Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

In consideration of entrepreneurship theory

  • Published:
Scientometrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study analyzes more than three decades of theory testing published in leading entrepreneurship journals. It uncovers the amount of theory testing; the extent to which theories are tested multiple times; and, the disciplinary origins of the theories that are tested. The analysis reveals that empirical researchers have increasingly responded to demands for more theory-driven knowledge over time through domestic theory creation and wholesale adoption of theories from other fields. It is observed that the most tested theories are borrowed from other scientific fields. The value of agency theory, the most popular one, is assessed via a foreign theory screening model. The result suggests that researchers cannot be too cautious when considering foreign theory for domestic knowledge development. Ultimately, researchers are strongly encouraged to consider testing the many domestic theories that have been specifically designed to answer the pressing, practical problems of the entrepreneurship discipline.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The extent to which each of the suggested components is sufficient is a complex issue mainly because component thresholds have not been established. In other words, a widely-held theory of scientific theory does not exist.

References

  • Ahlstrom, D., & Bruton, G. D. (2006). Venture capital in emerging economies: Networks and institutional change. Entrepreneurship: Theory & Practice, 30(2), 299–320.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alvarez, S. A., & Barney, J. B. (2010). Entrepreneurship and epistemology: The philosophical underpinnings of the study of entrepreneurial opportunities. Academy of Management Annals, 4, 557–583.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alvarez, S. A., Barney, J. B., & Young, S. L. (2010). Debates in entrepreneurship: Opportunity formation and implications for the field of entrepreneurship. In Z. J. Acs & D. B. Audretsch (Eds.), Handbook of entrepreneurship research (Vol. 5, pp. 23–45). New York, NY: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Arthurs, J. D., & Busenitz, L. W. (2003). The boundaries and limitations of agency theory and stewardship theory in the venture capitalist/entrepreneur relationship. Entrepreneurship: Theory & Practice, 28(2), 145–162.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bagby, D. R. (1988). Editorial: The winds of change. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 13(1), 5–6.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Baker, G., Jensen, M. C., & Murphy, K. (1988). Compensation and incentives: Practice vs. theory. Journal of Finance, 43, 593–616.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Birkinshaw, J., Healey, M. P., Suddaby, R., & Weber, K. (2014). Debating the future of management research. Journal of Management Studies, 51(1), 38–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Busenitz, L. W., West, G. P., Shepherd, D., Nelson, T., Chandler, G. N., & Zacharakis, A. (2003). Entrepreneurship research in emergence: Past trends and future directions. Journal of Management, 29(3), 285–308.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, J. P. (1990). The role of theory in industrial and organizational psychology. In M. D. Dunnette & L. M. Hough (Eds.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology 1 (2nd ed., pp. 39–74). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carlsson, B., Braunerhjelm, P., McKelvey, M., Olofsson, C., Persson, L., & Ylinenpää, H. (2013). The evolving domain of entrepreneurship research. Small Business Economics, 41(4), 913–930.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chia, R. (1996). Teaching paradigm shifting in management education: University business schools and the entrepreneurial imagination. Journal of Management Studies, 33(4), 409–428.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cochet, O., & Garg, V. (2008). How do franchise contracts evolve? A study of three German SMEs. Journal of Small Business Management, 46(1), 134–151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Combs, J. G., & Ketchen, D. J. (2003). Why do firms use franchising as an entrepreneurial strategy?: A meta-analysis. Journal of Management, 29(3), 443–465.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cuevas-Rodríguez, G., Gomez-Mejia, L. R., & Wiseman, R. M. (2012). Has agency theory run its course?: Making the theory more flexible to inform the management of reward systems. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 20(6), 526–546.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dalton, D. R., Daily, C. M., Certo, S. T., & Roengpitya, R. (2003). Meta-analyses of financial performance and equity: fusion or confusion? Academy of Management Journal, 46(1), 13–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dalton, D. R., Daily, C. M., Ellstrand, A. E., & Johnson, J. L. (1998). Meta-analytic reviews of board composition, leadership structure, and financial performance. Strategic Management Journal, 19, 269–290.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davidsson, P. (2005). Researching entrepreneurship (1st ed.). Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davidsson, P. (2015). Entrepreneurial opportunities and the entrepreneurship nexus: A re-conceptualization. Journal of Business Venturing, 30(5), 674–695.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dean, M. A., Shook, C. L., & Payne, G. T. (2007). The past, present, and future of entrepreneurship research: Data analytic trends and training. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 31(4), 601–618.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dos Santos, B. L., Holsapple, C. W., & Ye, Q. (2011). The intellectual influence of entrepreneurship journals: A network analysis. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 35(4), 735–754.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eckhardt, J. T., & Shane, S. A. (2003). Opportunities and entrepreneurship. Journal of Management, 29(3), 333–349.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhardt, K. M., & Graebner, M. E. (2007). Theory building from cases: Opportunities and challenges. Academy of Management Journal, 50(1), 25–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fayolle, A. (2014). Thinking and writing for scholarly publication in entrepreneurship. In A. Fayolle & M. Wright (Eds.), How to get published in the best entrepreneurship journals: A guide to steer your academic career (pp. 1–15). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Pub. Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gartner, W. B. (2007a). Is there an elephant in entrepreneurship? Blind assumptions in theory development. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 25(4), 27–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gartner, W. B. (2007b). Entrepreneurial narrative and a science of the imagination. Journal of Business Venturing, 22(5), 613–627.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gartner, W. B., Bird, B. J., & Starr, J. A. (1992). Acting as if: Differentiating entrepreneurial from organizational behavior. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 16(3), 13–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ghoshal, S. (2005). Bad management theories are destroying good management practices. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 4(1), 75–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gomez-Mejia, L. R., & Wiseman, R. M. (2007). Does agency theory have universal relevance? A reply to Lubatkin, Lane, Collin, and Very. Journal of Organizational Behaviour, 28, 81–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grégoire, D. A., Noël, M. X., Déry, R., & Béchard, J.-P. (2006). Is there conceptual convergence in entrepreneurship research? A co-citation analysis of frontiers of entrepreneurship research, 1981–2004. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 30(3), 333–373.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hambrick, D. (2007). The field of management’s devotion to theory: Too much of a good thing? Academy of Management Journal, 50(6), 1346–1352.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harrison, R. T., & Leitch, C. M. (1996). Discipline emergence in entrepreneurship: Accumulative fragmentalism or paradigmatic science? Entrepreneurship, Innovation, and Change, 5(2), 65–83.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hlady-Rispal, M., & Jouison-Laffitte, E. (2014). Qualitative research methods and epistemological frameworks: A review of publication trends in entrepreneurship. Journal of Small Business Management, 52(4), 594–614.