A new venture in corpus-based lexicography: towards a dictionary of academic English

This paper asserts the increasing importance of academic English in an increasingly Anglophone world, and looks at the differences between academic English and general English, especially in terms of vocabulary. The creation of wordlists has played an important role in trying to establish the academic English lexicon, but these wordlists are not based on appropriate data, or are implemented inappropriately. There is as yet no adequate dictionary of academic English, and this paper reports on new efforts at Aston University to create a suitable corpus on which such a dictionary could be based.

Does venture opportunity variation matter? investigating systematic process differences between innovative and imitative new ventures

The central thesis in the article is that the venture creation process is different for innovative versus imitative ventures. This holds up; the pace of the process differs by type of venture as do, in line with theory-based hypotheses, the effects of certain human capital (HC) and social capital (SC) predictors. Importantly, and somewhat unexpectedly, the theoretically derived models using HC, SC, and certain controls are relatively successful explaining progress in the creation process for the minority of innovative ventures, but achieve very limited success for the imitative majority. This may be due to a rationalistic bias in conventional theorizing and suggests that there is need for considerable theoretical development regarding the important phenomenon of new venture creation processes. Another important result is that the building up of instrumental social capital, which we assess comprehensively and as a time variant construct, is important for making progress with both types of ventures, and increasingly, so as the process progresses. This result corroborates with stronger operationalization and more appropriate analysis method what previously published research has only been able to hint at.

ACE research briefing paper 001 : the role of family in new business start-ups

This report uses data from the first two years of the CAUSEE study and focuses on the role of family in new business start-ups. While CAUSEE was not designed specifically to probe deeply into family matters the study does reveal interesting information on family orientated aspects including parental role models, family involvement on the start-up team, and family as a source of funding and advice. These findings can also be related to other information gathered as part of the comprehensive phone interviews that are used to gather the research data for CAUSEE. Furthermore we are also able to compare firm founders and 'Regular' nascent firm and young firm start-ups with their 'High Potential' counterparts in terms of their degrees of family involvement. Unless otherwise stated any differences or effects we comment on are 'statistically significant' at the five per cent level - that is, they are likely to reflect true differences or effects in the entire population of Australian start-ups.

Pegasus Town : innovative marketing of a new property venture

Purpose – This paper aims to outline the challenges and tasks involved in a organising and marketing a new venture from conception to sales. It presents an interesting situation with which readers can identify and apply knowledge and skills associated with entrepreneurship and marketing and link this with the key learning objectives of a new venture marketing study unit. Design/methodology/approach – The case is constructed around key principles of marketing and entrepreneurship linked to a description of a contemporary venture written from a participant observer perspective supplemented with knowledge from interviews and archival research. Findings – The case shows how effective a diligent, creative approach to developing and selling a new venture can be. It demonstrates that effective marketing requires more than rote adoption of basic principles – it requires creative thinking and enterprising adaption of relevant principles to address the specific and well defined objectives of the venture. Research limitations/implications – The case is not intended to prescribe a particular marketing method or process; rather it is meant to stimulate creativity in the use of marketing knowledge and skills. Practical implications – The case represents an effective resource for both formal and informal teaching and learning. It demonstrates the requirement for innovative and creative adoption of marketing concepts to fit the demands of a new venture. Originality/value – The case specifically addresses an identified need for learning resources and information tailored to the area of entrepreneurial new venture marketing.

Does venture opportunity variation matter? Investigating systemic process differences between innovative and imitative new ventures

The central thesis in the article is that the venture creation process is different for innovative versus imitative ventures. This holds up; the pace of the process differs by type of venture as do, in line with theory-based hypotheses, the effects of certain human capital (HC) and social capital (SC) predictors. Importantly, and somewhat unexpectedly, the theoretically derived models using HC, SC, and certain controls are relatively successful explaining progress in the creation process for the minority of innovative ventures, but achieve very limited success for the imitative majority. This may be due to a rationalistic bias in conventional theorizing and suggests that there is need for considerable theoretical development regarding the important phenomenon of new venture creation processes. Another important result is that the building up of instrumental social capital, which we assess comprehensively and as a time variant construct, is important for making progress with both types of ventures, and increasingly, so as the process progresses. This result corroborates with stronger operationalization and more appropriate analysis method what previously published research has only been able to hint at.

Turnover in entrepreneurial teams : are spousal teams different?

