Research in the pre–paradigmatic, applied scientific field of entrepreneurship is characterized mainly as exploratory. This article advocates for a considerable shift toward a more effective applied research agenda. An applied research program is proposed based on modifications to a Lakatosian research program. The agenda extends beyond typical calls for more replication work to include a focus on practical outcomes, practical significance, and surprising findings among other things. The intent is to produce substantially more practical knowledge—knowledge that is useful to entrepreneurs, policy makers, educators, and scholars.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AldrichH. (1992). Methods in our madness? Trends in entrepreneurship research. In SextonD.L. & KasardaJ.D. (Eds.), The state of the art of entrepreneurship (pp. 191–213). Boston, MA: PWS–Kent Publishing.
2.
ArmingtonC. (1983). Further examination of recent employment growth analysis of USEEM data for 1976 to 1980. SBA Contract No. 2641–0A–79 and NSF Grant No. ISI 8212970, mimeo, March.
3.
ArmingtonC. & OdleM. (1982). Small business—how many jobs?The Brookings Review, 20(Winter), 14–17.
4.
ArmingtonC. & OdleM. (1983). Further examination of sources of recent employment growth: Analysis of USEEM data for 1976 to 1980. Unpublished paper, The Brookings Institution, March.
5.
ArmstrongJ.S. (2003). Discovery and communication of important marketing findings: Evidence and proposals. Journal of Business Research, 56(1), 69–84.
6.
BauerC. (1951). Social questions in housing and community planning. The Journal of Social Issues, 7(1/2), 1–34.
7.
BirchD.L. (1979). The job generation process. Cambridge, MA: MIT Program on Neighbourhood and Regional Change.
8.
BirchD.L. (1987). Job creation in America: How our smallest companies put the most people to work. New York: Free Press.
9.
BlanchflowerD.G. & BurgessS.M. (1996). Job creation and job destruction in Great Britain in the 1980s. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 50(1), 17–38.
10.
BlaugM. (1975). Kuhn versus Lakatos, or paradigms versus research programmes in the history of economics. History of Political Economy, 7(4), 399–433.
11.
CarreeM. & KlompL. (1996). Small business and job creation: A comment. Small Business Economics, 8(4), 317–322.
12.
CarverR.P. (1978). The case against statistical significance testing. Harvard Educational Review, 48(3), 378–399.
13.
ChandlerG.N. & LyonD.W. (2001). Issues of research design and construct measurement in entrepreneurship research: The past decade. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 25(4), 101–113.
14.
ClaphamM.M. (2004). The convergent validity of the Torrance tests of creative thinking and of creative interest inventories. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 64(5), 828–841.
15.
CohenJ. (1990). Things I have learned (so far). American Psychologist, 45(12), 1304–1312.
16.
CohenM.D. (2007). Administrative behavior: Laying the foundations for Cyert and March. Organization Science, 18(3), 503–506.
17.
ConnellyB.L., IrelandR.D., ReutzelC., & CoombsJ. (2010). The power and effects of entrepreneurship research. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 34(1), 131–149.
18.
CorneliusB., LandstronH., & PerssonO. (2006). Entrepreneurial studies: The dynamic research front of a developing social science. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 30(3), 375–398.
19.
DavidssonP. (2004). Researching entrepreneurship. New York: Springer.
20.
DavidssonP., LindmarkL., & OlofssonC. (1998). The extent of overestimation of small firm job creation—an empirical examination of the regression bias. Small Business Economics, 11(1), 87–100.
21.
DavisS., HaltiwangerJ., & SchuhS. (1993). Small business and job creation: Dissecting the myth and reassessing the facts. NBER Working Paper, No. 449. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.
22.
DavisS.J., HaltiwangerJ.C., & SchuhS. (1996). Job creation and destruction. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
23.
DewaldW.G., ThursbyJ.G., & AndersonR.G. (1986). Replication in empirical economics: The Journal of Money, Credit, and Banking project. American Economic Review, 76(4), 587–603.
24.
DoyleJ.R. & GallagherC.C. (1987). The size distribution, growth potential, and job–generation contribution of UK firms, 1982–84. International Small Business Journal, 6(1), 31–56.
25.
DrummondM. & McGuireA. (1997). Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
26.
EdenD. (2002). Replication, meta–analysis, scientific progress, and AMJ's publication process. Academy of Management Journal, 45(5), 841–847.
27.
EvanschitzkyH., BaumgarthC., HubbardR., & ArmstrongJ.S. (2007). Replication research's disturbing trend. Journal of Business Research, 60(4), 411–415.
28.
FeigenbaumS. & LevyD.M. (1993). The market for (ir)reproducible econometrics. Social Epistemology, 7(3), 286–292.
29.
ForscherB.K. (1963). Chaos in the brickyard. Science, 142(3590), 339.
30.
GartnerW.B., DavidssonP., & ZahraS.A. (2006). Are you talking to me? The nature of community in entrepreneurship scholarship. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 30(3), 321–331.
31.
GouldnerA.W. (1957). Theoretical requirements of the applied social sciences. American Sociological Review, 22(1), 92–102.
32.
HobbsD. (1969). A comment on applied sociological research. Rural Sociology, 34(2), 241–245.
33.
HubbardR. & VetterD.E. (1996). An empirical comparison of published replication research in accounting, economics, finance, management, and marketing. Journal of Business Research, 35(2), 153–164.
34.
KaneE.J. (1984). Why journal editors should encourage the replication of applied econometric research. Quarterly Journal of Business and Economics, 23(1), 3–8.
35.
KaufmanJ.C. (2006). Self–reported differences in creativity by ethnicity and gender. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 20(8), 1065–1082.
36.
KelleyH.H. (1992). Common sense psychology and scientific psychology. Annual Review of Psychology, 43, 1–23.
