ICSB 2012: Proposal or PDW or Symposium

Professional Development Workshop or Symposium Title: Bridging the Gaps between Academics, Practice, and Policy in Entrepreneurship Suresh U. Kumar, Founder and CEO, NexAge Technologies USA Inc and Green Earth LLC. [email protected] Norris F. Krueger, Jr. Fellow, Max Planck Institute of Economics, Entrepreneurship Northwest. [email protected] Abstract: Academic and practitioner groups in the field of entrepreneurship hold large annual conferences but rarely interact effectively. Barring a few exceptions, there is very little by way of strategic partnerships between academic and practitioner organizations that tie in practice, research, education, advocacy and policy in meaningful ways. While there may not be a one size fits all solution, it is critical for academic and practitioner organizations and their individual members to explore avenues for collaboration to find out what works and what does not. This participatory workshop conducted by practitioner-researchers discusses practical and innovative strategies that have worked. This workshop is not an academic exercise - rather, it will feature a series of vignettes by expert entrepreneurs, researchers, consultants, and leaders of not-for-profit organizations that showcases academic-practice-policy bridging strategies that have worked in the field of entrepreneurship education. This workshop will highlight innovative ideas that can help bridge the divide and identify common ground between education and practice. The objective of this workshop is to share knowledge and help participants build upon it and thereby help make education and research more relevant to practice. We encourage participants not just to showcase 'best practices' but also to reflect upon the challenges faced, how innovative solutions were crafted, why the strategy has been so effective, and how the experiences were leveraged to bridge learning and practice.

1

ICSB 2012: Proposal or PDW or Symposium Principal Topic We begin by making a case for the need for the proposed professional development workshop at the 2012 ICSB conference. The leaders of this workshop, one a well known researcher and academician and the other a serial entrepreneur, have over the years experienced multiple disconnects between academics and practice in the field of entrepreneurship. Many major academic organizations such as Academy of Management, International Council of Small Business, and the United States Association of Small Business and Entrepreneurship; as well as organizations that represent practitioners such as the United States Chamber of Commerce, Inc Magazine, and The Indus Entrepreneur conduct large annual conferences for their members. Our experience attending many of the events has been that, barring a few exceptions, there is very little by way of strategic dialogue and sustainable partnerships between academic and practitioner organizations that tie in practice, research, education, advocacy and policy in meaningful ways. We have found that organizations charged with fostering the practice and education of entrepreneurship, at least for the most part, operate in silos that separate entrepreneurs from educators and researchers. For example, academic conferences that are focused on entrepreneurship organized by USASBE and ICSB are attended just by a handful of practicing entrepreneurs, usually those who have a recent success story and have been invited to speak. We attribute the following as among the reasons for this disconnect (a) there is hardly any outreach by the organizers of academic conferences to practitioners, (b) practicing entrepreneurs have busy schedules and select events where they can get proven and practical ideas that could address their immediate concerns and can be applied to their businesses, not abstract research finding, and (c) entrepreneurs and the organization that represent them often lack the training to find and see the relevance in academic research that could contribute to better decision-making (Davidsson, 2011). Having participated in over 25 academic conferences between us, we can testify that there are plenty of excellent mentoring and learning opportunities for researchers at academic conferences such as doctoral consortiums and workshops. However, the value proposition for practitioners at academic conferences is not the same. For the majority of the papers presented at academic conferences the practical applicability is suspect. We echo the arguments made by William Bygrave (2007), as the primary reasons for this problem: (a) use of improper datasets, widespread use of secondary data, research models based on weak theory, research questions that are of little relevance to the world of practice, and use of esoteric quantitative techniques that is for the most part far removed from the reality of what actually happens inside the complex and chaotic world of startup’s. According to Dale Meyer (2011), the academic field of entrepreneurship is “stalled” due the use of econometric methodologies and secondary databases that “distance researchers from actual people and behaviors that catalyze entrepreneurs and entrepreneurship” (p. 7). On the practitioner organization side, over the years, between us we have attended over 20 events and annual conferences such as the Americas Small Business Summit organized by the US Chamber of Commerce, Tie-con of TIE, and the annual Inc.

