Entrepreneurship Skill Building: Focusing Entrepreneurship Education on Skills Assessment and Development 303077919X, 9783030779191

Citation preview

Thomas S. Lyons ∙ John S. Lyons ∙ Julie A. Samson

Entrepreneurship Skill Building Focusing Entrepreneurship Education on Skills Assessment and Development

Entrepreneurship Skill Building

Thomas S. Lyons · John S. Lyons · Julie A. Samson

Entrepreneurship Skill Building Focusing Entrepreneurship Education on Skills Assessment and Development

Thomas S. Lyons Gary W. Rollins College of Business University of Tennessee at Chattanooga Chattanooga, TN, USA

John S. Lyons College of Public Health University of Kentucky Lexington, KY, USA

Julie A. Samson Jack & Julie Nadel School of Business & Entrepreneurship Santa Barbara City College Santa Barbara, CA, USA

ISBN 978-3-030-77919-1 ISBN 978-3-030-77920-7 (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-77920-7 © The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. This Palgrave Macmillan imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Switzerland AG The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland

Acknowledgments

Writing a book is a collaborative project; not merely among co-authors but with many other individuals. We would like to take this opportunity to acknowledge and thank our partners in preparing this volume. First, we want to thank our editor at Palgrave Macmillan, Marcus Ballenger, for giving us this opportunity and for supporting us along the way. Also, many thanks to our book Project Coordinator, Arun Kumar. In addition, we thank the proposal and manuscript reviewers for this book whose insights, encouragement, and constructive criticism greatly improved the product. We also extend our gratitude to Dustin Holmes for his help with aspects of the research that went into this effort. Our sincere thanks to our respective institutions—the University of Tennessee at Chattanooga, the University of Kentucky, and Santa Barbara City College—for the resources and other support that made it possible to write the book. Thanks also to Ken Knecht of OPEEKA, the developer of the RISE platform, for sharing the screenshots that appear in Chapter 7 and for his crucial contributions to the latest version of the RISE. We would also like to thank April D. Fernando, Ph.D. for her graphic expertise, which greatly enhanced our ability to communicate key concepts of our approach. We are also very grateful for the many entrepreneurs, students of entrepreneurship, and coaches who have played such an important role in the development of the RISE as early adopters and who shared with us their experiences in using the assessment and offered suggestions for its

v

vi

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

improvement. Without you, this book, quite literally, would never have been written. Thomas S. Lyons John S. Lyons Julie A. Samson

Contents

1

The Paradigm Shift in Entrepreneurship Education The Rise and Fall of Traits Theory Process Takes a Backseat Emergence of Skills Current Thinking on Skills-Based Entrepreneurship References

2

An Appropriate Response: A Skills Development Framework Entrepreneur Development as a Transformational Offering You Cannot Manage What You Do not Measure You Cannot Measure What You Do not Define Complexity and Managing Personal Change Transformational Collaborative Outcomes Management (TCOM) Organizing the Process of Helping References

3

The RISE of a Clinical Approach to Skills Assessment Classical Test Theory Item Response Theory Common Characteristics of Psychometric Measures Across Specific Theories The Problem with Norms

1 1 6 8 10 13 19 20 24 24 25 30 33 36 39 40 41 42 43

vii

viii

CONTENTS

Psychometrics and the Challenge of Triangulation The Structure of the RISE as a Communimetric Measure Defining What the RISE Means by “Skills” Identifying the Relevant Skill Set Transformational Management Skills Three Optional Social Entrepreneur Transformational Management Skills Relationship Management Skills Business Management Skills Organizational Process Management Skills Scoring the RISE References 4

5

Applying the Skills Assessment to Entrepreneurship Education The Current Nature of Entrepreneurship Education Bringing Business Creation into Entrepreneurship Education Gaming and Simulation in Entrepreneurship Education Using Design Principles in Entrepreneurship Education The Role of Reflection in Entrepreneurship Education How Skills Are Developed The Disconnect Between Curriculum and Co-curricular Activities Using the RISE to Integrate Entrepreneurship Programs The Evolution of the RISE Assessment Conclusion References The Case of Santa Barbara City College Santa Barbara City College Scheinfeld Center Overview History Mission and Vision Programming Students Facilities The Scheinfeld Center and the RISE RISE Pilot During the Get REAL Accelerator Internship Program

46 48 49 49 50 53 55 57 59 61 62 71 72 72 73 75 76 77 80 81 87 92 92 97 97 98 98 98 98 104 105 105 106 108

CONTENTS

ix

Implementation of a RISE Module in an Introduction to Entrepreneurship Course Future Use of the RISE The RISE and Entrepreneurship Program Development Conclusion References

110 111 112 113 114

6

The Case of the University of Tennessee at Chattanooga The University The Gary W. Rollins College of Business The Entrepreneurship Program The Entrepreneurship Strategy at UTC The RISE as a Guide to Program Building and Assessment Evaluating the Entrepreneurship Curriculum Solidifying the CIE’s Role Mentoring and Coaching Through the CIE The RISE as a Program Assessment Tool Conclusion References

115 116 116 117 123 125 125 127 128 130 130 131

7

Implementing a Skills-Based Curriculum with an Outcomes Management Framework The Way Forward Ensuring a Common Language of Skills: Training and Certification Information Management Supports Skill-Building Interventions and Activities Monitoring and Measuring Outcomes Individual-Level Outcomes Management Coach-Level Outcomes Management Program-Level Outcomes Equity, Social Justice, and the RISE Research and Development References

133 136 137 140 141 142 143 144 144 147 149 150

Appendix A: The RISE Reference Guide

151

Appendix B: The RISE Skills Glossary

173

Index

177

List of Figures

Fig. 2.1

Fig. 2.2 Fig. 2.3 Fig. 2.4 Fig. 3.1 Fig. 5.1 Fig. 6.1

Fig. 7.1 Fig. 7.2 Fig. 7.3 Fig. 7.4

The hierarchy of economic offerings (Source Pine and Gilmore [1999], Praed Foundation [2021], April Fernando, Ph.D.) Continuum of production (Source Pine and Gilmore [2011], Praed Foundation [2021], April Fernando, Ph.D.) Collaboration within a TCOM framework (Source Praed Foundation [2021], April Fernando, Ph.D.) Key stages in helping systems (Source Praed Foundation [2021]) Entrepreneurship skill development ladder (Source Lyons et al. [2020]; Diamond Darling) Scheinfeld innovators studio floor plan (Source Author’s creation) Center for innovation and entrepreneurship floor plan (Source Center for Innovation and Entrepreneurship, University of Tennessee at Chattanooga) Praed foundation collaborative training platform: TCOMtraining.com (Source Praed Foundation) The RISE represented on the Opeeka platform (Source Opeeka, Inc) Individual-level outcomes report on the RISE platform (Source Opeeka, Inc) Coach-level outcomes report on the RISE platform (Source Opeeka, Inc)

20 22 32 33 62 102

119 138 140 143 145

xi

xii

LIST OF FIGURES

Fig. 7.5 Fig. 7.6

Coach-level outcomes report on the RISE platform (Source Opeeka, Inc) Program-level performance/outcomes report on the RISE platform (Source Opeeka, Inc)

146 147

List of Tables

Table 1.1 Table 1.2 Table 2.1 Table 3.1 Table 4.1

Table 4.2

Table 5.1 Table 6.1 Table 6.2 Table 6.3 Table 6.4

Skills required for effective management Typology of entrepreneurship skills Effective management differences between a complicated versus complex system An inventory of skills on the readiness inventory for successful entrepreneurship Total sales revenue generated by advantage valley ELS clients over a six- to thirty-eight-month period as of 12/31/07 Average and median sales revenue by entrepreneurship skill level for 109 entrepreneurs participating in the Central Louisiana Coaching system using the ELSA, 2006–2009 Overall skill improvement among Get REAL Accelerator founders Entrepreneurship major (without general education and general business requirements) Entrepreneurship minor UTC RISE curriculum assessment: business management skills CIE activities by stage in the skill-building process

9 11 29 51

89

89 107 118 119 126 127

xiii

CHAPTER 1

The Paradigm Shift in Entrepreneurship Education

As our understanding of entrepreneurship has advanced, the field of entrepreneurship education has evolved in step, and this evolution has accelerated in recent years. There are two principal paradigm shifts that have hastened this change: (1) the shift in how scholars explain successful entrepreneurship and (2) the movement toward thinking about entrepreneurship as a method rather than a process. Together, they have pushed entrepreneurship education toward skill-based learning. How we arrived here and why is the subject of this chapter.

The Rise and Fall of Traits Theory We have long been interested in answering the questions, “what makes an entrepreneur successful?” and “why are some entrepreneurs more successful than others?” Attempts have been made to answer the first question by linking it to measures of business success: revenue growth, ability to attract external investment, employment growth, etc. It is frequently argued that when an entrepreneur can effectively grow revenue, investment and jobs, among other metrics, he or she is successful. However, this approach does not address the question of why some entrepreneurs are more successful than others, nor does it tell us why and how any entrepreneur achieves favorable metrics, when they do.

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 T. S. Lyons et al., Entrepreneurship Skill Building, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-77920-7_1

1

2

T. S. LYONS ET AL.

We have not been alone in our quest for answers to these questions. Many scholars have pursued this knowledge over the past several decades. As is always the case, we have learned from each other and built upon the knowledge scaffolding erected by those who came before us. Entrepreneurship, compared to law, medicine, and other professions, is relatively young. There is still considerable disagreement around basic definitions and much to learn. Add to this the rapidly increasing abundance of information and the technology that allows us to access and analyze it directly, and it is easy to appreciate why our understanding of the field of entrepreneurship is evolving so rapidly. In the early days of entrepreneurship inquiry and for several decades after that, the reigning explanation of entrepreneurial success was one called “traits” or “attributes” theory (Brockhaus, 1982; Fernald et al., 2005; Gorman et al., 1997; Greenberg & Sexton, 1988; Huefner & Hunt, 1994; Kassicieh et al., 1997; McClelland et al., 1953; Schumpeter, 1991; Timmons et al., 1985). Psychologists refer to this as “dispositional” theory and define traits as routine patterns of behavior, emotion, and thought that vary across individuals, are stable over time, and are consistent across situations (Kassin, 2003). This theory applied to entrepreneurs posited that these individuals were successful because they possessed certain innate traits that gave them a distinct competitive advantage over other individuals. They were natural risk takers. They could see economic opportunities others could not. In other words, they were entrepreneurs by nature, not necessarily through learning and/or experience. This made them seem rare and caused some theorists to compare them to the heffalump, the mysterious and rarely seen creature from A.A. Milne’s Winnie-the-Pooh stories (Hull et al., 1980). This proved to be a very powerful theory of entrepreneurship success. It not only influenced the way society thought about entrepreneurs, but it informed public policy and entrepreneurship education as well. Its influence has been stubborn in the face of contrary evidence. There are still influential theorists in the field who cling to it. Yet, extensive research does not support its veracity. As Lyons et al. (2007: 106–107) put it, “In general, personality traits research can be said to have failed to produce any consistent evidence as to the existence of unique entrepreneurial characteristics that differentiate entrepreneurs from the general population.” In short, it has been debunked. With due respect to the scholars who sincerely championed traits theory and those who still do, it is likely, in hindsight, that its slow demise

1

THE PARADIGM SHIFT IN ENTREPRENEURSHIP EDUCATION

3

has been a positive development. It has been argued that it severely limited the power of entrepreneurship to foster economic development. If successful entrepreneurs are born to it, the only recourse for those who seek to encourage entrepreneurship is to find the “natural” entrepreneurs and work with them, i.e., to pick “winners” (Lichtenstein & Lyons, 2010). It treats entrepreneurs as a finite resource in our communities, arguably precluding those individuals who are properly motivated from receiving the support they need to succeed at entrepreneurship. In this way, it is elitist and breeds an entrepreneurial exceptionalism that is unhelpful and unwarranted (Lyons, 2015). Traits theory stifles entrepreneurship education in a similar way. If these traits are immutable, then only certain individuals can benefit from an education in entrepreneurship. It also implies that all these individuals really need is to be infused with the requisite business knowledge because they already possess the natural characteristics needed for success. If this is the case, there would be no need for entrepreneurship education at all. The “natural” entrepreneurs could merely take a traditional business curriculum and then apply this knowledge and their innate traits to successful practice. Applying traits theory effectively requires an ability to accurately and consistently predict who has the requisite characteristics to be a successful entrepreneur. Is this something we are capable of doing? If, as research suggests, there is no single innate trait that is possessed by all entrepreneurs, then successfully making such a prediction seems highly doubtful. Take the example of venture capitalists, who generate their living attempting to make such predictions. A major factor in their investment decisions is their assessment of the quality of the entrepreneurial team (Teal & Hofer, 2001). If one analyzes their success rate, however, it is very low—1 in 2000 or 0.05% (Corporate Finance Institute, 2020). They survive not by consistently picking winners but by making the occasional educated guess that pays off handsomely. Is this not the very definition of gambling? One wonders how many prospective entrepreneurs, who are capable of learning and growing, are left out by this predictive, traits-based process. In the wake of traits theory’s power to explain entrepreneurship success being brought into question, entrepreneurship scholars began to explore alternatives. Two of these involved behaviors and cognition. The “behavior theory” of successful entrepreneurship holds that entrepreneurs who succeed engage in behaviors that can be observed, systematized,

4

T. S. LYONS ET AL.

and replicated (Block & Macmillan, 1985; Carter et al., 1996; Gartner, 1989). Unlike innate traits, behaviors are not immutable and, therefore, can be taught and learned. This was an encouraging development for entrepreneurship educators. However, the ability of the individual entrepreneur to think and adapt is not sufficiently addressed by this theory (Lichtenstein & Lyons, 2010). The “cognitive theory” of successful entrepreneurship explores the thought processes of entrepreneurs. It seeks to explain successful entrepreneurship as a way of thinking (Cope, 2005; Keh et al., 2002; Krueger, 2000; Minniti & Bygrave, 2001; Mitchell & Chesteen, 1995; Shane & Venkataraman, 2000). This has led to recent interest in the concept of “entrepreneurial mindset” and the work of Dweck (2006) on “growth mindset” and Duckworth et al. (2007) on “grit,” although both are considered non-cognitive (a learnable personality trait). Dweck argues that growth mindset is key to driving both motivation and achievement, with an emphasis on learning and effort (Blackwell et al., 2007). Stolz (2015) describes the dimensions of grit as growth, resilience, instinct (for working smart as opposed to merely working hard), and tenacity. The growth dimension has caused some scholars to link growth mindset to grit, though this has been challenged in recent research (Tang et al., 2019). What research seems to consistently support is that grit’s perseverance component does explain variability in performance (Crede et al., 2017). These concepts are important because they move us farther away from innate explanations for success and toward learning-based reasons. Much of the cognition-based research in the field of entrepreneurship has focused on intention. What causes an individual to become an entrepreneur? The two major theories that underlie this work are the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) and the Social Cognitive Career Theory (SCCT). TPB-based models of entrepreneurial intention hold that an individual is more likely to choose entrepreneurship if they perceive that doing so is both desirable and feasible (Krueger et al., 2000). SCCT-based models suggest that an individual’s career goals, self-efficacy, and belief that they can achieve positive outcomes are the variables that affect their choice of a career (Lent et al., 1994). The work of Pfeifer et al. (2016) lends empirical support to the applicability of SCCT to entrepreneurial intention and links it to entrepreneurial mindset. However, cognition scholars are increasingly seeking to expand entrepreneurial mindset to encompass more than mere intention. They are interested in cognitive explanations for how entrepreneurs think

1

THE PARADIGM SHIFT IN ENTREPRENEURSHIP EDUCATION

5

and act, which would shift entrepreneurship education from providing instruction that describes entrepreneurship to teaching students how to engage in entrepreneurship (Guth, 2016). It has been suggested that the best way to develop entrepreneurial mindset is to engage students in creative problem solving (Camacho et al., 2016). This migration in thinking about entrepreneurial mindset is captured in a definition from Lynch et al. (2016: 2): “…a growth-oriented perspective through which individuals promote flexibility, creativity, continuous innovation, and renewal.” The chief contribution of the entrepreneurial mindset concept to cognitive theories of entrepreneurship is to move the focus from description to action; from describing why individuals become entrepreneurs to explaining the thinking that drives entrepreneurial action and how to foster that thinking through action. Lynch et al. (2017) capture the latter way of entrepreneurial thinking as having a growth/learning perspective of the world, a customer focus, a collective orientation, a focus on the future, and a bias toward action. It is this explanation for entrepreneurship success that, in part, has driven the increased emphasis on co-curricular activities in entrepreneurship education—pitch competitions, makerthons, design challenges, startup internships, accelerators, etc. These are seen as action-oriented mechanisms for developing an entrepreneurial mindset. To summarize, traits theory was long the favored explanation for entrepreneurship success, but it has proven to be not only questionable in its ability to predict that success, but it also has greatly limited what entrepreneurship educators could do to enable entrepreneurship. While it is possible that there are some immutable personality delimiters that bound an individual’s ability to think and act entrepreneurially, these can arguably be overcome by creating teams of entrepreneurs that complement one another and mitigate such challenges. Innate traits, or the lack thereof, should no longer be an excuse for excluding those who are properly motivated from learning to become successful entrepreneurs. Behavioral and cognitive theories of entrepreneurship success have contributed substantially to effective entrepreneurship education. These bodies of theory have helped us to understand that we can do something about successful entrepreneurship—we can help our students to think and act entrepreneurially. However, the question remains: Are they root explanations for success in entrepreneurship? We will take this question up later in this chapter. First, we examine the second major paradigm shift that has affected our understanding of entrepreneurship and what must be done to effectively educate entrepreneurs.

