No abstract

This paper is a response to Gartner's critique of definitions posited by Carland, Hoy, Boulton and Carland (1984) for “entrepreneur” and “small business owner.” The paper concludes that both trait and behavioral approaches to research are necessary in order to understand the concept of entrepreneurship.

The literature of smaN business and entrepreneurship is explored. It is established that, although there is an overlap between entrepreneurial firms and smaN business firms, they are different entities. Using the 1934 work of Schumpeter and recognizing the additions to the field of current writers, a conceptual framework is established for the differentiation of entrepreneurs .from smaN business owners.

We refine and extend the study of entrepreneurial dispositions by linking three classic hallmarks of the entrepreneur—achievement motivation, risk–taking propensity, and preference for innovation—to the goal orientations of United States and Russian entrepreneurs. The results suggest that entrepreneurial dispositions vary according to culture and the entrepreneur's primary goal for the venture. The results have important implications for theoretical development linking dispositions and entrepreneurial behavior in different settings and for entrepreneurial education and government policy.

No abstract