurial opportunities which

might be pursued and developed through the exploration of these themes.

Contexts

The context in which entrepreneurial ideas, activities and ambitions are formulated is heteroge-

neous (Zahra and Wright, 2011), and is critical in shaping the venture and laying the foundationsfor future sustainability and growth. For example, as Welter (2011) argues, the institutional context

that prevails in transitional economies is fundamental to shaping entrepreneurial orientation and

new venture creation. Indeed, in order to illustrate this argument, Welter goes further in developing

an intersectional analysis, drawing upon the influence of gender on womens entrepreneurial activ-

ities within a context of relative subordination within Uzbekistan. Thus, context as a boundary

made recognizable through institutional norms is vital in shaping the entrepreneurial process.

There is much scope here for future research, particularly in developing work that challenges the

US/Eurocentric assumptions which underpin much of mainstream theorizing. The growing influ-

ence of China and emerging Middle East economies offer new and challenging opportunities to

evaluate dominant assumptions concerning the processes necessary to frame, exploit and commer-cialize entrepreneurial opportunities (Greene et al., 2011).

Related to institutional context, we have identified the influence of the market environment as

crucial in shaping the entrepreneurial process. Clearly, the market reflects broader contextual influ-

ences; however, in the current volatile climate there are both many opportunities and serious chal-

lenges to positioning new ventures. In addition, perceptions of and propensity towards risk within

such volatile markets are of considerable importance in critically analysing the future potential for,

and opportunities available to, new ventures. This is of particular interest in an era when the pre-

vailing neo-liberal perspective suggests that entrepreneurship holds many solutions to creating a

more innovative and vibrant economy, but at the same time, market volatility represents an increas-

ing threat to entrepreneurs engaged with new venture creation (Harvey, 2010). Thus, how opportu-nities are perceived, learning to exploit these opportunities and understanding the risks attached

within diverse and dynamic market environments, offer much potential for future work.

Of perennial interest within the venture creation and growth process is the temporal context

associated with the analysis of business life cycles (Phelps et al., 2007). Consequently, while high-

lighting this issue is not a new departure, we do suggest that clearer acknowledgement of the

diversity of entrepreneurial activities must be recognized, in order to gain a more robust and

informed picture of dynamic life cycles (Storey, 2011).

Firms

A number of important areas need to be developed in understanding the heterogeneity of the new

venture creation process at the firm level. Increasing recognition is now given to the notion that


8/10/2019 Wright 2012 ISBJ

6/9


market entry may relate not only to generating revenue in the product market, but also that firms

may enter the market for technology (Clarysse et al., forthcoming, 2011). Similarly, firms may

engage in exploration or exploitation activities. Over time, it is evident that firms may pursue one

Table 2. Suggested themes for a research agenda on the venture creation and development process

Context Firm Individual Entrepreneurialopportunity

How do

entrepreneurialactivities in theventure creation anddevelopment processvary according to theinstitutional context?

How do entrepreneurial

activities vary betweenthe process of explorationand of exploitation?

How do entrepreneurs

build legitimacy for theirventures? To what extentis this heterogeneousaccording to sector, phaseof development, etc.?

What processes are

involved in the stages offraming and exploitingopportunities tocommercialize technology?

How doentrepreneurialactivities in theventure creation anddevelopment process

vary according to thenature of competitionin the market, thepower of incumbentsand the maturity of themarket?

How do entrepreneurialfirms develop their marketentry strategies andattract customers andsuppliers?

What factors influencewhether entrepreneursdevelop their own skillsin the venture creationprocess or acquire them,

by either bringing in teammembers, recruiting staffor obtaining consultancyadvice?

How does entrepreneuriallearning influence theprocess of opportunityidentification andexploitation?

What challenges arisein evolving the venturecreation process overthe different phases ofthe venture life-cycleover time, and howand to what extent arethese overcome?

What processes areadopted to developorganisational structures,culture and humanresource management?

How does the processof venture creationand development differbetween portfolio, serial,novice and nascententrepreneurs?

How does the ownershipof formal intellectualproperty rights versusinformal affect the processof framing and exploitationof opportunities?

How does the venturecreation process differbetween differentownership andsectoral and spatialcontexts (e.g. family vsnon-family firms)?

How does the processof venture creation differwith respect to socialventures and sustainableventures?

What processes doentrepreneurs adopt toleverage resources inthe venture creation anddevelopment process?How are they affected bythe cognitive attributes ofentrepreneurs?