2

ICSB 2012: Proposal or PDW or Symposium 500/5000 Conference by Inc. magazine. At each of these events we were hard pressed to find experts from research and academia. We argue that among of the key reasons for this missed opportunity are the following: (a) there is hardly any outreach by practitioner organizations to the entrepreneurship educators and researchers, (b) majority of the organizations representing practitioners stick with a narrow agenda that is designed get the immediate attention of their membership at the cost of addressing long term systemic issues that are supported and validated by painstaking research, (c) educational institutions do not give tenure credit to researcher who conduct workshops, do research, or speak at non-academic conferences, (d) universities and business schools do not reimburse researchers the fee and expenses for non-academic conferences (Kumar, 2011). The irony is that practitioner conferences are attended by large numbers of entrepreneurs and has the potential to be rich sources of collection of raw data and can serve as excellent testing labs for theory. Our principal concern is that the disconnects discussed above could stall the progress of both academics and practice, especially in an applied field such as entrepreneurship that many experts believe is still in its infancy (Bygrave, 2007). The objective of the proposed workshop is to share practical strategies that have been used by both academicians and practitioners and the organizations that represent them to effectively bridge the gaps discussed above. While we realize that may not be a one size fits all solution, we believe that it is critical for academic and practitioner organizations and their individual members to explore avenues for collaboration to share best practices on what had worked. This participatory workshop conducted by practitioner-researchers will discusses practical strategies that can help make education and research relevant to practice.

Format of Workshop: This workshop is not intended as an academic exercise - rather, it will feature a series of distinct vignettes that showcases academic-practice bridging strategies that have worked in the real world so that others can build on it. We encourage participants not just to discuss 'best practices' but also to reflect upon the challenges faced, the processes used to arrive at solutions, why the strategy has been so effective, and how the experiences were leveraged to enhance learning and practice. The proposed time frame for the workshop is 2 hours. We have invited guest speakers with deep experience spanning teaching, research, policy, and practice in the field of entrepreneurship. Each speaker will share their experience in about 10 to 12 minutes that will follow the format of (a) problem/challenge faced, (b) discovery, evaluation, and deployment of the potential solutions, (c) outcomes or results, (d) learning lessons. The presentations will be followed by a Q&A session where there will be interaction between the presenters as well as between the speakers and the audience on the vignettes. The final segment of the workshop leaders will summarize the learning lessons from the vignettes and the thread that weave them all together.

3

ICSB 2012: Proposal or PDW or Symposium Themes for Presentation The themes for the presentation include but are not limited to the following: (a) making conferences collaborative undertakings through creative alliances between practitioner and academic organizations, (b) a team approach to developing teaching, learning, and research strategies, (c) formulating research questions that are relevant to practice, (d) selecting the most appropriate research methodologies, (d) enhancing data collection through researcher-practitioner partnerships, (f) finding the right academic/practitioner mentors for students, (g) networking and teaming for success, (h) emphasizing business models and not business plans, and (i) collaboration for social entrepreneurship and not-for-profit organizations/NGO’s. Conclusion: Despite the rapid growth experienced by the academic field of entrepreneurship and the practice of entrepreneurship as two distinct endeavors, the challenges faced at their intersection are deep and multifaceted. Given that the end goals of organizations, regardless of academic or practitioner focused, are more or less similar, organizational leaders have the responsibility to ensure greater collaboration. While we realize there may not be a one size fits all solution, it is critical for academic and practitioner organizations and their individual members to explore avenues for collaboration to find out what works and what does not. This professional development workshop is an attempt to share knowledge and find common grounds between academic and practice. References Bygrave, W. D. (2007). The entrepreneurship paradigm (I) revisited. In H. Neergaard and J. P. Ulhoi (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research methods in entrepreneurship (pp. 17-48). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar. Davidsson, P. (2011) Putting business research to practice. Brisbane Business News, 2011 Annual Edition, Brisbane, Australia. Kumar, S. (2011). Linkages between cognition, behavior, culture, and opportunity among high-growth Asian American immigrant entrepreneurs. Accessed online on July 25, 2011, from http://www.drsureshkumar.net/suresh/DoctoralStudy.aspx Kumar, S. (2011). Resolving the disconnects between academics and practice in entrepreneurship. White paper published by Small Gaints Community/ICSB Blog. Meyer, G. D. (2011). The reinvention of academic entrepreneurship. Journal of Small Business Management, 49, 1-8.

4