6

T. S. LYONS ET AL.

Process Takes a Backseat As the field of entrepreneurship moved away from entrepreneurial exceptionalism and the idea that entrepreneurs are individuals with special traits, it began to focus less on the person and more on the process (Neck & Greene, 2011). Scholars at the time argued for establishing causal relationships and predictability and understanding the processes that increased the probability of success and reduced risk (Amit et al., 1993; Ireland et al., 2003; Low & MacMillan, 1988; Miller, 2007). Entrepreneurs went from being natural-born risk takers to consummate managers of risk. Emphasis shifted from the individual to the business and the processes through which businesses grow. What emerged was a recipe for success in entrepreneurship. Recipes are linear and predictable. If one adds just the right amount of each of a set of ingredients, in the right order, and bakes them at a given temperature, one will create the promised cake. At its essence, a recipe is a plan. Translated to entrepreneurship, if an entrepreneur writes a business plan that captures a viable opportunity to add value to some group of customers, marshals the necessary resources (ingredients), organizes those resources effectively, and efficaciously executes the plan, he or she can be assured of a successful business that can be harvested for a profit (Hormozi et al., 2002; Morris, 1998; Zimmerman, 2012). This is the promise of a process – planning and proper execution (linearity) will yield predictable success. However, entrepreneurship is not a linear process. Oftentimes, getting from Point A to Point B involves touching Points C, D, and E, first. It can be messy and chaotic (Neck & Greene, 2011). Some have called this a “VUCA” world (volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous).1 Such a world does not lend itself to predictability. It requires creativity and flexibility in order to navigate it effectively. This might be described as “laying the track while driving the train.” Processes, and their accompanying planning and prediction, have their place, but they do not accurately describe entrepreneurship, nor should they be the focus of entrepreneurship education. The process approach provides entrepreneurs with a kit of tools that, when used appropriately, can enhance their effectiveness. Appropriate use involves both how and when to apply a given tool, ensuring adherence to the age-old admonition about hammers and nails. For example, it has been pointed out that 1 The origins of this term are attributed to the US Army (Mackey, 1992).

1

THE PARADIGM SHIFT IN ENTREPRENEURSHIP EDUCATION

7

business plans, a staple of the process approach to entrepreneurship, are better implemented later in the process than earlier (Blank & Dorf, 2020; Greene & Hopp, 2018; Neck et al., 2018). These are tactical considerations, which rightfully should take a backseat to the bigger realities of entrepreneurship. So, if entrepreneurship is not a process, then what is it? Neck and Greene (2011) have argued that it is a method. They assert that “…a method represents a body of skills or techniques…” (61). It is the way in which entrepreneurs think and act in an orderly fashion; therefore, it must necessarily involve practice. This takes us back to the cognition and behavioral theories of entrepreneurship but with an increased focus on action. It also opens the door to the suggestion by Lyons et al. (2020: 114) that “…skills are actionable; they underlie the entrepreneur’s decision-making processes and behaviors….” Neck and Greene (2011) draw several distinctions between a process approach and a method approach to entrepreneurship that are particularly instructive. One is that while a process is linear, a method is iterative. Being iterative suggests learning and growing—not knowing the destination when the journey begins but finding it incrementally over time. This further suggests that an entrepreneur’s journey is evolutionary, as opposed to mechanistic (Lichtenstein & Lyons, 2010). This segues nicely into another of Neck and Greene’s (2011) observations: that a process requires precision, a method implies experimentation. In the world of action in which entrepreneurs operate, precision has a point of diminishing returns. As John Maynard Keynes once put it, “It is better to be roughly right than precisely wrong.” Given the temporal constraints under which entrepreneurs work (think “windows of opportunity”), acting successfully often means working with the information one has, not perfect information. While being as accurate as possible is important, precision-seeking can impede action by creating “analysis paralysis.” A third observation by Neck and Greene (2011) is that processes are tested, while methods are practiced. In a process, one learns first and then acts, whereas, in a method, one learns from doing. These are major themes that will be revisited throughout this book. When taken together, the demise of traits theory and the replacement of the process approach by the method approach to entrepreneurship have had a major impact on both the way we think about entrepreneurship and the way in which we teach it to others. We now perceive entrepreneurs as individuals who are not born to the field but who are capable of

8

T. S. LYONS ET AL.

learning the skills and techniques required for success through practice. Entrepreneurship education is no longer about teaching the steps to predictable success. It has become practice focused, where students develop their skills by applying them in the field.

Emergence of Skills If, then, entrepreneurship is a method, a way of thinking and acting, how does this cognition and behavior manifest itself? What is it that entrepreneurs can learn to make the way they think and act more productive in terms of improving their practice? What is the role of knowledge relative to practice? For the answers to these questions, we look at another way of thinking about what makes entrepreneurs successful and some more successful than others. This is the skills perspective. While the progression of thought has been fairly chronological when it has come to moving from innate traits to cognition and behavior and from process to method, scholars have been considering the role of entrepreneurship skills since the 1980s (Vasconcelos et al., 2016). Arguably, this work stemmed from even earlier thinking about administrative and managerial skills (Ensley et al., 2000). As early as 1985, Ronstadt observed that successful entrepreneurship required a broad range of skills and that entrepreneurship education must make skill development its focus. Some scholars used the term “skills” quite broadly, weaving it around discussions of entrepreneurial personality traits (Ensley et al., 2000), but other research was more explicit, identifying general types of skill and individual skills required by successful entrepreneurs. Katz (1974) developed a typology of skills for effective administrators. It was constituted of three major skill types: conceptual, human, and technical. Szilagyi and Schweiger (1984) expanded upon this by identifying sub-skills within each of these three types, as shown in Table 1.1. In a literature review spanning 1985–1994, Gorman et al. (1997) found that writing on entrepreneurship and small business education focused extensively on personality traits and entrepreneurial attributes but that skill building was discussed by some scholars, with the specific skills of creative thinking, leadership, negotiation, and new product development being noted. While they tend to use the terms “behavior” and “skill” interchangeably, Stumpf et al. (1991) distinguish between knowledge and skill, arguing that both should be among the delivery goals

1

THE PARADIGM SHIFT IN ENTREPRENEURSHIP EDUCATION

Table 1.1 Skills required for effective management

9

Conceptual skills

Human skills

Technical skills

Administrative skill

Leadership

Entrepreneurial skill

Networking

Product/service skill Organization skill Industry skill

Sources Katz (1974) and Szilagyi and Schweiger (1984)

of entrepreneurship education and that skills are necessary to applying knowledge. Viswanathan et al. (1992) identified four groups of factors, which they classified as managerial skills and knowledge and contended are necessary to successful entrepreneurship, three of which are skill types: (1) analytical skills, (2) interpersonal skills, (3) operational/entrepreneurial skills, and (4) career usefulness. Iyigun and Owen (1998) drew a distinction between what they call “entrepreneurial” skills and “professional” skills. According to these scholars, the former involve risk and are learned through doing. The latter are learned through formal education. Both are essential to successful entrepreneurship. Over the two decades during which the early literature on entrepreneurship skills emerged, the great majority of the discussion was about managerial skills and skills directly associated with entrepreneurship at the time—risk management, opportunity recognition, creativity, and negotiation. An important addition to our understanding of the skills that make entrepreneurs successful came in the form of an article by Baron and Markman (2000), which asserted that “social” skills are also an essential skill set. These scholars defined social skills as those necessary for productive interactions with others, observing that such skills are needed both to attract resources to an enterprise (e.g., experience, personal contacts, and reputation) and to utilize those resources effectively once they have been acquired (e.g., persuasiveness, social adaptability). They went on to assert that these social skills can be developed. This opened the door to further scholarly exploration of what some have called the “soft” skills of entrepreneurship. Rainsbury et al. (2002) asserted that soft skills are behavioral skills that are required for implementing the “hard” skills of business. Muzio et al. (2007) included cognitive skills, interpersonal skills, and personal and social skills in the

10

T. S. LYONS ET AL.

soft skill category. Souza (2018) argues that these are leadership skills, which, for too long, have taken a secondary position to management skills in the literature. He goes on to observe that while skills certainly pertain to the individual, they also have a relationship to the context, an idea that we will revisit later in this book. To encapsulate, some entrepreneurship scholars have been thinking about the role of skills in entrepreneurship success for several decades and doing so in parallel with others who were looking for answers in traits, behaviors, or thought processes. Up until the twenty-first century, most discussions of skills were relatively narrow and had deep roots in the literature of business administration and management, but the work of Baron and others in the early 2000s broadened the conversation and opened minds to new possibilities and increasingly detailed cataloguing of the required skills for successful entrepreneurship.

Current Thinking on Skills-Based Entrepreneurship Arguably, the true impetus for the growth of the skills perspective on entrepreneurship success was the article by Neck and Greene (2011) that asserted that entrepreneurship is a method, not a process. As discussed earlier in this chapter, that article introduced the idea that a method must be practiced, and skills underlie that practice—that is, they are what must be practiced. However, even before that article was published, the literature on entrepreneurship skills was expanding. Lichtenstein and Lyons (2001), proposing an early version of what has come to be called an “entrepreneurial ecosystem,” suggested such a system should be driven by the skill development of the entrepreneurs it serves. They identified four major skill categories of successful entrepreneurs: technical, managerial, entrepreneurial, and personal maturity. Technical skills were defined as those essential to the industry in which the entrepreneur works. Managerial skills are those needed to conduct the day-to-day management of a business. Entrepreneurial skills are essential for recognizing and acting upon opportunities, while personal maturity skills are the “social” or “soft” skills noted in the previous section of this chapter. These skill categories, while themselves relatively crude, became the baseline, of sorts, for the work of other scholars exploring entrepreneurship skills.

1

THE PARADIGM SHIFT IN ENTREPRENEURSHIP EDUCATION

11

Smith et al. (2005) conducted a ten-state survey of Small Business Development Center (SBDC) directors. They framed the results using the four dimensions of skill identified by Lichtenstein and Lyons (2001). They expanded upon these by adding 17 more explicit skills, which were adapted from a discussion of “entrepreneurial needs” (defined as obstacles to getting and using essential resources to entrepreneurship) in an earlier book by Lichtenstein and Lyons (1996), entitled Incubating New Enterprises. Table 1.2 details the Smith et al. (2005) skill typology. Cooney (2012) also created an entrepreneurship skills typology using Lichtenstein and Lyons’ (2001) four dimensions as a base. He reduced the skill types to three: entrepreneurship, management, and technical skills. Entrepreneurship skills included the ability to take risk, change oriented, inner discipline, innovative, and persistence. Management skills were constituted of decision-making, finance, marketing, motivating, planning, and selling. Cooney’s technical skills include communications, design, environmental observation, operations specific to industry, and research & development. All of these were drawn from the extant literature of the time. In addition to these studies spawned by Lichtenstein and Lyons’s (2001) work, Morris et al. (2013: 358), using the Delphi Method, Table 1.2 Typology of entrepreneurship skills Technical skills

Managerial skills

Entrepreneurial skills

Personal maturity skills

Operational skills (for producing a product or service) Skills for obtaining supplies/raw materials Skills for matching office/production space to need Skills to identify and acquire equipment, plant & technology

Management skills

Business concept planning & communication Environmental scanning Having an advisory board and engaging in networking

Self-awareness

Marketing/sales skills Financial skills

Legal skills

Administrative skills Higher-order skills Source Smith et al. (2005)

Accountability Emotional coping Creativity

12

T. S. LYONS ET AL.

recognized 13 competencies of successful entrepreneurs: building and using networks, conveying a compelling mission, creative problem solving/imaginativeness, guerilla skills, maintain focus yet adapt, opportunity assessment, opportunity recognition, resilience, resource leveraging, risk management/mitigation, self-efficacy, tenacity/perseverance, and value creation. While this latter study used the term “compentencies,” these items are arguably meta-skills. Neck et al. (2018: 43–44), in their popular entrepreneurship textbook, identified five broad skills that they argued underlie a mindset supportive of the practice of entrepreneurship. They identified these as the skills of creativity, empathy, experimentation, play, and reflection. Creativity, according to these authors, is the ability to make or discover opportunities and to solve problems. They define empathy as understanding others’ feelings because you have had the same or similar experiences. Experimentation is learning through iterative testing. Having fun and using the imagination is play, and reflection ties all this together by providing the opportunity to make sense of what happens when these other four skills are applied. This textbook marks the beginning of the intentional integration of skills into entrepreneurship pedagogy in higher education on a large scale. Using the thinking of Neck and Greene (2011), the book discusses entrepreneurship as a method to be practiced, which requires skills to do so. The five skills Neck et al. (2018) feature are used to shape and reinforce their discussion of what entrepreneurship is and how it is undertaken successfully throughout the text. This shift in the focus of entrepreneurship education toward the development of skills can be seen in the recent literature. As an example, Towers et al. (2020) advocate bringing entrepreneurial skills and mindset development into the university classroom and offer a methodology for doing so. Galvao et al. (2020) highlight the value of skill building in entrepreneurship education. A pilot program using a simulation technique for developing business strategy skills in entrepreneurs is the focus of an article by Barnaby et al. (2020). Lyons et al. (2019) argued that in order to know which skills entrepreneurs and students of entrepreneurship need help in developing and to understand the true impact of skill-development efforts, a method for assessing entrepreneurship skills is required. They introduced a webbased tool for measuring these skills in a clinical fashion called the Readiness Inventory for Successful Entrepreneurship (RISE). They briefly

1

THE PARADIGM SHIFT IN ENTREPRENEURSHIP EDUCATION

13

describe the RISE and the 30 “essential” skills that it measures. These skills were identified via an extensive literature review and tested in the field. The authors suggest this assessment tool could have utility in the classroom, in university/college-based entrepreneurship centers, and in the consulting offered by university/college-based Small Business Development Centers (SBDCs). In a subsequent article, these same scholars offer a more detailed description of the RISE, its clinical design and the origins of the skill set it measures (Lyons et al., 2020). This subject will be discussed in greater detail throughout the remainder of this book. Examples of its use in university and community college settings will be used to illustrate how the tool might be used as well as its strengths and limitations. Having established that the new focus in entrepreneurship education is skills development, we turn our attention to what can be done to successfully facilitate this new reality. In Chapter 2 we offer a conceptual framework for defining, measuring, and developing entrepreneurship skills.

References Amit, R., Glosten, L., & Muller, E. (1993). Challenges to theory development in entrepreneurship research. Journal of Management Studies, 30(5), 815–834. Barnaby, J., Devins, D., & Beech, N. (2020). Using simulation to develop business strategy skills of entrepreneurs – some reflections on a pilot. Industry and Higher Education. https://doi.org/10.1177/0950422220945672 Baron, R. A., & Markman, G. D. (2000). Beyond social capital: How social skills can enhance entrepreneurs’ success. Academy of Management Executive, 14(1), 106–116. Blackwell, L. S., Trzesniewski, K. H., & Dweck, C. S. (2007). Implicit theories of intelligence predict achievement across an adolescent transient: A longitudinal study of an intervention. Child Development, 78(1), 246–263. Blank, S., & Dorf, B. (2020). The startup owner’s manual: The step-by-step guide for building a great company. Wiley. Block, Z., & MacMillan, I. C. (1985). Milestones for successful venture planning. Harvard Business Review, 85(5), 184–196. Brockhaus, R. H. (1982). The psychology of the entrepreneur. In C. L. Kent, D. L. Sexton, & K. N. Vesper (Eds), Encyclopedia of entrepreneurship (pp. 39– 57). Prentice-Hall. Camacho, A. P., Janowski, A., Konak, A., & Kulturel-Konak, S. (2016). Creative problem solving builds entrepreneurial mindset. Piscataway: The Institute of

14

T. S. LYONS ET AL.

Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc. (IEEE). Retrieved from https:// proxy.lib.utc.edu/login?url=https://search-proquest-com.proxy.lib.utc.edu/ docview/1787166101?accountid=14767. July 16, 2020. Carter, N. M., Gartner, W. B., & Reynolds, P. D. (1996). Exploring start-up event sequences. Journal of Business Venturing, 11(3), 151–166. Cooney, T. M. (2012, November 28). Entrepreneurship skills for growthoriented businesses, report for the Workshop on “Skills Development for SMEs and Entrepreneurship, Copenhagen. Cope, J. (2005). Toward a dynamic learning perspective of entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 29(4), 373–397. Corporate Finance Institute. (2020). A quick guide to startup funding. https:// corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/knowledge/other/how-vcs-lookat-startups-andfounders/#:~:text=A%20quick%20guide%20to%20startup,1% 20in%202000%20success%20rate. Retrieved July 16, 2020. Crede, M., Tynan, M. C., & Harms, P. D. (2017). Much ado about grit: A meta-analytic synthesis of the grit literature. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 113(3), 492–511. Duckworth, A. L., Peterson, C., Matthews, M. D., & Kelly, D. R. (2007). Grit: Perseverance and passion for long-term goals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92(6), 1087–1101. Dweck, C. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success. Random House. Ensley, M. D., Carland, J., & Carland, J. C. (2000). Investigating the existence of the lead entrepreneur. Journal of Small Business Management, 38(4), 59–77. Fernald, L. W., Solomon, G. T., & Tarabishy, A. (2005). A new paradigm: Entrepreneurial leadership. Southern Business Review, 30(2), 1–13. Galvao, A., Marques, C., & Ferreira, J. J. (2020). The role of entrepreneurship education and training programmes in advancing entrepreneurial skills and new ventures. European Journal of Training and Development, 44(6/7), 595– 614. Gartner, W. B. (1989). Some suggestions for research on entrepreneurial traits and characteristics. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 14(1), 27–38. Gorman, G., Hanlon, D., & King, W. (1997). Some research perspectives on entrepreneurship education, enterprise education and education for small business management: A ten-year literature review. International Small Business Journal, 15(3), 56–77. Greenberg, D. B., & Sexton, D. L. (1988). An interactive model of new venture initiation. Journal of Small Business Management, 26(3), 1–7. Greene, F. J., & Hopp, C. (2018). When should entrepreneurs write their business plans? Harvard Business Review (May). hbr.org/2018/5/whenshould-entrepreneurs-write-their-business-plans. Retrieved July 22, 2020. Guth, D. J. (2016). Creating an entrepreneurial mindset. Community College Journal, 87 (2), 26–31.

