Browsing by Author "Hunt, Richard A."
Now showing 1 - 6 of 6
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item Action ! Moving beyond the intendedly-rational logics of entrepreneurship(2018) Lerner, Daniel A.; Hunt, Richard A.; Dimov, DimoEntrepreneurial action is central to entrepreneurship theory, and is broadly seen to arise as a consequence of intendedly rational logics (whether causal or effectual), reflecting reasoned judgment. But, is this always the case? While entrepreneurial action may often be the result of a judgmental decision (between alternative courses of action/inaction), the presumption that reasoned judgment encompasses all the motives, modes and mechanisms leading to entrepreneurial outcomes seems dubious. Building on an emerging literature that seeks to address the boundaries of reasoned entrepreneurial action, we develop the notion that non-deliberative impulse-driven behavioral logics can also be the basis for business venturing. Our framework offers a complementary perspective to the intendedly-rational, deliberate logics perspective, opening novel pathways for future research and theory-building.Item Bringing It All Back Home: Corporate Venturing and Renewal Through Spin-ins(2019) Hunt, Richard A.; Townsend, David M.; Asgari, Elham; Lerner, Daniel A.More often than not, corporate acquisitions are expensive and difficult, especially those transacted for the purpose of advancing the aims of corporate entrepreneurship (CE). Motivated by frequent, high-cost failures, firms are experimenting with novel organizational structures and fresh approaches to acquisition-driven CE. In this study, we examine the effectiveness of corporate spin-ins—acquisitions in which the acquired company is founded by former employees of the acquiring firm—in resolving key challenges of CE-motivated acquisitions Using a matched pairwise dataset of spin-in and non-spin-in acquisitions, we discover that spin-ins generate superior outcomes, positioning them as a high-potential facet of CE portfolios.Item Dueling banjos: harmony and discord between adhd and entrepreneurship(2018) Lerner, Daniel A.; Hunt, Richard A.; Verheul, IngridThe past half century has witnessed a steady and diverse flow of scholarly research to understand the role individual differences play in determining entrepreneurial pursuits and new venture outcomes. Recently, the search for micro-level drivers has led scholars to investigate the role of dispositions and conditions that have been traditionally pathologized, such as attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). The potential influence of ADHD looms large in the field of entrepreneurship as a spate of recent studies suggests a positive relationship with creativity, entrepreneurial orientation, and new venture initiation. While offering significant progress in destigmatizing aberrant conditions, extant scholarship has left unanswered questions regarding ADHD’s influence on formation, development, and outcomes of new ventures. Accepting that ADHD should be neither stigmatized nor romanticized in the context of entrepreneurship, we develop a more holistic framework for ADHD, extending across the complete life cycle of business venturing.Item Entrepreneurial action as human action: Sometimes judgment-driven, sometimes not(2018) Hunt, Richard A.; Lerner, Daniel A.This article elaborates on a lively and rapidly evolving conversation central to entrepreneurship: the underpinnings of entrepreneurial action. In particular, we respond to a critique published in this journal by Brown, Packard, and Bylund (BPB), in which they argue that all EA is based on intendedly-rational judgment. The empirical reality of rational, deliberative intentionality in entrepreneurship is beyond dispute and we have argued that behavioral logics do not simply supplant intendedly-rational ones. However, mounting evidence suggests that the wide-spectrum framework developed by Lerner, Hunt and Dimov – ranging from impulse-driven, a-rational action to deeply deliberative, rational action – offers a more veridical and useful perspective. Although BPB's critique succeeds in underscoring the exciting challenges facing entrepreneurship scholars; in our view, the critique largely relies on philosophical argumentation and definitional boundary-setting that are inconsistent with decades of scientific advancement in the psychological sciences. Given this, and recent empirical evidence from entrepreneurship scholars, we think it would be counter-productive to consider entrepreneurship as the sole domain of human activity completely circumscribed by rational judgment.Item Lassie Shrugged: The Premise and Importance of Considering Non-Human Entrepreneurial Action(2022) Hunt, Richard A.; Lerner, Daniel; Ortiz-Hunt, AveryWhile management and entrepreneurship scholars have displayed comfort in and receptivity towards anthropomorphizing organizations, technologies, and even algorithms, our field has not yet grappled with a mountain of empirical evidence gathered over decades of research in the natural sciences that non-humans may behave entrepreneurially. For reflection and valuable perspective, our study relaxes the central assumption that entrepreneurial behaviors are the exclusive domain of human beings. Doing so invites fresh insights concerning the transversal nature of entrepreneurial action, the biological origins of innovation and entrepreneurship, the categorical assumptions demarcating the field of entrepreneurship, and the persistent emphases on intendedly rational conceptions of entrepreneurial action. The inspiration for our study involves “moving back from the species,” as E.O. Wilson advised. Through this “more distanced view” and by focusing on the reproducible benefits of entrepreneurship rather than narrower, human-centric conceptions of firm formation and profit generation, we find that the consideration of non-human behaviors contributes to the evolving definitions and future study of entrepreneurial action.Item Parental endowments versus business acumen: Assessing the fate of low-tech, service-sector spinouts(2019) Hunt, Richard A.; Lerner, Daniel A.; Townsend, David M.Research Summary In recent years, scholarship on intraindustry entrepreneurial spinouts has coalesced around a heredity‐focused perspective, propounding the notion that spinouts from high‐quality parent‐firms outperform those emanating from low‐quality parent‐firms. This view has found strong support in high‐tech sectors, but it is unclear whether parental lineage is a determinant of performance and survival in sectors exhibiting low‐technological dynamism, especially when the locus of value creation stems from generalist rather than technical‐specialist knowledge. Applying the knowledge spillover theory of entrepreneurship and jack‐of‐all‐trades framework, we assess the fate of a complete population of 678 service‐sector firms for the entire 32‐year history of an industry. Our study offers explanatory mechanisms that more fully account for the non‐hereditary success factors driving performance heterogeneity among entrepreneurial spinouts. Managerial Summary In many industries, half or more of the firms are founded by former employees of existing companies (i.e., “entrepreneurial spinouts”). In high‐tech sectors, these “spinouts” often appear to perform better than entrants without prior industry experience. Moreover, spinouts spawned by high‐performing parent‐firms tend to out‐perform spinouts from low‐performing parents, suggesting that spinouts benefit from advantageous parental knowledge and capabilities. However, this does not seem to be the case among spinouts in industries characterized by low‐technological dynamism. Our findings indicate that when technological dynamism is low, general business acumen eclipses parental lineage in determining spinout performance. In these cases, spinout founders with primarily technical experience would be well‐served by partnering with individuals possessing experience in marketing, sales, and day‐to‐day business management.