30.06.2013 Views

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

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

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

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

2.2.1.04 Foucault’s definitions <strong>of</strong> savoir knowledges and connaissance knowledges is<br />

extended by Schmidt [2006], who borrowed from Dil<strong>the</strong>y <strong>the</strong> German terms Verstehen and<br />

Erklaren (understanding and explanation). On one side <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> triangle, shown in Graphic<br />

2c, I have practitioners, in this case <strong>the</strong> entrepreneurs who have an understanding (as in<br />

<strong>the</strong>ir ‘savvy’ or savoir) <strong>of</strong> <strong>entrepreneurship</strong> in <strong>the</strong>ir ability to practise it, but who may not<br />

be able to explain it in <strong>academic</strong> terms. On ano<strong>the</strong>r side <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> triangle, I have <strong>the</strong><br />

<strong>discipline</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>entrepreneurship</strong> where <strong>the</strong> <strong>academic</strong>s attempt, within <strong>the</strong> constraints <strong>of</strong><br />

epistemology, to explain <strong>entrepreneurship</strong>, admittedly without necessarily understanding<br />

<strong>the</strong> elephant <strong>the</strong>y are describing. Discursively, <strong>the</strong> practitioners do not need to explain to<br />

<strong>the</strong> satisfaction <strong>of</strong> anyone, a concept suffices. However in <strong>the</strong> <strong>discipline</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>academic</strong>s<br />

need to <strong>of</strong>fer an explanation, via <strong>the</strong> contextualisation <strong>of</strong> epistemic justification, in a<br />

manner acceptable to o<strong>the</strong>rs in <strong>the</strong> <strong>discipline</strong>.<br />

2.2.1.05 The power <strong>of</strong> right <strong>of</strong> this <strong>discipline</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>entrepreneurship</strong> may have come into<br />

effect when, in 1987, <strong>the</strong> Academy <strong>of</strong> Management accorded division status to<br />

<strong>entrepreneurship</strong> [Shane, 1997], in a similar manner to <strong>the</strong> establishment <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> strategic<br />

management <strong>discipline</strong>.<br />

It was only after <strong>the</strong> Academy <strong>of</strong> Management's establishment <strong>of</strong> a strategy<br />

division in <strong>the</strong> early 1970s and t he birth <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Strategic Management Soc iety in <strong>the</strong><br />

early 1980s that <strong>the</strong> strategy field was able to proclaim its independence as a<br />

legitimate <strong>academic</strong> <strong>discipline</strong> [Azar and Brock, 2007, p2].<br />

As per Dery and Toulouse [1996], <strong>the</strong> <strong>discipline</strong> developed an ‘epistemology specific to<br />

<strong>the</strong> field <strong>of</strong> <strong>entrepreneurship</strong>’. However <strong>the</strong> discourse on <strong>entrepreneurship</strong> predated this<br />

event by a few centuries and <strong>the</strong> practice <strong>of</strong> <strong>entrepreneurship</strong> has probably considerably<br />

predated <strong>the</strong> discourse, even though it may have go ne under o<strong>the</strong>r names.<br />

2.2.1.06 Essentially, in my dissertation, I am looking at <strong>the</strong> power <strong>of</strong> right side <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

triangle. This is <strong>the</strong> <strong>discipline</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>entrepreneurship</strong>. However <strong>the</strong> role <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> practitioner<br />

should not be under-estimated. As mentioned by Foucault [1980] it is <strong>the</strong> truth effects<br />

corner <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> triangle that replenishes <strong>the</strong> power from which <strong>the</strong> right derives its power<br />

47

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!