Mapping the aliran of the academic discipline of entrepreneurship: A ...

entrepreneur to the firm, while Chandler, cited by Smith and Miner [1983] (14), have the
firm as a precursor to the organisation, which has a more bureaucratic style. However as
per my discussion on the 2 x 2 matrix shown in Graphic 4r, this linka ge is too simplistic, as
linking the firm and the entrepreneur may not always suffice, especially where there are
non-entrepreneurial firms.
5.1.03 I be lieve that the way the aliran delineates the difference between the
organization and the firm is more of a delineation between the discipline of management
and the discipline of entrepreneurship. In broad brush strokes, these differences, as
perceived from the aliran, are outlined as follows:
• Organizations generally do not, according to the aliran, engage in new ventures.
(Romanelli [1989] is one of the few exceptions to this generalization suggesting
that organizations can be involved in start ups.)
• Organizations tend not to inno vate, firms innovate. Seemingly individuals do not
innovate either. This exclusion of inno vation from the organization is consistent
with the ont ological domain specifications of the Academy of Management as
outlined in section 2.5.4.06.
• There is a low emphasis on learning by the firm. However, there is a strong
emphasis on or ganizational learning. As pointed out by Hitt, Ireland, Camp, and
Sexton [2001], organizational learning is one of the common domains between
entrepreneurship and strategic management. It may be possible to infer that
organizational learning is the way the discipline of management includes some of
the aspects of entrepreneurship that would otherwise be excluded.
• Entrepreneurs start firms / small businesses; they do not start or ganizations.
• Entrepreneurs run small businesses, not organizations. Managers run or ganizations
and are also invo lved in the management of firms.
214