Introducing the project Impact-Driven Entrepreneurship Education for Children.
DOCUMENT
All over the world entrepreneurs drive changes. They develop new products and services, inspire others and take decisions that result in growth of their businesses. But the world around entrepreneurs is changing and so are entrepreneurs. Life-long selfemployment or permanent wage employment are of the past. And the way people perceive self-employment is changing as well. And so must our thinking. Changes in our society call for policies and programmes in support of enterprising people. Diversity, mobility and connectivity offer new opportunities for enterprising people. Markets are changing, become more accessible and there is less need to be bound physically to one place for an entrepreneur. New avenues for business are open thanks to our improved access to information, our connectivity globally through social media and our ability to travel freely and frequently from one country to another. With less focus on life-long (self) employment people now combine paid work (or unpaid – house- work) with self-employment, or opt for just parttime entrepreneurship. New, hybrid forms of enterprising emerge. This combining of work with self-employment is rather common in developing countries, but in Europe it is a phenomenon not yet reported on in statistics and for which policy makers and service providers have no answers yet. Neither exist clear definitions or classifications. This book may serve as an eye-opener: hybrid entrepreneurs are indeed around us and deserve our attention. The research unit Financial Inclusion and New Entrepreneurship of The Hague University of Applied Science challenges policy makers, academics and service providers (such as educational institutes, business advisers and financial institutions) to pay more attention to hybrid entrepreneurs, those enterprising people who intend to create new values for a fair and sustainable society. They might not yet been seen, but they exist…..
DOCUMENT
Background: The full potential of social entrepreneurship remains challenging to achieve, despite continuous efforts in various economies, including South-East Asia. Several obstacles need to be addressed, such as the scarcity of skilled employees, limited business understanding among founders, difficulties accessing funding and infrastructure, and the absence of proper social impact measurement. Higher education institutions (HEIs) often face constraints in engaging and supporting early entrepreneurial activities, exacerbating the imbalance in the social entrepreneurship landscape. This imbalance has been observed in both Thailand and Myanmar. Research objectives: The Erasmus+ funded project, STEPup, running from 2020 to 2023, recognized an opportunity to foster innovative social entrepreneurship practices tailored for disruptive business settings in these two countries. By applying the challenge-based learning approach through interactive case challenge proceedings involving social entrepreneurs, faculty mentors and students, the development of the entrepreneurial mindset of the latter group was studied. Research design and methods: To accomplish this, a multi-method research design was chosen, which involved a case-challenge experience within the framework of 6 universities, a questionnaire-based survey conducted among the student population which took part in the case-challenge experience and desk research. Results: The study revealed the necessity for a self-organizing and organic support system for social entrepreneurship. The objective of this paper is to present recommendations and strategic guidelines to enhance access and opportunities for existing social enterprises and social entrepreneurs seeking to establish and sustain a social enterprise ecosystem. The proposed framework leverages the support, expertise, and structure of existing higher education institutions. Conclusions: Higher Education Institutions can serve as excellent cases demonstrating how to design and develop resource hubs for social enterprise practitioners and engage stakeholders from all sectors to address social issues and promote awareness.
