The Development of Entrepreneurial Drive During the University Business School Experience

This research investigates changes in entrepreneurial drive (ED) between each of the three-year levels of students at an undergraduate UK university business school in order to test this measurement construct within a European context. The research adopted a quantitative approach to determine whether the ED measurement instrument could identify differences in the students’ ED dimensions and the overall ED across the three different years of undergraduate study. The data was subjected to principle component analysis to create factor scores for the ED components and the multivariate analysis of variance tests to determine whether different year groups exhibited different levels of ED. The research found that the total ED score increased at each successive year level. In addition, the achievement motivation, proactive disposition, and self-efficacy factors (dimensions) all increased during the university experience. As such, this research confirms the value of the ED measurement instrument in assessing the development of entrepreneurial drive within a European higher education setting.

An Enterprise Opportunity for Entrepreneurial Students: Student Enterprise Development and Experience Assessed through the Student Voice

Purpose: This research investigates the effectiveness of an experiential learning approach, available to students in all disciplines that combined a hands-on entrepreneurial and enterprise experience with professional consultant mentoring by using a competition to win business start-up funding. Design/methodology/approach: Students at a UK university had the chance to enter a competition in which they developed an entrepreneurial idea and then designed and presented a business plan to win business start-up capital. Students who were entrepreneurially motivated, but who lacked capital to start up their business, were targeted, as these students have been argued to benefit the most from a combination of business plan training and entrepreneurial development. Feedback and data was obtained from the students at each stage of the process and was thematically analysed to assess the development of students’ entrepreneurial skills and knowledge through the experience. Findings: The research found that the benefits gained from this approach included both enterprising and entrepreneurial skills, with the greatest impact being on student confidence and belief in their ability to start a business. The practical skills had a ‘demystifying’ effect on students that made them feel like entrepreneurship and enterprise start-up were attainable. Research limitations/implications: The research focused on students at one UK University and centered on entrepreneurship in a retail business. The competition thus appealed mainly to students who were interested in retail start-up, thus leaving out some enterprising students whose feedback may have been different. In addition, while entrepreneurial skills are assessed in the data, the students who would be interested in the competition would be assumed to be proactive, and this skill was not able to be analyzed. This research is a single case, and thus could be enhanced by more cases and looking at other enterprise start-up means beyond retail. Originality/value: This research makes a case that, in light of literature critical of the use of business plan training in entrepreneurship education, certain students are appropriate candidates for this approach. Specific skills and knowledge can be developed in university students using a live enterprise experience, supported by entrepreneurial mentoring. By making the event extracurricular, the study sought to capture the feedback of students who self-selected into the program, who can benefit most from combined entrepreneurial and business-plan development experience.

Professional Practice in Learning and Development: How to Design and Deliver Plans for the Workplace

Introduction The world is changing! It is volatile, uncertain, complex and ambiguous. As cliché as it may sound the evidence of such dynamism in the external environment is growing. Business-as-usual is more of the exception than the norm. Organizational change is the rule; be it to accommodate and adapt to change, or instigate and lead change. A constantly changing environment is a situation that all organizations have to live with. What makes some organizations however, able to thrive better than others? Many scholars and practitioners believe that this is due to the ability to learn. Therefore, this book on developing Learning and Development (L&D) professionals is timely as it explores and discusses trends and practices that impact organizations, the workforce and L&D professionals. Being able to learn and develop effectively is the cornerstone of motivation as it helps to address people’s need to be competent and to be autonomous (Deci & Ryan, 2002; Loon & Casimir, 2008; Ryan & Deci, 2000). L&D stimulates and empowers people to perform. Organizations that are better at learning at all levels; the individual, group and organizational level, will always have a better chance of surviving and performing. Given the new reality of a dynamic external environment and constant change, L&D professionals now play an even more important role in their organizations than ever before. However, L&D professionals themselves are not immune to the turbulent changes as their practices are also impacted. Therefore, the challenges that L&D professionals face are two-pronged. Firstly, in relation to helping and supporting their organization and its workforce in adapting to the change, whilst, secondly developing themselves effectively and efficiently so that they are able to be one-step ahead of the workforce that they are meant to help develop. These challenges are recognised by the CIPD, as they recently launched their new L&D qualification that has served as an inspiration for this book. L&D plays a crucial role at both strategic (e.g. organizational capability) and operational (e.g. delivery of training) levels. L&D professionals have moved from being reactive (e.g. following up action after performance appraisals) to being more proactive (e.g. shaping capability). L&D is increasingly viewed as a driver for organizational performance. The CIPD (2014) suggest that L&D is increasingly expected to not only take more responsibility but also accountability for building both individual and organizational knowledge and capability, and to nurture an organizational culture that prizes learning and development. This book is for L&D professionals. Nonetheless, it is also suited for those studying Human Resource Development HRD at intermediate level. The term ‘Human Resource Development’ (HRD) is more common in academia, and is largely synonymous with L&D (Stewart & Sambrook, 2012) Stewart (1998) defined HRD as ‘the practice of HRD is constituted by the deliberate, purposive and active interventions in the natural learning process. Such interventions can take many forms, most capable of categorising as education or training or development’ (p. 9). In fact, many parts of this book (e.g. Chapters 5 and 7) are appropriate for anyone who is involved in training and development. This may include a variety of individuals within the L&D community, such as line managers, professional trainers, training solutions vendors, instructional designers, external consultants and mentors (Mayo, 2004). The CIPD (2014) goes further as they argue that the role of L&D is broad and plays a significant role in Organizational Development (OD) and Talent Management (TM), as well as in Human Resource Management (HRM) in general. OD, TM, HRM and L&D are symbiotic in enabling the ‘people management function’ to provide organizations with the capabilities that they need.