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hunt, S. D. (1991). Modern marketing theory: Critical issues in the philosophy of marketing science. Cincinnati, OH: South-Western.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hunt, S. D. (2010). Marketing theory: Foundations, controversy, strategy, and resource-advantage theory. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, M. C., & Murphy, K. J. (1990). Performance pay and top management incentives. Journal of Political Economy, 98(2), 225–264.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Joardar, A., & Wu, S. (2011). Examining the dual forces of individual entrepreneurial orientation and liability of foreignness on international entrepreneurs. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 28, 328–340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47(2), 263–291.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Katz, J. A. (2003). The chronology and intellectual trajectory of American entrepreneurship education: 1876–1999. Journal of Business Venturing, 18(1), 283–300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaufmann, P. J., & Dant, R. P. (1996). Multi-unit franchising: growth and management issues. Journal of Business Venturing, 11(5), 343–358.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kenworthy, T. P., & Balakrishnan, J. (2016). Theory usage in empirical operations management research: A review and discussion. Management Decision, 54(10), 2413–2432.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kenworthy, T. P., & Sparks, J. R. (2016). A scientific realism perspective on scientific progress in marketing: An analysis of theory testing in marketing’s major journals. European Management Journal, 34(5), 466–474.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kenworthy, T. P., & Verbeke, A. (2015). The future of strategic management research: Assessing the quality of theory borrowing. European Management Journal, 33(3), 179–190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kiser, E. (1999). Comparing varieties of agency theory in economics, political science, and sociology: An illustration from state policy implementation. Sociological Theory, 17(2), 46–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Korsgaard, S., Berglund, H., Thrane, C., & Blenker, P. (2016). A tale of two Kirzners: Time, uncertainty, and the “nature” of opportunities. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 40(4), 867–889.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuratko, D. F., Morris, M. H., & Schindehutte, M. (2015). Understanding the dynamics of entrepreneurship through framework approaches. Small Business Economics, 45(1), 1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Landström, H., Harirchi, G., & Åström, F. (2012). Entrepreneurship: Exploring the knowledge base. Research Policy, 41(7), 1154–1181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Landström, H., & Persson, O. (2010). Entrepreneurship research: Research communities and knowledge platforms. In H. Landström & F. Lohrke (Eds.), Historical foundations of entrepreneurship research (pp. 46–76). Cheltenham: Elgar.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Leitch, C. M., Hill, F. M., & Harrison, R. T. (2010). The philosophy and practice of interpretivist research in entrepreneurship. Organizational Research Methods, 13(1), 67–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewin, K. (1951). Field theory and experiment in social psychology. In D. Cartwright (Ed.), Field theory in social science: Selected theoretical papers. New York, NY: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Low, M. B. (2001). The adolescence of entrepreneurship research: Specification of purpose. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 25(4), 17–25.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Lubatkin, M., Lane, P. J., Collin, S., & Very, P. (2007). An embeddedness framing of governance and opportunism: Towards a cross-nationally accommodating theory of agency. Journal of Organizational Behaviour, 28, 43–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luor, T., Lu, H.-P., Yu, H., & Chang, K. (2014). Trends in and contributions to entrepreneurship research: A broad review of literature from 1996 to June 2012. Scientometrics, 99(2), 353–369.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Markin, E., Swab, R. G., & Marshall, D. R. (2017). Who is driving the bus? An analysis of author and institution contributions to entrepreneurship research. Journal of Innovation and Knowledge, 2(1), 1–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Markóczy, L., & Deeds, D. L. (2009). Theory building at the intersection: Recipe for impact or road to nowhere? Journal of Management Studies, 46(6), 1076–1088.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McDonald, S., Gan, B. C., Fraser, S., Oke, A., & Anderson, A. R. (2015). A review of research methods in entrepreneurship 1985–2013. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research, 21(3), 291–315.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McKelvey, B. (1997). Quasi-natural organization science. Organization Science, 8(4), 352–380.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meehl, P. E. (1990). Appraising and amending theories: The strategy of Lakatosian defense and two principles that warrant it. Psychological Inquiry, 1(2), 108–141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merton, R. K. (1973). Social conflict over styles of sociological work. In R. K. Merton (Ed.), The sociology of science: The theoretical and empirical investigations (pp. 47–69). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, M., Libaers, D., Thijs, B., Grant, K., Glänzel, W., & Debackere, K. (2014). Origin and emergence of entrepreneurship as a research field. Scientometrics, 98(1), 473–485.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moldoveanu, M. C., & Baum, J. A. C. (2002). Contemporary debates in organizational epistemology. In J. A. C. Baum (Ed.), Companion to organizations (pp. 733–751). Oxford: Blackwell Publishers Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moreno, A. M., & Casillas, J. C. (2007). High-growth SMEs versus non-high growth SMEs: A discriminant analysis. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 19(1), 69–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oswick, C., Fleming, P., & Hanlon, G. (2011). From borrowing to blending: Rethinking the processes of organizational theory building. Academy of Management Review, 36(2), 318–337.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pittaway, L., & Cope, J. (2007). Entrepreneurship education: A systematic review of the evidence. International Small Business Journal, 35(5), 479–510.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Popper, K. R. (1959). The logic of scientific discovery. London: Hutchinson & Co., Ltd.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Ramoglou, S., & Tsang, E. W. K. (2015). A realist perspective of entrepreneurship: Opportunities as propensities. Academy of Management Review, 41(3), 410–434.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rodrigues, R. G., & Raposo, M. (2011). Entrepreneurial orientation, human resources information management, and firm performance in SMEs. Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences, 28, 143–153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rudner, R. (1966). Philosophy of social science. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ryan, J. (2014). Financial accounting reform: the need for a ‘back to basics’ approach for profit measurement and wealth measurement. International Journal of Economics and Accounting, 5(1), 1–50.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Shane, S. (2003). A general theory of entrepreneurship. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Stewart, A., & Cotton, J. (2013). Making sense of entrepreneurship journals: Journal rankings and policy choices. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, 19(3), 303–323.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suchan, J., & Charles, M. (2006). Business communication research: past, present and future. Journal of Business Communication, 43(4), 389–397.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suddaby, R., Bruton, G. D., & Si, S. X. (2015). Entrepreneurship through a qualitative lens: Insights on the construction and/or discovery of entrepreneurial opportunity. Journal of Business Venturing, 30(1), 1–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teixeira, A. A. C. (2011). Mapping the (in)visible college(s) in the field of entrepreneurship. Scientometrics, 89(1), 1–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Burg, E., & Romme, A. G. L. (2014). Creating the future together: Toward a framework for research synthesis in entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 38(2), 369–397.