How is the process offraming opportunitiesfor domestic versusinternational marketslinked to the developmentof relevant capabilities?

How do entrepreneurial

firms develop theirmarket orientation anddecide whether this is themarket for technologyor products, and howdo they change betweenthese different markets?

How do entrepreneurs

build communication tokey stakeholders in orderto signal their legitimacy?


8/10/2019 Wright 2012 ISBJ

7/9


strategy initially, but then change to another or indeed adopt a dual strategy approach. The process

by which strategy choice is made, and how changes in such occur over time as the venture identifies

and adopts a viable configuration, are little understood and so, are worthy of further analysis.

Growing debate is focusing upon the complementarities and contrasts between social and profit-

focused enterprises. The former are attracting much greater attention, particularly in the light of politi-

cal optimism that during times of economic recession, they will deliver many services previously

provided by the public sector (Thompson, 2011). Yet, relatively little attention has been afforded to the

processes underpinning the creation and growth of social enterprise and, indeed, to what extent they

may or may not differ from their commercially focused counterparts (Westhead et al., 2011). Again,

there is much scope here for future research to explore and critically evaluate any such differences.

Individuals

Further research that focuses on the role of individuals in the venture creation process has the

potential for further development as the cognition and behaviour of individuals drives opportunity

recognition, as well as the accumulation and configuration of resources to exploit such opportuni-

ties. These microfoundations of entrepreneurship are being recognized now (Abell et al., 2008),

but there is considerable scope for further analysis. The processes adopted by entrepreneurs in the

venture creation process to leverage their resources and skills and to build legitimacy are little

understood. In addition, integrating the recognition of differing cognitive approaches adopted by

diverse groups entrepreneurs may help to highlight variations in these processes. When exploring

the confidence levels of portfolio, serial and novice entrepreneurship, Ucbasaran et al. (2010) dem-

onstrate how different ownership profiles critically influence entrepreneurial ambitions and activi-

ties. Consequently, future work needs to recognize how ownership structures profoundly affect the

development of the venture. As noted by Westhead and Wright (2011), the majority of new firms

are started by partners, families or teams, so much greater exploration of the dynamics and tensions

that inform these relationships, and their impact on both venture creation and development, is

required.

Opportunities

Opportunity recognition and framing is central to venture creation yet, the process through which

this occurs in different contexts warrants further analysis. In addition, as we have noted already,

entrepreneurs may have created previous ventures an important consequence of this being that

they may have learnt how to recognize and frame opportunities. Future studies could shed light on

this process but also identify how biases in learning may affect whether and how subsequent efforts

display adaptation in the process, in light of prior experience. Further sources of variety concern

whether the opportunity is based upon formal or informal intellectual property, and whether the

opportunity relates to a domestic or foreign venture. The extent to which these factors influence dif-

ferences in the process of framing opportunities warrants additional research.

Data and method

Our suggestions here represent but a few pathways that will progress the diverse and encompassing

field of new venture creation and development. In addition to such substantive issues, we would

suggest that there is considerable scope to adopt a range of methodological approaches to illustrateand analyse the complexity and volatility of new venture creation and growth. Within this special


8/10/2019 Wright 2012 ISBJ

8/9


edition, we have included articles using longitudinal work and ethnographic approaches; we would

suggest that research drawing upon methodologies that facilitate a more detailed and nuanced

exploration of the processual nature of creation and growth are essential to progress understanding.

For example, Rasmussen et al. (2011) provide a longitudinal study of the venture emergence pro-

cess in the context of academic spin-offs. Equally, comprehensive datasets that offer accurate and

detailed accounts of creation and growth over time and within specific contexts are essential to

inform future work. Of course, compiling such datasets is challenging but would enable the empiri-

cal testing of conceptual insights.

In conclusion, this special edition focuses on an issue of fundamental importance to the realiza-

tion of entrepreneurial ambitions to create and develop new ventures. Axiomatically, this process

is subject to considerable volatility and a myriad of uncertainties, but at the same time it is critical

to future economic wealth creation, innovation and social development. Accordingly, developing

robust evidence and generating sound theoretical insights to analyse this process is essential to

inform future understanding of how entrepreneurial opportunities are translated into new ventures

which, in turn, become sustainable enterprises.

Funding

This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit

sectors.

References

Abell P, Felin T and Foss NJ (2008) Building microfoundations for the routines, capabilities, and performance

links.Managerial and Decision Economics29(3): 489502.