1

THE PARADIGM SHIFT IN ENTREPRENEURSHIP EDUCATION

15

Hormozi, A. M., Sutton, G. S., McMinn, R. D., & Lucio, W. (2002). Business plans for new and small businesses: Paving the path to success. Management Decision, 40(7/8), 755–763. Huefner, J. C., & Hunt, H. K. (1994). Broadening the concept of entrepreneurship: Comparing business and consumer entrepreneurs. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 18(3), 61–75. Hull, D., Bosley, J., & Udell, G. (1980). Reviewing the heffalump: Identifying potential entrepreneurs by personality characteristics. Journal of Small Business Management, 18(1), 11–18. Ireland, R. D., Hitt, M. A., & Sirmon, D. G. (2003). A model of strategic entrepreneurship: The construct and its dimensions. Journal of Management, 29(6), 963–989. Iyigun, M. F., & Owen, A. L. (1998). Risk, entrepreneurship, and human-capital accumulation. The American Economic Review, 88(2), 454–457. Kassicieh, S. K., Radosevich, H. R., & Banbury, C. M. (1997). Using attitudinal, situational, and personal characteristics variables to predict future entrepreneurs from national laboratory inventors. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 44(3), 248–257. Kassin, S. (2003). Psychology (4th ed.). Pearson/Prentice-Hall. Katz, R. L. (1974). Skills of an effective administrator. Harvard Business Review, 52(5), 90–102. Keh, H. T., Foo, M. D., & Lim, B. C. (2002). Opportunity assessment under risky conditions: The cognitive processes of entrepreneurs. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 27 (2), 125–148. Krueger, N. F. (2000). The cognitive infrastructure of opportunity emergence. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 24(3), 5–23. Krueger, N. F., Reilly, M. D., & Carsrud, A. L. (2000). Competing models of entrepreneurial intentions. Journal of Business Venturing, 15, 411–432. Lent, R. W., Brown, S. D., & Hackett, G. (1994). Toward a unifying social cognitive theory of career and academic interest, choice, and performance. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 45, 79–122. Lichtenstein, G. A., & Lyons, T. S. (1996). Incubating new enterprises: A guide to successful practice. The Aspen Institute. Lichtenstein, G. A., & Lyons, T. S. (2001). The entrepreneurial development system: Transforming business talent and community economies. Economic Development Quarterly, 15(1), 3–20. Lichtenstein, G. A., & Lyons, T. S. (2010). Investing in entrepreneurs: A strategic approach to strengthening your regional and community economy. Praeger/ABC-CLIO. Low, M. B., & MacMillan, I. C. (1988). Entrepreneurship: Past research and future challenges. Journal of Management, 14(2), 139–161.

16

T. S. LYONS ET AL.

Lynch, M., Tuema, L., Andersson, G., & Steinert, M. (2016). Entrepreneurial mindset: An empirical starting point. Paper presented at the ISPIM Innovation Summit – Building the Innovation Century, Melbourne. Australia, December 10–13. Lynch, M. P. J., Kamovich, U., Andersson, G., & Steinert, M. (2017). The language of successful entrepreneurs: An empirical starting point for the entrepreneurial mindset. Proceedings of the 12th European Conference on Innovation and Entrepreneurship, Paris, France, 384–391. Lyons, T. S. (2015). Entrepreneurship and community development: What matters and why? Community Development, 46(5), 456–460. Lyons, T. S., Lichtenstein, G. A., & Kutzhanova, N. (2007). What makes a successful entrepreneur? In N. Walzer (Ed.), Entrepreneurship and local economic development. Lexington Books. Lyons, T. S., Lyons, J. S., & Jolley, G. J. (2019). The Readiness Inventory for Successful Entrepreneurship (RISE): A tool for university engagement in entrepreneurial learning. Journal of Economic Development in Higher Education, 7 (July), 1–7. Lyons, T. S., Lyons, J. S., & Jolley, G. J. (2020). Entrepreneurial skill-building in rural ecosystems: A framework for applying the Readiness Inventory for Successful Entrepreneurship (RISE). Journal of Entrepreneurship and Public Policy, 9(1), 112–136. McClelland, D. C., Atkinson, J. W., Clark, R. A., & Lowell, E. L. (1953). The achievement motive. Van Nostrand. Mackey, R. H. (1992). Translating vision into reality: The role of the strategic leader. U.S. Army War College. Miller, K. D. (2007). Risk and rationality in entrepreneurial processes. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 1(1–2), 57–74. Minniti, M., & Bygrave, W. (2001). A dynamic model of entrepreneurial learning. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 25(3), 5–16. Mitchell, R. K., & Chesteen, S. A. (1995). Enhancing entrepreneurial expertise: Experiential pedagogy and the new venture expert script. Simulation & Gaming, 26(3), 288–306. Morris, M. H. (1998). Entrepreneurial intensity: Sustainable advantages for individuals, organizations, and societies. Quorum. Morris, M. H., Webb, J. W., Fu, J., & Singhal, S. (2013). A competency-based perspective on entrepreneurship: Conceptual and empirical insights. Journal of Small Business Management, 51(3), 352–369. Muzio, D., Ackroyd, S., & Chanlat, J.-F. (Eds.). (2007). Redirections in the study of expert labour: Established professions and new expert occupations. Palgrave. Neck, H. M., & Greene, P. G. (2011). Entrepreneurship education: Known worlds and new frontiers. Journal of Small Business Management, 49(1), 55– 70.

1

THE PARADIGM SHIFT IN ENTREPRENEURSHIP EDUCATION

17

Neck, H. M., Neck, C. P., & Murray, E. L. (2018). Entrepreneurship: The practice and mindset. Sage. Pfeifer, S., Sarlija, N., & Susac, M. Z. (2016). Shaping the entrepreneurial mindset: Entrepreneurial intentions of business students in Croatia. Journal of Small Business Management, 54(1), 102–117. Rainsbury, E., Hodges, D. L., Burchell, N., & Lay, M. C. (2002). Ranking workplace competencies: Student and graduate perspectives. Asia-Pacific Journal of Cooperative Education, 3, 8–18. Ronstadt, R. (1985). The educated entrepreneurs: A new era of entrepreneurial education is beginning. American Journal of Small Business, 10(1), 7–23. Schumpeter, J. (1991). Comments on a plan for the study of entrepreneurship. In R. Swedberg (Ed.), Joseph A. Schumpeter: The economics and sociology of capitalism (pp. 406–428). Princeton University Press. Shane, S., & Venkataraman, S. (2000). The promise of entrepreneurship as a field of research. Academy of Management Review, 25(1), 217–226. Smith, W. L., Schallenkamp, K., & Eichholz, D. E. (2005). Entrepreneurial skills assessment: An exploratory study. International Journal of Management and Enterprise Development, 2(3), 349–359. Souza, M. J. (2018). Entrepreneurship skills development in higher education courses for team leaders. Administrative Sciences, 8(18). https://doi.org/10. 3390/admsci8020018. Stolz, P. G. (2015). The 4 components of a successful life. https://inspiyr.com/ successful-life/#:~:text=The%20upgrade%2C%20which%20I%20like,quality% 20as%20well%20as%20quantity. Accessed September 21, 2020. Stumpf, S. S., Dunbar, R. L. M., & Mullen, T. P. (1991). Developing entrepreneurial skills through the use of behavioural simulations. Journal of Management Development, 10(5), 32–45. Szilagyi, A. D., & Schweiger, D. M. (1984). Matching managers to strategies: A review and suggested framework. Academy of Management Review, 9(4), 626–637. Tang, X., Wang, M., Guo, J., & Salmela-Aro, K. (2019). Building grit: The longitudinal pathways between mindset, commitment, grit, and academic outcomes. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 48(5), 850–863. Teal, E. J., & Hofer, C. W. (2001). Key attributes of the founding entrepreneurial team of rapidly growing ventures. Journal of Private Equity, 4(2), 19–31. Timmons, J. A., Smollen, L. E., & Dingee, A. L. M. (1985). New venture creation (2nd ed.). Irwin Publishing. Towers, N., Santoso, A. S., Sulkowski, N., & Jameson, J. (2020). Entrepreneurial capacity-building in HEIs for embedding entrepreneurship and enterprise creation – a tripartite approach. International Journal of Retail & Distribution, 48(8), 881–899.

18

T. S. LYONS ET AL.

Vasconcelos, J. B., Kimble, C., & Rocha, A. (2016). A particular issue on knowledge and competence management: Developing enterprise solutions. Information Systems Frontiers, 18, 1035–1039. Viswathanan, R., Fontenot, G., & Hoffman, L. (1992). Skill development through small business Institute consultations: An exploratory empirical investigation. Journal of Business & Entrepreneurship, 4(2), 1–9. Zimmerman, J. (2012). Using business plans for teaching entrepreneurship. American Journal of Business Education (Online), 5(6). https://doi.org/10. 19030/ajbe.v516.7395

CHAPTER 2

An Appropriate Response: A Skills Development Framework

In this chapter, we layout a conceptual framework for a skill development perspective to entrepreneurship development. There are several clear implications of this paradigmatic shift away from the idea of entrepreneurship as a trait to a set of teachable skills. First, with skills theory, entrepreneur development is no longer a “selection” challenge— finding the true entrepreneur. Skill development requires teaching and coaching—it is a vocational and educational challenge. While traits theory implies a selection challenge (find the right person), a skill framework implies that it is more important to learn the right skills. Although it may remain an open question whether some potential entrepreneurs develop specific skills more or less easily than others, the basic notion of skill development is egalitarian—anyone could potentially develop the required skills to become a successful entrepreneur. Entrepreneur development then becomes an effort to teach the necessary skills. Ironically, while traits theory leads to a focus on business development—once you have the right person, it is all about the business plan/process—skills theory leads to a focus on personal development: once an entrepreneur acquires the required skills they can design and implement a successful business plan, among other things. The second consideration arises directly from the first. With a shift to skill development, the enterprise of entrepreneur development becomes, itself, a different type of business. Using Pine and Gilmore’s © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 T. S. Lyons et al., Entrepreneurship Skill Building, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-77920-7_2

19

20

T. S. LYONS ET AL.

Fig. 2.1 The hierarchy of economic offerings (Source Pine and Gilmore [1999], Praed Foundation [2021], April Fernando, Ph.D.)

(1999) hierarchy of offerings (see Fig. 2.1), traditional approaches to entrepreneur development would be classified as “services”—once the right entrepreneur candidate is identified, they would be provided capital and other resources to use in order to make their business idea a successful reality. In our paradigm shift, entrepreneur development becomes a “transformational offering.” The goal is to help entrepreneurs develop— to change fundamentally as a direct outcome of an entrepreneurial skills development initiative. In this way of thinking, entrepreneur development has more akin to educational and therapeutic approaches than to traditional concepts of business development. This reconceptualization is the reason for the collaboration on this book between the Lyons brothers— Tom with a career focus on entrepreneurship and John with a career focus on managing behavioral health systems. Learnings over the last several decades from each of these two fields when put together allow a paradigm shift in entrepreneur development from marshalling necessary resources into developing key entrepreneurial skills.

Entrepreneur Development as a Transformational Offering It is instructive to review Gilmore and Pine’s Hierarchy of Offerings in order to establish the implications of considering entrepreneur development as a transformational offering (Fig. 2.1). In this inventory of market

2

AN APPROPRIATE RESPONSE: A SKILLS DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK

21

places, these two economists identify five basic types of businesses in ascending order of the challenges to their management. Commodities are basic raw materials and these markets are the easiest to manage— in part because there are fewer customers. Not everyone is interested in purchasing commodities. In fact, the customers of commodities are generally businesses operating at the second level of this hierarchy— producers. One can take a commodity and produce something more readily accessible for a wider market—this is the business of Products. Services, the third most difficult type of business to manage, are businesses in which a service is provided to the customer—dry cleaners, butchers, and restaurants are common services. It is noteworthy that as we ascend Gilmore & Pine’s hierarchy, the complexity of the market places increases—more people are involved representing different perspectives and priorities. Experiences involve the production and sales of memories—theater, sporting events, and amusement parks are exemplars. Perhaps the Disney Corporation is the best-known business whose primary interest is in creating and managing experiences. However, sport leagues and hobbyist groups also fit this category of market place. Finally, the most difficult businesses to manage are transformational offerings. These businesses provide opportunities for personal change. Most aspect of the health system, fitness and wellbeing enterprises, and educational and vocational programs all are best understood as businesses dedicated to promoting personal change. There are critical and fundamental differences between managing a service and managing a transformational opportunity. Given our skill development emphasis, we believe that entrepreneur development should be considered a transformational offering with its primary objective being the reliable and effective development of key skills related to entrepreneurial success. While some readers might experience this as a simple rebranding exercise, the actual implications of reconsidering entrepreneur development as a transformational offering are dramatic. It is a very different undertaking to manage teaching people how to fish relative to serving them a fish dinner. For example, we know that simply giving a prospective entrepreneur the necessary capital to launch their business is not generally successful (Lichtenstein & Lyons, 2010). A primary way in which a transformational offering differs from a service is in the need to move away from “one-size-fits-all” program designs to models in which individuals are met where they are in terms of

22

T. S. LYONS ET AL.

readiness to succeed. Not all entrepreneurs start their journey of building a new business with the same set of skills. In addition, each skill has a separate and distinct learning curve. Customizing entrepreneurial development plans to fit the individual entrepreneur’s current skill level as required in entrepreneurial development is to be truly transformational for the prospective entrepreneur. In a later edition of their book, The Experience Economy, Pine and Gilmore (2011) propose that in order to potentiate the business of personal change (i.e., a transformational offering), the process should start with a notable personal experience. Figure 2.2 lays out a continuum provided by these authors for considering how an enterprise might choose to create such experiences as a routine business function. On the one extreme of this continuum is mass production. Mass production is an inexpensive and efficient business approach—the engine of the industrial revolution. However, in our example, that approach translates into treating all potential entrepreneurs exactly the same—like building a car on an assembly line. As Pine and Gilmore discuss, mass production approaches when applied to humans can be both off-putting and ineffective—unlikely to generate the type of positive personal experience necessary to create an opportunity for personal change. The problem with a mass production model is that it assumes everyone starts at exactly the same place. We know that is simply not true when it comes to aspiring entrepreneurs. On the other side of this continuum is individualization. In the extreme on this side of the continuum, everyone is treated as if they are entirely different from everyone else. This idea, while perhaps appealing in a humanistic way, is unworkable in a business environment. If everyone was indeed completely different, there would be nothing that we could

Fig. 2.2 Continuum of production (Source Pine and Gilmore [2011], Praed Foundation [2021], April Fernando, Ph.D.)

2

AN APPROPRIATE RESPONSE: A SKILLS DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK

23

do to help. We do not decide how we can help based on how people are different—we decide this based on how people are the same (while respecting differences). That is the only way learning processes can proceed. If everyone was entirely different, there is nothing to learn. It would be impossible to develop a model of entrepreneur development if there were no common skills, strategies and goals. Pine and Gilmore (2011) propose a compromise position, which they label “Mass Customization.” In this approach, common themes or components of the business are identified and available (i.e., mass) but the combination of these components can be adjusted (i.e., customized) to fit the specific circumstance of the customer. The business case they use in their book is “Build a Bear.” This business allows children to customize a teddy bear to their own specifications. However, the store provides the component parts. The child simply chooses the parts they desire and assembles those components into a bear. At the end of the construction process, the child feels like it is “their” bear rather than simply a bear picked off the store shelf that is just like every other bear. Note that the store did not expect children to build a bear “from scratch” but rather mass-produced component parts. The business then allowed children to customize their selection of these mass-produced components. This mass customization allowed the child to experience “individualization” but with sufficient efficiency to make the business economically feasible. Some businesses now also use this approach when they are providing a service (e.g., cell phone and insurance companies) by seeking to mass customize plans. This approach allows these businesses to create an experience in what customers will encounter as an enhancement of their service. Businesses that propose to engage in personal change increasingly embrace this approach as well. Often this stage of a transformational offering is called “engagement” (Bowden, 2009; Schneider et al., 2005). The implication of mass customization for the field of entrepreneur skills development would suggest that a “one size fits all” approach to helping emerging entrepreneurs is likely to be less successful as compared to an approach that adjusts the entrepreneur’s skill development work to their current level of development on each relevant skill. Mass customization requires an assessment to determine skill levels of the entrepreneur in development. This thinking is the foundation of the Readiness Inventory for Successful Entrepreneurship (RISE).

24

T. S. LYONS ET AL.

You Cannot Manage What You Do not Measure Anyone who has ever had the responsibility for managing a budget knows from firsthand experience that it is very difficult to do so without regular and accurate information on revenues and expenditures. In the absence of timely information about income and spending, it is exceptionally easy to over- or under-spend on allocations. That experience is the result of one of the absolute truths of management. You cannot effectively manage things that you fail to measure. You can pretend to. You can delude yourself into thinking that you can. However, you absolutely cannot manage what you do not measure. If you are not tracking inventory, at some point, you will likely end up with too much or too little. If a company does not track employee sick days and vacation, they may have difficulties maintaining productivity due to excessive absences over the long run. If you can’t manage what you don’t measure, then all successful businesses must have an intentional strategy regarding what information they require in order to successfully manage their business. Failure to do so generally results in failure of the business over time. In this way, a key business decision is what to measure. Of course, the decision on the necessary metrics should be driven by the aspirations of the business. As such, if the business of entrepreneur development involves developing the skills of participating entrepreneurs, then it is obviously necessary to measure those skills to assess (1) the status of skill development at initiation of development efforts, and (2) progress made in terms of the development of these core skills over time and intervention. Only with these metrics, is it possible to run a long-term successful entrepreneur development program. We can only “fake it” for so long. This is the reason that we developed the Readiness Inventory for Successful Entrepreneurship (RISE). If entrepreneur development programs are to become successful skill building interventions, then it is necessary to identify which skills exactly should be developed and then to measure progress on that skill development journey over the course of program participation. The assessment of skills is a critical component of any skill-building entrepreneur development initiative.

You Cannot Measure What You Do not Define Accepting the premise that metrics on skills are an essential component of any entrepreneurial development process that embraces skills theory over traits theory, it becomes important to understand the theories by

2

AN APPROPRIATE RESPONSE: A SKILLS DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK

25

which measures can be designed and developed. Although multiple theories of measurement exist, all agree that valid measurement requires the operationalization of a target construct. If we cannot operationalize a construct, measurement is not possible. Merriam-Webster’s online dictionary efficiently defines “operationalize” to mean “to make operational”. Operationalization is the essence of measurement. Failure to articulate and carefully define a target construct will lead to a failure in measurement. In our context, it then becomes essential to clearly identify and define (i.e., to make operational) key entrepreneur skills so that a measurement process can be used to provide metrics to be managed, thereby facilitating a successful entrepreneur development process. While there are multiple theories of measurement, we embrace the communimetric theory (Lyons, 2009) as the approach most suited to facilitating the operationalization of skill constructs in a transformational management framework. The communimetric measurement approach as it applies to the RISE will be discussed in detail in Chapter 3.

