The boot camp consisted of an introductory session and social activity on day 1 (Friday, from 5 pm), a day of practising skills around idea generation (in response to current industry challenges) and development on day 2 (Saturday) and a day of sharing these ideas (in digital forms—websites and videos—and also in professional presentations and pitches) on day 3 (Sunday). A more detailed schedule is included in the appendix for this chapter. Most sessions took place in small groups with a number of students from each institution and two facilitators from differing disciplines and HEIs. The event contained three keynote talks, two of which were streamed live on YouTube to students who could not attend the whole event and also to members of the general public. Days 2 and 3 began with optional networking sessions using a free online platform 'Wonder.Me', which was tested by the Student Advisory Board for its functionality to be used in this context. The event concluded with a diverse panel of alumni (one from each of the three institutions involved in the StART project) to discuss themes from the weekend. As shown in the appendix, some sessions were optional, allowing students the opportunity to practice 'selfawareness and self-efficacy', which EntreComp classifies as a 'resources' competency within their framework. Building in moments for autonomy for students here was simple, yet important, and helped us tailor the event to the different experience levels.

Given that students had expressed a desire to develop skills around generating new ideas in response to creative industries challenges (e.g. the decline in live events due to the COVID-19 pandemic), we also used an established framework to help develop skills in this area. The first day of the 2-day boot camp introduced students to the CLEAR IDEAS model, which is a structured programme that acts as an 'innovation training model' (Birdi, 2021).

The following were also important underpinning factors when designing the event:

#### 1.3.1 Access and Inclusivity

It was important for the aims of the StART project that the boot camp included all students at the three institutions and that this could be accessed by all students (e.g. by those students with commitments relating to part-time jobs and caring responsibilities and those students who identified as having a disability).

To ensure that the event was, and was promoted as being, open to all students, we ensured that the content of the boot camp would cater for all students, regardless of their experience of entrepreneurship education and competencies, and that no prior experience was needed. The event was centred around idea generation in response to creative industry challenges and hence allowed for engagement from students who were already planning start-ups and new initiatives but also those who were inexperienced in developing new ideas and taking these forwards.

To cater for disabilities and individual needs, the registration form asked if students had individual access needs which we should be aware of in planning the event. Students who ticked this box were connected to an accessibility specialist, who liaised with these students on a one-to-one basis and made recommendations to the organising team about how best to cater for any needs. There was also a separate strand of research and evaluation undertaken by a researcher with expertise in entrepreneurship education and accessibility. This included collection of both qualitative and quantitative data, in the form of interviews with event organisers and survey questions given to students who attended the boot camp at the end of sessions.1

We also took advice from one of the StART advisory board members, who had particular expertise in access and inclusion. Through consultation with the advisory board and students, we chose Zoom as the platform to host this online boot camp, as this was considered to be familiar to those taking part and to also be relatively accessible compared to other options (e.g. specialist conference software). Using an online format also allowed for everyone involved in the boot camp to include their gender pronouns in their Zoom name, which everyone was encouraged to do at the beginning of the event.

To help the event to be as accessible as possible, the two public keynote talks (which were streamed live over YouTube) were both live captioned (by a captioning expert) and live signed using British sign language.

In order to reach all students, including the graduating class of 2021, the KickStART Creative Lab was launched in May 2021, and recruitment marketing was sent out both at this time and in September 2021, when the new academic year had begun. A short promotional video was created, plus a professionally designed poster which was distributed over email and social media. This video 'trailer' used footage from previous online sessions at all three StART institutions, with a range of speakers representing different creative practices, businesses and perspectives, interspersed with engaging visuals and basic information to introduce the event.

### 1.4 Key Learning Points

The aims of the boot camp were that it should be relevant to students across multiple arts disciplines and should help develop a variety of skills associated with an entrepreneurial mindset. Student attendees fed back that they enjoyed working in cross-disciplinary groups; working on developing ideas; obtaining feedback on their ideas, presentations and pitches; the balance of talks and practical tasks; and opportunities to think about how to create positive change using their art and ideas. The boot camp was therefore deemed to have successfully met its aims and to have usefully contributed to the overall aims of the StART Entrepreneurship Project.

The following represents the main learning points from the event which we recommend are considered for future planning of any similar event (note that some of these are particularly relevant to the boot camp being delivered in an online format, and different learning points may have emerged if this event had been delivered in person).

1 Data from this data collection will be reported in a separate publication.

### 1.4.1 Allowance for Volatility in Number of Attendees Expected

Of the 149 students who registered for the event between May and November 2021, around half of these students engaged during the boot camp. Factors influencing student decisions regarding whether they engaged or not (having previously registered in advance) may include other weekend commitments arising, part-time job or freelance work commitments, students feeling under pressure with other course commitments or perceived lack of value of the event (see Jääskeläinen et al., 2020, for a discussion of factors which may impact on music students' perceived workload). For many creative industries students, weekends are likely to be a time when they have freelance work commitments. On the other hand, one of the benefits of an event where attendance is not mandated and flexibility in attendance can be accommodated is that this allows students to take charge of their own learning and base decisions about attendance on their own assessment of the relevance and interest of the event to their own learning and career trajectory. This self-awareness and self-efficacy competency links with the EntreComp framework (for guidance on how the EntreComp framework may be used in teaching, see McCallum et al., 2018). This volatility in engagement numbers is something the project is now looking into further as a research question, to better understand what might have impacted non-attendance.

### 1.4.2 Benefits of Cross-Disciplinary Working

Working with others from different institutions, and from different disciplinary backgrounds, was considered to have been hugely valuable by staff and students involved in the event. For students this offered a simulation of future workplace settings, and for staff it offered an opportunity to co-teach and learn from other members of staff (and students) from different institutions. These opportunities for knowledge exchange between higher education institutions are not usually a core part of day-to-day activity in the academic environment (Yusuf, 2008), but this boot camp demonstrated that they can be hugely valuable.

#### 1.4.3 Appropriate Choice and Use of Technology

Ensuring that staff and students were familiar with and able to utilise the technology used for this online boot camp was an important element in the successful running of the event and the level of engagement. Initiatives used to help with engagement in an online environment included making use of breakout rooms and utilising the chat and poll functions for interaction and participation. Some students fed back that they would have liked some or all of the event to have taken place in person (COVID-19 pandemic restrictions allowing). However, we found that the event was successfully delivered online, providing that thought had been given in advance to how to make the sessions as engaging as possible (and to allow for breaks away from the screen).

One other aspect of the boot camp which students fed back had been useful was the creation of an online hub of resources, which was shared before the event, available throughout and also available after the boot camp had ended. This online space was used for recordings of keynote sessions and to give access to key materials such as presentation slides and the timetable for the weekend. Students found that this hub allowed for flexibility in how they engaged with the event and the supporting materials, and also meant that they could continue to engage afterwards and to connect with one another.

#### 1.4.4 Equality, Diversity and Inclusivity

One of the main learning points of the event was that we found it to be important to consider any barriers to the boot camp feeling accessible by all students (e.g. those with disabilities or specific learning needs) and inclusive of the entire student body. This was also important for the aims of the StART project and the sector need overall (as discussed above). The initiatives in place for the boot camp as outlined above were important in meeting these aims (e.g. consulting with students with additional needs beforehand) and would be a priority in planning any such future events.

### 2 Conclusion

The goal of this chapter has been to discuss the benefits and share best practice in relation to a creative industries entrepreneurship education boot camp delivered online. The chapter focussed on the KickStART Creative Lab boot camp event and explored the basis for this in existing research and QAA guidance and other similar activities and programmes in educational settings in the UK and internationally. Finally, the chapter summarised key learning points from the boot camp.

As has been outlined in existing literature, the boot camp format was found to be a useful method to help students to develop skills associated with entrepreneurship, such as creativity. Moreover, the prioritisation of creativity may be important not only for such activities with creative industries students but also in relation to other entrepreneurship education contexts. As Dobson and Walmsley (Dobson & Walmsley, 2021) outline 'enterprise education is increasingly being seen as a highly creative pursuit of innovation and wider value creation, and is presented by many scholars as a departure from more traditional business venturing' (p. 343). Also, prioritising artistic identity and meeting the students at their starting point (e.g. in beginning with skills around idea generation) were found to be important.

While engagement numbers were likely impacted by a multitude of factors, the students who did engage were consistent, and this suggests the boot camp model is suited to some learners and not to others. A particular area of success of this delivery was the combined student and staff voice. Students were considered partners and key advisors throughout the planning of this event. It is hoped that this case study may provide useful guidance regarding how a boot camp for creative industries students may be successfully run in an online environment, while also prioritising access and inclusion. Our experience in running and evaluating the KickStART Creative Lab suggests that such a boot camp can have value for staff and students alike.

Acknowledgements The StART Entrepreneurship Project is a 2-year project funded jointly by Research England and the Office for Students in the UK.

### Appendix

The schedule for KickStART Creative Lab.

### Friday 5 November

### Saturday 6 November

### Sunday 7 November

# References

Dr. Michelle Phillips is head of enterprise (academic) at the Royal Northern College of Music in Manchester. Her research explores music and the perception of time, music and maths, audience response to live and recorded music, music and entrepreneurship and music and Parkinson's. Between September 2020 and 2022, Michelle was principal investigator of the £902,153 StART Entrepreneurship Project, in partnership with Royal Central School of Speech and Drama and University of the Arts London (funded by the Office for Students and Research England).

Ava Podgorski MusB (Hons), MusM, is currently a PhD candidate at the University of Leeds, undertaking research on 'evaluating cities of culture' funded by the Faculty of Arts, Humanities and Cultures. Between September 2020 and July 2022, Ava worked at the Royal Northern College of Music as the project coordinator for the StART Entrepreneurship Project (funded by the Office for Students and Research England).

Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license and indicate if changes were made.

The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter's Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the chapter's Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder.

# What Can SMEs Learn from Universities?: Transferring Entrepreneurship Education Knowledge from the University to the Corporate World

### Isabella Fitzky, Christina Lang, and Guido H. Baltes

Abstract Times of high dynamic and growing new knowledge demand for entrepreneurial education and university engagement. Higher education institutions (HEIs) have established intensive knowledge and resources about entrepreneurial education and relating activities and formats over the last years. As smaller companies (SMEs) are increasingly experimenting with entrepreneurship, they seem to struggle with setting up entrepreneurial activities within their established corporate strategy and innovation structures. It is beneficial for them to collaborate with higher education institutions to minimize the risk and uncertainty associated with implementing entrepreneurship education (EE) and catch up with larger corporates. Further, research lacks a systematic characterization of EE activities in those companies and classification of collaboration formats. Therefore, this study uses qualitative research methods to analyze data from interviews conducted with two German SMEs. Our study contributes to a better understanding of EE in SME and respective HEI collaborations by (1) characterizing EE in SME and SME-HEI collaboration based on attributes and collaboration types defined by their locus of collaboration and intensity of knowledge inflow and (2) identifying differences among EE in SME and HEI. We provide implications to practice—corporate and university EE initiatives—for a more effective design and implementation of EE in SMEs and the SME-HEI collaborations themselves.

Keywords Entrepreneurship education · Knowledge transfer · Collaboration · Small and medium-sized enterprises · Higher education

I. Fitzky · C. Lang (✉) · G. H. Baltes

Institute for Strategic Innovation and Technology Management, Konstanz University of Applied Sciences, Konstanz, Germany

e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
© The Author(s) 2023

J. H. Block et al. (eds.), Progress in Entrepreneurship Education and Training, FGF Studies in Small Business and Entrepreneurship, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-28559-2\_14

### 1 Introduction

Developments like digital transformation and shift toward more sustainability (Kerrigan & Kulasooriya, 2020) lead to constant discontinuous changes. These changes tend to transform business models, ways of working, and competence profiles: business driven by satisfying customer needs, work driven by the greater purpose, and competence driven by creativity (van den Berg, n.d.; Thang & Tuan, 2020). While these changes offer many opportunities for emerging startups, they pose several challenges to the established world of business and work (Lyytinen et al., 2016).