Entrepreneurial teams are increasingly prevalent. An important stage in new venture formation involves the recruitment and retention of team members, characterised by changes in the membership of the ET. ET turnover involves members joining or leaving the team, which could have positive or negative effects on the team and the firm. Spousal Entrepreneurial Teams (SET) are a frequently occurring, yet unique type of ET, with very distinct characteristics and dynamics. In an SET turnover is likely to be have different meanings and effects than in Other Entrepreneurial Teams. This research asks: What influences members joining and leaving entrepreneurial teams? And are SET different? Using data from 561 young firms over X years, we find significant differences between SET and NSET. Specifically, we find X.

A portrayal of new entrants into the Australian economy (Entrepreneurial individuals and ventures)

This paper provides a descriptive overview of the venture creation in Australia, those who participate in it and the types of firms they build. Findings of interest in this paper include: • The majority of business founders (89 per cent) state the motivation to start a new business is opportunity-driven rather than necessity driven. • The extent of under-representation of women business founders in Australia appears to be lower than international comparisons and has decreased over time. • Australian business founders tend to possess significant ‘human capital’ many are university-educated, and large shares have different types of experience that may benefit the start-up. • The major industries for start-up activities are Retailing; various service industries (Business Consulting; Health, Education and Social; other Consumer services); Construction, Manufacturing, and Agriculture. • A large proportion of CAUSEE respondents (49 per cent nascent firms and 46 per cent young firms) are members of start-up teams, which is similar to international comparisons.

Innovation and change in new ventures

This paper examines the innovativeness of nascent and young entrepreneurial firms in Australia. Findings of interest in this paper include: • The vast majority of new ventures offer some degree of innovation in some aspect of their business, be it the product, the process, their market selection or their marketing approach. • With close to 75 per cent claiming they do more than taking mere imitations to the market, novelty in the product/service is the type of innovation most commonly offered by start-up firms. • The innovativeness of start-ups varies by industry. Construction start-ups stand out as particularly low in innovation across all indicators, while Manufacturing stands out the most in the positive direction. • Team start-ups other than spouse teams have higher novelty, as do ventures started by founders with prior start-up experience. • There is no association between the founders’ level of education and the novelty of the ventures they (try to) create.

Unpacking the venture creation process

This paper investigates the dimensions of time and effort and how these factors impact on the venture creation process in Australia. Findings of interest in this paper include: • First and foremost business planning is used as a thinking tool within the boundaries of the firm. • Business planning is more strongly associated with firms that are more ambitious, being built by teams, draw on more experience or education. • Industry characteristics in part drive the duration required for venture creation. Manufacturing and Agriculture based firms seemingly take longer timeframes than other industries. Extended venture creation times frames are also associated with firms that aim to bring more novel concepts to market.

Does Venture Opportunity Variation Matter? Investigating Systematic Process Differences Between Innovative and Imitative New Ventures

The central thesis in the article is that the venture creation process is different for innovative versus imitative ventures. This holds up; the pace of the process differs by type of venture as do, in line with theory-based hypotheses, the effects of certain human capital (HC) and social capital (SC) predictors. Importantly, and somewhat unexpectedly, the theoretically derived models using HC, SC, and certain controls are relatively successful explaining progress in the creation process for the minority of innovative ventures, but achieve very limited success for the imitative majority. This may be due to a rationalistic bias in conventional theorizing and suggests that there is need for considerable theoretical development regarding the important phenomenon of new venture creation processes. Another important result is that the building up of instrumental social capital, which we assess comprehensively and as a time variant construct, is important for making progress with both types of ventures, and increasingly, so as the process progresses. This result corroborates with stronger operationalization and more appropriate analysis method what previously published research has only been able to hint at.

