Journal of General Management

This conceptual paper examines the nature of entrepreneurship in innovation processes in time of crisis. Crisis is a time of heightened uncertainty, manifested as increased ambiguity about what knowledge is available yet necessary for innovation. It is argued here that connecting this diverse knowledge is essential for innovation and that this is a key entrepreneurial process. Whilst this point is established in the literature, there is perhaps a gap in understanding how such knowledge is entrepreneurially applied. In systems-based views of innovation there seems to be an assumption that knowledge synthesis just happens as a natural occurrence. Reviewing and synthesising disparate literatures, this paper argues that stocks of knowledge are not, in themselves, sufficient to produce innovation. Instead, entrepreneurial agency is required to collaborate, connect and to combine these knowledge stocks to produce innovation. The paper contributes to understanding and theory by demonstrating how and why this ‘social’ connecting is a critical element of the entrepreneurial role and a crucial part of innovation.

This paper examines the role of entrepreneurial firms as agents of economic resilience. It focuses on the networks these firms construct with universities in order to access knowledge for innovation. Drawing on data from a cohort of entrepreneurial firms in the United Kingdom and the United States it is found that networks between entrepreneurial firms and universities are an important feature of the complex adaptive innovation systems associated with resilience. Furthermore, entrepreneurial firms play a role in open innovation practices through the establishment of both horizontal and vertical ties with universities. However, there are numerous challenges that entrepreneurial firms often face when seeking to connect with universities, which may stymie resilience.

In periods of economic crisis and instability, the response of many business organisations is to try and adapt to prevailing market conditions. This typically results in a pattern of retrenchment and rationalisation designed to cut costs. Responses of this kind may be justifiable and, to varying degrees, effective at a firm-level. However, their wider repercussions can include the worsening of a pre-existing economic downturn (e.g. large- scale redundancies affecting local communities and cancelled orders affecting other firms in the supply chain). When faced with an economic crisis, some firms adopt a more entrepreneurial approach, in which the key features are strategic reappraisal and various forms of product, process and organisational innovation (Filippetti and Archibugi, 2011). While large corporations are capable of this kind of transformation, there is an increasing recognition of the important part that smaller entrepreneurial firms can play in innovation (Christensen, 1997) including the reinvigoration of industry sectors through open innovation (Chesbrough, 2003) and contributing to the reconfiguration of geographic clusters (Best, 2001). Studies of long wave cycles have shown that periods of economic crisis and depression can be important for innovation: they can disrupt established industry structures and cause entrepreneurs to see markets and customers in a different light so that they re-think products and services (Barras, 2009). However, comparatively little attention has been directed to considering just how entrepreneurial individuals in smaller firms mobilise the resources necessary for innovation and cope with risk in the unfavourable and demanding conditions that prevail in times of economic crisis.

This exploratory study seeks to address this research gap. It does so through an in-depth historical case study of the contrasting responses of two firms, in the same industry sector but operating on different scales with differing modes of production (i.e. artisanal v. mechanised), to the greatest economic crisis of the 20th century, namely, the Great Depression of the 1930s (Crafts and Fearon, 2011). The two firms, which served the same markets and were affected by the same external forces, followed very different paths: the larger one engaged in a series of acquisitions as a means of rationalising production and cutting costs, while the much smaller firm that operated on a very modest scale chose to innovate. This innovation involved developing a product that was new to Britain at the time, namely the sousaphone, an unorthodox musical instrument that hitherto had only been produced in the United States. As well as comparing the activities of the two firms operating on different scales, the study examines why the owners of this small firm decided to innovate in the very difficult trading conditions that prevailed at the time, and exactly how they were able to acquire and mobilise the resources needed to pursue this path. In particular, the study focuses on the use of improvisation (Kamoche, Cunha and Cunha, 2002), that is to say ‘impromptu action’ (Dickson, 1997: p. 37), and the closely related concept of entrepreneurial ‘bricolage’ (Baker and Nelson, 2005; Phillips and Tracey, 2007) or ‘making do’ (Eisenberg, 1990: p. 154), as a means of accessing the resources required.

The findings suggest that while large-scale enterprises often concluded that a strategy of retrenchment and rationalisation was the appropriate response to economic crisis, firms operating on a smaller scale viewed the situation differently and responded to the altered trading conditions in more positive, creative and entrepreneurial ways. As a result they were able to identify opportunities associated with new and expanding markets with scope for innovation. The study provides insights into the ways in which these small firms were able to identify and access the necessary resources for their innovations. It also sheds new light on the improvisatory nature of their entrepreneurial response, and its capacity to overcome seemingly insurmountable obstacles to growth in a recessionary environment (e.g. adapting existing resources to new uses, forming unconventional subcontracting arrangements and turning existing skills to new uses). The paper concludes with a summary of the key findings and their implications for future research and practice.

The aim of this article is to explore graduate entrepreneurship and career-making in the period of stagnant economic growth in the UK over the six years from the financial crisis of 2008 to the present day. In the context of a challenging economy, this period has seen a strong emphasis on graduate employability and education for entrepreneurship within Higher Education, both within the United Kingdom and at international levels. The prevailing employment market offered depressed levels of demand and constrained graduate career opportunities, with signs of recent recovery. The article reflects on six years' experience of this ‘New Era’, drawing on labour market research and projections, and summarises the challenges and responses in graduate enterprise and employability applicable to the post-2008 economy. Finally, it offers practical options for institutional policies, enterprise education and individual actions, centering on graduate career development.

Recession and subsequent recovery present great entrepreneurial opportunities for those intending to start and grow their business. However, despite numerous initiatives by the UK government offering substantial financial and technical supports, aspiring and entrepreneurial individuals continue to be put off by myths and shocking tales of business failures during such difficult times. This article re-examines some of the myths surrounding the development of a business venture under the current economic climate, and shows that many of these are in stark contrast to the facilitating legal and commercial realities. Having said that, this brief overview is not intended to replace formal legal and taxation advice, but to provide an overview of the relevant rules to the entrepreneurs.

Dr Gwyn Jones is currently the Director of the Essex Business School (EBS), University of Essex. His first entrepreneurial venture involved successfully starting, growing and selling a software business. He became a serial entrepreneur, alongside his roles in the corporate environment as Chairperson, Director and Non-executive Director. Some of his high-profile posts include the Chairperson of the Welsh Development Agency, the North West Equity Fund, and training and consultancy firm RogenSi, a Non-Executive Director in Tesco and Apricot Computers, a Senior Independent Director at Invesco English and International Trust plc, a Governor of the BBC and a member of the S4C Authority. His career embraces technology, media, retail, consulting and investment.

He was appointed the EBS Director in 2013 to head up the management team and leads the review of the school's strategy for education, research and business engagement, a move that was intended to make the school more aligned with the opportunities that business engagement offers. Within a short year a number of agreements have been made with corporates and SMEs, and student numbers have escalated. In addition the school has developed a number of entrepreneurial initiatives, including the introduction of the internship option in small and medium enterprises (SMEs) for undergraduate students and the delivery of the Postgraduate Certificate programme in Entrepreneurship Practices for Essex's graduates who are intending to start a business. Currently, he is involved in a number of exciting projects including the development of business incubation spaces for entrepreneurial students to conduct their business activities. He also works closely with other departments within the University, and is involved in the development and running of a number of entrepreneurial initiatives including the GameHub (a game design programme in partnership with Colchester Borough Council, Essex County Council and Shark Infected Custard) and the annual entrepreneurship boot camp held in Essex.

Prior to his role of EBS Director, Gwyn has taught in various higher institutions in the UK including Manchester, Strathclyde, Aberystwyth, and Leicester.