Hence, entrepreneurial thinking and behavior have become a key prerequisite for companies of all sizes and individual employees (Kusa et al., 2021; Blanka, 2019). Systematically implementing entrepreneurial activities requires entrepreneurial spirit and comprehensive innovation skills to be strengthened among founders and employees—both prospective and current. In the underlying training process, high education institutions (HEIs) and companies take important roles alike (Schmelter et al., 2010). So far, it is mainly HEIs that have used entrepreneurship education (EE) as a widespread practice with which they aim to address current and future challenges and stay attractive to their different stakeholders (e.g., students, political supporters, business partners) (Bauman & Lucy, 2021; Ratten & Usmanij, 2021).

Established companies, however, are more and more under pressure to remain competitive—not only for new business but also for new talents (Kuratko & Audretsch, 2013). New types of innovation and organizational transformations are found to pose challenges for established companies as their organizational structures and approaches are mainly designed to improve the core business by increasing efficiency rather than to support entrepreneurial development (O'Connor & DeMartino, 2006; O'Reilly & Tushman, 2013; Elfring, 2005). To address this, it can be observed that companies are using entrepreneurial activities more intensively as a strategic tool (Selig et al., 2016; Tseng & Tseng, 2019).1

Scholars have identified a variety of motives why established companies invest in EE activities, e.g., creating new knowledge, increasing their innovativeness, and developing new ventures (Schmelter et al., 2010; Schiuma & Carlucci, 2018). While larger companies have implemented a wide variety of "professional" entrepreneurial activities (Kullik et al., 2018; Selig et al., 2018), like startup investments, company building, or incubating programs (Kullik et al., 2018; Kruft & Kock, 2019), and thus accompanying EE activities, small and medium enterprises (SMEs) seem to face

1 We consider the concept of corporate entrepreneurship (CE) as focusing on formalized entrepreneurial activities that are intended by top management with the goal to support the creation of new businesses and organizational transformation, whereas we consider intrapreneurship as rather informal entrepreneurial activities that are driven by individuals without being mandated by the company or top management (Blanka, 2019). Since we only examined EE activities initiated by top management in our study, we embedded our consideration into the CE context.

difficulties in using entrepreneurial activities and upstream EE training. One reason might be their limited resources and strategic know-how (Schmelter et al., 2010).

Having their own requirements, we assume that SMEs cannot easily adapt to the approaches of larger companies. Collaborations yield potential for compensating for this gap for SMEs. One potential partner seems to be HEIs. Indeed it can be observed that HEIs and companies are working ever more closely together in this field (Schiuma & Carlucci, 2018). So far, the EE literature mainly describes the motivations and benefits of EE and the trainable entrepreneurial competencies of leaders in the context of companies. To revitalize and renew the organization (Hjorth et al., 2003), companies use EE to stimulate employees to be more flexible, creative, and passionate about their work (Höglund & Mårtensson, 2019) and develop relevant entrepreneurial competencies like innovative behavior, risk propensity, long-term orientation, and independence (Schuler, 1986). Thereby, a description of the actual design and prerequisites are missing.

Even though EE in companies seems to be a relevant topic, it has received surprisingly little attention in the EE literature. Reasons might be found in the missing cases or research methodology. So far, EE activities have been practically tried and evaluated in individual places, but empirical evidence for effective action is lacking. Concluding, further empirical research is needed to increase the understanding of EE for SMEs, in which aspects it may be different from the approaches in HEIs and how this can be well studied scientifically in EE. In initial collaboration projects with different SMEs, the startup initiative of the Konstanz universities has applied specific EE formats and tools to the corporate practice. Thereby, it became apparent that various adjustments are required in the design, organization, and usage of EE programs to meet the company-specific requirements. However, to effectively meet these requirements, more profound insights from the corporate context are needed. We propose expanding previous qualitative research evaluations based on grounded theory to gain these insights. The basic understanding of EE in SME is mandatory for specifically designing activities for EE and innovation in SME. For this reason, our study aims to investigate the following: what characterizes EE for SMEs with HEIs and how is it different from the implementation in HEIs?

# 2 Theoretical Background: EE in Established Companies and HEI Transfer

EE refers to all activities and processes aimed at developing specific skills, expertise, and attitudes required to act entrepreneurially regardless of whether this is achieved by creating a new venture or by innovating in established companies (Henry et al., 2005a; Hisrich et al., 2010). EE is fostered for a variety of purposes: primarily, to enable individuals to build new ventures, pursue new paradigms, and assume responsibility for future challenges, and secondly, to rejuvenate economies through entrepreneurship (e.g., boosting competition and innovation, creating employment) (Matlay, 2008; Greene & Saridakis, 2007). The sought-after spreading of EE is mainly driven by HEIs' EE initiatives—supported by politics—and their intensive work on further expansion (Fretschner & Weber, 2013). Thereby, EE is realized through various and different activities like single in-class courses, whole study programs, or boot camps (Ilonen, 2021; Gedeon, 2014).

With the growth in interest in EE in practice, EE moved into the spotlight of research. Inspired by EE initiatives' evaluation processes, scholars strive to set up a theoretical concept using scientific methods, still searching for strategies to effectively analyze, systemize, and improve EE activities. A targeted review of the literature for the implementation of EE in the context of SME and HEI collaboration revealed three fields: (1) EE in HEI, (2) EE in larger and smaller companies, and (3) transfer of HEI knowledge into the innovation ecosystem.

EE in HEIs Research on EE in HEIs shows insights along with the steps of the impact model:

Thereby, the analysis mostly take the student perspective. However, more stakeholders than only HEIs are involved in EE, like startup enabling organizations (e.g., accelerators, incubators, and similar) that focus on startups at various maturity levels, governments, and, increasingly, established companies (Schiuma & Carlucci, 2018; Corral de Zubielqui et al., 2015). Regarding the latter, the corporate perspective is considered the least. This is somehow surprising since today, it seems that almost all large companies use entrepreneurship to overcome their delayed responsiveness and to explore new knowledge (Elfring, 2005; Glinyanova et al., 2021).

EE in larger and smaller companies In their endeavor to implement different organizational forms for entrepreneurship like incubation, startup investment, or open innovation programs, those large companies have realized the relevance of EE as a means to strengthen their innovation capabilities (Kullik et al., 2018; Selig et al., 2018). They have started more or less experimental to include EE in their program either with learning by doing or external consultations in workshops or further HR training—not entirely unsuccessful as examples like the tech incubator hub:raum by Telekom show.

On the other hand, SMEs face more difficulties in systematically implementing entrepreneurial activities and upstream EE training due to a lack of resources and strategic know-how (Schmelter et al., 2010). As a result, the empirical findings on how to implement EE activities are mainly based on studies with large established companies (Glinyanova et al., 2021; Selig, 2021; Zahra et al., 2013) than on the context of smaller companies. Specifically for SME, only aspects regarding:

In summary, aspects regarding how SMEs train their employees' entrepreneurial skills are missing, even though it might be increasingly in their interest. Companies with an "entrepreneurial HR base" are better prepared not only to respond to the on holding market dynamics but also to take emerging new business opportunities (Schmelter et al., 2010). Even more, small companies must catch up, and indeed, it shows that increasingly small companies are also starting entrepreneurial activities. However, due to their specific characteristics, SMEs cannot simply adopt the approaches and experiences of large companies one-to-one.

One way to counter this challenge is to collaborate with partners. Partnerships have been found essential for SMEs to overcome size-related disadvantages and benefit from networking and collaboration (Corral de Zubielqui et al., 2015; Mackinnon et al., 2004)—especially with HEIs. Furthermore, as HEIs face similar resource challenges, collaborative projects offer the potential to effectively transfer university EE knowledge (Schiuma & Carlucci, 2018; Corral de Zubielqui et al., 2015). In fact, in practice, it can be observed that HEIs and companies are working increasingly closely together in this field. Thereby, the "right" collaboration setting has been found to be crucial for the success of partnerships between SMEs and HEIs (Schiuma & Carlucci, 2018).

EE transfer from HEIs to companies As of today, HEIs deliver EE through their entrepreneurship centers with specific programs and formats for creating more new venture startups and educating future talents (Finkle et al., 2013; Maas & Jones, 2017; Crammond, 2020), mainly manifested through education happening on campus. At the same time, transfer is part of the core understanding of HEIs, so transfer activities are established in various forms and areas such as technology transfer offices, science parks, or business ventures (Jongbloed et al., 2008). So it stands to reason that HEIs are also playing a key role in the entrepreneurial activities of companies, especially of SMEs (Mian et al., 2016). Transfer in terms of collaboration of SMEs and HEIs for EE seems to be closest using the resources and experiences of the HEI EE initiatives for the corporate context. It appears that a trend toward an increasing number of EE formats by HEIs for the corporate context can be observed (Schiuma & Carlucci, 2018; Gordon et al., 2012; Orazbayeva et al., 2019; Zhang & Hamilton, 2010). However, this transfer poses some challenges on both sides due to the different contexts, corporate versus academia, and that every company is individual.

Research on knowledge transfer from HEIs shows that EE knowledge is transferable (Blankesteijn et al., 2021) but not only considers the specific case between company and university but refers to the general transfer of knowledge into the innovation ecosystem. These covers:

While traditional forms of collaboration such as sponsoring research projects are well established, in recent years, companies and universities have explored and used various new formats to make collaborations within local innovation ecosystems more effective. Examples include hackathons and idea competitions for students and companies, scholarship programs, and jointly sponsored conferences and workshops (Schiuma & Carlucci, 2018). In addition, SMEs have specific individual requirements for those EE initiatives and should adapt their programs when transferring (Orazbayeva et al., 2019). The many different perspectives from which EE is studied have resulted in various recommendations for action and programs developed (Ucbasaran et al., 2001). The format of collaboration should depend on the objectives sought through the collaboration of the SME and the university.

### 3 Methodology

This study follows an explorative, qualitative research approach to increase the understanding of how to describe and design the transfer between HEIs' EE initiatives and SMEs. Thus, grounded theory was integrated into an evaluation process with two cases to create new scientific, empirical insights into EE activities in SME-HEI collaborations. Our study is part of the corporate entrepreneurship research at the Institute for Strategic Innovation and Transformation Management (IST). Therefore, specific EE formats and tools of the Konstanz universities' EE initiative that have been adapted to the corporate practice in terms of collaboration projects with SMEs were examined.

# 3.1 Data Collection

Primary data sources include transcribed semi-structured interviews conducted with employees of the SMEs and an EE best practice company, as well as experts from the HEI EE initiative. Each SME case contained at least one interview with representatives of the following roles: CEO, collaboration coordinator, and participant. In those in-depth interviews with open-ended questions, the following key topics were addressed: (a) motivations for EE activities and the collaborations; (b) implementation of EE, the collaboration, and related challenges; (c) individual motivators and barriers; and (d) background information on innovation management within the SME. We supplemented these interviews with observations and informal conversations during the activities. Additionally, we gathered secondary data on the cases to achieve consistent findings and thereby strengthen the validity of our findings. Those data included publicly available data on the investigated SMEs like websites, presentations, and social media posts.

# 3.2 Data Set

The selection of the companies to be part of the study is based on their active cooperation project in the area of EE with the IST. The cooperation relationships with the IST are in various stages of the process, ranging from the evaluation phase to the tested and established implementation of the EE formats. The interviewed companies are related to the automotive or healthcare industry. Further, the company size reaches from approx. 2200 to 2450 employees. The sample contained eight interviews that were conducted between 2021 and 2022. All interviews were conducted in German, recorded, and transcribed on 163 pages representing 355 min of recorded material with an average interview duration of 44 min. The shortest interview was 27 min, and the longest was 62 min.

# 3.3 Data Analysis

Our analysis aimed to identify characteristics of SME-HEI collaborations on EE. Therefore, following grounded theory principles, all interviews were openly and selectively coded by one researcher and discussed with the other members of the research team to establish a reliable coding system. We then categorized and clustered the codes to identify higher-level attributes. By mapping two attributes, we were able to identify different collaboration types that the attributes can describe.

### 4 Results

Our findings reveal that EE in SMEs and, thereby, collaboration with HEIs is a diverse and multidimensional phenomenon. The analysis of the case studies has resulted in a set of attributes describing EE in SMEs and in collaboration with a university EE initiative. Using the two attributes of collaboration format and intensity of knowledge flow, distinct types of SME-HEI collaboration for EE have been identified.

# 4.1 Characterizing Attributes of EE in SME and HEI-SME Collaboration

Examining the cases resulted in a set of 13 characterizing attributes that can be used to describe EE collaboration activities with SMEs and HEIs from the perspective of SMEs. Examining these attributes resulted in insights and specifications for EE in SME and HEI-SME collaborations following five dimensions—strategic intention, condition, creation, collaboration format, and operative intention—and two levels, organizational level and individual level.

Figure 1 gives an overview of the assignment of the attributes to the clusters and levels.

Three of the five dimensions relate to EE in SME and the other two to EE in SME-HEI collaboration. For all dimensions, two attributes are assigned, except for condition with three. Additionally, the focus is mainly on the organizational level. We found that two attributes can also be discussed on an individual level, meaning that those attributes describe how employees perceive EE activities in SMEs. As participants are a part of EE activities, we further derived the (most dominant) motivation and challenges of individuals participating in the EE activities between SMEs and universities.

The attributes on a closer view show a wide variety of manifestations. To gain a better understanding of the design and usage of EE activities, a detailed categorization is provided in Table 1. Based on the findings in the study, the different attributes can be described in more detail by one or more variables, which can vary from case to case. For example, we identified the attribute "promoter role" in the dimension "intention for EE." This describes who in the company is responsible for introducing EE activities. In our case studies, the variable "top management" was distinctive with exceptional support from the CEO.

# 4.2 Mapping: HEI-SME-Collaboration Types for EE

One central dimension identified in this study is the collaboration format design, which is defined by the locus of collaboration (internal, joint, external) and intensity of know-how inflow (high, low). Thereby, the manifestation of the other attributes seems to be related to this dimension. To unlock the resulting relations, we suggest a mapping step. Combining the locus of opportunity with the intensity results in six

Table 1 Specification of EE in SME and SME-HEI collaboration

(continued)

(continued)

Table 1 (continued)

Table 1 (continued)

Fig. 2 An overview of the HEI-SME collaboration types for EE

clusters, which can be grouped into three distinct SME-HEI collaborations for EE. By distributing the attributes along with these three types, we see differences in EE in SMEs and among the EE collaboration types (Fig. 2).

#### 4.2.1 Type 1: EE Collider

Collaboration activities of this type take place solely in the HEI with inputs from the SME, which is provided through mentoring, coaching, validation of ideas, proof of concepts, or pilots. The company support can be either continuously through the idea development process (e.g., employees as mentors in a mentoring program) or for specific formats like summer schools with an entrepreneurial focus, entrepreneurship boot camps, or workshops at HEIs.

The main goal is to establish first contact points with EE for companies and to expand the companies' external network for future partnerships. Additionally, it is used to get in contact with future talents and get to know new approaches for innovating and working. These activities are performed outside of the corporate environment and therefore are not interfering with corporate structures, processes, and decision-making.

This selective collaboration is thus characterized by a relatively low transfer of knowledge into the company, leading to a lower impact on the SME. At the same time, this offers companies the opportunity to gain insight into entrepreneurial formats and to use student competencies and thought patterns. Students get "real" knowledge from corporate practice in entrepreneurial formats.

#### 4.2.2 Type 2: EE Matchmaker

Collaboration activities of this type happen jointly between HEI and SME and are characterized by the active participation of company employees and students. Both parties are contributing in terms of knowledge, competence, and resources. Thus, joint EE collaborations result in a medium to a high amount of transferred knowledge into the company, depending on the design of the activities.

In turn, these respective designs are determined by the main goals for EE matchmaker addressing changes in core business, insourcing novel approaches, gaining access to new talents, and strengthening collaborative relationships. These activities are found to occur either inside the company, inside the HEIs, or at thirdparty places.

One format is "broad hackathons," where different companies propose their current problem statements, send corporate idea teams, and bring them together with students, resulting in co-creative new solutions, access to new talent, and entrepreneurial knowledge. Other formats like "single idea challenges" that last a weekend or even a whole semester, where a group of students addresses the issued problem statement of one company with the support of company representatives as sparring partners and mentors, also provide new ways of thinking and access to talent but insert less EE knowledge into the company. By working together on a specific problem, joint activities offer the opportunity for more impact on the SME than EE colliding.

#### 4.2.3 Type 3: EE Facilitator

Collaboration activities of this type are only implemented within the company. Thereby, parts of the organization and individual employees are fully involved and influenced by the activity. The role of the HEI is found to reveal the current innovation capability, work out a common goal, and bring in experiences about possible procedures and tools to achieve the goal. This collaboration is thus characterized by a high flow of knowledge into the SME.

The EE facilitator aims to establish novel innovation approaches and companywide training on EE. This seems to require strong motivators for EE and active promotors for EE and the HEI collaboration. This, in turn, means a total commitment from the top level and allocation of resources.

HEIs need a strong understanding of SME culture and unique requirements as the activity occurs in the corporate environment. An example of this kind of collaboration can be SME-internal idea competitions, which are adapted in structure and approach from HEIs to the needs of the SME. In these, employees generate novel ideas, for example, new products or use cases, which can be evaluated and possibly integrated into the portfolio of the SME. Therefore, the developed ideas must be strategically aligned and fit into the company's product scope.

### 5 Discussion

Little research has been conducted to date on EE in the specific context of SMEs. Our study and results contributed to a first understanding, which may serve as a foundation for further research to build a deeper understanding of this domain. The examination of EE in SME and SME-HEI collaboration shows a distinct picture regarding the intention, conditions, and creation for EE activities. Our results enhance the research on EE by identifying attributes and variables suited for describing EE activities in SMEs. In the next section, we will discuss the characterizing aspects of EE activities, followed by a description of the differences in EE in HEIs. Finally, implications for the SME and HEI EE initiatives will be given.

# 5.1 Characterization of EE Activities in SME and SME-HEI Collaboration

Organization attributes in focus Design attributes for EE in SMEs focus on companies' organizational level. One reason may be that organization-related aspects like process and structure are hard factors that are easier to identify and thus easier to design. Contrary, softer factors, including the individuum and the environmental factors, are more challenging to grasp and, therefore, more difficult to address. The organizational dimensions of EE in SME manifest as an interplay of intention, condition, and creation for EE, which must not only be considered in themselves but how they are mutually dependent on each other. Depending on how they are designed, they provide a corresponding framework for individuals, which allows them to act entrepreneurially.

EE not yet a strategy tool Literature recognizes entrepreneurial activities as a strategic tool for established companies (Selig et al., 2016; Tseng & Tseng, 2019). Further, our findings indicate that EE is not yet an innovation strategy and management tool in SMEs. The lack of actual embedding in SMEs' strategic planning might be because their innovation focuses still on the core business with incremental product development. Thereby, completely new ideas required for future business development have no process yet.

Simultaneously, EE seems to be in the strategic scope as the CEO promotes its implementation. Thus, it appears to be important that the respective activities are culturally compliant and strategically aligned. However, SMEs are still in the phase of experimenting with this topic and have not yet implemented EE as a fixed part of their strategy.

Some barriers ahead To take full advantage of EE, SMEs must overcome several obstacles. This requires that established thought patterns (efficiency and exploitation) and priorities (daily business over the future business) are reconsidered and changed. The barriers on the organizational level and the individual level partly correspond with each other. For example, lack of awareness for the activities and limited communication opportunities lead to employees having an unclear understanding of the reason the SME is pursuing EE in the first place and what objectives are associated with it. Furthermore, prioritizing the day-to-day business is a challenge already for beginning to implement EE activities. However, this also manifests itself during the implementation, when employees lack the free capacities (time) to participate in the EE activities.

Intention As mentioned in the literature section, the motivations for EE in the literature are consistent with the motivators identified through the case studies. Furthermore, the drivers' strategic renewal and insourcing of EE know-how were additionally mentioned as motivators in the case studies. While SMEs try to exploit internal potential through EE activities to tackle future challenges, the motivation for collaboration with HEIs is different. SMEs collaborate with HEIs to gain knowledge and acquire new talents and viewpoints. Therefore, a distinction must be made between the motivation for EE and collaboration. Since SMEs are currently still experimenting with EE, it is essential for them to minimize the risk and the use of resources. As mentioned in the literature section, this is achieved through collaboration with HEIs, as they can draw on existing experience and share the risk and resource input.

EE collaboration needs configuration Depending on the intention for EE activities in SMEs, distinct types seem to be more suitable. If EE is part of the "new" innovation or even corporate strategy, EE facilitation is found to match these requirements better. On the one hand, EE facilitation implies that the EE activities are initiated within the SME, which results in adapting their organizational structure toward an innovation-friendly environment to build up and use EE knowledge and thus realize the "new" strategy. On the other hand, with EE facilitation, the deep strategic innovation knowledge from the HEI EE initiative to realize company-wide innovation with EE is provided. On the contrary, EE colliding or matchmaking with a more company-external orientation would be less suitable as insourcing knowledge for a "new" strategy, while simultaneously outsourcing the relevant processes and structures seems opposed.

EE collaboration as a marketing tool EE involves different innovation competencies in terms of creating new ideas or using alternative working methods. Therefore, smaller companies seem to have understood that different ways of innovating and working are a new paradigm. So, EE is used (at least in part) by companies as a tool to attract and acquire new talents and thus establish their employer branding toward "being innovative."

# 5.2 Differences in EE Between SME and HEI

Motivation individual In the area of motivation on the individual level, it appears that both employees and students participate in EE formats only if there is a primary intrinsic motivation. However, participants in the academic environment are significantly more intrinsically motivated, while those from the corporate context additionally require stronger extrinsic motivators.

Challenges individual We find one of the most significant differences between HEIs and SMEs when looking at the availability of time to participate in EE formats. While in the academic environment the time resources are relatively unlimited and the participants have a high degree of freedom in organizing their time, in SME, we find a substantial restriction of this resource and almost no freedom in terms of time allocation since all workflows are efficiency-driven and capacity-optimized.

Company culture conformity While cultural conformity plays a minor role in the academic environment, this point is highly relevant to SMEs' design of EE activities. The methods and procedures used, specific linguistic elements in SME, and the visual design (corporate design) must be adapted and considered in SME. In the academic environment, the use of external media and the exchange of knowledge are firmly anchored so that the methods and the visual design of the activities do not necessarily have to be adapted to be accepted by the target group. However, a strong brand like the university design supports the acceptance of new offers.

Resources As stated out in the literature section, both HEIs and SMEs have limited resources (time, capital) as organizations. However, the perspective on EE programs and resulting projects differs as SMEs evaluate them much more by their prospects of success and the anticipated ROI than universities since the latter are more often financed by external funding and the programs are thus not directly linked to value creation. The different financing structures of the two programs thus lead to another way of evaluating their profitability.

Know-How Another significant difference, which is the cornerstone of the attractiveness of transfer cooperation, can be found in the existing knowledge base. Explorative knowledge acquisition through research is an elementary core element of universities and leads to considerable methodological knowledge, which is almost wholly lacking in SMEs as they must allocate their resources in a very strategic targeted area.

# 5.3 Managerial Implications

This study has shown that EE is a multidimensional phenomenon with a wide variety of aspects to be considered when designing and implementing EE activities in SMEs. Therefore, we present different managerial implications.

### 5.3.1 Learnings for SME

Generally, the introduction of the EE activities in SMEs is performed step by step with local rollouts over a more extended period. If EE activities from the academic environment are transferred to the corporate, various adjustments must be applied. It should be noted that the design of the activities needs to address the company's requirements and the individual subjects.

Collaborations to transfer EE knowledge and formats must occur early and address future challenges associated with high uncertainty. If the issues are already severe, conflicts in prioritizing resources (time and money) will make successful implementation difficult. Prior to the implementation of the EE programmes, none of the companies studied had a point of contact for innovative and novel ideas outside the company's current business. Since the introduction of EE activities is a significant organizational change, it is essential to sensitize employees to the topic of entrepreneurship and to create an understanding of why the company is now introducing these activities. To do so, information flows and touchpoints need to be designed, for example, through physical illustrations of virtual tools or services. Even if various tools and knowledge sources are already available through the HEI, care must be taken to ensure that their design is aligned with the corporate design and fits in with the corporate identity to strengthen employees' trust in the tools and activities. The primary employees who participate in the EE formats are already encouraged by the motivators mentioned above, but the additional potential could be exploited if financial or material incentives were also offered as a reward for successful implementation. During the activities, it is essential for the participants to have a continuous contact person and to be guided. This support can occur through mentoring, workshops, and other formats if it is both substantive and processual. Depending on the design of the EE activities, these can also include the development of new ideas and concepts. In this case, it can be difficult for the participants to transition from the idea phase to a project phase, especially if no financial resources or sponsors are available. Therefore, it is also essential to consider how participants can proceed after the EE activity.

Special attention must be devoted to the following aspects:

#### 5.3.2 Learning for EE Academia

When cooperating with higher education institutions, SMEs are not interested in classic consulting for current problems but rather in support in evaluating and overcoming potential challenges that may arise in the future and jeopardize the core business and sharing the risk associated with the establishment of EE activities. HEIs have accumulated a lot of knowledge on methods but not only methodological support, for example, in the form of toolboxes is needed, but also additional expert knowledge, which can be brought in, for example, by mentors from inside and outside the company.

While in the academic environment various independent activities can be offered to address the different knowledge levels of the students, SMEs focus on fewer activities that need to be suitable for more diverse target groups. Therefore, the offers must be adapted so that they can be used appropriately with different previous knowledge of a technical and economic matter.

SMEs are looking for a new field of application for existing core competencies and primarily are not looking for new core competencies. The future core business should use existing core competencies, making search fields in EE activities in SMEs more limited from the beginning. In contrast, EE activities at HEIs and the ideas developed are requiring less strategic alignment, which is vital for SMEs. Therefore, the backing of management and staff is essential, whereas, in the academic environment, there is more freedom to operate.

Special attention must be devoted to the following aspects:

# 5.4 Limitations and Future Research

In the nature of research, the emergence of limitations is inevitable. The presented results face the following limitations and opportunities for future research. First, by focusing on only two case companies, the question of generalizability arises; second, as the data set only contains case studies on collaboration between SMEs and on EE HEI initiative, we may have an inaccuracy in comprehensively characterizing the implementation of EE activities in SME and the associated collaboration with HEI. Thus third, the number and maybe even the specifications of attributes and variables could be different if more cases are considered. Fourth, some aspects are described in a biased manner, leaving room for narratives and interpretations, exacerbated by the retrospective view that is partially taken. A counteract may be a more longitudinal study that "on going" follows EE collaboration projects. Finally, the limitations of our results and conclusions toward generalizability and applicability in practice must be further elaborated by investigating a broader range of collaborations between other HEIs and SMEs.

Concerning the abovementioned managerial implications of this study, several opportunities for future research arise. First, examining the impact of the adaptation of the elements described above on cultural conformity would be interesting, as we suspect that not all elements affect perceived cultural conformity. However, perceived cultural conformity is particularly important for the SME. Second, we assume that the existing initial situation concerning existing innovation processes and framework conditions influences the SME's motivation to establish CE and thus EE programs. Whether and in which form the catalyst for EE is affected by the initial situation should be investigated.

### 6 Conclusion

Transferring knowledge about impactful programs from academic settings into the corporate environment is one approach for benefitting from experiences made in the last decades. It can be observed in practice that universities and companies are working ever more closely together in this field (Schiuma & Carlucci, 2018). This chapter has examined how EE activities are designed in collaborations among SMEs and HEIs, thus strengthening the understanding of key requirements for the transfer and implementation of EE activities in SMEs. The investigated case studies resulted in characteristics in which we were able to identify various aspects where the underlying conditions in SMEs and universities are similar. However, characteristics were also found that differ and therefore make it necessary to adjust formats and activities if they are transferred to the corporate context.

SMEs can benefit from the transfer of EE knowledge in cooperation with universities of their enormous know-how in designing processes for strategic innovation, business development, and business model innovation through proven innovation methods. HEIs can use the insights from SMEs through collaboration to generate new knowledge. This includes what SMEs will need in the future and what entrepreneurial knowledge can be imparted to students to enable them to become intrapreneurs and, therefore, more valuable employees.

### References

Isabella Fitzky received the master's degree in industrial engineering and is currently working for Kilometer1—the startup initiative of the Konstanz universities—at the University of Applied Sciences (HTWG) in Konstanz, Germany. There, she educates students in entrepreneurial skills and supports them on their way to become entrepreneurs.

Christina Lang is a researcher at the IST Institute at the University of Applied Sciences (HTWG) in Konstanz, Germany. Her research focus is on goal setting for steering corporate entrepreneurship units more strategically. By supporting SMEs to establish entrepreneurial innovation management, she has gained in-depth knowledge of the specifications of German SMEs and the design of entrepreneurial activities.

Dr. Guido H. Baltes is the director of the IST Institute focusing on design issues in the context of strategic innovation and corporate entrepreneurship. He is visiting professor at UIBE University in Beijing and UC San Diego's Rady School of Management. He combines corporate and entrepreneurial experience with internationally renowned research: besides a successful track as a senior executive in a multinational company, he has helped to build several successful startups as cofounder.

Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license and indicate if changes were made.

The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter's Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the chapter's Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder.

# Female Entrepreneurs' Motivations, Intentions and Barriers in Higher Education: A Case Study from Team Academy Bristol

#### Berrbizne Urzelai, Lauren Caple, and Samuel Watkins

Abstract The objective of this study is to examine factors contributing to entrepreneurial intention, motivation and barriers among female university students. For this, we take a case study approach and focus on a Team Academy undergraduate degree programme run in Bristol, UK, which bases its pedagogical model on studentcentred, experiential and team-based learning where students use their team companies through 3 years to engage in real-world, trade-based activities and ventures and reflect on their learning by getting support and encouragement from team coaches and mentors. Data gathered through semi-structured questionnaires from female students and graduates of the programme since it was launched in 2013–2014 shows that entrepreneurial motivation, intentions and perceptions on barriers might have specific characteristics for entrepreneurial females in higher education as the reasons and ambitions are also influenced by their student identity, beyond their entrepreneurial identity.

Our findings highlight that the experiential-led nature of the Team Academy educational setting provides a supportive environment which facilitates enhanced levels of self-efficacy for female entrepreneurial students, i.e. their belief in their ability to start ventures is enhanced through their practical experiences of doing so during their programme of study.

While female students are in the minority on the programme, making up just 15% of the cohort, their entrepreneurial intentions remain strong or increase during their time at university, and they have a positive attitude towards the benefits of becoming entrepreneurs. However, our data suggests that female students may lack the confidence to take actions and risks, and the support network of their peers and team coaches is key in empowering them and helping to minimise self-doubt.

B. Urzelai (✉) · L. Caple

S. Watkins VWV Solicitors, Bristol, UK

© The Author(s) 2023

J. H. Block et al. (eds.), Progress in Entrepreneurship Education and Training, FGF Studies in Small Business and Entrepreneurship, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-28559-2\_15

Business Management, University of the West of England (UWE), Bristol, UK e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
The findings in this chapter inform changes within the programme and suggestions for future development of a more inclusive and diverse degree. The findings also have implications for entrepreneurship educators in further understanding the potential motivations, entrepreneurial intentions and entrepreneurial barriers of female students engaging in an entrepreneurial degree programme. This offers important considerations in terms of how inclusivity and diversity can be reflected in curriculum design.

Keywords Team Academy · Entrepreneurial motivations · Entrepreneurial intentions · Female entrepreneurship

### 1 Introduction

The current academic debate surrounding female entrepreneurs focuses on barriers and gender differences. As GEM report suggests in the majority of economies, new businesses are more likely to be started by men than women (Bosma et al., 2021). The ratio of female to male early-stage entrepreneurship varies across the UK regions, so care needs to be taken using the often-repeated statement that "women are half as likely as men to be starting their own business in the UK". The UK female to male TEA ratio of 63% in 2019 is higher than in previous years (Hart et al., 2020), yet white males continue to dominate the entrepreneurial landscape (Pages, 2005). In terms of their motivations to start a business, studies suggest that females in the UK tend to be more motivated by making a difference in the world or earning a living than by building wealth and income or continuing a family tradition (DeMartino & Barbato, 2003; Hart et al., 2020). This, together with reports of female entrepreneurs being hardest hit by the pandemic, has shaped the current UK policy debate leading to a government pledge of 600,000 new female-run businesses by 2030. While these factors are undoubtedly true, the current debate misses "'why"' these females decide to be entrepreneurial by starting a journey of experiential learning in education.

This in context, the field of entrepreneurship education has been characterised by explosive growth given the importance of entrepreneurship in job and wealth creation (Koellinger & Roy Thurik, 2012; Lumpkin & Bacq, 2019). Not surprisingly, across the globe, entrepreneurship is taught to students at different levels and across many different disciplines (Jones & Iredale, 2010). Tiimiakatemia was developed in 1993 by Johannes Partanen at Jyväskylä University of Applied Sciences (JAMK) in Finland. Within entrepreneurship education, Team Academy (TA) is seen by some as an innovative pedagogical model that enhances social connectivity, as well as experiential (Kayes, 2002; Kolb, 1984), student-centred (Brandes & Ginnis, 1986) and team-based learning (Michaelsen et al., 2004). It also creates spaces for transformative learning to occur (Mezirow, 2006).

"If you really want to see the future of management education, you should see Team Academy", Peter Senge (Senge, 2008) made this comment over a decade ago about TA, and since its inception, educators and practitioners engaging in TA-based programmes have continuously pushed at the innovation boundaries of more traditional teaching approaches to education (Urzelai & Vettraino, 2022a; Urzelai & Vettraino, 2022b; Vettraino & Urzelai, 2022a; Vettraino & Urzelai, 2022b). TA is often referred to as a model of entrepreneurship education (Sear & Norton, 2012) and the way it takes the learning through approach (Hytti & O'Gorman, 2004; QAA, 2018). TA is seen as the flagship programme for the University of the West of England (UWE) in terms of being enterprising, and UWE TA has been recognised as a first and leading example of the TA methodology in the UK, achieving, beyond others, the Collaborative Award for Teaching Excellence from Advance HE in 2021.

Today Team Academy-inspired degree programmes exist within higher education institutions spanning four continents and many countries (Urzelai & Vettraino, 2022a; Urzelai & Vettraino, 2022b; Vettraino & Urzelai, 2022a; Vettraino & Urzelai, 2022b). On Team Academy programmes, learners create and operate real enterprises, and their learning is centred around their team company, a team of up to 20 fellow students that collaborate on projects and ventures and support each other's learning goals (Davies et al., 2022). Each team company is assigned a team coach, who supports learning through enquiry rather than instruction, and students are referred to as "team entrepreneurs" to emphasise the practice-led nature of the programme and to espouse the value of entrepreneurial mindset. Learners are required to engage in self-managed learning with support from others, namely, peers within their team company and their team coach. This involves a form of negotiated learning in which they are required to develop learning goals that align to their personal ambitions as well as the mission, vision and values of their team company, with regular feedback provided by their team coach and their peers.

However, "essential and interdependent" support functions that need to be in place for students making the transition into university education include not only cognitive support through course materials and resources or systems support from the institution but also affective support by creating a nurturing and supportive environment (Tait, 2000). You might expect that the team- and coaching-based experiential learning pedagogy adopted within TA would accommodate these functions, but the fact is that although females perform well and have higher pass rates and higher marks in the UWE TA programme, the number of females enrolled is much lower than in other business and management programmes. Since 2013, 364 students have joined the programme at UWE, out of which only 58 were females (15%). An average of 17% females enrol onto the UWE TA programme each year, compared to 42% for business management programmes since 2017. These are the future female leaders and entrepreneurs of the UK (Urzelai, 2021).

Therefore, this project aims to explore the intentions and motivations that young females have to become team entrepreneurs within a Team Academy setting and the barriers they face in their entrepreneurial journey.

The chapter will follow the following structure. We will first introduce the literature review on intentions, motivation and barriers that female entrepreneurs face. We then explain our methodology. After that we present our findings and analysis. The chapter ends with some general observations and conclusions.

### 2 Literature Review

Our chapter intends to better understand female entrepreneurship students in higher education, so for that purpose, we will focus our literature review in understanding female entrepreneurial intentions, female entrepreneurial motivations and the barriers and limitations that female entrepreneurs may face.

# 2.1 Entrepreneurial Intentions

In recent years entrepreneurship intention research has encompassed a wide range of topics including the impact of self-efficacy, entrepreneurship education and entrepreneurial role models. Scholars have argued that entrepreneurship does not happen serendipitously and comprises of a set of skills that can be learned (Bazan et al., 2019). Entrepreneurship education has thus received a lot of attention in relation to its influence on entrepreneurial behaviours and intentions (Bae et al., 2014; Opoku-Antwi et al., 2012). There is further evidence of the role of entrepreneurship education in improving levels of self-efficacy, which seems to be intrinsically linked to entrepreneurial intentions.

Researchers have examined the relationship between entrepreneurial intentions and entrepreneurial self-efficacy and found that gender had a strong effect on both, with males demonstrating higher levels than females (Wilson et al., 2009). Furthermore, it was found that, when viewed separately, gender and education did not have a significant effect on entrepreneurial behaviour, but when viewed together, they did. Furthermore, when factoring in self-efficacy, it was found that its effects overwhelmed the others. These relationships seem to demonstrate the important role that entrepreneurship education can play in increasing self-efficacy, especially in females (Palmer et al., 2015).

A previous study has examined the impact of gender orientation on entrepreneurial intentions (EI) among university students (Palmer et al., 2015). Having studied an entrepreneurship course was a significant predictor of EI for females but not for males (Palmer et al., 2015). The authors suggest that entrepreneurship education may have contributed more to entrepreneurial self-efficacy in females than for males, particularly in the cases where females had fewer vicarious entrepreneurial experiences than their male counterparts. Knowing an entrepreneur was a significant predictor of male EI but was unrelated to levels of female EI. This finding seems to support the need for female role models in entrepreneurial contexts (Palmer et al., 2015).

Exposure to entrepreneurial role models and self-efficacy as a predictor of women's entrepreneurial intentions (EI) has also been explored (Austin & Nauta, 2016). In a study of 620 female college students in the US, higher levels of selfefficacy and a larger number of entrepreneurial role models within one's network were associated with higher levels of EI. The intensity of interactions with role models was also associated with higher levels of EI (Bae et al., 2014), thus emphasising the importance of meaningful connections with entrepreneurial role models for female nascent entrepreneurs.

Entrepreneurial intention can be further understood by considering the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) (Ajzen, 1991), which suggests that personal attitude (a favourable or unfavourable evaluation of behaviour), subjective norms (perceived social pressure to perform or not perform a behaviour) and perceived behavioural control (perceived ease or difficulty of performing the behaviour) are antecedents of entrepreneurial intention.

# 2.2 Entrepreneurial Motivations

Entrepreneurs need to have confidence in the future and their abilities to start a business, but it is also sensible to assume that the COVID-19 pandemic might have had an impact in the start-up's motivations. Some authors define four categories of entrepreneurs' motivations (Sulikashvili et al., 2021):

Women are more motivated by autonomy, achievement, a desire for job satisfaction and other non-economic rewards, but the desire to make money is not, however, an unimportant motive (Cromie, 1987). So, they are usually more motivated by intrinsic factors.

In the context of the UK, studies found that building wealth was the stronger motivation, while continuing family tradition was ranked the weakest motivation, but females tend to evaluate both factors much lower than males and are more interested in what, for them, makes a difference in the world or to earn a living (Hart et al., 2020). Women are less competitively inclined than men in almost all countries included in the sample and are also less willing to take risks (Bönte & Piegeler, 2013). More detailed work found that having freedom, greater flexibility, challenging oneself and fulfilling a personal vision were the most popular motivations for females in the UK (Hart et al., 2017). Males tend to place economic gain as the primary motivation for starting a business, whereas females oftentimes go into business for themselves in order to achieve a more favourable family-work-life balance (DeMartino & Barbato, 2003).

However, it is important to note that although there is a strong gender effect on some motivational factors, gender itself needs to be examined along with other social factors to understand differences in motivations (Humbert & Drew, 2010).

# 2.3 Barriers and Limitations

This research has analysed entrepreneurial barriers that female entrepreneurship students faced before and during their start-up process. These were classified as "societal barriers", "infrastructural barriers" and "behavioural barriers". Our research recognises the extrinsic nature of these barriers and the interconnectivity they rely upon.

#### 2.3.1 Societal Barriers

Gender stereotyping confines women to have qualities that are less likely to be associated with entrepreneurship (Hentschel et al., 2019). Accordingly, selfstereotyping by FEs may negatively influence their intentions to enter this field (Gupta et al., 2009). By "thinking entrepreneurship – thinking male", it becomes apparent that the defining characteristics of the stereotypical entrepreneur are effectively those which define masculinity (Marlow, 2004). Implementing a broader view of stereotypes that considers congruence to gender identification deconstructs this stereotyping (Gupta et al., 2009).

Besides, much of the literature on entrepreneurship argues that sociocultural factors such as fear of failure, perceived opportunities or role models are the most important drivers of entrepreneurial behaviour (Arenius & Minniti, 2005), especially in the case of female entrepreneurship (BarNir et al., 2011).

#### 2.3.2 Infrastructural Barriers

Gender-based discrimination causes women to experience barriers to acquiring financial capital in the form of loans, as measures used to determine creditworthiness have been based on masculinised norms such as domestic circumstances (De Andrés et al., 2021).

There is a lack of women in entrepreneurship, and this, therefore, affects social capital and access to resources. Female business networks are sparse and are found to either be too competitive or male-oriented (McGowan et al., 2015). Thus, there is a lack of sufficient and beneficial mentoring for females. This is compounded by the notion that a young woman cannot be successful both entrepreneurially and domestically simultaneously (Sandberg, 2013).

As a result, there is a perceived irrelevancy of female entrepreneurship as an option within the educational system – perceiving entrepreneurial endeavours as inappropriate for young women, thus stopping the self-confidence necessary for the development of an entrepreneurial career. However, the further women progress through the system, the more likely they are to possess entrepreneurial skills (McGowan et al., 2015). Thus, there is a need for an education system that encourages the development of business skills from the outset of education, to encourage the development of aspiring females from all educational backgrounds (Jones, 2014).

#### 2.3.3 Behavioural Barriers

Aspiring females are likely to have lower levels of self-efficacy. They are often dismissive of entrepreneurship as a viable career choice and will choose a different career path if they believe they have a stronger skillset elsewhere (Wilson et al., 2007). This causes them to develop a risk aversion and are less likely to take risky entrepreneurial decisions. However, it has recently been suggested that the risktaking propensity of women actually exceeds that of men, as by knowing the barriers they may face but still engaging with entrepreneurship, this exhibits a higher willingness to take risks than male counterparts (Castillo et al., 2017).

Furthermore, current coaching models are homogenous and fail to differentiate between gender. Many suggest that an impartial online coaching model would increase entrepreneurial self-efficacy by removing geographical barriers and offering increased flexibility (Hunt et al., 2019).

### 3 Research Methodology and Sample

This research adopts a case study research strategy (Yin, 2009) and qualitative approach (Saunders et al., 2015) as it attempts to gain a deep understanding of the whys and hows of a phenomenon in that particular context (TA programme).

Two of the authors of this chapter work in the programme as team coaches and had access to most of the students and graduates. A semi-structured questionnaire was distributed to all of the 60 female students and graduates of the programme, resulting in completion by 20 participants in total (33% of the total of females enrolled in the programme since it was launched in 2013–2014). It included both open (i.e. "what are your entrepreneurial motivations linked to the 'need for independence and autonomy'?" The individual creates their company in order to be free from all external constraints, to be independent and to have full control of their life at work. The individual is at the origin of his own actions) and closed questions (i.e. if self-employed, how did you start in the business? (1) Entrepreneur by creation: I

#### Table 1 Respondents' start date (academic year)

started a business from scratch. (2) Entrepreneur by acquisition: I started by buying an existing business. (3) Entrepreneur by inheritance: I continued a family business. (4) Franchise: I helped expand the franchisers' business. (5) Other).

Fifty-five per cent of the responses we obtained were from current students who started after 2019 (see Table 1). Only 5% of the respondents had postgraduate or master's degree, which means that most of the graduates did not continue education after graduation.

Most of the respondents (75%) were under 25 (see Table 2). The managerial experience is low as 55% have no experience and 45% have 1–5 years of experience.

Twenty-five per cent of the respondents were studying either full- or part-time. Thirty per cent were solely working full time as paid employees and 10% as selfemployed. However, there is another 15% that although they are self-employed, they are also either studying or working as paid employees or both.

All the self-employed participants consider they are entrepreneurs by creation and not by acquisition/inheritance or through a franchise. The majority (80%) has been running their business for 1 to 5 years. In terms of employees, 40% have no employees and 60% have 1–4 employees in their business.

In terms of the sector of activity, the number of participants that are working (paid or self-employed) in services is quite high, accounting for 54% of the total, followed by 15% in retail.

A thematic analysis was adopted as a framework to analyse the data. The main concepts that emerged were identified and categorised into common themes by different researchers. Statements and quotes allocated to the themes were then used to present a textural description of the qualitative empirical data. A descriptive analysis was used to analyse the answers that were of a more quantitative nature.

