What makes entrepreneurship research interesting? Reflections on strategies to overcome the rigour–relevance gap

Frank, Hermann; Landström, Hans

doi:10.1080/08985626.2015.1100687

Cited by 75 publications

(90 citation statements)

References 66 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…1 Another possible explanation for 'myth-building' within public policy centres on the selective use of empirical evidence. Due to the so-called 'rigour-relevance gap', connectivity between scholarly entrepreneurship research and practice is low (Frank and Landström, 2016). Therefore, while the empirical literature surrounding HGFs has expanded considerably over the last decade, assumptions about these firms within public policy have failed to catch-up with the expanding evidence.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Myth-busting and entrepreneurship policy: the case of high growth firms

Brown

Mawson

Mason

2017

Entrepreneurship & Regional Development

164

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Promoting high growth firms (HGFs) has become a strong fixation within enterprise policy. This is a debate article seeking to examine and challenge the mythology perpetuated by policy makers and embedded within high growth entrepreneurship policy frameworks. Within the article we argue that a number of distinctive 'myths' have become deeply embedded within these policy frameworks. Such myths have been built on misconceived preconceptions of HGFs, which has resulted in policy-makers taking a myopic view of these firms. A key aim of the paper is to highlight how false perceptions of HGFs translate into inappropriate policy interventions. The paper challenges some of the most commonly held myths about these firms (that they are predominantly young, small, high-tech, VC-backed, university spin-outs, who grow in an orderly organic fashion, operating similarly irrespective of location) and identifies a clear mismatch between how policy makers perceive HGFs and what they actually look like in reality. Suggestions for the design of future policy approaches are forwarded.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Myth-busting and entrepreneurship policy: the case of high growth firms

Brown

Mawson

Mason

2017

Entrepreneurship & Regional Development

164

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…(Fayolle 2013, Verzat 2015. Although research in entrepreneurship first emerged to answer such questions, Frank and Landström (2016) show that the discipline has undergone a phase of academic institutionalisation, which has progressively shifted it away from the practical perspective it had initially. Today the quality of entrepreneurship research is measured based on its visibility in the best academic journals, which implies increasing specialisation into highly specific questions and methods associated with a select few authors.…”

Section: The Third Challenge Is Epistemological and Ethicalmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Elsewhere in the literature, Frank and Landström (2016) report a growing tension in the community in relation to the objectives of research between scientific rigour and practical relevance. Based on interviews with eight focus groups of junior and senior researchers in entrepreneurship, they highlight two main problem areas between researchers and practitioners: the origin and nature of the issues investigated and the lack of collaboration in the knowledge creation and dissemination process.…”

Section: The Third Challenge Is Epistemological and Ethicalmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

In quest of legitimacy: The theoretical and methodological foundations of entrepreneurship education research

Fayolle

Verzat

Wapshott

2016

International Small Business Journal: Researching Entrepreneurs

162

187

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Such a review would contribute not only to the field's legitimisation but also to settling the debate this subject area has generated (Veciana, 2006). Because this debate is reopened every few years, it weakens the rigour and relevance of the field's findings (Frank & Landström, 2015).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Entrepreneurship as a dynamic field of study: a bibliometric analysis of research output

Ramírez¹,

Cañizares²,

García³

2017

TMS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present study's objective was to carry out a systematic literature review whose main value lies in updating and analysing the current state of scientific production in the field of entrepreneurship based on the best known international bibliographic databases, Web of Science and Scopus. To this end, the relevant papers published in indexed international journals were selected from both databases. The most-cited research was identified by setting a standardised threshold number of citations based on the Hindex called 'H-Classics', which is sensitive to the particular characteristics of each research area. This study analysed the most important authors, years of greater production, journals, cited authors, themes, subject areas, text typology, countries, institutional affiliations and keywords. The results are rankings of journals and authors based on the weights given by both databases' H-index for citation frequency. Keywords:Literature review, H-index, entrepreneurship. ResumenEl objetivo del presente trabajo de investigación es realizar una revisión sistemática de la literatura (RSL) cuya principal utilidad sea la de actualizar y analizar el estado de la producción científica en el campo del entrepreneurship según las dos bases de datos bibliográficas más reconocidas a nivel internacional: Web o Science (WOS) y Scopus. Para ello se han recuperado una selección de documentos publicados en las revistas internacionales indexadas en ambas bases de datos. La selección de documentos más citados se realizó fijando un umbral de citación estandarizado basado en el índice H denominado H-Classics sensible a las características propias de cualquier disciplina de investigación. Se analizan los autores más relevantes, años de mayor producción, revistas, autores referenciados, temas, áreas de conocimiento, tipología documental, países, afiliaciones y palabras clave. Los resultados aportan un ranking de revistas y autores aplicando una ponderación del H-Index por su frecuencia respectiva en cada base de datos.Palabras clave: Revisión de la literatura, índice H, entrepreneurship.

show abstract

What makes entrepreneurship research interesting? Reflections on strategies to overcome the rigour–relevance gap

Cited by 75 publications

References 66 publications

Myth-busting and entrepreneurship policy: the case of high growth firms

Myth-busting and entrepreneurship policy: the case of high growth firms

In quest of legitimacy: The theoretical and methodological foundations of entrepreneurship education research

Entrepreneurship as a dynamic field of study: a bibliometric analysis of research output

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About