Six Pillars of Modern Entrepreneurial Theory and How to Use Them

  • Yngve DahleEmail author
  • Anh Nguyen-Duc
  • Martin Steinert
  • Kevin Reuther


In recent years, there has been an explosion of interest in entrepreneurship from both practical entrepreneurs and researchers. While theories are helpful for explaining business-driven activities in a startup, they are also valid in reasoning for the practical activities occurring in the entrepreneurial context. We believe that startups would benefit from the awareness of these entrepreneurial theories and the understanding of how they can be connected to decision-making in both business and engineering perspectives. In particular, we want to focus on theories that are already used by practical entrepreneurs and their advisors. As an example, we have studied the Scandinavian entrepreneurial ecosystem. We selected six groups of theories that might be particularly relevant for the startup population, namely (1) core competence and resource-based view, (2) effectuation, (3) the fulfillment of entrepreneurial opportunities, (4) bricolage, (5) business model innovation, and (6) lean startup. In this chapter, we explain these theories including the ongoing research around them, the connections among these theories, and how they can be applied in a real case study.


Entrepreneurship theories Effectuation Bricolage Resource- based view Lean startup Business modeling Software startups Software development 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Forenklingsudvalget for Erhvervsfremme: Fokuseret og fremtidssikret (2018)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Landström, H.: The roots of entrepreneurship research. The intellectual development of a research field. N. Engl. J. Entrep. 1(2), 9–20 (1999)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cantillon, R.: Essay on the Nature of Trade in General. Henry Higgs, London (1755). (edition and translation 1959)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Schumpeter, J.A.: Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy. Harper & Row, New York (1942)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Schumpeter, J.A.: The Theory of Economic Development. Harvard Economic Studies, Cambridge, MA (1934)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Carlsson, B.: The rise of small business: causes and consequences. In: Adams, W.J. (ed.) Singular Europe: Economy and Polity of the European Community After 1992, pp. 145–169. University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, MI (1992)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Carlsson, B., Acs, Z.J., Audretsch, D.B., Braunerhjelm, P.: Knowledge creation, entrepreneurship, and economic growth: a historical review. Ind. Corp. Chang. 18(6), 1193–1229 (2009)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gartner, W.B., Shane, S.A.: Measuring entrepreneurship over time. J. Bus. Ventur. 10, 283–301 (1995)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Shane, S.: Reflections on the 2010 “AMR” decade award: delivering on the promise of entrepreneurship as a field of research. Acad. Manag. Rev. 37, 10–20 (2012)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Shane, S., Venkataraman, S.: The promise of entrepreneurship as a field of research. Acad. Manag. Rev. 25(1), 217–226 (2000)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Amit, R., Glosten, L., Muller, E.: Challenges to theory development in entrepreneurship research. J. Manag. Stud. 30(5), 815–834 (1993)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Simpeh, K.N.: Entrepreneurship theories and empirical research: a summary review of the literature. Eur. J. Bus. Manag. 3(6), 1–8 (2011)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Barney, J.: Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. J. Manag. 17, 99–120 (1991)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Wernerfelt, B.: A resource-based view of the firm. Strateg. Mark. J. 5, 171–180 (1984)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Prahalad, C., Hamel, G.: The core competence of the corporation. Harv. Bus. Rev. 68, 79–91 (1991)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Sarasvathy, S.: Causation and effectuation: toward a theoretical shift from economic inevitability to entrepreneurial contingency. Acad. Manag. Rev. 26, 243–263 (2001)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sarasvathy, S.D., Venkataraman, S.: Strategy and entrepreneurship: outlines of an untold story. In: Hitt, M.A., Freeman, E., Harrison, J.S. (eds.) Strategic Management Handbook, pp. 650–668. Blackwell, Oxford (2000)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Baker, T., Nelson, R.E.: Creating something from nothing: resource construction through entrepreneurial bricolage. Adm. Sci. Q. 50, 329–366 (2005)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Maurya, A.: Running Lean. O’Reilly, Sebastopol, CA (2012)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Osterwalder, A., Pigneur, Y., Tucci, C.L.: Clarifying business models: origins, present, and future of the concept. Commun. AIS. 15, 751–755 (2005)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Osterwalder, A., Pigneur, Y.: Business Model Generation. Wiley, Hoboken, NJ (2010)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Zott, C., Amit, R., Massa, L.: The business model: recent developments and future research. J. Manag. 