The importance of gestation process dynamics

Principal Topic In this paper we seek to highlight the important intermediate role that the gestation process plays in entrepreneurship by examining its key antecedents and its consequences for new venture emergence. In doing so we take a behavioural perspective and argue that it is not only what a nascent venture is, but what it does (Katz & Gartner, 1988; Shane & Delmar, 2004; Reynolds, 2007) and when it does it during start-up (Reynolds & Miller, 1992; Lichtenstein, Carter, Dooley & Gartner, 2007) that is important. To extend an analogy from biological development, what we suggest is that the way a new venture is nurtured is just as fundamental as its nature. Much prior research has focused on the nature of new ventures and attempted to attribute variations in outcomes directly to the impact resource endowments and investments have. While there is little doubt that venture resource attributes such as human capital, and specifically prior entrepreneurial experience (Alsos & Kolvereid, 1998), access to social (Davidsson & Honig, 2003) and financial capital have an influence. Resource attributes themselves are distal from successful start-up endeavours and remain inanimate if not for the actions of the nascent venture. The key contribution we make is to shift focus from whether or not actions are taken, but when these actions happen and how that is situated in the overall gestation process. Thus, we suggest that it is gestation process dynamics, or when gestation actions occur, that is more proximal to venture outcomes and we focus on this. Recently scholars have highlighted the complexity that exists in the start-up or gestation process, be it temporal or contextual (Liao, Welsch & Tan, 2005; Lichtenstein et al. 2007). There is great variation in how long a start-up process might take (Reynolds & Miller, 1992), some processes require less action than others (Carter, Gartner & Reynolds, 1996), and the overall intensity of the start-up effort is also deemed important (Reynolds, 2007). And, despite some evidence that particular activities are more influential than others (Delmar & Shane, 2003), the order in which events may happen is, until now, largely indeterminate as regard its influence on success (Liao & Welsch, 2008). We suggest that it is this complexity of the intervening gestation process that attenuates the effect of resource endowment and has resulted in mixed findings in previous research. Thus, in order to reduce complexity we shall take a holistic view of the gestation process and argue that it is its’ dynamic properties that determine nascent venture attempt outcomes. Importantly, we acknowledge that particular gestation processes of themselves would not guarantee successful start-up, but it is more correctly the fit between the process dynamics and the ventures attributes (Davidsson, 2005) that is influential. So we aim to examine process dynamics by comparing sub-groups of venture types by resource attributes. Thus, as an initial step toward unpacking the complexity of the gestation process, this paper aims to establish the importance of its role as an intermediary between attributes of the nascent venture and the emergence of that venture. Here, we make a contribution by empirically examining gestation process dynamics and their fit with venture attributes. We do this by firstly, examining that nature of the influence that venture attributes such as human and social capital have on the dynamics of the gestation process, and secondly by investigating the effect that gestation process dynamics have on venture creation outcomes. Methodology and Propositions In order to explore the importance that gestation processes dynamics have in nascent entrepreneurship we conduct an empirical study of ventures start-ups. Data is drawn from a screened random sample of 625 Australian nascent business ventures prior to them achieving consistent outcomes in the market. This data was collected during 2007/8 and 2008/9 as part of the Comprehensive Australian Study of Entrepreneurial Emergence (CAUSEE) project (Davidsson et al., 2008). CAUSEE is a longitudinal panel study conducted over four years, sourcing information from annually administered telephone surveys. Importantly for our study, this methodology allows for the capture and tracking of active nascent venture creation as it happens, thus reducing hindsight and selection biases. In addition, improved tests of causality may be made given that outcome measures are temporally removed from preceding events. The data analysed in this paper represents the first two of these four years, and for the first time has access to follow-up outcome measures for these venture attempts: where 260 were successful, 126 were abandoned, and 191 are still in progress. With regards to venture attributes as gestation process antecedents, we examine specific human capital measured as successful prior experience in entrepreneurship, and direct social capital of the venture as ‘team start-ups’. In assessing gestation process dynamics we follow Lichtenstein et al. (2007) to suggest that the rate, concentration and timing of gestation activities may be used to summarise the complexity dynamics of that process. In addition, we extend this set of measures to include the interaction of discovery and exploitation by way of changes made to the venture idea. Those ventures with successful prior experience or those who conduct symbiotic parallel start-up attempts may be able to, or be forced to, leave their gestation action until later and still derive a successful outcome. In addition access to direct social capital may provide the support upon which the venture may draw in order to persevere in the face of adversity, turning a seemingly futile start-up attempt into a success. On the other hand prior experience may engender the foresight to terminate a venture attempt early should it be seen to be going nowhere. The temporal nature of these conjectures highlight the importance that process dynamics play and will be examined in this research Statistical models are developed to examine gestation process dynamics. We use multivariate general linear modelling to analyse how human and social capital factors influence gestation process dynamics. In turn, we use event history models and stratified Cox regression to assess the influence that gestation process dynamics have on venture outcomes. Results and Implications What entrepreneurs do is of interest to both scholars and practitioners’ alike. Thus the results of this research are important since they focus on nascent behaviour and its outcomes. While venture attributes themselves may be influential this is of little actionable assistance to practitioners. For example it is unhelpful to say to the prospective first time entrepreneur “you’ll be more successful if you have lots of prior experience in firm start-ups”. This research attempts to close this relevance gap by addressing what gestation behaviours might be appropriate, when actions best be focused, and most importantly in what circumstances. Further, we make a contribution to the entrepreneurship literature, examining the role that gestation process dynamics play in outcomes, by specifically attributing these to the nature of the venture itself. This extension is to the best of our knowledge new to the research field.