Complexity and Managing Personal Change One of the reasons communimetrics was developed was to assist in the management of complexity. All systems involving more than one person are defined as complex. The more people involved, the more complex an organization or system becomes. Therefore, an important concept of transformational management in helping systems is the idea of complex adaptive systems. Complexity arises because no two people ever see the same thing in exactly the same way. Determining how to make this complexity into an adaptive learning environment is an important key to transformational development. Anything that requires more than one component part can be considered a system. Currently, the science of systems theory makes an important distinction between two fundamentally distinct types of systems: complicated systems and complex systems (Sargut & McGrath, 2011). Complicated systems are systems in which the components are 100% predictable. An automobile would be considered a complicated system. Complex systems are those in which the component parts are not as predictable. The most common examples of complex systems are those involving multiple people. It is important to consider the important similarities and critical differences between these two types of systems. Both complicated and complex

26

T. S. LYONS ET AL.

systems have many active components or “moving parts” (Note: with the advent of the computer, many active parts do not “move” in perceptible ways, although some form of movement does occur). With both types of systems, the only way for the system to achieve optimal function is for those moving parts to be fully coordinated with each other through continuous, simultaneous, and perfect communication. This reality is true of both complicated and complex systems. In both types of systems, the component parts must be fully integrated (i.e., work together) for the system to function. No system works if the components of that system fail to interact/communicate with the other components of the system. Optimal performance of any system requires perfect continuous communication. While the similarities are dramatic, it is the distinctions between complicated and complex systems that are crucial to considering the nature of entrepreneur development. We offer two analogies. Complicated systems are far easier to integrate because the component parts are mechanical and, therefore, as described above, predictable. Traditional engineering approaches work exceedingly well to optimize complicated systems. Telephones no longer require cables, have shrunk in size, and have dramatically increased in functionality. Many mobile telephones now have the storage capacity and computing power of desktop computers from just a few years ago and of mainframe computers from the end of the last century. Enormous rockets routinely blast off to help resupply astronauts in an orbiting space station. These same rockets have also been safely landed back on earth on floating sea-borne platforms so that they can be re-used. Each of these successes can be attributed to engineering solutions that successfully use breakthroughs in science to support solutions that integrate and/or coordinate an enormous number of component parts into a well-functioning whole. The successful operation of a complicated system requires the full integration of all its components so that all parts are working together to achieve the objective of the system. The working parts of helping systems are people rather than mechanical parts. People, with their shifting perceptions of situations and goals, introduce a source of unpredictability that is uncharacteristic of machine parts. Because of the greater challenge in predicting human behavior, traditional engineering solutions cannot be directly applied to complex (human) systems. While much can be learned based on the success of engineering solutions with machines, there is a strong argument that

2

AN APPROPRIATE RESPONSE: A SKILLS DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK

27

organizations of people are not fully understood when thought of from a machine perspective (Collins, 2010; Stacey, 2001). While artificial intelligence (AI) can conceivably replace humans in many machine functions and activities, humans cannot conceivably replace AI. Though an engineering metaphor may be useful for some binary behaviors of persons in well-controlled circumstances, complex systems largely defy the hierarchical order and linear progress which the term “engineering” often implies (c.f. Kurtz & Snowden, 2003). In complex systems, it is not possible to always and invariably predict the behavior of all component parts all of the time. Nor is it possible to establish perfect simultaneous communication. Given this lack of predictability regarding human decisions and behaviors and the challenges of communication across people, recent work in a number of scientific fields has shifted to an analysis of complexity to bring a scientific lens to large, diverse organizations comprised of multiple people. The diversity of actions and functions that exist within such systems underscore their complexity. The more people, the more complexity, as every person has at least some decision-making authority in every human organization. While multi-component systems are by definition complicated, they also are generally non-linear. The actions of complicated machinery, such as an airplane, involve the coordinated effort of thousands of parts working in a carefully designed ensemble. Yet, the cause and effect relationship between these parts is linear and predictable. The rules governing their actions are known and specific outcomes can be expected. Complex systems, on the other hand, are in most cases not linear in either their actions or effects. The behaviors of persons in large-scale human organizations are subject to myriad influences both immediately present and existing in each person’s past experiences. In addition, factors outside of the organization can influence the decision-making and behavior of people within the organization as almost all people are involved in multiple complex systems. For example, what is happening with your family at home can influence what you do at work. A shared experience with a child can inform how that parent solves a problem at work. These myriad potential factors include social influence, bounded rationality, competing or conflicting directives, and the ability to see outside of the local context (Kurtz & Snowden, 2003; Prottas, 1979). People in complex systems adapt and learn from their experiences in the system (Lizier, 2017). Thus, unlike complicated systems, complex

28

T. S. LYONS ET AL.

systems incorporate feedback from the experience of people in the system and are in a perpetual state of adaptation based on that feedback. This experiential feedback loop is the “intelligence” in AI. Humans have been using experiential feedback in learning since the beginnings of the species. This iterative process of adaptation provides a large number of non-linear loops in causal chains within each person and across any organization. Though complex, these adaptive processes provide a window into the opportunities to assist these systems to evolve into more efficient and effective organizations. Consider the following situations. The first is a 42-year-old single mother of two pre-teen children who wishes to open a flower shop. For the past five years, she has worked as an assistant manager at a grocery chain store and has moonlighted doing floral arrangements for friends and acquaintances. She seeks assistance from a business incubation program. The second situation involves a 31-year-old recent immigrant from Central America who is currently unmarried and has no children. He has worked for three years helping with a friend’s cleaning business and now wishes to start his own business cleaning offices. The third situation is a 58-year-old executive in a sporting goods firm who has come up with an idea for a locker organizer for golfers that he wishes to take to market outside of his company. All three of these situations would be descriptive of the types of people who seek entrepreneur development support. And all three circumstances are quite different. The needs of each are different. The skill backgrounds are different. The likely relationship between each of these individuals and any given coach would be different. The social and familial context in which the entrepreneur would be trying to succeed would be different. These are all examples of the complexities that challenge the effective provision of transformational offerings. There are even complexities in the level of skill assessment that arise. Surveys have shown, for example, that 80% of physicians describe themselves as “above average.” While we would recommend not seeking health care from one of the self-identified 20% who considers themselves average or below, it is clear that many physicians overestimate their skill level. As we will discuss in greater detail in Chapter 3, there are disparities between peoples’ views of their own skills versus the assessment of others of the same skills. We only have to watch opening episodes of the widely popular talent discovery shows to find people who dramatically overestimate their skills and others who dramatically underestimate their skills.

2

AN APPROPRIATE RESPONSE: A SKILLS DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK

29

Any prospective entrepreneur’s assessment of their own skills offers an important complexity when compared to the assessment of people who are operating a business incubator, considering a venture capital investment, or evaluating a business plan. This is a fundamental complexity management challenge in entrepreneur development work which we will address in detail in Chapter 3. The reality of the lack of perfect predictability in complex systems does not mean that it is impossible to manage a complex system effectively. It does mean that the approaches to management and problem-solving in that system will be notably different compared to strategies that are effective for managing and problem-solving in a complicated system. Table 2.1 compares some basic differences between the management of complicated and complex systems. It can be useful to consider these differences in conceptualizing how to best operate any entrepreneur development initiative. Table 2.1 makes it clear that complicated systems are top-down systems in which there is an established “truth”; understanding and managing toward that truth creates a more effective system. There is a set strategy for designing and building an airplane. Although design teams in aeronautical engineering are useful to ensure a thorough consideration of options, you do not build a plane by committee. Complex systems cannot use the same approach, although it is often tried. Complex systems require constant feedback and adjustment based on learned experiences in an environment that is never fully predictable. Benjamin Franklin famously said, “Tell me and I forget. Teach me and I remember. Involve me and I learn.” Put simply, engaging people in the ongoing solution is the central Table 2.1 Effective management differences between a complicated versus complex system

Complicated systems

Complex systems

Role clarity Hierarchical decision-making (top-down) Tight structure Knowing (evidence-based practice)

Relationship building Collective interpretation (collaborative) Loose coupling Learning (practice-based evidence) Innovation and evolution

Staying the course (compliance to process) Source Adapted from Allen (2016)

30

T. S. LYONS ET AL.

task of the management of a complex system, rather than telling people what to do. It is instructive for us to consider the work involved in a skillsbased system to develop entrepreneurs. The process, of course, begins with the potential entrepreneur. Then there is either an educator or a coach, or sometimes both. Most educators/coaches work within an organization; so, that increases the number of people, resulting in greater complexity. All entrepreneurs have to, at minimum, work with one or more potential or actual customers and often have business partners, associates, and possibly employees. A business coach will likely work with the entrepreneur to facilitate further development of their professional network as a strategy to advance their business; however, a college/university educator might not. All of these involved parties enter into the relationship for the specific business enterprise with different experiences, perspectives, and sometimes even different goals and objectives. If we are going to help aspiring entrepreneurs become successful in their new enterprises, we must first master the complexity ourselves and then help those entrepreneurs master their own complex circumstances. We believe that these efforts require a comprehensive approach to rethinking the work of entrepreneur development. For this, we have borrowed from our work in other transformational sectors.

Transformational Collaborative Outcomes Management (TCOM) In order to create an integrated approach to address the issues raised above, we have proposed a conceptual framework for managing helping systems called Transformational Collaborative Outcomes Management (see TCOMConversations.org). TCOM was first published in 2004 as Total Clinical Outcomes Management (Lyons, 2004). This branding was a result of the debate at the time between quality management, which focuses on business processes, and outcomes management, which focuses on business outcomes. In health care, that debate is no longer relevant as it has become clear that a focus on process without attention to impact is not effective. Similarly, a focus on impact without attention to processes needed to deliver those outcomes is also ineffective. In 2014, we re-branded TCOM as Transformational Collaborative Outcomes Management (Lyons & Israel, 2014) in order to capture

2

AN APPROPRIATE RESPONSE: A SKILLS DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK

31

how this approach to outcomes management differs from other current strategies. Transformational: This term was selected to emphasize that the primary common objective of all helping enterprises is to assist in personal change. Status at the end of a helping experience is not an outcome in the TCOM framework as it creates problems of adverse selection. If a program wants good “outcomes” at the end of program implementation, simply select participants who already have those good outcomes. A focus on personal change shifts the incentive to taking on people with needs since those with the greatest needs generally demonstrate the greatest change. In entrepreneurial skill development, that translates into taking on potential entrepreneurs who do not currently have the skills they need to be successful and helping them build those skills. Venture capital investment programs are intended for entrepreneurs who have already developed business plans and skills. Entrepreneur development should prepare potential entrepreneurs to successfully apply for such funding. Collaborative: As mentioned above, collaboration is the fundamental strategy necessary to manage complex systems. However, creating an atmosphere where everyone is working together can be challenging. A colleague once defined “collaboration” as unnatural acts among nonconsenting adults (Karl Francis, 1997, personal communication). While this is arguably hyperbole, the key characteristic of successful collaboration is finding a common aspiration or shared vision of the reason to work together. In business that can be the success of the start-up enterprise. In entrepreneur development, that is likely (hopefully) the success of each entrepreneur working to develop their skills. Failure to have shared goals results in conflicts and even sabotage of success. In complex human systems, collaboration is generally required for optimal functioning. Figure 2.3 provides the TCOM model of collaboration. It consists of some generally shared values, without which collaboration is difficult if not impossible. We need to be thoughtful and clear in our approach to working with others. These concepts are described in the values of conscience, judiciousness, and being explicit. Taking personal responsibility for that for which you are responsible is a central common value. The interactional components involve how we relate to one another. The structural components are the characteristics necessary for an organization to successfully implement a collaborative decision-making approach in day-to-day business operations. Although collaboration represents a

32

T. S. LYONS ET AL.

Fig. 2.3 Collaboration within a TCOM framework (Source Praed Foundation [2021], April Fernando, Ph.D.)

“flat” organization, it is not possible without leadership. Real-world limitations must always be considered to not over-promise the degree to which decision-making is shared. Outcomes: TCOM is flexible across all forms of helping because while it focuses on personal change and collaborative solutions, it is agnostic about the definition of an outcome. While outcomes are always defined in terms of personal change within a TCOM framework, the exact nature of that change depends on the specific goals of the helping enterprise. In our case, the outcomes of interest would be an observable change in the skill level of the potential entrepreneur. For this reason, it becomes a management priority to consistently and reliably measure and monitor the existing skill sets in entrepreneurs involved in development initiatives. Management: Management is the most difficult part of TCOM. Learning to manage transformational offerings has less history or knowledge base from which to work. Since most transformational offerings have been historically managed as if they were merely services, we have far less cultural experience managing change processes. The key to building our capacity to learn how to manage these types of enterprises focused on personal change is first to define and then to measure that change. In

2

AN APPROPRIATE RESPONSE: A SKILLS DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK

33

this way, metrics of change can be used to determine what works best, what works at all, and what does not work or is even potentially harmful. Matching our knowledge of what works should of course be our knowledge of “for whom.” So ultimately, TCOM involves mass customizing interventions to match presenting skills or needs. Creating a measurement infrastructure on entrepreneurial skills is the foundation of rethinking the nature of entrepreneur development from a skills perspective. We believe that the RISE represents an important starting point for this infrastructure development. For this reason, the next chapter describes the measurement theory and process used to develop the RISE.

Organizing the Process of Helping While no two helping systems are exactly alike, all helping enterprises share a common process. This process is replicated in any skill-building entrepreneur development program or initiative. Figure 2.4 presents the six basic stages of all helping processes. Access: The first stage of helping is to determine who is identified to participate. In health care, this would include the concepts of eligibility and medical necessity. In entrepreneur development, in a broader concept of the access process, it would be relevant to consider including how prospective entrepreneurs hear about the program and how they might get the funding necessary to attend. At minimum, access would be restricted to people who have an idea for a new business and the requisite motivation to do the hard work of skill-building. If mass customization

Fig. 2.4 Key stages in helping systems (Source Praed Foundation [2021])

34

T. S. LYONS ET AL.

is not available within the program, then consideration should be given to the skill level of potential participants. You would not want participants who are either under- or over-prepared to optimally benefit from the program design. So, assessment of “readiness” for any program is an important consideration at the point of access. Assessment and Engagement: As discussed previously, in a skills development approach to entrepreneur development, it is necessary to assess the specific skill levels of participants in order to determine which and at what level skill development intervention is required. Assessment is a required component of managing helping endeavors. For example, one aspiring entrepreneur might need assistance building their networking skills. Another might need to learn bookkeeping. A third candidate might know aspects of their business well but has not yet learned the laws and regulations under which they would have to manage a new business in that field. Other candidates might have two of these skill development needs or might even need to develop all of them. A skill development program must know where each participant stands on their skill development if that program is to effectively facilitate the acquisition of skills. Simultaneous to the assessment process, it is important for programs or initiatives to effectively engage participants so that they will fully invest in the opportunities offered. We believe that the assessment process can go a long way toward establishing program engagement through the concept of mass customization described above. By spending time individually with a prospective entrepreneur and having (potentially difficult) conversations with them about their current skill level across a range of important skills, our experience has been that this process alone demonstrates a level of caring about the individual which is the fundamental tenet of engagement. The process by which a development program discusses the candidate entrepreneur’s current level of skills becomes an important way of joining with that individual to build a shared understanding of the work ahead if they are to be successful in their future endeavor. Intervention/Planning/Delivery: This third stage of a helping system is when the work of development occurs. In a skill-building model, this is when programming is initiated that assists prospective entrepreneurs in developing skills that they will need for their business success.

2

AN APPROPRIATE RESPONSE: A SKILLS DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK

35

A broad-based skill development program likely will not provide skill building experiences for every key ability for any particular business. It would be a rare program that could offer everything from network building to bookkeeping to operations management, etc. More likely an effective development program would serve as a point of triage. The areas of skill development needs would be identified in the assessment/engagement phase and while some programming might be provided “in-house,” the aspiring entrepreneur also would be linked to external resources and support to create opportunities for comprehensive skill building, without the development program incurring the expense of covering all possible skills. Monitoring and Adapting: The fourth stage of a helping system involves monitoring feedback and adapting the intervention to help ensure desired performance outcomes are attained. Within a transformation-based skill-building initiative, it is necessary to monitor progress in the program and adjust the interventions when things are not working or end the interventions as soon as the skills are built to the desired level. Without the use of feedback in terms of what is working or not, it is not possible to adjust to ensure that the program is effective either for an individual participant or for the program in its entirety. Feedback and learning are fundamental to the adaptation of complex systems. Intentional use of ongoing assessment processes to support this critical role is required. Coordination and Case Management: This fifth stage of helping systems might sound a bit foreign to an entrepreneur development initiative, but in health care and other helping sectors, it is a vital part of a successful transformational experience. Someone with knowledge of the intricacies of the system of supports and interventions works with the person being helped to assist them in moving from program to program or to help them access resources that can be challenging to identify and secure. In entrepreneur development, this is often the role of a coach. The coach serves as a mentor and facilitator but also helps link the entrepreneur to valuable resources both within and outside the program. Transitioning: The sixth and final stage of a helping system is where the person being helped leaves the program or system. In health care, this stage is typically called “discharge” (which is an unfortunate choice of words arising out of a plumbing metaphor for the system). In an entrepreneur development enterprise, this stage is when the entrepreneur

36

T. S. LYONS ET AL.

is ready to go out on their own to succeed or fail based on their idea and abilities. The key question at this stage is how does a development program “know” that an entrepreneur is now ready to succeed. Some programs just work a curriculum and then end. But in this mass production model, the assumption is that everyone leaves at the same level, equally prepared. In transformational approaches, the decision to end an individual’s participation in the intervention is customized to when that individual meets an established threshold of personal change. The program “dose” necessary to get different individuals to this threshold is likely to be different adding to the importance of mass customization. In the case of skill development, the threshold would be when a skill has been developed sufficiently to be operational in the entrepreneur’s business enterprise. In a college or university entrepreneurship education environment, this may suggest that the student entrepreneur’s skill development work may need to continue beyond graduation. Chapter 1 has made the argument that entrepreneur development should be centered on skill building and that education programs that seek to facilitate the next generation of successful entrepreneurs should make that their focus. This chapter presents a conceptual framework about how these programs can conceptualize themselves as being in the business of personal change. That reconceptualization requires a strategy for the measurement of skills. Chapter 3 presents the RISE which is the skill measurement strategy that we have developed and implemented to address this need.