DOCUMENT
This text has become a performance of (affirmative) entrepreneurship. This is done by a set of writing (and methodological) techniques: autoethnography, the triptych of mimesis, poiesis, kinesis and a life journey that forms the base of the chapter. As such, this text challenges some well-known shortcomings of entrepreneurship research such as being enacted by a distant observer/writer, decontextualized accounts of entrepreneurship and disregard of creativity and playfulness. The main contribution of the chapter is methodological, in its broadest sense (Steyaert, 2011): I propose autoethnography as “more than method” for engaging with processes of (affirmative) Entrepreneuring that speak to the increased attention for narrativity and playfulness in entrepreneurship (see for example Hjorth, 2017: Hjorth and Steyaert, 2004: Gartner, 2007; Johannisson, 2011). The autoethnographic story offers an engaging and relevant account of the practice of entrepreneurship and provides rich emic insight into the socio-materiality of lived experience. It also highlights the temporality of entrepreneurship – both in terms of chronos (continuous flow of time) and Kairos (taking advantage of the “right moment”) (Johannisson, 2011). And as I continue performing affirmations, I am curious how you are Entrepreneuring your life – tell me. This is a draft chapter/article. The final version is available in Research Handbook on Entrepreneurial Behavior, Practice and Process edited by William B. Gartner and Bruce T. Teague, published in 2020, Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd https://doi.org/10.4337/9781788114523
DOCUMENT
Clinical Decision Support Systems (CDSS) are increasingly developed for hospital nursing practice, yet their impact on decision-making, workflow efficiency, and patient outcomes remains complex. This rapid review synthesizes findings from 21 studies, highlighting both the benefits and challenges of CDSS implementation focused on three key areas. CDSS can enhance nursing decision-making by reducing variability and improving standardization, but there are concerns about system usability and the tendency to override recommendations. While CDSS improve workflow efficiency by prioritizing tasks, issues such as alert fatigue and poor interoperability with hospital systems hinder their potential. Patient outcomes benefit from CDSS-driven medication safety and risk prevention, yet adherence to recommendations varies among nurses. These findings underscore the need for user-centered CDSS that align with nursing values. Future research should explore long-term effectiveness, implementation strategies and best practices for integrating CDSS into nursing workflows.
MULTIFILE
In this brief chapter of the report we focus on the model that was developed as part of the evaluation strategy: the local CoP impact measurement model. This model has been described as part of the strategy report as well. For purposes of clarity (as it is one of the main deliverables of work package 3) we briefly present it in this document. Background: Promoting Healthy Ageing, and specifically an Active & Healthy Lifestyle, is one of the biggest societal and economical challenges the EU is facing. A paradigm shift from health care and cure to prevention is essential since the traditional ways have proven to be insufficient to solve this complex problem. An impact-driven multi-sector approach is necessary to develop innovative products and services to change this for the better.ObjectivesThe Knowledge Alliance for Communities of Practice for Healthy Lifestyle aimed at developing and sustaining communities of practice (COP) in order to stimulate innovation and socio-economic development in the area of Healthy Ageing.ImplementationThe Consortium comes from 7 EU Member States and in 5 countries Local COP were developed. A European COP Support Lab and a European COP Alliance were developed that facilitate the set-up and sustainability of COP. An open access Community Knowledge Hub provides pilot-tested formal and informal blended learning material for managing COP and implementing interventions; whilst an entrepreneurship competition lead into an intensive program to develop entrepreneurial skills and stimulate innovation.AchievementsIn total 6 local COP were fully established who all defined their shared interest, organized learning opportunities, meetings and effective local activities that contributed to a common agenda setting for Healthy Lifestyle. Furthermore, the Alliance between businesses and HEI was extended exponentially and over 30 businesses, 18 HEI and 73 public authorities were involved. All 6 COPs are still running beyond the project funding period and supported by an open online platform www.yanuz.eu.
DOCUMENT
Our planet’s ecology and society are on a collision course, which manifests due to a contradiction in the assumptions of unlimited material growth fueling the linear economic paradigm. Our closed planetary ecosystem imposes confined amounts of space and a finite extent of resources upon its inhabitants. However, practically all the economic perspectives have been defiantly neglecting these realities, as resources are extracted, used and disposed of reluctantly (Ellen MacArthur Foundation 2015). The circular economy attempts to reconcile the extraction, production and usage of goods and resources with the limited availability of those resources and nature’s regenerative capabilities This perspective entails a shift throughout the supply chain, from material science (e g non-toxic, regenerative biomaterials) to novel logistical systems (e g low-carbon reverse logistics). Because of this, the circular economy is often celebrated for its potential environmental benefits and its usefulness as a blueprint for sustainable development (Ellen MacArthur Foundation 2017). Unfortunately, the promise of the circular economy aiming at enhanced sustainability through restorative intent and design (McDonough & Braungart 2010), is often inhibited by institutional barriers posed by the current linear economy of take, make, use and waste (Ghisellini et al. 2016). Underlying those barriers our cultural paradigm celebrates consumerism, exponential growth and financial benefit instead of human values such as diversity, care and trust. Based on a mapping exercise of the circular economy discourse in the Netherlands and an overview of international (academic) literature (Van den Berg 2020) supplemented with collaborative co-creation sessions, visiting events, conferences, giving talks and classes, we have defined a gap leading to the focus of the Professorship. First, we highlight the importance of a process approach in studying the transition from a linear to a circular economy, which is why we use the verb ‘entrepreneuring’ as it indicates the movement we collectively need to make. The majority of work in the field is based on start-ups and only captures snapshots while longitudinal and transition perspectives - especially of larger companies - are missing (Merli et al. 2019; Geissdoerfer et al. 2018; Bocken et al. 2014). We specifically adopt an entrepreneurship-as-practice lens (Thompson, Verduijn & Gartner 2020), which allows us to trace the doings – as opposed to only the sayings - of organizations involved in circular innovation. Such an approach also enables us to study cross-sector and interfirm collaboration, which is crucial to achieve ecosystem circularity (Raworth 2019). As materials flow between actors in a system, traditional views of ‘a value chain’ slowly make way for an ecosystem or value web perspective on ‘organizing business’. We summarize this first theme as ‘entrepreneurship as social change’ broadening dominant views of what economic activity is and who the main actors are supposed to be (Barinaga 2013; Calás, Smircich & Bourne 2009; Steyaert & Hjorth 2008; Nicholls 2008). Second, within the Circular Business Professorship value is a big word in two ways. First of all, we believe that a transition to a circular economy is not just a transition of materials, nor technologies - it is most of all a transition of values We are interested in how people can explore their own agency in transitioning to a circular economy thereby aligning their personal values with the values of the organization and the larger system they are a part of Second, while circularity is a broad concept that can be approached through different lenses, the way in which things are valued and how value is created and extracted lies at the heart of the transition (Mazzucato 2018). If we don’t understand value as collectively crafted it will be very hard to change things, which is why we specifically focus on multiplicity and co-creation in the process of reclaiming value, originating from an ethics of care Third, sustainability efforts are often concerned with optimization of the current – linear – system by means of ecoefficient practices that are a bit ‘less bad’; using ’less resources’, causing ‘less pollution’ and ‘having less negative impact’. In contrast, eco-effective practices are inherently good, departing from the notion of abundance: circular thinking celebrates the abundance of nature’s regenerative capacities as well as the abundance of our imagination to envision new realities (Ellen MacArthur Foundation 2015). Instead of exploiting natural resources, we should look closely in order to learn how we can build resilient self-sustaining ecosystems like the ones we find in nature. We are in need of rediscovering our profound connection with and appreciation of nature, which requires us to move beyond the cognitive and employ an aesthetic perspective of sustainability This perspective informs our approach to innovating education: aesthetics can support deep sustainability learning (Ivanaj, Poldner & Shrivastava 2014) and contribute to facilitating the circular change makers of the future. The current linear economy has driven our planet’s ecology and society towards a collision course and it is really now or never: if we don’t alter the course towards a circular economy today, then when? When will it become urgent enough for us to take action? Which disaster is needed for us to wake up? We desperately need substitutes for the current neo-liberal paradigm, which underlies our linear society and prevents us from becoming an economy of well-being In Entrepreneuring a regenerative society I propose three research themes – ‘entrepreneurship as social change’, ‘reclaiming value’ and ‘the aesthetics of sustainability’ – as alternative ways of embracing, studying and co-creating such a novel reality. LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/kim-poldner-a003473/
MULTIFILE
Social issues are becoming increasingly pressing. From dementia to climate change to corona; we as people, citizens, residents and city users - through our own experience or otherwise - have a sense of them. However, truly understanding and addressing these issues is difficult because there is no single owner. Everything is related, intertwined and also changing. Getting an overview and deciding together on necessary steps proves difficult. Complex issues thus become orphaned. Design and more specifically co-design - creative collaboration with others - is increasingly seen as a possible approach to these such issues and collaborations because it can deal with complexity and uncertainty, is optimistic and investigative in nature. With a co-design approach, we can find a shared desire and with that we connect with each other. By then searching together for mechanisms that can lead to the desired values, we gain insights on how to tilt a problematic situation. That enables us to imagine alternative futures. These help us on our way to a better, greener and more social world and social change.
DOCUMENT
The emergence of organic planning practices in the Netherlands introduces new, non-conventional, local actors initiating bottom-up urban developments. Dissatisfied with conventional practices and using opportunities during the 2008 financial crisis, these actors aim to create social value, thus challenging prevailing institutions. Intrigued by such actors becoming more present and influential in urban planning and development processes, we aim to identify who they are. We use social entrepreneurship and niche formation theories to analyse and identify three types of social entrepreneurs. The first are early pioneers, adopting roles of a developer and end-user, but lacking position and power to realize goals. Secondly, by acting as boundary spanners and niche entrepreneurs, they evolve towards consolidated third sector organizations in the position to realize developments. A third type are intermediate agents facilitating developments as boundary spanners and policy entrepreneurs, without pursuing urban development themselves but aiming at realizing broader policy goals. Our general typology provides a rich picture of actors involved in bottom-up urban developments by applying theories from domains of innovation management and business transition management to urban planning and development studies. It shows that the social entrepreneurs in bottom-up urban development can be considered the result of social innovation, but this social innovation is set within a neoliberal context, and in many cases passively or actively conditioned by states and markets.
MULTIFILE
Since the film of Al Gore An inconvenient truth, sustainability stands high on the national agenda of most countries. Concern for the environment is one of the main reasons in combination with opportunities to innovate. In general, innovation and entrepreneurship are important in the realm of national economies because they hold the key to the continuity and growth of companies (e.g. Hage, 1999; Cooper, 1987; Van de Ven, 2007) and economic growth within a country. It is therefore obvious that national governments are investing money to enable and improve innovation management and entrepreneurial behaviour within organizations with sustainability in mind. Policy measures are aimed at reduction of carbon dioxide emission, waste management and alternative use of energy sources and materials. In line with these measures companies are urged to integrate sustainability in their business processes and search for innovative sustainable solutions. While on a national level policy measures towards a more sustainable society are defined, enterprises - and especially small and medium sized companies - lag behind and fail in incorporating these measures appropriately in their day-to day business. As a result research for sustainability has become an important driver for innovation. Within the Centre for Innovation and Entrepreneurship (CI&E) at The Hague University of Applied Sciences we have taken the initiative to develop an innovation and research program for the construction industry to help small and medium sized companies (SME's) integrate sustainability in their business processes, while simultaneously professionalizing students and lecturers. This paper is part of ongoing research among 40 companies in the region of South-Holland. The companies are mostly SME's varying from very small (6 employees) to middle-sized (more than 100). According to Rennings (2000) while innovation processes toward sustainable development have received increasing attention during the past years, theoretical and methodological approaches to analyse these processes are poorly developed. This paper describes a theoretical approach developed at our university's Centre for Innovation and Entrepreneurship, which combines education and research. It is an inductive approach that departs from real-life problems encountered by companies, and is aimed at developing a model that supports companies in integrating sustainability in their business and innovation processes. We describe the experiences so far with a number of companies in the construction industry, which participate in the innovation and research program described above and the barriers they encounter. Our sustainable program is centred on four themes: cradle-to-cradle, social corporate responsibility, climateneutral construction and sustainability and customer orientation in the building process. It is an exploratory research in which students and undergraduates are involved under the supervision of a lecturer as senior researcher of this program. Through an in-depth analysis of the companies, participant observation and indepth interviews with the owners/directors of the companies, experts and prominent sustainable trendsetters, insight is gained in innovation processes towards sustainable development. Preliminary conclusions show that on a company level one of the main bottlenecks is the dilemma posed by the need for profit for the continuity of a company, while taking into account people and planet. The main bottleneck is however the inability of companies to translate policy measures into strategy and operations. This paper is set up as follows. In section 2 we give an account of European and Dutch policy measures geared at stimulating sustainability in a business context and especially the building and construction industry. In section 3 an overview is given of the economic importance and characteristics of the Dutch building and construction industry and the problems in this sector. These problems are offset against the opportunity of sustainability as a strategic option for SME's in this sector. In section 4 the innovation and research program developed at the CI&E is introduced in the context of the main research question. Following that in section 5, methodological choices are addressed and the research design is presented. We finalize this paper in section 6 with our conclusions and recommendations for further research.
DOCUMENT
