Entrepreneurship as the structuration of individual and opportunity: A response using a critical realist perspective

Abstract

A note on versions:The version presented here may differ from the published version or, version of record, if you wish to cite this item you are advised to consult the publisher's version. Please see the 'permanent WRAP url' above for details on accessing the published version and note that access may require a subscription. (2000) framework of the interrelationship between opportunity and the entrepreneur, by proposing Giddens' structuration theory as the 'lens through which to view the entrepreneurial process ' (2006: 286). In this comment we make four points. Although we agree that the nexus of entrepreneur and opportunity is one that requires understanding within the context of social structure and the individual agency.Our view of structure differs substantially from Giddens and by implication Sarason et al. (2006) we discus the implications. Second, since strata in social reality have different ontologies we propose it follows that they are viewed as a dualism. Third, agents have causal power, and ultimate concerns which they try to fallibly to put into practice. We propose Entrepreneurship is the study of the interplay between the structures of a society and the agents within it the implications of fallibility is made explicit. Finally, we take issue with Sarason et al.'s argument for an interpretist epistemology We conclude that it appears to us that structuration theory is not the most useful theory to handle the nexus of opportunity and entrepreneurship. Rather a critical realist perspective, like Archer's morphogenesis, may be more appropriate

Emancipation through digital entrepreneurship? A critical realist analysis

“…While Davidson and Vaast, in the actor-network tradition, locate agency in the material as well as in the human actor (2010, p.4), they do not consider how human and technological agency might differ, nor how these differences mean that such agency may be constrained or enabled in completely different ways. (Mole & Mole 2010), consistent with the presentation of the phenomenon in most extant literature (Table 1). In general, the expectations of what the digital can do for entrepreneurial processes are overwhelmingly positive because they fail to account for the unequal structural barriers that agents may encounter.…”

Take-up and variation of advice for new firm founders in different local contexts

“…There is a distinct persistent hierarchy of entrepreneurial places such that the same areas have high, low and medium rates of start-up year upon year (Moyes andWesthead 1990, Reynolds, Storey andWesthead 1994). This persistence highlights structural forces that reproduce and reinforce the existing status quo (Fotopoulos 2014, Stinchcombe 1987, Mole and Mole 2010. The extant literature suggested several structural correlates for start-up rates: greater new firm founding rates are found in densely populated areas, where industry is more specialized, where employees have higher levels of human capital and where there are extensive production links (Boschma and Frenken 2011).…”

Critical Realist Information Systems Research in Action

“…Miller and Tsang=s approach would, in most cases, require collaboration between researchers trained in different fields. In terms of comparing theories, Mole and Mole (2010) compare the use of Gidden=s (1984) structuration theory and Archers (1995) morphogenesis theory in the entrepreneurship field and conclude that a CR perspective, like Archer=s morphogenesis, may be more appropriate. Similar types of studies are needed in the IS field.…”