References Allen, W. (2016). Complicated or complex – knowing the difference is important. Learning for Sustainability. Accessed March 2, 2021. learningforsustainability.net/post/complicated-complex Bowden, J.L.-H. (2009). The process of customer engagement: A conceptual framework. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 17 (1), 63–74. Collins, R. (2010). Leadership in the wiki world: Leveraging collective knowledge to make the leap to extraordinary performance. Dog Ear Publishing. Kurtz, C. F., & Snowden, D. J. (2003). The new dynamics of strategy: Sensemaking in a complex and complicated world. IBM Systems Journal, 42(3), 462–483.

2

AN APPROPRIATE RESPONSE: A SKILLS DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK

37

Lichtenstein, G. A., & Lyons, T. S. (2010). Investing in entrepreneurs: A strategic approach for strengthening your regional and community economy. Praeger/ABC-CLIO. Lizier, A. L. (2017). Investigating work and learning through complex adaptive organisations. Journal of Workplace Learning, 29(7/8), 554–565. Lyons, J. S. (2004). Redressing the emperor: Improving our children’s public mental health system. Praeger. Lyons, J. S. (2009). Communimetrics: A communication theory of measurement for human services. Springer. Lyons, J. S., & Israel. N. (2014). Introducing transformational collaborative outcomes management. 14th Annual CANS/TCOM Conference, Chicago, IL, USA, October. Pine, B. J., II., & Gilmore, J. H. (1999). The experience economy: Work is theatre & every business is a stage. Harvard Business Review Press. Pine, B. J., II., & Gilmore, J. H. (2011). The experience economy (updated). Harvard Business Review Press. Praed Foundation. (2021). Transformational Collaborative Outcomes Management—Overview. Child and Adolescent Needs and Strengths. Retrieved July 13, 2021, from https://praedfoundation.org. Prottas, J. M. (1979). People-processing: The street-level bureaucrat in public service bureaucaricies. Lexington Books. Sargut, G., & McGrath, R. G. (2011). Learning to live with complexity. Harvard Business Review, 89(9), 68–76, 136. Schneider, B., Ehrhart, M. G., Mayer, D. M., Saltz, J. L., & Niles-Jolly, K. (2005). Understanding organization-customer links in service settings. Academy of Management Journal, 48(6), 1017–1032. Stacey, R. D. (2001). Complex responsive process in organizations: Learning and knowledge Creation. Routledge.

CHAPTER 3

The RISE of a Clinical Approach to Skills Assessment

Entrepreneur development programs have many choices in terms of how they might elect to measure skills. However, any program that conceptualizes entrepreneurship as a set of skills must make this decision. In order to remain consistent with the TCOM framework and create an efficient and collaborative assessment process, we have created the Readiness Inventory for Successful Entrepreneurship (RISE) as mentioned in Chapter 2. To achieve the aspirations of TCOM we have used the communimetric measurement theory (Lyons, 2009). In this chapter we describe this theory and contrast it to traditional theories of measurement. We then describe the development, structure and uses of the RISE. As discussed in the previous chapter, if a principle goal of entrepreneur development should involve building the skills of the prospective entrepreneur, then any successful program must first understand that entrepreneur’s current skill set and have the ability to monitor skill development as it occurs. This is a basic requirement of successfully managing an entrepreneur development initiative as a transformational offering (Pine & Gilmore, 1999). Decisions must be made about how to accurately and efficiently assess skill level to support working in this paradigm. Until recently most approaches to the measurement of human factors have been guided by psychometric theories of measurement (Lyons, 2009). The same is true of formal measurement in the field of © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 T. S. Lyons et al., Entrepreneurship Skill Building, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-77920-7_3

39

40

T. S. LYONS ET AL.

entrepreneurship (c.f., a list of approaches to measuring entrepreneur orientation, Lumpkin & Dess, 1996). The field of psychology is home to most of both the original and current work on measurement beginning with the seminal work of the Cavendish Physics Laboratory. Here, Stephen Cattel and Sir Francis Galton invented the field of psychometrics beginning in 1887. (Note: Sir Francis Galton was also the originator of the theory of eugenics which evolved into Nazism in the following century and White Supremacy theories currently). In the next century, Joy Guilford (1936, 1954) and then Jum Nunnally (1978) published what many consider to be the classic texts on the original theory of psychometrics, Classical Test Theory. Also, in the twentieth century, the field of education has contributed to measurement, beginning in the 1940s in Europe (Rasch, 1960) and brought to the United States by such luminaries of the field of measurement as Benjamin Wright (e.g., Wright & Masters, 1982). Item Response Theory has arisen as an alternative theory within the psychometric tradition. For purposes of this book, we will provide a brief review of each of these theories.

Classical Test Theory Classical Test Theory proposes that there exists a universe of all possible items that could be included in a measure—a universe of possible items to sample. In Classical Test Theory, a good measure adequately (i.e., randomly) samples this universe of all possibilities. The idea is that a random sample of questions taken from the population of all possible questions of a particular construct could be added together to provide a reliable and valid measure of that construct. There is an obvious limitation to this theory. It is, of course, impossible to fully enumerate any population of items—all possible questions for a survey of a specific skill, for example. To evaluate a classical measure, a correlation matrix among a brain-stormed sample of items is used. A total score is created by combining items into a linear combination of items (i.e., a sum). Evaluation of items then is done by studying the correlation of an individual item with all other items and with the total score. Nunnally (1978) recommended that good items have inter-item and item-to-total scale score correlations in the 0.30 to 0.60 range, indicating that the item is measuring a similar construct but is not fully redundant with other items. Logically under this theory, the more items in a measure, the better the ability of that measure to accurately describe the universe of

3

THE RISE OF A CLINICAL APPROACH TO SKILLS ASSESSMENT

41

possible items. Research suggests that somewhere around 30 items is optimal to measure a construct well, while 10 items is often identified as a minimum standard (Nunnally, 1978). In Classical Test Theory, many items are required in order to measure one thing.

Item Response Theory The measurement theory arising out of the field of education is Item Response Theory (IRT). Here the goal of measurement is conceptualized as the task of determining the location of an individual on an unseen continuum relative to all other individuals. If social networking were seen as a skill, where does each entrepreneur stand in relationship to all others on this continuum from no skill at all to world’s leading expert. Prospective items are thought to exist at different levels of “difficulty,” “severity,” or “intensity” along this continuum. For example, being able to relate to others is an “easy” aspect of social networking. Being able to maintain multiple, complex relationships despite competing agendas is a more difficult aspect of social networking. The sampling of items should be based on the degree to which items effectively represent the full continuum. An effective measure samples across all relevant levels of intensity or difficulty. The goal of measurement is to find items that are sensitive at different degrees of intensity or severity along this latent trait. For example, if we are measuring math mastery, an easy item is sensitive on the low range of a math skills continuum, such as simple addition. A subtraction item would be more difficult and sensitive at a higher range of math abilities. Multiplication items are still more difficult, followed by division. Matrix algebra or the calculation of a derivative would be solvable only by a respondent with very strong math skills and would only be sensitive at the highest ranges of the math skills. Most respondents would fail a matrix algebra item, but it would separate out levels among the most math talented respondents. In IRT item difficulties (the percent of people who get the question “correct”) are used to order items that fit along a latent trait. Complex approaches to IRT can use many parameters beyond item difficulty that can be derived from the statistical behavior of each item, but nearly all approaches include at minimum the difficulty parameter (Lord, 1980). While IRT also requires multiple items to measure a characteristic, it does have a logical minimum of two items (i.e., you cannot have a line/continuum without at least two points). As with Classical Test Theory, it is always better to have more good items than fewer.

42

T. S. LYONS ET AL.

Common Characteristics of Psychometric Measures Across Specific Theories Whether one uses CTT or IRT to develop a psychometrically sound measure, the most important information used by the developer is the statistical relationship between and among items. It is the statistical “performance” of the items that informs the measurement developer regarding their decisions about item inclusion and fit. And in terms of at least some forms of reliability (i.e., internal consistency), these same metrics are used to help define the quality of the measure. CTT uses correlation coefficients and IRT uses difficulty metrics and other fit statistics (i.e., depending on the number of parameters in the model used). While sophisticated approaches to both theories support strategies like cognitive testing of items to ensure that some attention is paid to what respondents believe the item means, the final decision regarding inclusion or exclusion of a specific item into a measure will be guided by the statistical characteristics of each item relative to the other items (c.f., Furr & Bacharach, 2014). There are notable implications of this common feature of all psychometric theories: 1. All psychometric measures require multiple items. CTT generally requires a minimum of 10 items but the ideal measure has at least 30 items (Nunnally, 1978). IRT has been reported to be functional with as few as two items; however, the ideal measure, again, has more items to ensure appropriate scale sensitivity across the continuum. 2. Decisions on test construction are based on the statistical relationship among items. While a number of theorists have suggested various methods of ensuring that the actual linguistic content of the item should be studied to ensure that respondents understand the meaning of the item, there is little to no formal inclusion of these processes in the theories themselves (Nunnally, 1978; Wright & Masters, 1982). 3. The measure’s total score which is almost invariably a sum of items (Note: sometimes with a norming transformation applied) always results in arbitrary metrics (Blanton & Jaccard, 2006). Latent continua have no obvious grounding in reality (i.e., an unseen dimension that represents the construct being measured—we cannot

3

THE RISE OF A CLINICAL APPROACH TO SKILLS ASSESSMENT

43

see leadership, but we assume that there is this dimension of leadership that goes from low to high). 4. Since individual items are thought to be insufficiently reliable in psychometric theory, there is no pressure to make individual item rating scales non-arbitrary either. Generally, these measures rely on ratings of agreement, frequency, or intensity using Likert scales (e.g., completely agree, mostly agree, neither agree nor disagree, mostly disagree, completely disagree). 5. The same total score of a measure can result from a variety of different scores on individual items. Two respondents with identical total scores on the measure might actually look quite different on closer inspection. In other words, on a measure of ten items that each uses a 4-point Likert scale measure, 10 items rated a “2” would be equivalent in meaning to five items rated a “3” and five other items rated “1” or five items rated a “4”. The more items on a measure, the more varied the possible profiles of ratings that can result from the identical score. For this reason, translating a scale score back to an individual in a meaningful way can be quite challenging. This problem is particularly acute for classically developed measures but may also be true within IRT. Although IRT establishes a clear latent continuum, there is no clear relationship of any location on that continuum and actionable meaning. 6. Arbitrary metrics lead psychometricians to emphasize norming processes in order to provide a somewhat higher level of interpretability of the findings of the measure (c.f. Fryback et al., 2010).

The Problem with Norms As mentioned above, individual items on measures developed from psychometric theories generally use Likert-type scales of agreement, intensity/severity, or frequency, although some applications use yes/no or true/false item level scaling. Neither Classical Test nor Item Response Theory takes a consistent position on an item level scaling choice except as it impacts the statistical behavior of the items relative to each other

44

T. S. LYONS ET AL.

and the total scale score. While such rating strategies are not logically a requirement of the theories, there is a substantial amount of research over the past century on the best item designs within this basic logical framework (c.f., Furr, 2010; Schriesheim et al., 1993). IRT does differ from CTT in this regard, as IRT also supports mastery items (e.g., correct vs incorrect). Given this choice of item design, many psychometric measures guarantee their arbitrary nature even at the item level, as there is substantial research demonstrating response sets with Likert ratings (Likert, 1932). In other words, response biases can influence ratings so that one person’s rating of “moderate” or “somewhat agree” might be substantively different in either meaning or importance from another person’s rating under the same circumstances. (e.g., Podstaff et al., 2003; Reese et al., 2013). The concept of norms defines individuals within a population based on their relationship to the average of that population. Deviations from this average are described in multiple ways (e.g., T scores, z scores); however, because of the logic of the approach and the language used, there is a significant risk that deviations from population averages are defined as “deviant.” This natural semantic consequence of the theory of measurement creates challenges for cultural sensitivity and responsivity. When the population average is defined as “normal” (i.e., it is after all the “normal” distribution), then the natural implication of intervention is to move individuals who are deviant from that norm toward the population average (i.e., “abnormal”). This is congruent with the notion of acculturation (i.e., the melting pot) that was the predominant cultural perspective of the first two centuries of the United States but has been identified as creating problems of cultural insensitivity and even racism in more recent cultural considerations (c.f. Aud et al., 2012; Banks & Banks, 2004). For example, the United States Court of Appeals (Larry P vs Riles, 1984) ruled that IQ could not be used as a decision input in the school system because its norm-based structure resulted in cultural insensitivity across racial groups. Psychometric theories were developed in the scientific context of an early understanding of the potential applications of evolutionary theory to social processes. Proponents of the use of normed instruments in the United States sadly moved away from more enlightened perspectives on the use of norms (such as Binet’s perspective that normed tests of intelligence could be used primarily to help accelerate or ameliorate the learning of persons underperforming scholastically) and toward ideas of

3

THE RISE OF A CLINICAL APPROACH TO SKILLS ASSESSMENT

45

using norms to determine and reify notions of individual and racial superiority (e.g., Hilliard, 1979). Features of this basic approach are still in operation today; although, the pejorative language used in the past for categorical designations has been somewhat softened. For example, many normed clinical instruments in use today label any scores which are at least two standard deviations above the mean as beyond the “clinical cutoff” for determining a need to treat an underlying condition. Some go so far as to label this deviation as “abnormal (Goodman, 2001). Though this may appear at first glance to be an objective criterion for determining the presence of a case (e.g., diagnosis), it rests on the idea that there is a clear and categorical distinction in which labels should be used and clinical actions should be taken based on scores with potentially small differences on an underlying continuum. This approach ignores two important and related ideas with increasing scientific evidence for their validity. First, that most human characteristics are distributed on a continuum which does not have clear cutoffs (or “joints” at which to be carved) but rather gradients which defy clear a priori categorizations of where standing on the characteristic is and is not harmful to a person or society (c.f., Anastasi & Urbina, 1997; Lilienfeld & Marino, 1995). Second, the importance of an individual’s score on a characteristic is often radically contextual. By radically contextual, we mean that the identical score on a characteristic often has very different meaning in terms of action based on a cultural or contextual interpretation of the phenomenon, its usefulness or accommodation within a context, and its relationship to other intra-individual characteristics. (c.f., Lilienfield et al., 2013). For example, not being aggressive in a home setting may have very different contextual meaning than not being aggressive in pursuing a business opportunity. Or, leveraging resources might require different approaches given different cultural contexts. The advance in thinking about the complex phenomenon that we call “intelligence” is a case in point (Gardner, 1993; Sternberg, 1988). Many would agree with the conceptualization of intelligence as a set of characteristics which allows persons to be more adaptive in a given context or series of contexts. In this view, intelligence underlies our ability to rapidly solve problems. The particular set of traits and skills which optimally predict success in a given environment have been consistently broadened over time as we have better conceptualized the dynamic demands that varying environments provide, further complicated by person-environment interactions.

46

T. S. LYONS ET AL.

Beyond measurement of intelligence, similar challenges confront measurement of other clinically relevant constructs. Conceptions of “reality testing,” for example, are also co-constructed and contextual. Even the constructs with which psychologists are most familiar require a dynamic and contextual construction to be utilized. A person born with privilege might have options available to them to support a business startup that would be unimaginable to a person born into a community that experienced discrimination.

Psychometrics and the Challenge of Triangulation Person-centered, the goal of Transformational Collaborative Outcomes Management (TCOM) (see Chapter 2), requires a full and equal partnership between those who seek help and those who provide help. Partnership requires consensus. It is instructive to consider how traditional measurement views consensus. Due to its grounding in logical positivism as its underlying philosophy of psychometric theories, the dominant method for measuring meaning has been pre-triangulation measurement. The focus in these theories of measurement is on the careful measurement of a single perspective. That then presents us with the challenge of how does one combine information from multiple perspectives. The traditional solution originates in astronomy—triangulation. Triangulation is a very important methodological breakthrough in the history of science. Triangulation arose from work in astronomy and physics as a strategy to measure the movement of objects from a distance. In astronomy, the movement of stars and planets can be understood based on the measurement of their location from different places and times. Combinations of these measurements (“triangulation”) allow precise distances to be calculated. In human measurement, the concept of triangulation was first translated by Campbell and Fiske (1959) into multi-trait, multi-method approaches of taking different measures from different perspectives using different methods of measurement (Obeid & Lyons, 2011). In this model you would assess the skill level from the entrepreneur’s perspective and from the coach’s perspective separately. The idea would be that there must be some statistical way to combine these perspectives to get at the “true” skill level. However, after more than 50 years of trying, no one has been able to create a viable approach for combining perspectives after the fact.

3

THE RISE OF A CLINICAL APPROACH TO SKILLS ASSESSMENT

47

In the helping sector, this approach to measurement triangulation has serious drawbacks. It has not been demonstrated that it is possible to combine the measurements of multiple human perspectives using any statistical procedures in order to create precise measures of a single personal attribute (e.g., achieving consensus). Typically, researchers have defaulted to averaging ratings across informants or simply reporting change by the various perspectives. In other words, the “true” skill level would be the average of the entrepreneur and the coach and perhaps some third party. Rather than providing more precise information, averaging perspectives threatens to remove the most important information—differences among individuals in their perceptions of what is actionable. This problem is particularly acute in entrepreneur development when attempting to measure skills. Of course, one could imagine a series of performance/mastery tests to see exactly what skills an entrepreneur currently possesses—a business version of the National Football League’s College Combine where potential draftees come and perform drills which are observed and rated. Most entrepreneur development/education programs are funded at a level where this type of massive undertaking is not feasible. There are many important skills to develop and few similar drills have been developed to predict aspects of entrepreneurial success. Self-reporting and rating approaches are flawed by the limits of the perspective. Some prospective entrepreneurs are confident in their skills; some are not. Some confident prospective entrepreneurs are so selfassured that they over-value their skills; while others are accurate. Some less confident entrepreneurs have skills that they do not give themselves credit for possessing. But in order to be successful, entrepreneurs themselves must have a clear perspective of what skills they have mastered and what skills they must develop. The most efficient method for achieving this goal is a consensus-based assessment process that involves a back and forth dialogue on understanding current skill levels between the prospective entrepreneur and someone skilled in understanding the relevant skill set. Elsewhere we have referred to this as pre-measurement triangulation (Obeid & Lyons, 2011). In this approach, the measurement achieves the primary benefit of different perspectives (i.e., triangulation) but is not hamstrung by the problem of solving the impossible challenge of how to combine perspectives statistically.

48

T. S. LYONS ET AL.

The Structure of the RISE as a Communimetric Measure Communimetric measurement is intended for practice applications of measurement to enhance their value in an information culture context. As such, communimetric measures have key principles that make them distinct from traditional measures (Covin & Slevin, 1989; Covin & Wales, 2012; Miller, 1983). Here are the key characteristics as they apply to the RISE. 1. The RISE is designed to be reliable and valid at the item level. Each item is selected because it is a meaningful indicator of some important information. In the case of the RISE, the items reflect key entrepreneur skills that have been identified in the literature on entrepreneur development. Although the RISE can be scored for an overall skill level, it can simultaneously be used for planning and monitoring entrepreneur skill development at the individual skill level. 2. The four action levels for the RISE are 0 = No evidence of the skill. 1 = Individual has some aspects of the skill but it is not currently useful. 2 = Individual has this skill. 3 = Individual has mastered this skill.

3. The RISE is about the person, not about the person with supports. Skills are described for the individual. If the individual has put supports in place to compensate for a lacking skill, the lacking skill is described, not the fact that the person has compensated for that absence. 4. The RISE skill development ratings should be completed within a cultural and developmental context. Different cultures have different styles and approaches to many things. Interpersonal relationships are managed differently in different cultures. Different rules and regulations both formal and unstated can apply. In order to be culturally responsive, it is important to understand skills within the cultural context of the use of the RISE. In addition, you would not understand the skill set of an entrepreneur trying to establish

3

THE RISE OF A CLINICAL APPROACH TO SKILLS ASSESSMENT

49

a cleaning business with the same frame as evaluating a prospective CEO of a Fortune 500 company. Developmental context is also important for understanding the skill development needed to be successful. 5. The RISE is about the “What” not the “Why”. The skill development ratings are descriptions and do not address etiology of the skills. 6. Skills are rated with a 30-day rating period. Is this skill operable in the past 30 days? Evidence for a useful skill could be from outside of this window of observation; however, it must be clear that the skill is still operable to describe it as currently useful. Although the RISE can be completed independently by either the entrepreneur or their coach, it is recommended to be used as a consensus between the entrepreneur and coach, thus providing an assessment framework that reinforces a skills development approach to entrepreneur coaching. By understanding the status of an entrepreneur’s skills, that entrepreneur can understand how they should focus their development, and the coach can help them secure those needed skills, either through personal development or teaming.

Defining What the RISE Means by “Skills” While many definitions of skills exist in the literature, a recurring theme to most is an effort to integrate the concepts of “agency” and “structure” (Lyons et al., 2019, 2020). In this way, the entrepreneur is thought to apply their knowledge through practice in a specific social and business context (Mascolo & Fischer, 1999). In developing an approach that was the precursor to the RISE, Lichtenstein and Lyons (2010, p. 34) defined skill as “[…] the ability to perform a particular action or task on a consistent basis, at a high level of performance, without a great deal of conscious thinking or attention, to achieve a desired outcome.” We have incorporated this definition of skills to guide the design of the RISE.

Identifying the Relevant Skill Set One key consideration in the development of any communimetric measure is to identify the key themes of people’s stories that must be known to guide any transformational planning process. In the case of

50

T. S. LYONS ET AL.

entrepreneur skill development, what are the key skills that must be developed? The RISE is based on a four-dimensional understanding of entrepreneur skills. A comprehensive review of the existing literature was used to establish this organizing model and identify specific skills within each. We embraced the heuristic first articulated by Smith et al. (1980) in their development of meta-analysis—“It is OK to combine apples and oranges if you are talking about fruit.” So, depending on the specific skill area, we selected higher levels of aggregation of skills to capture common themes for development rather than to micro-identify skills that would be a subset of these concepts. For example, a large number of specific skills combine to define a person’s abilities regarding accounting and bookkeeping. For our purposes, it is more efficient to understand how a prospective entrepreneur possesses this set of skills than to get too deep “into the weeds” in terms of articulating every relevant subskill. Appendix A contains the RISE Reference Guide which provides the anchored definitions for each skill’s four levels of action rating. There are a number of ways that entrepreneur skills have been organized. Hisrich et al. (2004) proposed the three dimensions of managerial, personal, and technical. Later, Smith et al. (2005) building on work by Lichtenstein and Lyons (2001) organized skills into four dimensions— technical, managerial, entrepreneurial, and personal maturity. In the development of the RISE we have refined this four-dimensional model. The four basic areas of skill development can be described as: Transformational, Relationship, Business, and Organizational Process (see Table 3.1). A single successful social entrepreneur must either achieve mastery in these four areas or assemble a leadership team that brings to bear all four of these skills areas with a sufficient level of sophistication in order to be successful. In Appendix B, a glossary of the 30 “essential” skills of the RISE, allocated to these four skills areas, is provided.

Transformational Management Skills The skills in this domain include ones that are pertinent to supporting change management. More than some of the other skills on the RISE, these are often personal skills of the entrepreneur and are developed in life rather than in business school. The one thing that is certain in all new businesses and even in most ongoing enterprises is that things change. One’s ability to manage changing environments to support an

3

THE RISE OF A CLINICAL APPROACH TO SKILLS ASSESSMENT

51

Table 3.1 An inventory of skills on the readiness inventory for successful entrepreneurship Transformational Relationship management skills on the management RISE skills on the RISE Problem solving Persistence/relentlessness Passion/charisma Flexibility & adaptability Knowledge as a resource Creativity Innovation Leadership Resiliency Resourcefulness Self-awareness

Networking capacity Leveraging existing partnerships Resource leveraging Building and maintaining a reputation Community involvement & influence Accountability Teaming

Business management skills on the RISE

Organizational process management skills on the RISE

Knowledge of field/industry Knowledge of law/regulations Accounting/bookkeeping Finance Marketing/communications Operations management Technology-enabled business management

Internal communication Process design Decision-making Conflict & conflict resolution Performance & discipline

ongoing positive business trajectory is a crucial set of skills. Within the RISE we identify 11 of these skills that are relevant to the development and management of commercial businesses. PROBLEM SOLVING refers to the ability to think strategically and play out multiple scenarios, understanding the potential consequences, to create possible solutions to obstacles and then to efficiently select the best option. This skill, of course, is generally important to everyone whether or not they intend to be an entrepreneur. Being able to clarify poorly formed problems and identify possible solutions and anticipate various outcomes are all important to business success (Bell, 2008; Dees, 2012). The desire of Gen Z students to effect change with complex social, political, and climate issues demonstrates the critical need for applied problem-solving. The inclusion of this skill in the RISE enables aspiring entrepreneurs to assess alignment of their venture with their desire to create such change. PERSISTENCE/RELENTLESSNESS refers to the individual’s determination, once an objective is set, to do anything possible to succeed (Dweck, 2006). The ability to use adversity as a resource, drawing motivation to work harder through challenges. There are many old saws that

52

T. S. LYONS ET AL.

represent this skill but what is almost always true is that the only difference between people who succeed and people who fail is that people who succeed fail more. With a few possible lucky exceptions, continued effort in the face of setbacks is a requirement for success. Additionally, current times are often marked by uncertainty, which underscores the need for persistence and relentlessness required to unlock the opportunities presented by the challenges at hand. PASSION/CHARISMA refers to the individual’s zealous drive toward a goal; the ability to compel and inspire others by one’s personality and ability to communicate that goal. This skill is essential for an entrepreneur to lead their team and attract investors and partners (Below & Schlosser & Todorovic, 2006; Tripp, 2010). Passion and charisma are thought to be a combination of a deeply held belief in the value of the enterprise, a strong sense of personal agency, and a confidence that others will support them (Mair & Noboa, 2006). All of these can be developed and are not inherent traits. FLEXIBILITY/ADAPTABILITY TO CHANGE refers to the individual’s ability to assess changes in a situation and modify actions accordingly; resolving negative emotions and embracing differences. Research on successful entrepreneurs supports the inclusion of this learnable skill (Audet & Couteret, 2012; Kutzhanova et al., 2009). This skill has sometimes been described as the ability to tolerate risk and uncertainty (Rae, 2012). Rigid adherence to a specific way of doing anything often limits learning and problem solving. KNOWLEDGE AS A RESOURCE refers to the individual’s ability to harness the development of knowledge and share it as a core strategy to achieve a goal. Effective use of knowledge has been demonstrated to improve the impression of profitability and growth (Omerzel & Antoncic, 2008). Some scholars have identified knowledge as the single greatest form of human capital in any business development context (Baron & Markman, 2000; Kuratko & Hodgetts, 2007). From the start, Gen Z has been connected virtually to information at their fingertips and the acceleration of knowledge. Helping them understand, identify, and cultivate knowledge within their venture over time can help them experience the importance of knowledge as a business asset and competitive advantage. CREATIVITY describes the individual’s ability to create something entirely new; an invention. Creativity is a learnable skill if taught properly (Cooney, 2012; Sarri et al., 2010).

3

THE RISE OF A CLINICAL APPROACH TO SKILLS ASSESSMENT

53

INNOVATION refers to the individual’s ability to build creative solutions into strategic planning and actions, efficiently and effectively. In business, this would be finding a way to get an invention to the market that needs it. Innovation is related to creativity in that it is the implementation of creativity, but these are separate skills (Amabile, 1983). LEADERSHIP SKILLS describe the individual’s ability to lead their own team or peers effectively in pursuit of a goal. There is an abundance of research literature on leadership and its various manifestations. All point to this skill as being crucial for the success of the founder, or leader, of any enterprise. Leadership is a meta-skill that is a blending of many micro-skills (e.g., Mattare, 2010). Consistent with our TCOM approach, we focus here on what has been called transformational leadership. This form of leadership has been linked to employee creativity and innovations in an organization (Gumusluoglu & Ilsev, 2009). RESILIENCY describes the individual’s capacity to quickly and effectively recover from obstacles or setbacks, developing and growing strengths from challenges to better themselves and the organization. This skill helps entrepreneurs rebound with energy and enthusiasm when faced with setbacks or obstacles (Flores et al., 2013; Rae, 2012). RESOURCEFULNESS refers to the individual’s ability to identify and utilize external/environmental strengths to progress and better both themselves and their organization. It is the ability of the entrepreneur to find resources in their environment (Choi & Shepherd, 2004). Entrepreneurs must learn that they are not limited by the resources they currently possess (Stevenson, 1983). SELF-AWARENESS This item refers to the individual’s capability to recognize and identify their own strengths and weaknesses as well as resource and capability needs; an ongoing process of self-reflection and metacognition. A number of scholars have linked this learnable skill to entrepreneurial success (Mattare, 2010). An important aspect of this insight is understanding the personal meaning of being an entrepreneur (Middleton & Donnellon, 2014; Rae, 2012).

Three Optional Social Entrepreneur Transformational Management Skills The following entrepreneurship skills have most commonly been thought of as social entrepreneurship skills and were originally included in a version of the RISE designed for measuring the skills of social

54

T. S. LYONS ET AL.

entrepreneurs (RISE-SE). However, it has become apparent that younger generations are increasingly perceiving these skills to be important for all entrepreneurs. As a result, we are exploring incorporating them into future versions of the RISE for commercial entrepreneurs. MORAL COMPASS refers to the individual’s ability to promote, live, and work by the highest moral and ethical standards. It includes the ability to embed ethical practices into the enterprise’s culture and processes. This is a skill that is important for social entrepreneurs and (perhaps sadly) less relevant for some for the development of commercial entrepreneurs, although it arguably should be. In the space of social enterprises, values and purpose are very important guiding principles. People generally do not create social enterprises for the purposes of wealth accrual. Rather the primary aspiration of social enterprises is some form of positive social change. It is important for social entrepreneurs to understand and embrace this vision of working for social change as a business enterprise. Gen Z largely holds the expectation that businesses should drive social and environmental change, which invites these aspiring entrepreneurs to consider their moral compass in addressing these issues within their own venture. MORAL JUDGMENT refers to the individual’s drive to right something that is perceived as wrong. Pursuing efforts that are clearly stimulated and supported by a sense of moral responsibility (Mair & Noboa, 2006). Again, this skill is used in the social entrepreneur version of the RISE for the same reason as Moral Compass. The United Nations Sustainable Development Goals within a given industry exemplify the importance of moral judgment as a skill for all entrepreneurs, such as upholding people, planet, and profit in the circular economy of sustainable fashion. EMPATHIC UNDERSTANDING refers to the individual having a clear empathic appreciation for a target social cause (Mair & Noboa, 2006). This skill is the third and final one that is thought of as mission critical in the social entrepreneur space. Empathy is the ability to place yourself in the shoes of another, if even for a moment or to feel another’s pain. Although sometimes portrayed as a trait, empathy is a skill that develops over time. Developmentally, the ideal period to learn to be empathic is in childhood (Walsh & Walsh, 2019). People who have not developed empathy by the time they become adults sometimes have a substantially longer learning curve. Given that a primary reason that startups fail is that there is no market need (or insufficient

3

THE RISE OF A CLINICAL APPROACH TO SKILLS ASSESSMENT

55

demand), empathy regarding customer needs is an important skill for any entrepreneur in the development of products and services, as exemplified in the customer-centric approach of Design Thinking.

Relationship Management Skills The seven skills on the RISE that comprise this domain are important in making, maintaining, and effectively leveraging relationships with people in the work of the entrepreneurial enterprise (Morris et al., 2013). These include relationships with people both internal and external to the business. NETWORKING CAPACITY describes the individual’s ability to build and maintain networks as a leader. Possession of this skill means that the entrepreneur can effectively build and maintain a network of contacts or colleagues with the aspirations of either acquiring legitimacy or influence (Aldrich & Fiol, 1994), developing customers (Freeman & Cavusgil, 2007), accessing information (Frazier & Niehm, 2004), assembling resources (Batjargal, 2003), or recruiting and forming a team (Aldrich & Kim, 2007). This form of social capital has been linked to business success (Kumar et al., 2001; Stam et al., 2014). LEVERAGING EXISTING PARTNERSHIPS refers to the individual’s capacity to utilize one’s existing network and relationships as a resource, including peer, advocacy and funder organizations, as well as individuals. The ability to attract long-term, mutually beneficial partnerships in order to develop and grow. Once a network is built, utilizing it is a different skill. Sometimes referred to as “relationship capital,” this skill has been identified as a key to effective inter-firm relationships (Collins & Hitt, 2006). It also has been identified as a competitive advantage for start-ups (Busenitz et al., 2005). To develop this skill set, the entrepreneur must learn to reach out and engage others through shared experiences that build the trust needed for sustained relations that can be relied upon for assistance when needed (Collins et al., 2008). RESOURCE LEVERAGING refers to the individual’s ability to use the resources obtained from others to achieve strategic goals. This skill is often called “bootstrapping” and is based on the understanding that one need not own resources to achieve one’s goals, only control those resources (Stevenson, 1983). Leveraging limited resources has often been identified as a key skill for the entrepreneur to allow them to succeed in a limited resource environment (Starr & MacMillan, 1990).

56

T. S. LYONS ET AL.

BUILDING & MAINTAINING A REPUTATION describes the individual’s ability to cultivate respect as a leader and maintain a stellar reputation. A person’s reputation is in many ways their most important asset. It is certainly the most portable of all assets. Originally this was referred to by some as “entrepreneurial capital” (Davidsson & Honig, 2003; Morris, 1998). Bourdieu (1986) referred to it as “symbolic capital.” Students can relate to the meta-skills involved with cultivating their reputation as a business leader as they witness the rise (and sometimes the fall) of prominent social media influencers who launch their own brands. COMMUNITY INFLUENCE & INVOLVEMENT describes the individual’s development and creation of external working relationships toward strategic goals. The ability to perceive the political environment of a situation, and to understand and utilize influence over leaders and the community as a whole. Having a strong community presence has been linked to business success (Kotkin, 1986). Hindle (2010) has described the relationship between a business and its community as organic and mutual with each influencing the other. This suggests the opportunity for entrepreneurs to create a mutual benefit relationship with their community in a way that is similar to leveraging a network (Lyons et al., 2012). ACCOUNTABILITY refers to the individual’s ability to define and create accountability structures whereby all business components have clearly articulated performance objectives that tie to the organization’s broad goals and strategies. Also accepting personal responsibilities for one’s own actions is an important aspect of leadership. During rapid growth of a new business, this can mean flexibly shifting from informal to formal mechanisms for maintaining accountable performance (Gilmore & Kazanjian, 1989). Developing the skill of identifying, tracking, and analyzing Key Performance Indicators (KPI’s) is also important for accountability to business goals and objectives in a startup (Huelsbeck et al., 2011). TEAMING describes the individual’s ability to structure teams and team-based approaches to the activities and processes of the organization. As our knowledge base expands, it is increasingly difficult for one person to succeed alone. Learning how to effectively work in teams and developing teaming approaches is an essential skill. Many new businesses start out as a team (e.g., Cooper & Daily, 1997; Man & Lau, 2000) and learning how to manage a group of people with complementary skills

3

THE RISE OF A CLINICAL APPROACH TO SKILLS ASSESSMENT

57

can be a key to success (Vesper, 1993). In a TCOM context collaboration is the underlying strategy to effective teaming.. Emerging research suggests that Gen Z demonstrates a preference to work on teams as opposed to autonomously (Moore et al., 2017), and helping this generation develop teaming as a skill will support collaboration as they tackle complex problems and opportunities as entrepreneurs.