    Google Scholar 

  • van de Ven, A. H. (1989). Nothing is quite so practical as a good theory. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 486–489.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Praag, C. M., & Versloot, P. H. (2007). What is the value of entrepreneurship? A review of recent research. Small Business Economics, 29(4), 351–382.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weick, K. E. (1995). What theory is not, theorizing is. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40(3), 385–390.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Welsch, H. P., & Liao, J. (2003). Strategies for entrepreneurship development: Striking a balance between explorative and exploitative research. In C. Steyaert & D. Hjorth (Eds.), New movements in entrepreneurship (pp. 20–34). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiklund, J., Davidsson, P., Audretsch, D. B., & Karlsson, C. (2011). The future of entrepreneurship research. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 35(1), 1–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wirtz, P. (2011). Beyond agency theory: Value creation and the role of cognition in the relationship between entrepreneurs and venture capitalists. In R. Yazdipour (Ed.), Advances in entrepreneurial finance (pp. 31–44). New York, NY: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Zahra, S. A. (2007). Contextualizing theory building in entrepreneurship research. Journal of Business Venturing, 22(3), 443–452.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Windsor Odette School of Business, Windsor, Canada

    Thomas P. Kenworthy

  2. Haskayne School of Business, The University of Calgary, 2500 University Drive NW, Calgary, AB, T2N 1N4, Canada

    W. Edward McMullan

Authors
  1. Thomas P. Kenworthy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. W. Edward McMullan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Thomas P. Kenworthy.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kenworthy, T.P., McMullan, W.E. In consideration of entrepreneurship theory. Scientometrics 115, 767–783 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2699-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2699-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation