دانلود رایگان مقاله سفر کارآفرینی به عنوان سیستم سلسله مراتبی ناشی از فرآیند آرتیفکت-ایجاد

Abstract

Entrepreneurial ‘process’ perspectives explain the events of an entrepreneurial journey in terms of mechanisms, such as ‘effectual logic’, ‘bricolage’, ‘dynamic creation’, ‘opportunity tension’ and ‘enactment’. Process theorists, however, have not as yet developed an analytical framework that explains an entrepreneurial event in relation to the entrepreneurial journey as the unit of analysis. Building on Sarasvathy's (2003, 2008) and Venkataraman et al.'s (2012) conception of entrepreneurship inquiry as a ‘science of the artificial’ (Simon, 1996), we explain how this research gap can be addressed by conceptualizing the entrepreneurial journey as an ‘emergent hierarchical system of entrepreneurial artifact-creating processes’. From this perspective, entrepreneurial events can be explained in relation to the endogenous dynamics of prior patterns of artifact emergence. We discuss some research implications of focusing on artifact emergence as a key unit of analysis in process theory development.

5. Conclusion

In this article, we have taken up Venkataraman et al.'s (2012) proposal that entrepreneurship inquiry should move forward as a science of the artificial by considering the significance of hierarchically organized artifact-creating processes for process theory development. We have argued that the ability to conceptualize the entrepreneurial journey in terms of hierarchically organized patterns of artifact emergence contributes to our understanding of the endogenous, self-causing, context-creating, self-organizing and pathdependent dynamics of venture creation. In particular, we have explained how the emergent hierarchy of entrepreneurial artifactcreating processes has implications for units of analysis in the development of multi-contextual and multi-level explanations of phase transitions in the entrepreneurial journey. Although the notion of an emergent hierarchy of entrepreneurial artifact-creating processes is in its infancy, we hope we have made some thought-provoking suggestions concerning how the work of Herbert Simon (1996) and complexity science concepts more generally might impact on the future direction of entrepreneurship process research.