In many countries the issue of legitimacy is a problem for the entrepreneur. The concept of “legitimacy” signifies the degree to which an idea is accepted by society generally. It refers to the status that an idea or collection of ideas has among people: how it is rated, valued and maintained by society. Some ideas appear to have higher levels of legitimacy than others. In quite a number of countries the careers of doctor, lawyer and accountant have high levels of legitimacy. Practitioners of these careers are held in high esteem and have a certain status. Concepts such as capitalism, economic development, employment, market forces or professionalism are given considerable attention in modern societies and seem to acquire an order of priority because of attitudes towards them or the way they have developed historically over time. If we are dealing with the subject of entrepreneurship, it is relevant to ask what status has the concept in society. Where does it stand in the social scale? How is it valued and rated by people generally? More importantly, we need to know the extent to which its relative status influences the numbers of people who are interested in becoming entrepreneurs. The degree of support and regard accorded to entrepreneurs seems to vary quite considerably from society to society. The task, which will be undertaken in this book, is to highlight the contribution that entrepreneurship can make to the development of society by:
Identifying the key elements in the process,
Delineating the skills of entrepreneurial activity in order to estimate their contribution to society’s development
Conceptualizing a model through which entrepreneurship can be understood as a discipline in its own right rather than one of the factors of production.
We know that in the US there is a great tradition of respect for those who are entrepreneurial and those who make money. Furthermore, we know that the Thatcher government in the UK promoted the entrepreneurial culture to the point of ignoring those who were really badly off. In the same way, the American idea that every single person has the capacity to become his/her own boss tends to create a corresponding disrespect for those who are badly off in society. Consequently, the American welfare system tends to be less caring than it might be if humanitarian criteria were used for assessing people’s worth. In other words, promoting an entrepreneurial culture can have a negative impact as well as a positive one. Notwithstanding such limiting factors the general thesis in this book is that entrepreneurship is a positive human activity and that efforts at legitimizing it are to be welcomed. A number of measures that have been found productive are described below.
Celebrating entrepreneurial endeavor
The principle of celebrating those who are successful in the business and wealth-creating world is enshrined in the American way of life. Special awards are given to people who succeed in business activities: their characteristics are paraded in public, they are asked to open festivals and they are given the highest accolades the country has to offer. Despite this fact, American educators complain about a lack of credibility for the study of entrepreneurship in schools (Kent, 1990). This is also the case in other countries where traditional subjects such as classical music, languages, geography, history as well as pure science are rated far more highly than subjects that deal with hard-nosed practical affairs of the day. There is no question or argument at all about the fact that all of these subjects are necessary for a person to have a well-rounded education. The problem is not that too much recognition is given to these subjects to the detriment of the practical ones. It is rather a question of the practical subjects not being similarly recognized as an integral part of a well-rounded education for the 21st century. A number of authors and reports have stressed the fact that the educational system needs to adapt to changing industrial demands. Perelman (1986) says "the technology we call school; will have as much place in the twenty first centurys learning system as the "horse and buggy have in today’s transportation system”. An OECD (1989) report entitled "Towards and Enterprise Culture" points out that the formal educational systems have often stressed an "abstract, academic style of institutional learning which has results in an average school leaving rate of 46% among 11 western nations". Thus languages, pure science and mathematics will have a higher status than home economics, woodwork or technical drawing. This differentiation is also reflected in the respect and status that is given to the entrepreneur.
