Commentaire de phong phabmiaxay
Le 19 novembre 2008 à 16:41.
Bravo pour votre blog. Je l’ai découvert, un pyeu par hasard, en cherchant à me renseigner sur ce qui se fait dans le domaine de l’enseignement de l’entrepreneuriat.
J’aurai le plaisir de vous retrouver ce jeudi 20 novembre à Osny pour notre réunion sur le projet COM Un apprenti entrepreneur.
Cordialement,
Phong
Commentaire de Gilbert C.
Le 14 novembre 2008 à 10:54.
Si vous souhaitez devenir le prochain Richard Branson, Steve Jobs ou le nouvel Henri Ford, vous vous devez de prendre des décisions risquées. Longtemps stigmatisés par les sciences sociales, les entrepreneurs se voient gratifiés d’être parmi les premiers maillons de l’évolution. C’est la conclusion d’une étude menée par des scientifiques de l’Université de Cambridge.
Source : http://www.unisciences.com/societe/news/entrepreneur_evolution.php?id=362
Commentaire de Vincent SONG
Le 6 novembre 2008 à 14:26.
L’innovation génère t’il le besoin ?
C’est ce qu’on constate après coup : le téléphone à été inventé par Bell pour communiquer avec sa femme (qui était sourde), l’invention a bien évoluer depuis…
D’un autre coté si on ne se confronte pas au marché, on risque d’engloutir des sommes faramineuses en pure perte :p
Thank you for your post….I enjoyed reading it. One statement that jumped out at me was “Entrepreneurship is neither natural nor spontaneous.” My research and experience suggest it is both natural and spontaneous.
93% of academicians believe, according to Erkkila (2000) that entrepreneurial skills can be learned. Yet, according to Thornberry (2003) attempts to train people to be intrapreneurs have largely been unsuccessful. Essentially, theory isn’t translating into practice. I believe this is because entrepreneurial skills are a manifestation of human talent and creativity. Would 93% of scholars assume that you can teach people to be a successful artist? Sure, the basic principles can be taught but there needs to be some sort inherent talent or interest for one to thrive as an artist. As a practicing entrepreneur, I view what I do more as an art than science.
When Cantillon wrote his Essai sue la nature du commerce en General in 1734 he specifically mentioned that entrepreneurs were different than employees due to their willingness to accept risk and act on their vision. To Cantillon, entrepreneurship was synonymous with self-employment. Most academicians follow Schrumpeter’s (1931) definition that essentially equates entrepreneurship with innovation or creative destruction. That is, entrepreneurship is about doing new things in new ways; or old things in new ways.
Regardless of whether one agrees with the Cantillon or Schrumpeter definition, it seems clear that an effective entrepreneur demonstrates natural intrinsic motivation by recognizing and acting on opportunities others don’t see. He/she also often needs to make spontaneous judgments making decisions when there is a lack of empirical data.
Rather than trying to train people to be entrepreneurial (something many employees have no desire to be) companies and countries should identify those segments within that have natural entrepreneurial traits and a propensity for (and interest in) entrepreneurship. Once these natural entrepreneurs (or intrapreneurs) are identified then companies can implement targeted and effective training and support can be provided.
Our firm works with global companies and economic development agencies to show segments of the company (departments; demographic profiles etc.) and society that have the most interest in entrepreneurship, and identify the cultural values that may foster or inhibit entrepreneurship and innovation. We believe this is the starting point for successful entrepreneurial development efforts.
Loading ...
Commentaire de phong phabmiaxay
Le 19 novembre 2008 à 16:41.
Bravo pour votre blog. Je l’ai découvert, un pyeu par hasard, en cherchant à me renseigner sur ce qui se fait dans le domaine de l’enseignement de l’entrepreneuriat.
J’aurai le plaisir de vous retrouver ce jeudi 20 novembre à Osny pour notre réunion sur le projet COM Un apprenti entrepreneur.
Cordialement,
Phong
Commentaire de Gilbert C.
Le 14 novembre 2008 à 10:54.
Si vous souhaitez devenir le prochain Richard Branson, Steve Jobs ou le nouvel Henri Ford, vous vous devez de prendre des décisions risquées. Longtemps stigmatisés par les sciences sociales, les entrepreneurs se voient gratifiés d’être parmi les premiers maillons de l’évolution. C’est la conclusion d’une étude menée par des scientifiques de l’Université de Cambridge.
Source :
http://www.unisciences.com/societe/news/entrepreneur_evolution.php?id=362
Commentaire de Vincent SONG
Le 6 novembre 2008 à 14:26.
L’innovation génère t’il le besoin ?
C’est ce qu’on constate après coup : le téléphone à été inventé par Bell pour communiquer avec sa femme (qui était sourde), l’invention a bien évoluer depuis…
D’un autre coté si on ne se confronte pas au marché, on risque d’engloutir des sommes faramineuses en pure perte :p
Il y a bien un juste milieu à trouver…
Commentaire de Dr. Matthew G. Kenney
Le 31 octobre 2008 à 19:02.
Thank you for your post….I enjoyed reading it. One statement that jumped out at me was “Entrepreneurship is neither natural nor spontaneous.” My research and experience suggest it is both natural and spontaneous.
93% of academicians believe, according to Erkkila (2000) that entrepreneurial skills can be learned. Yet, according to Thornberry (2003) attempts to train people to be intrapreneurs have largely been unsuccessful. Essentially, theory isn’t translating into practice. I believe this is because entrepreneurial skills are a manifestation of human talent and creativity. Would 93% of scholars assume that you can teach people to be a successful artist? Sure, the basic principles can be taught but there needs to be some sort inherent talent or interest for one to thrive as an artist. As a practicing entrepreneur, I view what I do more as an art than science.
When Cantillon wrote his Essai sue la nature du commerce en General in 1734 he specifically mentioned that entrepreneurs were different than employees due to their willingness to accept risk and act on their vision. To Cantillon, entrepreneurship was synonymous with self-employment. Most academicians follow Schrumpeter’s (1931) definition that essentially equates entrepreneurship with innovation or creative destruction. That is, entrepreneurship is about doing new things in new ways; or old things in new ways.
Regardless of whether one agrees with the Cantillon or Schrumpeter definition, it seems clear that an effective entrepreneur demonstrates natural intrinsic motivation by recognizing and acting on opportunities others don’t see. He/she also often needs to make spontaneous judgments making decisions when there is a lack of empirical data.
Rather than trying to train people to be entrepreneurial (something many employees have no desire to be) companies and countries should identify those segments within that have natural entrepreneurial traits and a propensity for (and interest in) entrepreneurship. Once these natural entrepreneurs (or intrapreneurs) are identified then companies can implement targeted and effective training and support can be provided.
Our firm works with global companies and economic development agencies to show segments of the company (departments; demographic profiles etc.) and society that have the most interest in entrepreneurship, and identify the cultural values that may foster or inhibit entrepreneurship and innovation. We believe this is the starting point for successful entrepreneurial development efforts.
Take care,
Dr. Matthew G. Kenney
http://www.globalpreneurship.com
Commentaire de Hervé
Le 28 octobre 2008 à 23:43.
Bravo Thomas pour ton marathon à Lausanne ce W.E, l’important c’est avant tout de se lancer dans le grand bain…le prochain sera plus facile!
@ Bientôt
H