### 4 Findings

# 4.1 Entrepreneurial Intentions

To analyse levels of entrepreneurial intentions, the survey asked respondents to indicate levels of agreement with the following statements, using a seven-point Likert scale:

m Overall, each of the statements elicited a higher percentage of responses in agreement than disagreement, suggesting strong levels of entrepreneurial intentions among respondents. The statements which elicited the strongest levels of agreement overall were "My professional goal is to become an entrepreneur" and "Ia determined to create a firm/venture in the future".

The survey also explored whether entrepreneurial intention had changed during the student's time on the programme. The data highlighted that 80% of respondents had the desire to start their own business before joining the team entrepreneurship programme. This intention changed during the programme for 65% of respondents. For a relatively small proportion of respondents (15%), their intention has moved away from entrepreneurship, or this has become a longer-term ambition for the future with their shorter-term goals focused on gaining employment. However, a larger majority (40%) highlight that their entrepreneurial intentions have strengthened during the programme or their perception of entrepreneurship has shifted to a more obtainable and realistic goal through increased self-efficacy and through gaining relevant experience. This is encapsulated in the following quotes:

I always use to dream about having my own business but never thought about actually setting one up. I thought I would be better working for someone in a large company.  (R5)

I would say the desire got stronger. It was more of a dream before I started TE but the programme helped me to see it as more of a reality and take the steps to make it happen. (R16)

It is interesting to note that both respondents use the word "dream", suggesting that entrepreneurship was previously viewed as unobtainable or unrealistic. This supports previous findings (Palmer et al., 2015) in relation to entrepreneurship education increasing levels of self-efficacy in females through providing knowledge and experience, and thus confidence, in the process of becoming an entrepreneur.

Figure 1 indicates the numerical data in relation to participants' attitudes towards entrepreneurship. A series of statements were derived based on the Theory of

Fig. 1 Attitudes towards entrepreneurship (mean score values). n: 20

Planned Behaviour (TPB) model (Ajzen, 1991), and respondents were asked to rank each of the statements from 1 to 7, where 1 indicates total disagreement and 7 indicates total agreement.

A mean score of 6.1 indicates that the majority of respondents hold a positive personal valuation of being an entrepreneur, thus further suggesting strong levels of entrepreneurial intention among participants. This goes in line with studies that found a positive and significant influence of personal attitude and perceived behavioural control on entrepreneurial intention in females (Dinc & Budic, 2016). Respondents are, on average, more neutral in relation to the subjective norm, i.e. feeling social pressure to carry out entrepreneurial behaviours, and they have a higher disparity of opinions on this dimension. This supports previous findings (Palmer et al., 2015) where knowing an entrepreneur was a significant predictor of EI for males but not for females, perhaps owing to a lack of female entrepreneurial role models. Participants are also somewhat neutral overall in relation to the perceived behavioural control, suggesting that while participants may hold a positive attitude towards the benefits of becoming an entrepreneur, they are less confident in their abilities to do so. This is in line with previous studies highlighting lower levels of entrepreneurial self-efficacy in females (Wilson et al., 2009).

# 4.2 Entrepreneurial Motivations

Many respondents emphasised the practical element of the course as a driver to join the programme and how the methodology was seen as more appropriate for people with different learning styles. This reflects that the TA methodology could be much more inclusive as students are able to personalise their learning to surpass some of the barriers found in traditional academic settings under teacher-led approaches.

I liked the practical element. I would always lose attention if talked at for too long. I find even if I tried really hard in academics I still would never get the desired results but it was

Table 3 Female entrepreneur's motivations to start a business

N = 20

more achievable with TE. I also always dreamed of owning a cafe so I thought entrepreneurship would be a good way of doing that. (R16)

I thought it would be a good opportunity to gain real life skills that I could take with me when hopefully starting my own business. (R18)

I joined the program because traditional degrees didn't suit my learning style. I get bored and distracted very easily but found this course to be the perfect fit as it was practical and pushed me out of my comfort zone. (R5)

I wanted more control over my future, I loved working with people, leading and learning about business. Entrepreneurship brought my love for these together and offered the freedom for me to make it my own. (R14)

Many mentioned within their main three reasons the networking and team element of it. This goes in line with studies that argue that social capital is emphasised for women, who may disproportionately require it in order to become entrepreneurs (Humbert & Drew, 2010).

I can work with others and lead in a safe environment. (R14)

To work closely with a range of different people and make friends for life. (R6)

The motivations that the participants have to start a business were measured with a scale of importance level from not important at all (Ajzen, 1991) to very important (BarNir et al., 2011) (see Table 3).

The motivation was mainly related to having freedom and flexibility, having to challenge themselves and desiring to fulfil a personal vision. The least important factors were to continue a family tradition or to follow the example of a person they admire. Wealth and income related motivations were of moderate importance.

Although the results are in line with other results in terms of the factors that are the most important among that list (Hart et al., 2017), if we compare the data with the results of that UK level GEM report, the percentage of female entrepreneurs stating

Table 4 Main intrinsic and extrinsic motivations

the motivation was fairly or very important varies. In our context (HE) "to follow the example of a person I admire" was rated much lower (20% vs 38.5%), while others were stronger motivations for our young female team entrepreneurs, such as "fulfilling a personal vision" (100% vs 84.2%), "challenge" (95% vs 83.5%), "income" (80% vs 69.2%) and "building wealth" (80% vs 69.6%).

When talking about intrinsic motivations (Table 4), the participants talk a lot about autonomy, freedom and achievement or being satisfied and enjoying what they do. Although money is one of the extrinsic motivations that was more frequently repeated among the responses obtained, there were other factors that represent how the female entrepreneurs need to find "external validation" to what they do.

Participants referred to the need for independence and autonomy as an important motivator for them which they linked to running a team, having the freedom to learn and create or being in control of the decision-making process.

I am motivated by my own creativity and to not have limited boundaries when it comes to creativity. I want to work for myself and not feel limited in my ability to achieve more than what my manager/employer would want me to achieve. I look forward to running my own business when I work freely and independently, working with my own timetable. (R5)

I love having freedom in what I want to learn and develop. (R19)

Not having to answer to anyone or follow another leaders' rules or regulations. If I had my own business I would create them myself. (R12)

It's about having more control. As an entrepreneur you can have a meaningful say it what happens and how things are run, it enables you to create your reality. (R16)

The idea of a money-free lifestyle, whereby I can live a lifestyle and not have to consider cost, is really appealing. Coming from a working-class background, I have always wanted to succeed within a career to the point that I don't have to think about what I am spending. In addition, I have always been very driven to make this life for myself rather than be given such lifestyle. (R3)

In terms of the motivations related to the safety and well-being of the family, this was less relevant in our context as not many female entrepreneur students had family responsibilities. However, the participants acknowledged being able to contribute to the well-being of their families as an important aspiration. They look at it from the perspective of having more time for family but also from a financial point of view:

Being able to take care of my family is a motivator to be successful. (R14)

I want to be able to see my family when I need/would like to. I would like to be able to socialize with friends and family without feeling unable to due to work commitments. I want to be able to support them where I can. I feel mentally happy when I am working on my own projects/goals and aspirations compared to those that have been set for me. Therefore, being an entrepreneur will make me more physically happy compared to an everyday job. (R5)

Success often results in money. I have always to give back to those that have put so much time and effort into helping me build my entrepreneurial career within these early days and succeeding within my career is a way of doing that. Similarly, coming from a working-class background I didn't go hungry but, money was often tight when I was little. Personally, being able to ensure my children have the financial security they need to build their desired futures is really important and another reason behind why I want every venture I build to succeed. (R3)

### 5 Barriers Towards Entrepreneurship

When creating our survey, the aim was to examine the different types of barriers as established through prior literature. We asked participants to rank a number of barriers from 1 (to an extremely small extent) to 7 (to an extremely large extent). By doing this, we could analyse which of the barriers most female TAs perceive to be the strongest. We also compared perceived barriers before engaging in entrepreneurship, while doing so, in order to see if these barriers change (see Fig. 2).

The respondents identified a low level of legal and economic knowledge, lack of self-confidence, fear of failure, lack of work-life balance, lack of self-efficacy or limited access to finance as some of the main barriers.

It is interesting to note that most of those barriers are perceived as less of a limitation once the business is already running but that some of them increase: lack of self-confidence, lack of mentoring, lack of ambition for success, their personal attitude towards risk-taking, cultural barriers or fear of failure. Looking at standard variation values, there is a much higher disparity of opinions when evaluating the barriers during operations than when evaluating the barriers before setting up a business.

It seems that our participants perceive more behavioural barriers than infrastructural or societal barriers, so factors such as self-confidence, ambition for success, fear of failure or attitude towards risk-taking are more problematic for them (Table 5).

# 5.1 Societal Barriers

In terms of societal barriers, the results were divided. Very few of our participants found "gender stereotyping" to be a large barrier, with 50% rating this as a small barrier. We found the same result when looking at "male domination" and "discrimination" in the entrepreneurial sector. This implies that the notion of gender-based

Fig. 2 Barriers towards entrepreneurship before and during setting up a business

Table 5 Categories of barriers and limitations (before and during business operations)

stereotypes acting as a barrier to female intentions of engaging with entrepreneurship is beginning to become outdated as we move towards a more gender-fluid society.

One barrier our participants did find to be large was a "lack of work-life balance". Despite the rise in more gender-neutral concepts, the gendered division of labour is still unequal, and 75% of our participants found this to at least be a "moderate" barrier to success. There is a common notion that females are "not taken seriously as entrepreneurs". This is the case for working mothers and people perceiving they have been patronised, which implies there is a need for coherent educational networks that target/adapt to working mothers, for instance.

# 5.2 Infrastructural Barriers

Limited access to financial support was found by our participants to be one of the main barriers to entrepreneurship, although this lessened once they started running their own business. This suggests that increasing economic intelligence through a TA programme is key to lessening assumed financial constraints.

Our participants, all of whom are degree educated, did not perceive a difference in educational level as a significant barrier, with over 50% of participants rating this barrier as a small extent. This correlates with the suggestion that the further women progress through the system, the more likely they are to possess entrepreneurial skills.

# 5.3 Behavioural Barriers

Low self-efficacy is highly cited in literature as one of the main barriers females face. Conversely, our results on this were mixed, with a 50/50 split between participants. Research undertaken within the same TA programme suggests that personal growth and confidence building are the key values that the programme reinforces (Davies et al., 2022), but there is a constant dilemma on how to offer the right balance between the team and individual dimensions or the business vs. competency outcomes (Urzelai & Davies, 2022). However, lack of self-confidence was found to be a large barrier. This may suggest that low entrepreneurial self-efficacy is translating in this form and that female entrepreneurs believe that they can succeed as entrepreneurs but lack the confidence to do so.

This lack of self-efficacy can also take the form of risk aversion. Where a behaviour is seen as entrepreneurially risky, females are less likely to engage in this behaviour than their male counterparts, which is also reflected in our results. This is not to suggest that women lack "ambition for success", as when asked this the response from our participants overwhelmingly pointed towards this being a small barrier. It does however suggest that they have a lower risk-taking propensity and are less likely to make risky decisions that may, ultimately, benefit their business.

### 6 Conclusion

Despite the evidence of an escalation in entrepreneurial activity by women, females are still only half as likely as men to start a business, and education has a big role to play here. Inclusivity needs to be represented not only in the participants in the rooms but also in the teaching materials and resources, coaches and mentors or workshops and speakers. It is essential for an economy to welcome female entrepreneurs to start their own businesses, thus to create jobs, innovate and generate income.

Understanding the motives, intentions and barriers that our female entrepreneurs face in the context of an innovative entrepreneurial programme within HE is important to evaluate whether what we offer as educators supports their needs and aspirations. Societal barriers enshrined through centuries of patriarchal society have led to infrastructural barriers that act as an administrative hurdle. However, education can play a very important role in minimising the female entrepreneurs' cognitive barriers that influence their behaviour.