Business Management Skills KNOWLEDGE OF FIELD/INDUSTRY describes the individual’s understanding of the context surrounding the enterprise, with experience in the field itself. This has sometimes been called technical skills in other fields but the term “technical” is too broad to maintain much meaning. This skill has been long established as essential to business success (e.g., Anderson, 2005; Gustafsson, 2006). It nearly goes without saying that an entrepreneur should understand the field in which they seek to create or maintain a successful business. By virtue of their limited business experience, aspiring student entrepreneurs need an accurate read on their skill level in their chosen industry, as well as the support of mentors to help them see around the corners and identify opportunities. KNOWLEDGE OF LAWS/REGULATIONS describes the individual’s knowledge and understanding of the existing laws and regulations in the business environment of the organization that directly pertain to the functioning of that organization. This skill is commonly recognized in inventories of essential business skills for an entrepreneur (e.g., Bagley & Dauchy, 2011; Smith et al., 2005). As often indicated by students’ initial projections of their startup and operating costs, the importance of securing outside support to ensure legal compliance in startups is often overlooked or minimized. Coaching students about entity formation, legal compliance, and intellectual property can help them recognize the necessity, value, and benefit of allocations for such costs. ACCOUNTING/BOOKKEEPING identifies the individual’s knowledge and understanding of accounting and bookkeeping principles and practices. As we have discussed earlier, you can’t manage what you don’t measure and that includes money. Accurately and timely keeping track of income and expenses is crucial to the success of any business (e.g., McEwen, 2013). The emerging generation of student entrepreneurs is demonstrating pragmatism in their personal financial management, shaped by their experience of the Great Recession, student debt, and

58

T. S. LYONS ET AL.

the global pandemic during their growth years. With coaching, these entrepreneurs can learn to apply this skill to the financial management of their ventures as well. FINANCE identifies the individual’s knowledge and understanding of funding an enterprise. Many small business startups fail because they are under-capitalized (Knotts et al., 2003). In other words, they have failed to secure sufficient financing to survive the inevitable ups and downs of all enterprises. Businesses operating on a small margin cannot afford to take unnecessary risks and the consequences of a single setback can be greater. Knowing where to obtain financing and how to secure it is essential to business success (Cheatham et al., 1993; McEwen, 2013). MARKETING/COMMUNICATIONS identifies the individual’s understanding of and experience with marketing, sales, and communication practices. This skill captures the entrepreneur’s ability to understand the needs and interests of prospective customers and how to reach those customers with messaging that responds effectively to those needs and/or interests. Pricing, marketing, and selling are skills within this bundle that have been identified among the most important for entrepreneurs to master (Romero & Gary, 2002). Today’s aspiring student entrepreneurs experience first-hand the importance of marketing. For instance, twothirds of Gen Z respondents to a 2018 Center for Generational Kinetics survey said they read at least three product reviews before buying something, and 16 percent said they read nine or more reviews. With coaching on this skill aspiring entrepreneurs are able to transfer their consumer experience to marketing their own ventures. OPERATIONS MANAGEMENT describes the individual’s knowledge and understanding of operations management practices—the ability to run the day-to-day activities of the enterprise. Regardless of what the business produces, including anything from developing knowledge to cleaning offices to assembling productions, there is a process that needs to be designed, developed, implemented, supervised, and evolved to ensure that the business is efficient and effective in how it goes about its business. Managing operations is an essential entrepreneurial skill in translating an idea into a functioning enterprise (Cooney, 2012; Hisrich et al., 2004; Smith et al., 2005). The level of optimism demonstrated in students’ initial sales forecasts and financial projections can serve as an indicator of their skill development in operational management and applied understanding of the time and resources required to manage a startup. These skills may be among the most work-necessary to develop.

3

THE RISE OF A CLINICAL APPROACH TO SKILLS ASSESSMENT

59

TECHNOLOGY-ENABLED BUSINESS MANAGEMENT identifies the individual’s knowledge of the tools of technology-enabled business (e.g., social media, CRM, bookkeeping software, 3-D printing, etc.) and their utility to the organization. The need for this skill has rapidly become ubiquitous (Schulman & Rogoff, 2011). And the need for its mastery is only likely to grow more complex and acute. As more and more businesses have a predominantly online presence, the skills necessary to establish, brand, and market a business require social media savvy. Many business processes can be automated to improve efficiency and decrease costs; so, skills in relevant software applications and systems are also critical. In fact, since most business processes have been computerized to the extent that even the term “computerized” has become archaic. Skills in these software packages are also critical. Keeping up with new technology in a rapidly changing environment is important to maintaining one’s business over time.

Organizational Process Management Skills This domain describes the set of skills an entrepreneur will need to manage both the people and the processes involved in their business enterprise. On the RISE there are five core skills that comprise this key domain. INTERNAL COMMUNICATION refers to the individual’s ability to express one’s meaning to others in a clear, transparent, and positive way; the ability to utilize effective communication to lead an organization. Keeping everyone informed and on the same page serves to facilitate a sense of organization belonging and esprit de corps that are important for a cohesive and committed workforce. In addition, clear and efficient communication reduces errors and redundancies and improves efficiency and effectiveness. Miller and Simmons (1992) have reported that internal communication is often richest and most effective in the early days of an organization when energy, enthusiasm, and optimism is at a peak and a relatively small number of people are all working together. As an organization grows and matures, maintaining effective internal communication becomes geometrically more challenging with the size of the organization (Cooney, 2012). This dynamic exemplifies the importance of helping entrepreneurs cultivate the skill of internal communication as they progress from nascent entrepreneurs to founders to small business leaders.

60

T. S. LYONS ET AL.

PROCESS DESIGN describes the individual’s ability to work efficiently and effectively toward goals and objectives through processes that are robust, lean, well-designed, consistently used, and widely accepted. Design thinking is an increasingly popular approach to business management and planning. Designing efficient and effective processes that are sensitive to the needs of employees and respectful of the culture and climate of the business environment is an important overall component of a successful business (Smith, 2003). Conversely, inefficient, off-putting or redundant and overly bureaucratic processes can interfere with a businesses’ success. There is no “one way” to do anything; therefore, all process design must be customized (Tuler & Webler, 2010). DECISION-MAKING describes the individual’s ability to, first, make decisions, and then to make them in a well-reasoned, informed, and timely way toward achieving individual and organizational goals. Good, quick decision-making has been linked to organizational effectiveness (Wally & Baum, 2003; Zenger & Folkman, 2007). Bygrave (2004) reported that “decisiveness” is one of ten key entrepreneurial skills, by which he meant making rapid decisions. There are a number of important emotional and cognitive factors that make up this skill including courage to decide in the face of change, and the ability to rapidly identify and value decision options. CONFLICT MANAGEMENT describes the individual’s ability to manage conflict in healthy and constructive ways; the ability to create an organizational culture that addresses conflict in this way. Of course, anytime two or more people work together there will likely be conflict. By itself disagreement is a very good thing for organizations (Johnson et al., 2006). Having different perspectives and viewpoints and being open to different approaches is the key to the value of teaming and collaboration. The challenge is to ensure that people do not take personally these naturally occurring disagreements, which will create conflict. Today’s intergenerational workplace combined with the fact that Gen Z is on track to become the most diverse generation to date underscores the importance of cultivating the skill of conflict management. PERFORMANCE & DISCIPLINED ACTION rates the individual’s focus on performance as an expected norm; self-discipline and the ability to encourage and reward high performance in others. This skill describes an entrepreneur’s ability to create a business/organization context that is conducive to high performance and to be able to acknowledge and reward that performance when it occurs. This combined skill

3

THE RISE OF A CLINICAL APPROACH TO SKILLS ASSESSMENT

61

of simultaneously motivating and rewarding high performance is not as simple as it may sound. Many entrepreneurs are good at one or the other. Some use high expectations to motivate performance only to hesitate to reward as a sign of being satisfied. Alternatively, they focus so much on rewarding performance that employees come to expect the rewards without the performance tie in. Stewart and Roth (2007) reported that the propensity for achievement among entrepreneurs results from organizational culture and business goals. In that way, a performance orientation is a skill of a successful entrepreneur. It is intentional and learned.

Scoring the RISE As with all communimetric measures, there are multiple ways to score them. For an individual entrepreneur it is often useful to leave the scores at the time level and track progress across each skill. This application is the most helpful strategy to identifying what areas require development or whether it might be useful for the entrepreneur to identify strategies to find complementary support for a skill that they do not plan to develop. It is unlikely that any entrepreneur can develop all skills simultaneously, so the individual items also provide input to prioritizing “what’s next” in terms of skill development plans. Although the individual items are useful, it also can be useful to have some sort of benchmark of how the entrepreneur development is going overall. For this reason, we have also developed a total score which is calculated by summing the skill ratings across all items. This score can then be translated into one of five levels as demonstrated in Fig. 3.1 The total score allows the entrepreneur and the coach to track overall skill level. This score also allows program administrators the ability to track the progress of individual entrepreneurs and the performance of coaches, instructors, and programs. Finally, it allows the reporting of performance that might be useful to communicating impact to prospective funding sources for the entrepreneur development program itself. There are additional ways in which the RISE can be scored. Combining skills across teams (pick the high score of each individual or have the team complete the assessment collaboratively) can be useful as a strategy to determine the degree to which an entrepreneurial team is ready for success. Movement on individual skills as demonstrated in Chapter 7 can be used to track the progress of individual entrepreneurs during

62

T. S. LYONS ET AL.

Fig. 3.1 Entrepreneurship skill development ladder (Source Lyons et al. [2020]; Diamond Darling)

their participation in a development program to identify successes and challenges on their pathway to success. In this chapter we described the theory, development, structure, and uses of the RISE. Of course, entrepreneur development programs have choices regarding how they measure skills. However, we believe that the RISE is simultaneously easy and comprehensive—meeting the needs of a program without overwhelming the program with measurement processes and documentation. We adopted the RISE from communimetric theory as this is the only approach that offers this type of convergence between convenience and thoroughness. In the next two chapters we will provide use examples to move from the concept of the approach to its application in entrepreneur skill development programs.

References Aldrich, H. E., & Fiol, M. (1994). Fools rush in? The institutional context of industry creation. Academy of Management Journal, 19(4), 645–670. Aldrich, H. E., & Kim, P. H. (2007). Small worlds, infinite possibilities? How social networks affect entrepreneurial team formation and search. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 1, 147–165. Amabile, T. M. (1983). The social psychology of creativity. Springer-Verlag. Anastasi, A., & Urbina, S. (1997). Psychological testing (7th ed.). Prentice Hall. Anderson, J. R. (2005). Cognitive psychology and its implications (3rd ed.). W.H. Freeman/Times Books/Henry Holt.

3

THE RISE OF A CLINICAL APPROACH TO SKILLS ASSESSMENT

63

Aud, S., Hussar, W., Johnson, F., Kena, G., Roth, E., Manning, E., Wang, X., & Zhang, J. (2012). The condition of education 2012 (NCES 2012–045). U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. Washington, DC. Retrieved March 16, 2021, from http://nces.ed.gov/pub search. Audet, J., & Couteret, P. (2012). Coaching the entrepreneur: Features and success factors. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 19(3), 515–531. Bagley, C. E., & Dauchy, C. E. (2011). The entrepreneur’s guide to business law. Cengage Learning. Banks, J. A., & Banks, C. A. M. G. (2004). Handbook of research on multicultural education (2nd ed.). Jossey-Bass. Baron, R. A., & Markman, G. D. (2000). Beyond social capital: How social skills can enhance entrepreneurs’ success. The Academy of Management Executive, 14(1), 106–116. Batjargal, B. (2003). Social capital and entrepreneurial performance in Russia: A longitudinal study. Organization Studies, 24(4), 535–556. Bell, J. R. (2008). Utilization of problem-based learning in an entrepreneurship business planning course. New England Journal of Entrepreneurship, 11(1), 53–61. Below, C. L., & Tripp, K. D. (2010). Freeing the social entrepreneur. Stanford Social Innovation Review (Fall). Blanton, H., & Jaccard, J. (2006). Arbitrary metrics in psychology. American Psychologist, 61(1), 27–41. Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of capital. In J. Richardson (Ed.), The handbook of theory and research for the sociology of education (pp. 241–258). Greenwood. Busenitz, L. W., Fiet, J. O., & Moesel, D. D. (2005). Signaling in venture capitalist-new venture team funding decisions: Does it indicate long-term venture outcomes? Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 29(1), 1–12. Bygrave, W. D. (2004). The entrepreneurial process. In W. D. Bygrave & A. Zacharakis (Eds.), The portable MBA in entrepreneurship(3rd ed., pp. 1–27). Wiley. Campbell, D. T., & Fiske, D. W. (1959). Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 56, 81–105. Cheatham, L. R., Dunn, P., & Cheatham, C. (1993). Do college level business courses provide adequate financial management expertise? Journal of Business and Entrepreneurship, 5(1), 105–109. Choi, Y. R., & Shepherd, D. A. (2004). Entrepreneurs’ decisions to exploit opportunities. Journal of Management, 30(3), 377–395. Collins, J. D., & Hitt, M. A. (2006). Leveraging tacit knowledge in alliances: The importance of using relational capabilities to build and leverage relational capital. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 23(3), 147–167.

64

T. S. LYONS ET AL.

Collins, J. D., Uhlenbruck, K., & Reutzel, C. R. (2008). Entrepreneurial social capital and the Gatsby effect. Journal of Business and Entrepreneurship, 20(1), 18–36. Cooney, T. M. (2012, November 28). Entrepreneurship skills for growthorientated businesses, report for the workshop on “skills development for SMEs and entrepreneurship. Copenhagen. Cooper, A. C., & Daily, C. M. (1997). Entrepreneurial teams. In D. L. Sexton & R. W. Smilor (Eds.), Entrepreneurship 2000 (pp. 127–150). Upstart. Covin, J. G., & Slevin, D. P. (1989). Strategic management of small firms in hostile and benign environments. Strategic Management Journal, 10(1), 75– 87. Covin, J. G., & Wales, W. J. (2012). The measurement of entrepreneurial orientation. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 36(4), 677–702. Davidsson, P., & Honig, B. (2003). The role of social and human capital among nascent entrepreneurs. Journal of Business Venturing, 18(3), 301–331. Dees, J. G. (2012). A tale of two cultures: Charity, problem solving, and the future of social entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Ethics, 111(3), 321–334. Dweck, C. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success. Random House. Flores, I. B., Muniz, E., & Serviere-Munoz, L. (2013). Entrepreneurs’ resilience in violent areas: A cognitive triad approach. Journal of International Business & Economics, 13(1), 5–12. Frazier, B., & Niehm, L. S. (2004). Exploring business information networks of small retailers in rural communities. Journal of Developmental Entrepreneurship, 9(1), 23–42. Freeman, S., & Cavusgil, S. T. (2007). Toward a typology of commitment states among managers of born-global firms: A study of accelerated internationalization. Journal of International Marketing, 15(4), 1–40. Fryback, D. G., Palta, M., Cherepanov, D., Bolt, D., & Kim, J. S. (2010). Comparison of 5 health-related quality-of-life indexes using item response theory analysis. Medical Decision Making: An International Journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making, 30(1), 5–15. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 0272989X09347016 Furr, R. M. (2010). The double-entry intraclass correlation as an index of profile similarity: Meaning, limitations, and alternatives. Journal of Personality Assessment, 92(1), 1–15. Furr, R. M., & Bacharach, V. R. (2014). Psychometrics: An introduction (2nd ed.). Sage Gardner, H. (1993). Multiple intelligences: The theory in practice. Basic Books. Gilmore, T. N., & Kazanjian, R. K. (1989). Clarifying decision making in high growth ventures: The use of responsibility charting. Journal of Business Venturing, 4(1), 69–83.

3

THE RISE OF A CLINICAL APPROACH TO SKILLS ASSESSMENT

65

Goodman, R. (2001). Psychometric properties of the strengths and difficulties questionnaire. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 40(11), 1337–1345. Guilford, J. P. (1936). Psychometric methods. McGraw-Hill. Guilford, J. P. (1954) Psychometric methods (2nd ed.). McGraw-Hill. Gumusluoglu, L. H., & Ilsev, A. (2009). Transformational leadership, creativity, and organizational innovation. Journal of Business Research, 62, 461–473. Gustafsson, V. (2006). Entrepreneurial decision making: Individuals, tasks and cognition. Edward Elgar. Hilliard, A. G. I. I. I. (1979). Standardization and cultural bias as impediments to the scientific study and validation of “intelligence.” Journal of Research and Development in Education, 12, 47–58. Hindle, K. (2010). How community context affects entrepreneurial process: A diagnostic framework. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 22(7/8), 599–647. Hisrich, R. B., Peters, M. P., & Shepherd, D. (2004). Entrepreneurship (6th ed.). McGraw-Hill. Huelsbeck, D. P., Merchant, K. A., & Sandino, T. (2011). On testing business models. The Accounting Review, 86(5), 1631–1654. Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Tjosvold, D. (2006). Constructive controversy: The value of intellectual opposition. In M. Deutsch, P. T. Coleman, & E. Marcus (Eds.), Conflict resolution: Theory and practice (pp. 69–91) Jossey-Bass. Knotts, T. L., Jones, S. C., & Udell, G. G. (2003). Small business failure: The role of management practices and product characteristics. Journal of Business and Entrepreneurship, 15(2), 48–63. Kotkin, J. (1986, September). The reluctant entrepreneur: Are American blacks still stuck at the bottom rung of the economic ladder because so few start businesses of their own? Inc, 8(9). Kumar, K., Subramanian, R., & Strandholm, K. (2001). Competitive strategy, environmental scanning, and performance: A context specific analysis of their relationship. International Journal of Commerce & Management, 11(1), 1–33. Kuratko, D. F., & Hodgetts, R. M. (2007). Entrepreneurship: Theory, process, practice (7th ed.). Thomson/South Western Publishing. Kutzhanova, N., Lyons, T. S., & Lichtenstein, G. A. (2009). Skill-based development of entrepreneurs and the role of personal and peer group coaching in enterprise development. Economic Development Quarterly, 23(3), 193–210. Lichtenstein, G. A., & Lyons, T. S. (2001). The entrepreneurial development system: Transforming business talent and community economies. Economic Development Quarterly, 15(1), 3–20.