37, 1019–1042 (2011)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Blank, S.: The Four Steps to the Epiphany—Successful Strategies for Products That Win. K&S Ranch, Menlo Park, CA (2005)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ries, E.: The Lean Startup: How Today’s Entrepreneurs Use Continuous Innovation to Create Radically Successful Businesses, 1st edn. Currency, New York (2011)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Gartner, W.B.: Who is the entrepreneur? Is the wrong question. Am. J. Small Bus. 12, 11–32 (1988)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Pinchot, G.: Who is the intrapreneur? In: Intrapreneuring: Why You Don’t Have to Leave the Corporation to Become an Entrepreneur, pp. 28–48. Harper & Row, New York (1984)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Hammersley, M., Atkinson, P.: What is ethnography. In: Ethnography: Principles in Practice, pp 9–25. Routledge, London (1995)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Jorgensen, D.L.: Participant observation. In: Scott, R.A., Kosslyn, S.M. (eds.) Emerging Trends in the Social and Behavioral Sciences. Wiley, New York (2015)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Porter, M.E.: Competitive Strategy. Free Press, New York (1980)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Teece, D., Pisano, G., Shuen, A.: Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strateg. Manag. J. 18(7), 509–533 (1997)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Eckhardt, J.T., Shane, S.A.: Opportunities and entrepreneurship. J. Manag. 29(3), 333–349 (2003)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Gangi, J.: The synergies of artistic and entrepreneurial action. J. Arts Manag. Law Soc. 45, 247–254 (2015)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Dahle, Y., Anh, N.D., Steinert, M., Chizhevskiy, R.: Resource and competence (internal) view vs. environment and market (external) view when defining a business. In: 2018 IEEE International Conference on Engineering, Technology and Innovation (ICE/ITMC), pp. 1–9 (2018)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Schumpeter, J.A.: Theorie der wirtschaftlichen Entwicklung. Duncker und Humblot, Berlin (1912)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Simon, H.A.: The Sciences of the Artificial, 3rd edn. MIT, Cambridge, MA (1996)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Nguven-Duc, A., Dahle, Y., Steinert, M., Abrahamsson, P.: Towards understanding startup product development as effectual entrepreneurial behaviors. In: Felderer, M., Fernández, D.M., Turhan, B., Kalinowski, M., Sarro, F., Winkler, D. (eds.) Product-Focused Software Process Improvement, pp. 265–279. Springer International, Cham (2017)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Levi-Strauss, C.: Ther Savage Mind. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL (1967)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Ritter, T., Lettl, C.: The wider implications of business-model research. Long Range Plan. 51, 1–8 (2018)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Baden-Fuller, C., Morgan, M.S.: Business models as models. Long Range Plan. 43, 156–171 (2010)Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Rambow-Hoeschele, K., Nagl, A., Harrison, D.K., Wood, B.M., Bozem, K., Braun, K., Hoch, P.: Creation of a digital business model builder—a concept to simulate a digital twin of a business model and its imperative nature. In: 2018 IEEE International Conference on Engineering, Technology and Innovation (ICE/ITMC) (2018)Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Morris, M., Schindehutte, M., Allen, J.: The entrepreneur’s business model: toward a unified perspective. J. Bus. Res. 58, 726–735 (2005)Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Moore, G.: Crossing the Chasm. HarperCollins, New York (1995)Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Ghezzi, A.: Digital startups and the adoption and implementation of lean startup approaches: effectuation, bricolage and opportunity creation in practice. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 146(C), 945–960 (2019)Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Brown, T., Katz, B.: Change by design. J. Prod. Innov. Manag. 28(3), 381–383 (2011)Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Design Thinking Bootleg: Stanford website (n.d.). Accessed July 2019
  46. 46.
    Jensen, M.B., Lozano, F., Steinert, M.: The origins of design thinking and the relevance in software innovations. In: International Conference on Product-Focused Software Process Improvement, pp. 675–678. Springer, Cham (2016)Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Lewin, K.: Psychology and the process of group living. J. Soc. Psychol. 17, 113–131 (1943)Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Kirzner, I.: Competition and Entrepreneurship. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL (1973)Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Schumpeter, J.A.: Über das Wesen der Wirtschaftskrisen. Zeitschrift für Volkswirtschaft, Sozialpolitik und Verwaltung. Organ Ges. Österr. Volkswirte. 19, 271–325 (1910)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Engineering Science and TechnologyNorwegian University of Science and TechnologyTrondheimNorway
  2. 2.Department of Business and ITUniversity of South-Eastern NorwayNotoddenNorway
  3. 3.School of Business and Enterprise, University of the West of ScotlandGlasgowUK

Personalised recommendations