The research findings show that the educational setting provides the supportive environment for them to gain confidence and the female entrepreneurial students gain self-efficacy through the experience of running their projects throughout their programme. They value the community and experiential learning approach and the freedom they get to personalise their learning and build their social capital. Throughout the degree they actually start believing that it is possible for them to start a business and they are capable of doing it.

Even if they are surrounded by males in the programme (only 15% are females) and some have not started their own business yet, their entrepreneurial intentions remain strong or increased during their time at university, and they have a positive attitude towards the benefits of becoming entrepreneurs, but they lack the confidence to take actions and risks, and they need their teams, coaches and surrounding to reinforce their achievements and past successes and provide constant feedback that minimises their own self-doubting feelings.

Besides, the programme might need to evaluate how the message is received externally as entrepreneurship has connotations that might stop females from taking that career route. The message could focus not just on "venture creation" or "business outcomes" but on providing the support system for females to develop entrepreneurial and enterprising skills and competencies that make them flourish into more independent and confident living and thinking individuals. However, this poses a debate to the programme team as both the data from females (10% are self-employed as their main source of income) and data from graduates (15%) show that the programme might support the students in their personal development ambitions regardless if those are venture creation related or not. Is this programme for entrepreneurial individuals that want to set up businesses and lead their own organisations? Or is it for enterprising individuals that develop self-confidence, curiosity and problem-solving skills and might want to work for other organisations? Hopefully the second will lead into the first, and enterprising skills will encourage entrepreneurial action and job creation.

### References

Berrbizne Urzelai Team-Coach and Senior Lecturer at the University of the West of England (UWE), Bristol (UK). Her consultancy, teaching and research work are around Team Academy pedagogy, entrepreneurship, international business, social capital and knowledge transfer.

Lauren Caple Team Coach and Senior Lecturer at the University of the West of England (UWE), Bristol (UK). Her experience ranges from delivering a specialist entrepreneurship education programme to large-scale entrepreneurship education delivery.

Samuel Watkins Solicitor and former LLB law student at the University of the West of England (UWE). His experience stems from supporting female entrepreneurs through a third-year placement module and exploring the barriers that they faced. He is a strong advocate for the engagement of males towards gender imbalances.

Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license and indicate if changes were made.

The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter's Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the chapter's Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder.

# The Experiential Perceptions of Entrepreneurial Competencies: Avenues for the Next-Generation Entrepreneurship Education

Juha Kansikas and Pavlos Tarasanski

Abstract This self-narrative study on entrepreneurial competencies was conducted among potential next-generation members belonging to entrepreneurial families. As public university bachelor students, self-narratives written by the students themselves do not reflect just perceptions of entrepreneurial competencies in the context of business families but also in the context of higher education. The conceptual advancement of this paper focuses on extending the discussion of entrepreneurial experience-based competencies before designing and launching a venture, such as creativity, innovativeness, risk-taking, sales, and marketing.

Keywords Entrepreneurship education · Entrepreneurial competency · Next generation · Family business · Higher education

# 1 Introduction

The aim of the study is to understand entrepreneurial competencies by the higher education students belonging to entrepreneurial families. Entrepreneurial competencies will be understood empirically based on the undergraduate student self-narratives and their qualitative analysis. Theoretically, this study focuses on entrepreneurship education from the perspective of entrepreneurial competencies, in the context of potential next-generation members preparing for the future business world. These undergraduate students contain cognitive, conative, and affective assets of entrepreneurship which are based on summer jobs, family role models, heritage, culture, and other types of forms of socializing yourself to business through your family members. Thus, studying experiential perceptions among them enables us to increase conceptual understanding on next-generation entrepreneurial competencies.

e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
J. Kansikas (✉) · P. Tarasanski

Jyväskylä University School of Business and Economics, University of Jyväskylä, Jyväskylä, Finland

© The Author(s) 2023

J. H. Block et al. (eds.), Progress in Entrepreneurship Education and Training, FGF Studies in Small Business and Entrepreneurship, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-28559-2\_16

By reasoning and interpreting self-narratives, we conceptualize next-generation entrepreneurial competencies and increase knowledge related to them. This has both educational implications and managerial implications in forms of teaching and consulting family businesses and entrepreneurial families. In addition to these pragmatic approaches, this paper contributes by suggesting research initiatives on future next-generation entrepreneurship studies. These implications will be debated more in detail at the Conclusions section.

Methodologically, the study is based on self-narratives written by potential nextgeneration members with an entrepreneurial family background. Self-narrative analysis based on categories of analysis and their content was conducted. Self-narratives enable personal expressions, reflections of memories, and documentation of experiences. As self-narratives focus on understanding self-identity and its construction, in the form of "I" and "me," the role of the researchers is to understand as "we" and "us" the self-narratives. These roles characterize self-narrative analysis and offer multiple possibilities to conduct the qualitative reasoning. We chose for this purpose lexical search terms and aimed to understand the self-narratives as accounts of realities in which the meanings of the concepts vary. Through multiple searches and analysis, we formed coded segments which reflect main contents of the documents. At the Results section, the categories of analysis at the self-narrative analysis will be presented to understand conceptual realities of students belonging to the potential next-generation entrepreneur generation. Later at the Discussion section, preconceptual understanding will be reflected with the conceptual interpretations to increase contribution to generalization of the concepts related to the research question stated.

As European bachelor students at the public university, these young people do not just represent potential next-generation members. They reflect new suggestions and ideas on how to modernize entrepreneurship education in higher education and what type of future expectations potential next-generation members have through the experiential learning experiences they have about entrepreneurship.

Potential next-generation entrepreneurs experience entrepreneurship from early childhood (Bozer et al., 2017). They gather influence through belonging to entrepreneurial families, which impacts the intention to start their own business in comparison to those persons who do not have any entrepreneurial family background. This is explained by effects of the resource accesses (Vladasel et al., 2021) which increases the likelihood of becoming an entrepreneur in comparison to students without experiential knowledge. As next-generation members contain long-term experiential knowledge on entrepreneurialism (Murphy et al., 2019), it is relevant to understand their perceptions of entrepreneurial competencies in entrepreneurship education. We notice the current criticism in entrepreneurship literature toward the question "who is an entrepreneur?," and for this reason, we aim to understand students, who because of the circumstances of belonging to entrepreneurial families are more likely to become entrepreneurs (Ramoglou et al., 2020).

The potential next-generation entrepreneurs gather influences from multiple stakeholders, including not just school, social media, friends, and role models but also from their family members as family influence, i.e., familiness (Frank et al., 2016). Belonging to an entrepreneurial family makes the potential next-generation entrepreneurs choose some of the social and ethical models (Bernhard & Labaki, 2021) and working practices their family members represent, like managing innovations (Erdogan et al., 2020). Lack of next-generation commitment and engagement to business creates risks for family business continuity (Garcia et al., 2019). Studying the family influence on the next-generation entrepreneurial competencies would need a quantitative research setting, and for this reason, it is not studied in this paper. Instead of that, next-generation entrepreneurial competencies are understood through student self-narratives with the methodological aim to interpret them through analysis of categories.

Current research has identified needs to study different contexts of entrepreneurial competencies and how higher education can answer for these challenges (Gümüsay & Bohné, 2018) and how entrepreneurship education can influence entrepreneurial competencies and therefore entrepreneurial intentions (González-López et al., 2021). For this reason, we aim to study potential next-generation members of the entrepreneurial families and their perceptions of entrepreneurial competencies in higher education. Thus, the research question of the study is: "How do potential nextgeneration members perceive entrepreneurial competencies in higher education?"

### 2 Literature Review

One of the key questions surrounding entrepreneurship that links back to the search for the distinctive nature of entrepreneurs is whether we can teach it or at least nurture various competencies within students (Bird, 2019). Despite the arguable popularity of entrepreneurship nowadays, so far entrepreneurship education has not managed to deliver promising results (Nabi et al., 2017). Entrepreneurship education has attracted criticism from various directions, such as a focus on outdated pedagogies (Bae et al., 2014), mismatch between coursebook contents and actual experiences of entrepreneurs (Edelman et al., 2008), and a lack of qualified personnel to deliver entrepreneurship courses (Gümüsay & Bohné, 2018). This may be partially the reason why interest in entrepreneurship is high but, on the other hand, the belief in one's ability to become an entrepreneur is somewhat low (Pavone, 2018). That is a problem which can be addressed by focusing on the development of the required competencies, as demonstrated in this chapter. However, to successfully do that, we must ensure that the ones helping students become entrepreneurs are also suitable for the job.

Discussions surrounding who should be the one teaching about entrepreneurship have been going on, yet no consensus has been achieved as suggestions on co-learning environments with students and teachers, (Collins et al., 2006), experiential learning in business (Cope, 2005), student-led experiential learning (Bell & Bell, 2020), and learning in entrepreneurial ecosystems with other entrepreneurs (Guiso et al., 2021) have been made. Whereas often students consider that the one to teach should be the one who has done it, teachers counterargue that it is enough for a pedagogue to exert entrepreneurial qualities and be able to positively affect the entrepreneurial intentions of the students (San-Martin et al., 2021).

The discussion surrounding entrepreneurial competencies can be linked to attempts to decode entrepreneurs in terms of what makes them distinct from non-entrepreneurs (Gartner, 1989). The nature of the discipline is dynamic and in close interplay with the personal experiences, feelings, and thoughts of the individuals engaging in it, which sometimes makes it a challenge to find common ground among them. Nonetheless, it is assumed that finding such commonalities can provide a compass that might be able to guide educators toward nurturing key competencies via educational means (Schindehutte et al., 2006), if we are to believe that such competencies can be taught in the first place. The motivation to do so is justified within entrepreneurship education literature with evidence postulating that should a person gain a better understanding and mastery of the competencies relevant to entrepreneurship, the intention to start up a business will be greater (Sánchez, 2013).

Entrepreneurial competencies differ from the possession of specific skills in a manner that they include behaviors, knowledge, personality traits, and experiences among others (Bird, 2019). In other words, they answer the question of what enables an entrepreneur to engage in the activity from a holistic point of view rather than focusing on a particular skill. Entrepreneurial competencies have been studied from multiple contexts, such as motives (Cruz-Ros et al., 2017), intentions (Sánchez, 2013), learning (Kennedy et al., 2021), and entrepreneurs themselves (Mitchelmore & Rowley, 2013). For example, sustainable entrepreneurs need their own type of entrepreneurial competencies related to ethical and business-based decision-making and ecological and social value creation (Carey et al., 2021).

Not only entrepreneurial competencies have been studied with regard to different impacts on various elements of entrepreneurship, but they also have been approached from the perspective of which ones are more crucial depending on the stage of the company. At the inception phase, creativity and innovativeness, flexible and agile thinking, and market knowledge are prioritized among the potential entrepreneurs as entrepreneurial competencies (Oosterbeek et al., 2010).

In turn, as a company progresses through the inception phase and begins a full cycle of activities, a different set is becoming more important, specifically market knowledge, relationships, decision-making, resource management and leadership, strategic management, and commitment (Man et al., 2002) (see also the work by Rasmussen (Rasmussen et al., 2011) on opportunity seizing and entrepreneurial competencies).

Entrepreneurship education vary depending on the aspects of conative, cognitive, and affective components (Johannisson, 2018) selected for teaching and learning (Johannisson, 2014). As affective component is rooted into emotions, conative one reflects motivation and cognitive one knowledge. (Kyrö et al., 2008). Entrepreneurial competencies can be related alternatively, or simultaneously, to conative, cognitive, or conative pedagogies, didactics, and learning agendas. This study will focus on cognitive approach based on the abduction between self-narrative analysis and conceptual understanding.

