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
In the last decade, directed from the European Union, entrepreneurship and entrepreneurship education became a main topic on both, political and strategic managerial agenda’s. Despite the enormous effort and money invested, the failure rate of starting entrepreneurs seems to be stable. Next to an increase of starting entrepreneurs, more young people are faced with the trauma of an entrepreneurial failure. This paper want to explore the causes of a negative entrepreneurial outcome an the possibilities to prevent from this.
MULTIFILE
Despite its widespread occurrence, the topic of failure is barely addressed in entrepreneurship education. Consequently, students are given an incomplete and unrealistic picture of the complexity of being entrepreneurs. This study explores the pedagogical potential of introducing vicarious learning about failure in educational programs rather than focusing solely on starting, growing and success. Taking a qualitative approach, this study examined students’ reflective reports written after an interview with an entrepreneur on their experience of failure. Using concepts emerging from these reports and theoretical constructs, it was established whether and how students drew lessons and reflections from the failure stories. The findings show that interviewing and reflecting about the experiences of entrepreneurs allow for vicarious learning from failure, yet without students having to experience it themselves. The lessons learned and the reflections feed each other in a continuous loop. Students recognized that entrepreneurship involves trial and error instead of one straight road. Important lessons include the importance of adaptable behavior, access to key resources, insights in business development and the benefits of networking. Hence, this article contributes to the pedagogy of entrepreneurial education and provides initial suggestions for educators to introduce vicarious learning about failure as a topic in their programs.--Malgré sa fréquence élevée, le sujet de l’échec est à peine abordé dans l’enseignement de l’entrepreneuriat. En conséquence, il est communiqué aux étudiants une image incomplète et irréaliste de la complexité d’être un entrepreneur. Cette étude explore le potentiel pédagogique de l’apprentissage par procuration sur l’échec dans les programmes éducatifs, plutôt qu’une focalisation seulement sur le démarrage, la croissance et la réussite. En adoptant une approche qualitative, l’étude a examiné les rapports de réflexions rédigés par les étudiants à la suite d’un entretien avec un entrepreneur, centré sur son expérience de l’échec. À l’aide de concepts émergeant de ces rapports et de constructions théoriques, la manière dont les étudiants tiraient des leçons et des réflexions des récits d’échec – si tel était le cas - a été établie. Les résultats montrent que les entretiens et la réflexion sur l’expérience des entrepreneurs permettent un apprentissage par procuration concernant l’échec, sans pour autant que les étudiants aient eux-mêmes à vivre un échec. Les leçons apprises et les réflexions se nourrissent mutuellement dans une boucle continue. Les étudiants ont reconnu que l’entrepreneuriat a pour implication des épreuves et des erreurs, plutôt qu’une ligne toute droite. Parmi les leçons apprises majeures, citons l’importance des comportements adaptatifs, l’accès aux ressources-clés, les connaissances en matière de développement commercial et les avantages du travail en réseau. Ainsi, cet article contribue à la pédagogie de l’éducation sur l’entrepreneuriat et fait des suggestions pour les enseignants afin qu’ils introduisent l’apprentissage par procuration sur l’échec en tant que sujet à aborder dans leurs programmes.