In Ireland, for instance, entrepreneurs are regarded as “tanglers” or people who rob from others (O Connor and Lyons, 1982) or as "rogues who would be more at home with a pack of Cossacks than at the helm of Irish business" (Curran and Hayes, 1999). Of course, it is an integral part of human nature to be envious of others and, in many cases; this is what motivates people to speak disparagingly about the entrepreneur. Here again the problem solving abilities of entrepreneurs should be sufficient to get around the difficulty. In other words, the entrepreneur usually ignores such destructive criticism while striving to reach his or her targets. The real difficulty lies in the fact that the negative climate that is created by envy can be inimical to the development of entrepreneurial cultures. It can prevent lead educators and program directors to de-value the skills that entrepreneurs have to the extent that they are not fully acknowledged in society or in the educational system
Dealing with the eye of the needle syndrome
The gospel tenet that "it is more difficult for a camel to get through the eye of a needle than it is for a rich man to get to heaven" has put a question mark before the morality of money-making activities. It seems to signify that there is more of a welcome in heaven for the man or woman is poverty stricken than for the person who makes money. The attitude is often represented in popular lore as a belief that in some way the rich man is less virtuous than the poor man. The following ditty in vogue 50 years ago seems to express the attitude rather pithily:
“The rich man died and went down to Helium,
He had supper with the devil at half past Elevenium,
Stinkybanky Dusilia O Rogelum,
The poor man died and went up to Heavenium,
He had supper with the angels at half past elevenium
Gloria Alleluia O Rogelum”
For many years Protestants dealt with the problem of their consciences in relation to the creation of wealth by emphasizing what was called the “the Protestant work ethic”. This meant, in effect, that if you worked hard you would have a just reward in heaven. In the same context, it was felt that the creators of wealth had a duty to the wealth that they held, insofar as they should not squander it foolishly. It is obvious from the success of the industrial revolution in England that this philosophy served the ruling classes well. A similar philosophy permeates the financial policies of governments who try to keep public spending under control. What such an approach signifies in relation to government policy, is that the making of money is a worthwhile and praiseworthy activity, provided savings are not squandered on unnecessary products and services. To a large extent, the greater portion of this book is concerned with the topic of entrepreneurship as a praiseworthy pursuit in itself. In this way the book demonstrates that studies into the dynamics of entrepreneurship are a very positive way of promoting the concept.
Is it hereditary?
How often have we heard statements such as he is a “born leader”, “a born teacher” or a “born actor”? It is as if the person in question has some particular quality that differentiates him from all his peers. When it is applied to the entrepreneur it is expressed in terms such as:
"The man with the golden touch”
"He can’t put a foot wrong" or just simply
"He was born under a lucky star"
Since the thesis of this book is that entrepreneurs can be made the idea that they have inherent hereditary magical qualities, that cannot be acquired through learning programs, is a contradiction in terms. In order to counteract the powerful and debilitating logic of the assumption that the characteristic is hereditary it is useful to identify and deal with the major ideas that arise in this school of thought. Therefore, the origin, nature and expression of the concept are outlined below.
Origin of the mystique
Whether such mythology is perpetuated by the entrepreneurs themselves or not is an interesting question. Obviously, if you want to distance yourself from your rivals it is of considerable help to make them feel that you are untouchable in some way. There have been a number of famous actors and authors, for instance, who shunned the public gaze for years and this has caused contemporaries to bestow characteristics on them that make them analogous to demigods. For their part, they have enhanced this image by living in castles and large estates, while they engage in the most bizarre pursuits.
A mystique is woven around the successful entrepreneur to such an extent that people readily accept the fiction that they brought their characteristics with them in their genes.
As is the case with any characteristic that manifests itself sparingly across populations, such as intelligence, leadership or creativity, it is far easier to attribute the existence of the phenomenon to factors that are outside individual control than to ones that may be subject to analysis. After all there has been only one Einstein, one Shakespeare, one Mozart or for that matter, one Bill Gates. When you search for the factors that brought such people into existence you find yourself baffled by the search.
Coping with the “born with it school”
With regard to what we may term “the born with it” school of entrepreneurship, it can be said that there is no way of proving or disproving that humans bring the characteristic with them in their genes. As is the case with studies of leadership, intelligence and creativity all that can be said is that some people have a higher level of it than others. Kilby (1971) termed the search for the characteristic as a case of “hunting the heflalump” and goes on to say that the heflalump is a large animal that no one has seen but everyone can describe. According to him and others the search is irrelevant, insofar as we know that the phenomenon exists and that is all we need to know in order to be able to proceed with analysis.
If we turn to the field of developmental psychology for answers we may get some clues. For centuries there has been a debate concerning whether or not the mind is a tabula rasa at birth. There has been no satisfactory resolution of this discussion but there is general consensus regarding the fact that we have certain predispositions at birth that lay the groundwork, so to speak, for future development. According to the psychologists this is all that can be said.
As to the question of whether one human being has a more highly developed intelligence than another at birth psychologists have little to say. It is clear enough that there are differences but accurate measurement of such differences has proven to be exceedingly difficult. All that can be said is that we have predispositions to act in certain ways at birth that seem to be built on later.
In the same way we can identify entrepreneurial characteristics in people such as problem solving, goal setting or creativity in people but we cannot say with absolute certainty whether they were born with them or taught them. The question is very much related to the matter of nature versus nurture, which is discussed below.