Barney JB, Ketchen D and Wright M (2011) The future of resource-based theory: Revitalization or decline?

Journal of Management37(5): 12991315.

Blackburn R and Kovalainen A (2009) Researching small firms and entrepreneurship: Past, present and

future.International Journal of Management Reviews11(1) 127148.

Clarysse B, Bruneel J and Wright M (2011) Explaining growth paths of young technology-based firms: Struc-

turing resource portfolios in different competitive environments. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal

48(6): 14201442.

Davidsson P, Steffens P and Fitzsimmons J (2009) Growing profitable or growing from profits: Putting the

horse in front of the cart?Journal of Business Venturing24(4): 388406.

De Clercq D and Voronov M (2009) Toward a practice perspective entrepreneurship: Entrepreneurial legiti-

macy as habitus.International Small Business Journal27(4): 395419.

Delmar F, Davidsson P and Gartner WB (2003) Arriving at the high-growth firm.Journal of Business Ventur-

ing18(2): 189216.

Greene F, Han L and Marlow S (2011) The influence of maternal stereotypes upon daughters entrepreneurial

propensity.Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice35(6): 652669.

Harvey C (2010) The Enigma of Capital and the Crisis of Capitalism. London: Profile Books.

Moroz P and Hindle K (in press, 2011) Entrepreneurship as a process: Toward harmonizing multiple perspec-

tives.Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice.

Phelps R, Adams R and Bessant J (2007) Life cycles of growing organizations: A review with implications for

knowledge and learning.International Journal of Management Reviews9(1): 130.

Rasmussen E, Mosey S and Wright M (2011) The evolution of entrepreneurial competencies: A longitudinal

study of university spin-off venture emergence.Journal of Management Studies48(6): 13141346.


8/10/2019 Wright 2012 ISBJ

9/9


Sirmon D, Hitt MA, Ireland RD et al. (2011) Resource orchestration to create competitive advantage: Breadth,

depth and life cycle effects.Journal of Management37(5): 13901412.

Storey DJ (2011) Optimism and chance: The elephants in the entrepreneurship room. International Small

Business Journal29(4): 303321.

Thompson J (2011) Reflections on social enterprise and the Big Society. Social Enterprise Journal 7(3):

219223.

Ucbasaran D, Westhead P and Wright M (2001) The focus of entrepreneurial research: Contextual and process

issues.Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice25(1): 5780.

Ucbasaran D, Westhead P and Wright M (2010) The nature of entrepreneurial experience business failure and

comparative optimism.Journal of Business Venturing25(6): 541555.

Vohora A, Wright M and Lockett A (2004) Critical junctures in spin-outs from universities. Research Policy

33(1): 147175.

Welter F (2011) Contextualising entrepreneurship: Conceptual challenges and ways forward. Entrepreneur-

ship Theory and Practice35(1): 165184.

Westhead P and Wright M (2011) David Storeys optimism and chance perspective: A case of the Emperors

New Clothes?International Small Business Journal.

Westhead P, Wright M and McElwee G (2011)Entrepreneurship: Perspective and Cases. London: Pearson.

Zahra S and Wright M (2011) Entrepreneurships next act.Academy of Management Perspectives.

Mike Wrightis Professor of Entrepreneurship and Director of the Centre for Management Buy-out Research

at Imperial College Business School, Visiting Professor at the University of Ghent, editor of Strategic

Entrepreneurshipjournal and Chair of the Academy of Management Entrepreneurship Division. His publica-

tions on various aspects of entrepreneurial mobility have appeared in leading journals such as Academy of

Management Review, Academy of Management Journal, Strategic Management Journal, Journal of

Management Studies, etc. His most recent book is Entrepreneurship: Perspectives and Cases (with Paul

Westhead and Ged McElwee, Financial Times/Prentice Hall, 2011).

Susan Marlow is Professor of Entrepreneurship at the University of Birmingham, Visiting Professor at the

University of Leeds, Editor of theInternational Small Business Journaland Vice President for Research at

the Institute for Small Business and Entrepreneurship. Her research interests focus on the diverse range of

issues influencing entrepreneurial behaviours and small firm management; she has published extensively in

US and UK journals and is the co-editor, along with Colette Henry of the Routledge series of Mastertexts in

Entrepreneurship and the Emerald/ISBE series of entrepreneurship texts.

wright 2012 isbj

Documents