VOlUME 04 ISSUE 12 DECEMBER 2021
1N. S Akilu,2 Fodio Garba
1Department of Business Administration Usmanu Danfodiyo University, Sokoto
2Department of public Administration Usmanu Danfodiyo University, Sokoto
Google Scholar Download Pdf
ABSTRACT
Based on isomorphic considerations, this paper attempts to establish an entrepreneur as complex adaptive system, which is one of the concepts that appear prominently in the field of complexity sciences. The attempt to equate the notion of an entrepreneur with the idea of a complex adaptive system, presupposes recognition of the entrepreneur’s role in adaptive agency. Along with this recognition, comes the convenience of contextualizing the concepts of phase transitions and bifurcation points in terms of venture emergence. The dynamics of these concepts are however more commonly explored within the workings of complex or dynamic physical systems. Yet, the broad applicability of the underlying ideas offers the possibility of identifying similar concepts in biological systems and by extension, the field of entrepreneurial cognition and behavior. Thus, the paper adopts an interdisciplinary approach and employs retroductive reasoning in the assemblage of relevant ideas, sought from diverse literary sources. The outcome is a conceptual framework, which presents certain propositions that offer implication for action.
KEYWORDS:Venture, Complex System, Adaptive Agents, Self Organization
REFERENCES
1) Aloulou, W. (1991). Investigating Entrepreneurial Intentions and Behaviour of Saudi Distance Business Learners: Main
Antecedents and Mediators. jornal of International Business and Entrepreneurial Development, 231-257.
2) Alvarez, S., & Barney, J. (2012). Epistimology, Opportunities and Entrepreneurship: Comments on Venkatareman et al,
2021 and Shane 2012. Academy of Management Review, 154-157.
3) Baker, T., & Nelson, R. (2005). Creating Something from noting:Construction through Entrepreneurial Bricolage.
Administrative Year Quarterly, 329-366.
4) Baker, T., Miner, A., & D, E. (2003). Improvising Firms: Bricolage Account Giving and Improvisational Competencies in
the Founding Process. Research Policy, 255-276.
5) Bandura, A. (1994). Exercise of Personal and Collective Efficacy in Changing Society. In A. Bandura, Self Efficacy in
Changing Society (pp. 1-45). Newyork: Cambridge University Press.
6) Baron, R., H, Hmieleski, k., & Henry, R. (2012). Entrepreneurial Dispositional positive Affect:The Potential Benefit and
Potential Cost of Being Up. Journal of Business Venturing, 310-324.
7) Bruyat, C., & Julien, P. (2000). Defining the Field of Entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing, 165-180.
8) Buchanan, J., & Pierro, A. (2005). Cognition,Choice and Entrepreneurship. Southern Economic Journal, 425-499.
9) Cunningham, J., & Lischeron, J. (1991). Defining Entrepreneurship. Journal of Small Business Management, 45-61.
10) Davidson, P. (2003). The Domain of Entrepreneurship Research: Some Suggestions. Advances in Entrepreneurship,Firm
Emergence and Growth, 315-372.
11) Davidsson, P. (2015). Entrepreneurial opportunities and the Entrepreneurship Nexus: A Reconceptualization. Journal of
Business venturing, 674-695.
12) Dew, N., Read, S., Sarasvasty, S., & Wiltbank, R. (2009). Effectual versus Predictive Logic in Entrepreneurial decision
making. Journal of business venturing, 287-309.
13) Dimov, D. (2011). Grappling with the unbearable of Entrepreneurial Opportunities. Entrepreneurship theory and Practice,
57-81.
14) Dutta, D., & Crossan, M. (2005). The Nature Entrepreneurial Opportunities:Understanding the Process Using
Organizational learning Practice. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 693-701.
15) Eidelson, J. (1997). Complex Adaptive Systems in Behavioral and Social Sciences. Review of General Psychology, 42-71.
16) Farmer, J. (1995). The Second Law of organization. Newyork: Simun and Schuster.
17) Frese, M., & Gielnik, M. (2014). The Psycology of Entrepreneurship. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and
Organizational Behaviour, 413-438.
18) Gaglio, C., & Katz, J. (2001). The Psychological Basis of Opportunity Identification. Small Business Economics, 95-111.
19) Giddens, A. (1988). Central Problem in Social Theory. London: Macmillan.
20) Gleick, J. (1987). Chaos. Newyork: Pengum Books.
21) Harvey, D. (2001). Chaos and Complexity:Their Bearing on Social Policy Research. Social Issue, 1-2.
22) Holland, J. (1997). Emergence . Philosophica, 11-40.
23) Lichtenstein, B. (2011). Levels and Degrees of Emergence International Journal of Complexity in Leadership and
Management, 252-74.
24) Manimala, M. (1992). Entrepreneurial Heuristics: A Comparison between high PI and Low PI Ventures. Journal of
Business Venturing, 477-504.
25) McKelvy, B. (2004). Towards a Complexity Science of Entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Management, 313-341.
26) Mitchell. (1994). Stakeholder theory and Liability of Newness in New Ventures. In W. S.A, International Association for
Business and Society Proceedings (pp. 345-350). Hilton Head.
27) Mitchell, R., Randolph-Seng, B., & Mitchell, J. (2011). Socially Situated Cognition: Imagine new Opportunities for
Entrepreneurial Research. Academy for Management Review, 774-776.
28) Ramalingan, B., Harry, J., Toussaint, R., & John, Y. (2008).. London: Overse as Development Institute.
29) Shane, S. (2012). Reflections on the 201o AMR Award: Delivering on the promise of Entrepreneurship as a field of
research. Academy of Management Review, 2010, 10-12.
30) Stadler, M., & P, K. (1995). The Function of Meaning in Cognitive Order Formation. In P. Kruise, & M. Stadler, Ambiguity
in Mind and Nature: Multistable Cognitive Phenomenon ( 5-21). Berlin,Germany: Springer-Verlay.
31) Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1973). Heuristic for Measuring Frequency and Probability. Cognitive Psychology, 207-232.
32) Weber, J. (2013). Character,Attitude, and Disposition. Journal of Philosophy, 12-28.