37.
KenworthyT.P. & McMullanW.E. (2010). Theory morphing vs theory testing—human capital in entrepreneurship. ICSB Conference Proceedings, Cincinnati, OH.
38.
KhanA.M. (1987). Assessing venture capital investments with noncompensatory behavioral decision models. Journal of Business Venturing, 2(3), 193–205.
39.
KirchhoffB.A. & GreeneP.G. (1998). Understanding the theoretical and empirical content of critiques of US job creation research. Small Business Economics, 10(2), 153–169.
40.
KirkR.E. (1996). Practical significance: A concept whose time has come. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 56(5), 746–759.
41.
KuhnT.S. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
42.
LadikD.M. & StewartD.W. (2008). The contribution continuum. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 36(2), 157–165.
43.
LakatosI. (1970). Falsification and the methodology of scientific research programmes. In LakatosI. & MusgraveA. (Eds.), Criticism and the growth of knowledge (pp. 91–132). New York: Cambridge University Press.
44.
LakatosI. (1978). The methodology of scientific research programmes: Philosophical papers volume 1. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
45.
LakatosI. & FeyerabendP. (1999). For and against method. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
46.
LindsayD.S., ReadJ.D., & SharmaK. (1998). Accuracy and confidence in person identification: The relationship is strong when witnessing conditions vary widely. Psychological Science, 9(3), 215–218.
47.
McClellanM. & NewhouseJ.P. (1997). The marginal cost–effectiveness of medical technology: A panel instrumental–variables approach. Journal of Econometrics, 77, 39–64.
48.
McClellandD.C. (1961). The achieving society. New York: Free Press.
McMullanW.E. (2009). A general scientific theory of entrepreneurship. Unpublished manuscript, The University of Calgary.
51.
MeehlP.E. (1967). Theory testing in psychology and physics: A methodological paradox. Philosophy of Science, 34(2), 103–115.
52.
MeehlP.E. (1990). Why summaries of research on psychological theories are often uninterpretable. Psychological Reports, 66(1), 195–244.
53.
MeyerG.D. (2009). Commentary: On the integration of strategic management and entrepreneurship: Views of a contrarian. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice33(1), 341–352.
54.
PahreR. (1996). Patterns of knowledge communities in the social sciences. Library Trends, 45(2), 204–225.
55.
PengM.W. & DessG.G. (2010). In the spirit of scholarship. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 9(2), 282–298.
56.
PicotG., BaldwinJ., & DupuyR. (1994). Have small firms created a disproportionate share of new jobs in Canada? A reassessment of the facts. Presented at the Canadian Economics Association Meetings, June, Calgary, Alberta, Canada, 1994.
57.
PicotG. & DupuyR. (1998). Job creation by size class: The magnitude, concentration and persistence of job gains and losses in Canada. Small Business Economics, 10(2), 110–139.
58.
PopperK.R. (1963). Conjectures and refutations: The growth of scientific knowledge. London: Routledge.
59.
RosenthalR. & RosnowR.L. (1984). Essentials of behavioral research: Methods and data analysis. New York: McGraw–Hill.
60.
RozeboomW.W. (1960). The fallacy of the null hypothesis significance test. Psychological Bulletin, 57, 416–428.
61.
SalmonW.C. (1984). Scientific explanation and the causal structure of the world. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
62.
SchmidtF. (1996). Statistical significance testing and cumulative knowledge in psychology: Implications for the training of researchers. Psychological Methods, 1(2), 115–129.
63.
SchumpeterJ.A. (1942). Capitalism, socialism and democracy. London: Allen and Unwin.
64.
ShaneS. (2003). A general theory of entrepreneurship: The individual–opportunity nexus. Cheltenham, U.K.: Edward Elgar.
65.
ShaneS. & VenkataramanS. (2000). The promise of entrepreneurship as a field of research. Academy of Management Review, 25(1), 217–226.
66.
Small Business Administration and Executive Office of the President. (1999). The state of small business: 1999. Washington, DC: Author.
67.
Small Business Administration, Office of Advocacy. (1998). Small business growth by major industry, 1988–1995. Washington, DC: Author.
68.
SpillingO. (1996). Do small firms create jobs?Journal of Enterprising Culture, 4(2), 147–161.
69.
StinnettA.A. & MullahyJ. (1998). Net health benefits: A new framework for the analysis of uncertainty in cost–effectiveness analysis. Medical Decision Making, 18(2), S68–S80.
70.
SuttonR.I. & StawB.M. (1995). What theory is not. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40(3), 371–384.
71.
TsangE.W.K. & KwanK.M. (1999). Replication and theory development in organizational science: A critical realist perspective. Academy of Management Review, 24(4), 759–780.
72.
VenkataramanS. (1997). The distinctive domain of entrepreneurship research: An editor's perspective. In KatzJ. & BrockhausR. (Eds.), Advances in entrepreneurship, firm emergence, and growth (Vol. 3, pp. 119–138). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
73.
VerheesF.J.M. & MeulenbergM.T.G. (2004). Market orientation, innovativeness, product innovation, and performance in small firms. Journal of Small Business Management, 42(2), 134–154.
74.
WhettenD.A. (1989). What constitutes a theoretical contribution?Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 490–495.
75.
WhiteS.B. & OstermanJ.D. (1991). Is employment growth really coming from small establishments?Economic Development Quarterly, 5(3), 241–257.
76.
ZahraS.A. (2005). Disciplinary research and entrepreneurship scholarship. In AlvarezS.A., AgarwalR., & SorensonO. (Eds.), Handbook of entrepreneurship research (2nd ed., pp. 253–268). New York: Kluwer.
77.
ZahraS.A. (2007). Contextualizing theory building in entrepreneurship research. Journal of Business Venturing, 22(3), 443–452.