### 3 Methodological Choices of the Self-Narrative Study

Methodologically, this study aims to analyze empirical material through qualitative self-narratives of public university students. Thus, 514 bachelor-level university students participated in writing self-narratives in March 2021, meaning 4–10 pages (written as a word document or a pdf) of text per student. The task was done as a home exercise at the course Introduction to Entrepreneurship at the Jyväskylä University School of Business and Economics in Finland. The selfnarratives were written with students' mother language, in Finnish, and they were returned personally by downloading the narrative into the e-learning environment.

The study is based on a type of qualitative entrepreneurship research, narrative analysis, which is based on self-reported narratives in which categories of analysis and profiles within them are recognized (Van Burg et al., 2020). Narrative research fits into next-generation context, as it enables students to study multiple topics related to family business strategy and management, including continuity and future of entrepreneurial firms (Hamilton et al., 2017).

Out of the 514 persons, 171 persons belonged or had belonged earlier to entrepreneurial families. Out of the 514 persons, 4 persons declined to give permission to analyze the self-narrative report, and for this reason, they were excluded from the data. The empirical material of 171 next-generation students contained 850 pages (200,000 words) of self-narrative texts. First, entrepreneurial family members were identified from the material based on students' self-reporting. This was done through the self-narratives about their earlier experiences on entrepreneurship and possible experiences in an entrepreneurial family. Thus, we utilized among the students an experiential selection criterion on next generation to identify them (Bell & Bell, 2020).

The criterion was that at least one of these options will be fulfilled so that a student could be regarded as a potential next-generation entrepreneur:

As "meaningful experientially," we meant that the student wrote a self-narrative about closeness and personal experiences related to entrepreneurship so that it had an impact on understanding what entrepreneurship is in practice. This included, based on (Garcia et al., 2019) study on the next-generation commitment to family business, factors such as role modeling, encouragement, and emotional support, but also personal experiences like summer jobs, observation, and communication with family members. This study does not divide students into different types of next-generation profiles but instead sees the bachelor degree students as potential next-generation members based on the experiential selection criteria they all possess.

Second, the self-narratives were analyzed by the MAXQDA2020 software. The aim of the software is to categorize the 850 pages of text into concepts that reflect entrepreneurial competencies through saturation. Finally, the author(s) did the iteration and the interpretation with the data when writing the qualitative results based on the self-narrative analysis. Results will contribute to understanding higher education from the perspective of students who are members of entrepreneurial families.

Methodological rigor of the study is based on using simultaneously the MAXQDA program and the self-narrative analysis approach. The role of the MAXQDA program is to create a text pool of qualitative self-narratives, to conduct transcription of the documents, and to organize them. At this resource pool, all the self-narratives were saved as documents. Among these documents, lexical search terms, decided by the author(s), were chosen for the research. This was done by reading through the self-narratives and selecting search terms to interpret the research question and preconceptual understanding related to it. The MAXQDA 2020 program was used for making the search and to create coded segments for the self-narrative analysis. The role of the lexical search terms and the coded segments was to create saturation related to the pool of self-narratives and the research question stated.

Rigor of the analysis was based on making multiple lexical searches and testing different search terms in lexical searches and by reading manually the self-narratives and engagement on creating a self-narrative template for the students. Also, author (s) were supervising students whenever needed in their writing process.

The coded segments were manually analyzed by the author(s), who interpreted the research question through creating categories of analysis. The role of the categories of self-narrative analysis was to understand conceptually entrepreneurial competencies by the potential next-generation entrepreneurs.

### 4 Results

Qualitative self-narrative analysis was chosen, to understand categories of analysis within them conceptually. By self-narrative analysis, we mean self-identification of students to entrepreneurship (Phillips, 2012). As students self-report their experiential world, they also reflect entrepreneurial competencies through the emotions, experiences, thoughts, and future ideas they have got about entrepreneurship.

Self-narratives reflect not just present and future assumptions on entrepreneurship but also distant and close, but still memorable, experiences of it. Some of the students identify "the entrepreneurial self" (Frederiksen & Berglund, 2020) as the others are still in the process of thinking what their identity is as young bachelor students. This identity of the next generation, as a contextual focus of the research, is characterized in this study through family background and experiences in it, often reflecting action-based learning together with communication, observation, participation, and personal thinking (Gregori et al., 2021).

The following lexical search terms covered multiple documents by creating large segments of the self-narratives, enabling saturation in qualitative analysis (search terms are translated from Finnish to English): 1) competencies and know-how (772 coded segments, from 276 documents), 2) risk-taking (218 coded segments, from 109 documents), 3) creativity and innovativeness (347 coded segments from 168 documents), and 4) sales and marketing (615 coded segments from 256 documents). The codes represented all words starting with the same letters, adjectives, and verbs, meaning that in the case of term number 3, creativity and innovativeness, also terms which started with "crea" and "inno" such as "to create," "to innovate," "creative," and "innovative," were included into the coded segments. As the same term can be multiple times in the same document, the number of documents is higher than the original 171 self-narratives. In sum, these four main categories contained 1952 coded segments at the self-narratives written by the students.

In terms of lexical search terms, the following concepts were tested with the MAXQDA2020 program and excluded from the analysis (number relates to coded segments, the search terms are translated from Finnish to English): resilience (0), network (36), networking (3), skill (191), skillfulness (23), internship (16), capability (2), to practice (152), be able to (92), to learn (353), teacher (145), and learning (158).

The number of the excluded coded segments was 1171. Exclusion criteria were based on analyzing how the content overlaps between the coded segments and contribution of the focus of the research. Most of the largest excluded segments, such as to learn, learning, to practice, and ability, did not increase contribution on the focus of the research. Saturation was able to be achieved through the four groups of coded segments to understand next-generation entrepreneurial competencies.

The first group of categories of analysis was generic, and it was related to how students understood what competencies, know-how, and abilities are in entrepreneurship. Representative direct quotations (translated from Finnish to English) are presented at each category of the analysis (CA). Understanding competencies was based on three categories of analysis. First, competencies were understood as sources of opportunities (CA1 Professional competencies as sources of entrepreneurial opportunities). Interest toward academic and complex expertise enables an increase in professional competencies which offer sources for entrepreneurial opportunities: "There is a possibility to create something of your own, and to adopt current technologies or to start to consult complex solutions related to the information technology. I have been lately very interested in cloud services and information technology solutions in organizations. This is a topic which could make me start a business and to become an entrepreneur. In practice it could focus on consulting organizations."

The second category of analysis (CA2 Competencies needed in starting up a new business) was related to competencies students regard as an essential pool of knowledge in the process of becoming an entrepreneur and in starting a new business. These competencies were based on a vision and on dreaming to become an entrepreneur: "As an entrepreneur you are free to influence yourself for your job and on how you employ yourself. Entrepreneurship is based on competencies to take advantage of your know-how. You have to trust for yourself, and for the start-up and its profitability... Entrepreneur needs to have multiple skills, as you need in running the business skills of marketing and accounting. You need to have prior working experience and ability to develop your business and its services."

The third category of analysis (CA3 Unknown world of competencies) reflected the reality of bachelor degree students who in several cases were first year students (especially in the case of business school bachelor degree students who take this course in the first year). Personal competencies were still an unknown mystery in this category of analysis. Entrepreneurship was familiar in this group through family members, role models, media, and school, but the personal competencies and identity related to it were still unknown: "I am still so in the beginning with my studies that it is impossible to say what kind of expertise will I have in the future, and what my interests professionally."

These three generic categories of analysis focused on student understanding of competencies. More precisely, categories of analysis on risk-taking, creativity and innovativeness, and sales and marketing will focus more in detail on entrepreneurial competencies of potential next-generation students.

Risk-taking, as a coded segment, contained the following categories of analysis, based on the self-narrative analysis conducted: risk-taking as a future-oriented competency (CA4), risk-taking as an experience-related competency (CA5), risktaking as a courage-related competency (CA6), and risk-taking as a gateway to new business operations (CA7). Risks were future-oriented in terms that they reflect "belief in the future..." and they were related to "...abilities to see new business opportunities proactively" (CA4). Risk-taking was also understood as an experience-related category, in which past, present, and future-expected experiences influence students' view on entrepreneurial competencies: "I have learnt through experiences when to take risks and when to avoid risk taking" (CA5). In addition to that, missing experience was realized. Risk-taking was related to courage and highly personal among students: "I would not like to be an entrepreneur at the moment, because I feel that uncertainty and risks are too high, especially during this covid pandemic... it takes a lot of courage and risks are often too high (CA6). Despite the heterogeneity of risk taking as an entrepreneurial competency, "Entrepreneurship is about challenging and developing yourself, and to take risks.. Entrepreneurs are risk takers and they produce innovations..." (CA7).

Creativity and innovativeness reflect competencies to generate new improvements and solutions for markets by combining resources available. As categories of analysis, creativity as a decision-making tool (CA8), creation of newness (CA9), and agile thinking (CA10) were interpreted. Creativity enabled competencies on entrepreneurial decision-making (CA8): "As an entrepreneur, you can choose your own team" and "As an entrepreneur you can generate ideas by yourself and be creative." Also, creating new business and finding new improvements and solutions were evident (CA9): "As a person I am creative, and I want to constantly try something new." Not just decision-making and newness creation but also agile thinking was interpreted as an entrepreneurial competency (CA10): "You need to possess somehow proactive and innovative thinking, which makes you to identify up-to-date, important trends, and to find out new things and in general, to make yourself visible and distinct as an entrepreneur and as a business."

Sales and marketing represent a large mass of coded segments, focusing on marketing from multiple perspectives. As categories of analysis, the following ones were interpreted: sales as a gateway to entrepreneurial behavior (CA11), salespersons as role models (CA12), marketing as a source of start-up feasibility (CA13), and market gap identification (CA14).

Sales was a source of entrepreneurial behavior for the potential next-generation students (CA11): "I do not have any entrepreneurial experience, but I think that the sales experience I got has created my intrapreneurial potential"; "I have done some sales in promoting gigs, but I would be interested in developing the idea further." In birth and growth of competencies, role models are meaningful for young nextgeneration students (CA12): "I have worked in sales, and I get along very well with different types of people and I believe this is very useful if I will one day start my own business... many of my relatives have worked as salespeople... ." Marketing and sales are interconnected competencies in new business development and its feasibility (CA13): "It is, for sure, very useful to acquire knowledge on different types of business formats, marketing, customer relationship management, and sources of funding for a start-up." Also, marketing provides opportunities to create competencies to understand market gaps (CA14): "Entrepreneurship is social action, in which entrepreneurs identify market gaps in which there are opportunities to do profitable business."

### 5 Discussion

The research question of the study was: "How do potential next-generation members perceive entrepreneurial competencies in higher education?" Next, the research question will be answered by understanding conceptually the results by positioning it with the preconceptual knowledge of the current research literature.

Student perceptions of artificial entrepreneurship are reflected through competencies which are gateways to opportunity access, resources to start new businesses, and into the world of unknown realities. Thus, entrepreneurial competencies lead in the world of students to opportunity evaluation and start-ups, and for this reason, they are vital for those potential next-generation members who want to become entrepreneurs. It must be recognized that entrepreneurial competencies are not known, recognized, or realized by a group of students. In the case of the professional identity and the personal one, the transformation will take place in the future, and for this reason, competencies are still a vague concept of unknown and artificial realities which is in contradiction with thinking of next-generation members as a homogenous group of experienced family business members (Murphy et al., 2019).