|
The concept of entrepreneurship was selected as a central theme of the research because of a profound personal interest and during the research extensive engagement with theory as well as practice has been taken place. In the following paragraphs a short overview of the knowledge entrepreneurial experiences that make up the body of the phenomenological action research are recounted.
Qualitative research if often criticized because of the constraint that the interpretation of qualitative data is a subjective interpretation of explanations given by informants. Hence, so the argument, it is impossible to verify the correct interpretation. On the one hand this critique is retorted through the practice of validating the described conditions at the universities through engaging in collective review and discourse with the informants and the institution in general (see section on case validation above), on the other hand the research project itself is taken as a knowledge entrepreneurial venture and the constant identification of theoretical and practical opportunities, the reflection on risks (of losing time and focus), and especially the pragmatic realization of positively assessed opportunities (by investing in understanding and exploiting the insights to forge a solid knowledge product), was an important source for understanding the phenomenon. The researcher has followed the premises of action research to engage in an iterative evolutionary process of reflecting upon opportunity identification, evaluation or as Blum (1955) put it diagnosis, and third a therapeutic stage in which the act of integrating the concept into the research product was realized. Thereby the many thesis memos and documents are used as documentation of these reflections. Especially the organisation of the case studies was an entrepreneurial venture as both access to relevant documents, data and especially suitable interview partners was a constant emergent search, assessment, and realization of knowledge opportunities. As Checkland (1981, p. 153) states: “The problem with action research arises from the fact that it cannot be wholly planned and directed down particular paths … [The researcher] may express his research aims as hopes, but cannot certainly design them into his ‘experiments’. He has to be prepared to act to whatever happens in the research situation; he has to follow wherever the situation leads him or stop the research”. One good example is the expansion of the research through the implementation of a focus group interview held with students of the LSE. This opportunity arose in an informal meeting with an LSE teaching assistant, was assessed to add substantial insight to the research and subsequently realized. But, as was understood to be entrepreneurial, I did not focus exclusively on the cases but also followed up on opportunities that emerged along the way. Two examples are, the etymological investigation conducted with a historian from my home town (see Chapter 1 – Footnote 13) or the interview conducted with the CEO of StarLab, a private sector research company, which is collaborating with universities and entrepreneurially pursuing research grants (see Chapter 4 – Axiology and Teleology).
Dressel and Langreiter found that “we try to create structures and processes ‘in our own area’ were we have more possibilities for action: in our working groups, in our department, in university courses, in self-organized workshops etc. – first of all with ‘our equals’” (Dressel & Langreiter, 2003). In the following paragraphs some selected knowledge opportunities that were realized during the research are listed.
o January and May, 2007 Presentation and Debate at the Entrepreneurship Laboratory, Berlin
Presentation and discussion of research theme at the entrepreneurship community of practice gathering at Prof. Faltin’s Entrepreneurship Laboratory institution (see chapter three section 1.9.6.).
o June 28 – July 1st, 2006 Eudokma PhD Seminar 2006, Amsterdam
Collaborative seminar on “Organizational Learning, Networks and Communities: Innovations in the Emerging Strategic Entrepreneurship Field”. Organized by the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Public Administration & Organization Science
o Oktobre 2006, Presentation at the OECD IMHE, Paris
Presentation and discussion of paper: “Entrepreneurial Universities in the Network Society - A Code of Conduct for Use of the Internet” at the OECD conference “Values and Ethics: Managing Challenges and Realities in Higher Education”.
o 16. May – 24.June 2005 United Nations University, Tokyo
The course “Ecology – Science and Policies” offered a unique opportunity to learn about current best practices with regards to implementing a sustainable information society.
o 18.–30. April 2005 European Doctoral Training Programme, Strasbourg
Programme which gives young researchers a specific training in the new developments of the Economics of Technological and Institutional Change.
Through these collaborative sessions, I was able to “receive impulses from the outside and where we can meet with people who move in various academic circles but who are not involved in the project, in order to discuss and engage in informal analytic thinking with them regarding our interpretations, thought sand issues. (Dressel & Langreiter, 2003)”
Users' Comments (0) 
|
|
|