If we scan the infant world looking for a single characteristic that will differentiate the entrepreneurial personality from the non-entrepreneurial one, our efforts will be every bit as fruitless as similar searches in relation to religious or political leaders.
Nurture versus nature
Quite a number of studies point out that many entrepreneurs have parents who were entrepreneurs before them. We are tempted to conclude from these studies that the characteristic must be hereditary. Thus in Ireland, for instance, it was felt that many entrepreneurs were the sons and daughters of farmers or shopkeepers (Rothery, 1977)) and other studies in America (Hisrich, 1990) also emphasise the fact that a parental role can have a dramatic effect on the entrepreneurial skills of a growing child. However, there are so many examples of entrepreneurs who seemed to carve out niches of their own despite their parental encouragement, rather than as a result of it, that it is unlikely to be an adequate explanation of the phenomenon.
Closely allied to the above line of thought is the suggestion that entrepreneurship is associated with certain regions to the extent that enterprises pass from father to son or daughter. This is said to be the case in Kortrijk in Belgium where most of the businesses are family owned. However, it cannot be concluded from this fact that the flowering of entrepreneurship in this region is due solely to the fact that entrepreneurship exists as a hereditary phenomenon. As has already been shown in the studies mentioned earlier linking academic institutions with businesses in can create an entrepreneurial culture. This can happen in areas where there was never such a climate before. Of course, the development may be due to geographic, geopolitical, historical and cultural factors as well. The fact remains that it is perfectly possible to create such environments with the right training approaches and without any particular record of entrepreneurship in an area.
It is a striking fact that many family enterprises go through cycles such as foundation, development, expansion and decline. Thus, they replicate the phenomenon, in the macro word, of the genesis of civilisation, its development and, finally, its decline.
A confluence of many factors
A number of researchers would include factors such as the person, the opportunity and the environment as the essential ingredients in the making of the entrepreneur. Obviously, consideration of the person as a factor will involve psychological factors such as drive, motivation, targets setting, career maturing and internality, which are dealt with in greater detail later on. This approach is more sensible because it deals with the phenomenon of entrepreneurship in the same way as any other human phenomenon. To be constantly searching for a single factor to explain the phenomenon is a waste of time that could be spent on spelling out how best we can make people entrepreneurial. Systematic training approaches to the development of leadership, motivation and management have evolved without much reference to hereditary factors. The world stands back in awe at the abilities of a Caesar, a Napoleon or a Churchill but historians go to great pains to explain such phenomena as products of their ages rather than people who inherit mysterious characteristics. As a result of their efforts such people can be understood against the background or historical canvass in which we find them. The same needs to be done for the entrepreneur. While there may be hereditary characteristics, this writer believes that these do not tell the whole story by a long shot. There are other factors such as opportunity and environment that play a major role. This book is taken up with demonstrating how these other factors can be manipulated in such a way that the entrepreneur can in fact be “made” in the same way as other professionals can be made. There may very well be basic characteristics that a person needs in order to adopt the entrepreneurial persona described in these pages but the fact remains that the entrepreneur is a learner par excellence.
The entrepreneur learns from the environment, learns from trial and error, builds castles in the air, initiates projects, implements schemes and makes money while doing so. Many of the skills that the entrepreneur uses are ones that are acquired in a hands on way. They are not all ones that are peculiar to him or her. In fact, the entrepreneur normally has no hang ups about borrowing skills from others. He/she is flexible and almost constantly on a learning curve.
What has got to be remembered about most entrepreneurs is that they started small - very small. The large chain of stores that you see spanning an entire country, very likely had its origins in street trading. Those peddlers of souvenirs, which you see haggling outside castles may very well, be the founders of trend setting stores in the future. That travel agency which organized the trip that took you half way across the world probably started as a one-man operation built around some specific interest such as sports or pilgrimages. Now, as you observe their ticketing procedures, or the beautifully spoken professionals who greet you when you arrive at foreign airports you tend to forget their humble beginnings. It is easier to say that they have the magical touch.
All such beliefs are myths that need to be countered and surmounted by the potential entrepreneur. They need to be challenged by the entrepreneurship trainer in schools, youth clubs and community associations. The “magical” qualities that seem to be unique to existing entrepreneurs should be evoked in trainees in such a manner that enthusiasm carries them forward to tackle the issues that confront them.
