You are looking at 1 - 8 of 8 items

  • Author or Editor: Ted Baker x
Clear All Modify Search
You do not have access to this content

Ted Baker and Friederike Welter

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to make the argument that previously marginalized but now flourishing subfields of entrepreneurship research continue to provide insights that can form the basis for future entrepreneurship research that is more broadly practical and critical. What is currently core or “mainstream” in entrepreneurship research would then be seen as an important but rare special case. Design/methodology/approach - The essay briefly explores a number of illustrative themes that have emerged and become important in women’s entrepreneurship research (acknowledging that some similar themes have emerged in other subfields). These themes are used to suggest how broader application of such insights to theory-building about entrepreneurship in general – rather than “just” to “women’s entrepreneurship” - might greatly enrich the field. Findings - The authors’ arguments suggest that research focused on ghettoized subfields such as women’s entrepreneurship challenge the assumptions of what entrepreneurship is and what it contributes. For example the richer perspective on motivations, goals, and outcomes and on the possibilities of emancipation that currently animate research on women’s entrepreneurship can improve the understanding of all entrepreneurship. Originality/value - Too much of current entrepreneurship research is both of limited practical value for “practitioners” and of little “critical value” for scholars interested in how things might work better. The authors argue that by broadening the set of goals, motivations, contexts and accomplishments that are taken as legitimate targets of study, entrepreneurship research can become both more practical and more critical and thus more broadly useful and legitimate.

You do not have access to this content

Ted Baker and E. Erin Powell

Current notions of opportunity in the entrepreneurship literature render important issues of inequality of opportunity largely invisible. Attempts to show how entrepreneurs can cope with disadvantage through behaviours such as ‘bricolage’ can sometimes serve as inadvertent apologias for structural disadvantage. We propose a number of antidotes, including: the embrace of an older and more robust notion of opportunity, greater attention to subfields of research that explore responses to disadvantage and adversity – especially as these fit into the life course of the entrepreneur, expansion of promising theory and research around entrepreneurial identity, and more generally, recognition that entrepreneurship needs to be better contextualized in terms of structural patterns of stratification and inequality of opportunity.

You do not have access to this content

Handbook of Inclusive Innovation

The Role of Organizations, Markets and Communities in Social Innovation

Edited by Gerard George, Ted Baker, Paul Tracey and Havovi Joshi

The Handbook of Inclusive and Social Innovation: The Role of Organizations, Markets and Communities offers a comprehensive review of research on inclusive innovation to address systemic and structural issues – the “Grand Challenges” of our time. With 27 contributions from 57 scholars, the Handbook provides frameworks and insights by summarising current research, and highlights emerging practices and scalable solutions. The contributions highlight a call to action and place social impact at the heart of theory and practice. It will be an invaluable resource for academics, practitioners, and policymakers who champion social inclusion and emphasize innovative approaches to addressing sustainable development goals.
This content is available to you

Edited by Gerard George, Ted Baker, Paul Tracey and Havovi Joshi

This content is available to you

Gerard George, Ted Baker, Paul Tracey and Havovi Joshi

Social inclusion is at the heart of sustainable development. Innovation in the ideation, development and implementation of solutions is necessary to improve social inclusion by systematically addressing the barriers that disenfranchise individuals and communities. The editors synthesize the 26 contributions in this Handbook to provide a framework for academics and policy makers to study, design and implement innovative ideas that support social inclusion. They present a future research agenda as a “call to action” for management, business and social science scholars to define questions and highlight solutions that can produce meaningful social impact.

You do not have access to this content

Friederike Welter, Ted Baker, David B. Audretsch and William B. Gartner

This essay contrasts a perspective that places an excessive focus on technology businesses and growth with a view of entrepreneurship that embraces its heterogeneity. We challenge a taken-for-granted belief that only certain kinds of entrepreneurship might lead to wealth and job creation and additionally suggest that these two outcomes (wealth and job creation) need to be placed within a broader context of reasons, purposes, and values for why and how entrepreneurship emerges. We suggest that a wider and nondiscriminatory perspective on what constitutes entrepreneurship will lead to better theory and more insights that are relevant to the phenomenon.

This content is available to you

William B. Gartner, Bruce T. Teague, Ted Baker and R. Daniel Wadhwani

This chapter explores this question: What was known about “opportunity” before scholars began treating it as the “distinctive domain of entrepreneurship” (Shane and Venkataraman, 2000)? The chapter focuses on uncovering and recognizing a significant amount of past scholarship on opportunity that we suggest has value for helping entrepreneurship scholars, now, re-conceptualize the idea of opportunity as well as reformulate and contextualize methods and situations for studying opportunity as an aspect of entrepreneurship. We suggest that the concept of opportunity, historically, is much richer and more nuanced than is recognized in current scholarship. Second, there is a strong foundation of prior scholarship on the nature of opportunity from the strategic management area (e.g. Dutton and Jackson, 1987; Jackson and Dutton, 1988) that laid a strong foundation for any subsequent pursuit of opportunity as a subject of scholarship. Third, the idea of opportunity as a primary characteristic of entrepreneurship appears to have been first proposed by Stevenson (1983), and his subsequent work has, essentially, been ignored. We suggest that an ignorance of prior thought, theory and evidence has been detrimental to subsequent theory building and empirical research on the importance of opportunity as an idea that has value for understanding the nature of entrepreneurship. We offer some suggestions for how this prior research and theory might be fruitfully integrated into current scholarship on opportunity. Finally, we offer some thoughts for how a historical approach to entrepreneurship scholarship might be useful for informing the development of theory and practice.