66

T. S. LYONS ET AL.

Lichtenstein, G. A., & Lyons, T. S. (2010). Investing in entrepreneurs: A strategic approach for building a stronger regional and community economy. Praeger/ABC-CLIO. Likert, R. (1932). A technique for the measurement of attitudes. Archives of Psychology, 22(140), 1–55. Lilienfeld, S. O., Ritschel, L. A., Lynn, S. J., Cautin, R. L., & Latzman, R. D. (2013). Why many clinical psychologists are resistant to evidence-based practice: Root causes and constructive remedies. Clinical Psychology Review, 33(7), 883–900. Lilienfeld, S. O., & Marino, L. (1995). Mental disorder as a Roschian concept. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 104(3), 411–420. Lord, F. M. (1980). Applications of item response theory to practical testing problems. L. Erlbaum Associates. Lumpkin, G. T., & Dess, G. G. (1996). Clarifying the entrepreneurial orientation construct and linking it to performance. The Academy of Management Review, 21(1), 135–172. Lyons, J.S. (2009).Communimetrics. A communication strategy for measurement in human service enterprises. New York, Springer. Lyons, T. S., Alter, T. R., Audretsch, D., & Augustine, D. (2012). Entrepreneurship and community: The next frontier of entrepreneurship inquiry. Entrepreneurship Research Journal, 2 (1), Article 1, https://doi.org/10. 2202/2157-5665.1064. Lyons, T. S., Lyons, J. S., & Jolley, G. J. (2019). The readiness inventory for successful entrepreneurship: A tool for higher education engagement in entrepreneurial learning. Journal of Economic Development in Higher Education, 2, 1–8. Lyons, T. S., Lyons, J. S., & Jolley, G. J. (2020). Entrepreneurial skill-building in rural ecosystems: A framework for applying the Readiness Inventory for Successful Entrepreneurship (RISE). Journal of Entrepreneurship and Public Policy, 9, 112–136. McEwen, T. (2013). An examination of the barriers that impact the implementation of environmental sustainability practices in small business. Journal of Business and Entrepreneurship, 25(1), 117–139. Mair, J., & Noboa, E. (2006).Social entrepreneurship: How intentions to create a social ventureare formed. In J. Mair, J. Robinson, & K. Hockerts (Eds.), Social entrepreneurship. Palgrave Macmillan. Man, T. W. Y., & Lau, T. (2000). Entrepreneurial competencies of SME owner/manager in the Hong Kong services sector: A qualitative study. Journal of Enterprising Culture, 8(3), 235–254. Mascolo, M. F., & Fischer, K. W. (1999). The dynamic co-development of intentionality, self and social relations. In J. Brandstadter & R. M. Lerner (Eds.),

3

THE RISE OF A CLINICAL APPROACH TO SKILLS ASSESSMENT

67

Action and development: Origins and functions of intentional self-development (pp. 133–166). Sage. Mattare, M. (2010). Use of self-101: The case for teaching personal development in the entrepreneurship curriculum. New England Journal of Entrepreneurship, 13(1), 17–28. Middleton, K. W., & Donnellon, A. (2014). Personalizing entrepreneurial learning: A pedagogy for facilitating the know why. Entrepreneurship Research Journal, 4(2), 167–204. Miller, D. (1983). The correlates of entrepreneurship in three types of firms. Management Science, 29(7), 770–791. Miller, L. E., & Simmons, K. A. (1992). Differences in management practices of founding and nonfounding chief executives of human service organizations. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 16(4), 31–39. Moore, K., jones, C., & Frazier, R. S. (2017). Engineering Education For Generation Z. American Journal of Engineering Education (AJEE), 8(2), 111–126. https://doi.org/10.19030/ajee.v8i2.10067 Morris, M. H. (1998). Entrepreneurial intensity: Sustainable advantages for individuals, organizations, and societies. Greenwood. Morris, M. H., Webb, J. W., Fu, J., & Singhal, S. (2013). A competency-based perspective on entrepreneurship: Conceptual and empirical insights. Journal of Small Business Management, 51(3), 352–369. Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). McGraw-Hill. Obeid, N., Lyons, & J. S. . (2011). Post triangulation measurement. Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation, 25, 59–82. Omerzel, D. G., & Antoncic, B. (2008). Critical entrepreneur knowledge dimensions for the SME performance. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 108(9), 1182–1199. Pine II, B. J., & Gilmore, J. H. (1999). The experience economy: Work is theatre & every business is a stage. Harvard Business Review Press. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879–903. Rae. D. (2012, November 6). Enterprise & entrepreneurship education: The new curriculum guidelines in Ireland and the UK. Presented at the ISBE Conference, Dublin, Ireland. Rasch, G. (1960). Studies in mathematical psychology: I. Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests. Nielsen & Lydiche. Reese, R. J., Gillaspy, J. A., Jr., Owen, J. J., Flora, K. L., Cunningham, L. C., Archie, D., & Marsden, T. (2013). The influence of demand characteristics and social desirability on clients’ ratings of the therapeutic alliance. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 69(7), 696–709.

68

T. S. LYONS ET AL.

Romero, E., & Gray, S. R. (2002). Management skills and training needs of small business managers. Journal of Business and Entrepreneurship, 14(1), 91–101. Sarri, K. K., Bakouros, I. L., & Petridou, E. (2010). Entrepreneur training for creativity and innovation. Journal of European Industrial Training, 34(3), 270–288. Schlosser, F. K., & Todorovic, Z. W. (2006). Entrepreneurial charisma: A key to employee identification? Journal of Small Business and Entrepreneurship, 19(1), 49–62. Schriesheim, C. A., Powers, K. J., Scandura, T. A., Gardiner, C. C., & Lankau, M. J. (1993). Improving construct measurement in management research: Comments and a quantitative approach for assessing the theoretical content adequacy of paper-and-pencil survey-type instruments. Journal of Management, 19(2), 385–417. Schulman, S. A., & Rogoff, E. G. (2011). The technology enabled entrepreneur: Today’s hope for a better tomorrow. Entrepreneurship Research Journal, 1(4). https://doi.org/10.2202/2157-5665.1057. Smith, M. (2003). Business process design: Correlates of success and failure. The Quality Management Journal, 10(2), 38–49. Smith, M. L., Glass, G. V., & Miller, T. I. (1980). Meta-analysis of psychotherapy. American Psychologist, 41, 165–180. Smith, W. L., Schallenkamp, K., & Eichholz, D. E. (2005). Entrepreneurial skills assessment: An exploratory study. International Journal of Management and Enterprise Development, 2(3), 349–359. Stam, W., Arzlanian, S., & Elfring, T. (2014). Social capital of entrepreneurs and small firm performance: A meta-analysis of contextual and methodological moderators. Journal of Business Venturing, 229(1), 152–173. Starr, J. E., & MacMillan, I. C. (1990). Resource cooptation via social contracting: Resource acquisition strategies for new ventures. Strategic Management Journal, 11(1), 79–92. Sternberg, R. J. (1988). The triarchic mind: A new theory of human intelligence. Viking Penguin. Stevenson, H. H. (1983). A perspective on entrepreneurship (Harvard Business School Working Paper 9, 384–131). Stewart, W. H., & Roth, P. L. (2007). A meta-analysis of achievement motivation differences between entrepreneurs and managers. Journal of Small Business Management, 45(4), 401–421. Tuler, S., & Webler, T. (2010). How preferences for public participation are linked to perceptions of the context, preferences for outcomes, and individual characteristics. Environmental Management, 46(2), 254–267. Vesper, K. H. (1993). Entrepreneurship education. University of California.

3

THE RISE OF A CLINICAL APPROACH TO SKILLS ASSESSMENT

69

Wally, S., & Baum, J. R. (2003). Personal and structural determinants of the pace of strategic decision making. Academy of Management Journal, 37 (4), 932–956. Walsh, E., & Walsh, D. (2019). Smart parenting, smarter kids: Anxiety, stress in children. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/smart-parent ing-smarter-kids/201905/how-children-develop-empathy posted October 9 Wright, B. D., & Masters, G. N. (1982). Rating scale analysis: Rasch measurement. Mesa Press. Zenger, J., & Folkman, J. (2007). Leadership development 6.0. Leadership Excellence, 24(10), 7.

CHAPTER 4

Applying the Skills Assessment to Entrepreneurship Education

In Chapter 3, the clinical assessment tool called the RISE was described and explained. In this chapter, we will take up its application to the education of students of entrepreneurship. We will pick up on the discussion of the current model of entrepreneurship education begun in Chapter 1, exploring learning theory, both curriculum and co-curricular activities, and where the RISE might fit into this flow. We will look at the application of outcomes management principles to skill-building efforts in entrepreneurship education. Finally, we will examine how the RISE has been modified and extended over the course of its development and the implications of this for its use in the entrepreneurship education arena. As observed in Chapter 1, entrepreneurship education has shifted its focus over the past decade from entrepreneurship as a process to entrepreneurship as a method. This suggests that what students must be taught is how to think and act as an entrepreneur, or how to practice entrepreneurship (Neck & Greene, 2011). For Neck and Greene (2011), this suggests a teaching portfolio that includes four major types of activities: (1) launching businesses as a course activity and outcome; (2) gaming and simulation, with an emphasis on what are known as “serious” games; (3) learning that uses principles of design; and (4) reflecting on and in practice. This portfolio can be used as a framework for examining the current state of entrepreneurship education.

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 T. S. Lyons et al., Entrepreneurship Skill Building, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-77920-7_4

71

72

T. S. LYONS ET AL.

The Current Nature of Entrepreneurship Education The movement toward incorporating action into entrepreneurship education has changed the educational landscape rather dramatically. While there are still lecture-based courses that strive to describe this applied field, they have become fewer in number and are often introductory courses to a full planning program, addressing the questions: What is entrepreneurship and what do entrepreneurs do? Significantly less emphasis is placed on traditional business planning than in the past, as the shift has been to the more strategic activity of business modeling. This reflects the adoption of lean startup principles by entrepreneurship educators, which emphasize customer-driven economic offerings and more organic approaches to business creation, such as iterative experimentation. The former is captured by Steve Blank’s (2013) now iconic admonition to entrepreneurs to “get out of the building.” The latter manifests itself in the concept of prototyping, i.e., the “minimum viable product,” which has encouraged the introduction of makerspaces into the curricula and co-curricular activities of entrepreneurship programs. Using Neck and Greene’s teaching portfolio, we take a deeper dive into this new entrepreneurship pedagogy environment. Bringing Business Creation into Entrepreneurship Education If entrepreneurship educators should be preparing their students for the practice of entrepreneurship, then what could be more germane than giving those students the opportunity to actually create a business as part of their education process? This exercise exposes students to the same, or similar, challenges that an entrepreneur faces in the startup process. It also contributes to the entrepreneurship skill-building method by giving students the opportunity to practice the knowledge they have amassed, a subject that will be discussed in more detail later in this chapter. This activity manifests itself in a variety of ways. Some entrepreneurship programs use a capstone course approach, where students are required to apply everything they have learned over the course of their studies to taking a business idea from concept to launch in a semester or two. Neck and Greene (2011) suggest flipping this, in the spirit of experiential learning, and making this experience the first thing entrepreneurship majors do, allowing them to reflect upon and learn from the experience.

4

APPLYING THE SKILLS ASSESSMENT …

73

In some programs, several courses make developing a business model a primary output of the learning experience, which allows instructors to link theory and practice in a single course. Pitching a business concept has also become a common teaching activity tied to incorporating business creation in the entrepreneurship education portfolio. Sometimes this is treated as a co-curricular activity; sometimes as part of a course on communication in entrepreneurship or on new venture creation; and sometimes as a practice-oriented activity in an otherwise theoretical or conceptual course. Preparing a pitch requires the student, or team, to think through their business concept fully in order to communicate it effectively to others. The instructor can use a framework such as the Business Model Canvas to help students organize their thinking (Osterwalder & Pigneur, 2010). Creating a business as a crucial part of the entrepreneurship education experience teaches numerous valuable skills. Among these are strategic thinking, customer discovery, experimentation, resilience, resourcefulness, managing failure, team building and maintenance, and communication, among others. Students also learn how to integrate the key business functions (Neck & Greene, 2011). Gaming and Simulation in Entrepreneurship Education Games have long been sources of entertainment in societies around the world (Almeida, 2020). However, they can also have educational value. Games are increasingly being used in higher education to teach concepts, processes, and skills (Vlachopoulos & Makri, 2017). While such games can still incorporate entertainment, and often do, their teaching intent has led to the appellation “serious games.” Serious games have the following characteristics (Almeida, 2020: 30): • They put teaching and learning ahead of entertainment as a goal; • They provide knowledge and the opportunity to improve skills through activities that are virtual; • They have three basic elements: concept, design, and purpose; • They use a narrative to engage and inspire users; and • Their purpose may be one or more of the following: – To encourage competition and/or collaboration among players;

74

T. S. LYONS ET AL.

– – – –

To To To To

provide immediate feedback; afford challenges that are motivational; provide opportunities to learn from mistakes; encourage agency

The emergence of serious games has given rise to a pedagogical methodology known as Game-Based Learning (GBL), which intentionally incorporates designing, building, and applying games into education practice (Almeida, 2020). Entrepreneurship education has adopted GBL, at least at some institutions. This has involved the use of both off-the-shelf and individual program-designed and -developed games in the classroom (Neck & Greene, 2011). One example of the latter is Virtual Enterprise (VE), which was created by the Department of Tourism and Hospitality at Kingsborough Community College of the City University of New York (CUNY) in 1998, making it one of the earlier examples of the use of serious games in entrepreneurship education. From its inception, VE permitted students to build and operate a virtual business in a virtual economy. This economy was international, at one time including students from over 40 countries, making it a global marketplace (Borgese, 2011). Within this virtual marketplace, students were asked to develop a business concept, write a business plan with an estimate of startup costs, and pitch this to investors. This pitch resulted in the assignment of seed capital and a virtual bank account from the CUNY Institute for Virtual Enterprise to each student or student team. The students were then ready to pursue their business goals (Borgese, 2011). At the heart of VE was its MarketMaker, a virtual economy with a virtual bank, credit cards, stock market, and ecommerce shopping mall. These features made it possible for students to experientially learn the skills of business financing, including budgeting, managing loans and lines of credit, managing cash flow and trading stock. They also taught students about meeting payroll, human resources management, supplier negotiations, marketing, and distributing goods to the shopping mall on a timely basis. The international nature of the marketplace forced students to learn to overcome the challenges to business created by differences in languages and cultures. Studies conducted by various researchers found that VE was highly effective in developing skills, motivating learning among students,

4

APPLYING THE SKILLS ASSESSMENT …

75

and preparing the simulation’s users for the world of business (Borgese, 2011). These are among the key attributes of a successful serious game. Serious games afford entrepreneurship educators the opportunity to simulate reality and allow students to interact with that artificial reality. They provide a safe environment in which students can experiment and learn without the financial risk of actually starting a business. In the Lawrence N. Field Programs in Entrepreneurship at Baruch College of the City University of New York, gaming simulations have been used as a “bridge” between the knowledge provided in the classroom and the business creation activities pursued in the programs’ co-curricular activities—a way of preparing students for business creation. Using Design Principles in Entrepreneurship Education Entrepreneurship involves both creation and innovation. Innovation— finding ways to get an invention to the market that needs it—has received considerable attention in the entrepreneurship literature and in entrepreneurship education; however, the creative process, which leads to the invention of solutions to customer needs, has only recently begun to garner its share of attention. This process is very much like that employed by designers. The design principles of experimentation and modification are crucial to the entrepreneurial activities of opportunity recognition and exploitation (Erichsen & Christensen, 2013). This is the process that Sarasvathy (2008) has called “effectuation.” Design thinking is underlain by five principles: user-centricity, problem framing, experimentation, visualization, and diversity (Carlgren et al., 2016). Representative of this approach is Stanford University d.school’s design thinking process, which is constituted of five stages and adapted to entrepreneurship here (Kickul & Lyons, 2020): • Stage 1. Empathize: In this stage, the entrepreneur becomes sensitive to the needs of the customer through listening and observation. • Stage 2. Define: The information gathered in Stage 1 is analyzed and used by the entrepreneur to clearly identify the problem to be addressed—a process referred to as “sense-making.” • Stage 3. Ideation: This stage involves the brainstorming of new ideas for solving the problem defined in Stage 2. This is known as “divergent thinking” because it does not censor ideas before they are

76

T. S. LYONS ET AL.

thoroughly considered. This stage also involves “convergent thinking”—the narrowing of the pool of ideas to one or a very few with which to work (Neck et al., 2018). • Stage 4. Prototyping: One, or more, of the ideas generated and refined in the Ideation stage is captured in a model or archetype. This prototype is usually a stripped-down version of the product— called a “minimum viable product” in the language of lean startup— which allows the end users to readily test it and make suggestions for improvement. • Stage 5. Testing: This is the stage in which the experimentation or testing actually takes place. This is intended to be an iterative process. As the entrepreneur reflects on the results of the testing stage, this information can be used to refine the prototype for further testing. However, the testing results might also highlight the need to revisit the empathy, definition, and ideation stages as well. Design thinking processes are widely used in entrepreneurship education. They may be woven into individual course designs or incorporated in co-curricular activities. Makerspaces are increasingly playing an important role in this aspect of entrepreneurship pedagogy. They provide the venue and equipment for expressing the tangible results of ideation and prototyping through events such as hackathons and design challenges (Halbinger, 2020; Szymanska et al., 2020). The Role of Reflection in Entrepreneurship Education Taking time to reflect on one’s practice yields new knowledge, which can be used to inform and improve that practice (Lundmark et al., 2019; Neck & Greene, 2011). Arguably, the late Donald Schon’s, 1984 book The Reflective Practitioner best captures this concept. In it, he laments the many failures of professional practice, which he attributes to professional education that neglects to incorporate opportunities for students to practice and reflect on their practice. Schon maintains that professionals should be so adept at incorporating reflection on what they have learned from plying their trade that they become capable of what he calls “reflection-in-action”—being able to make adjustments to one’s practice while practicing. This level of awareness, of course, requires considerable

4

APPLYING THE SKILLS ASSESSMENT …

77

practice and the discipline to intentionally and regularly reflect on the results of one’s work. Research on education has shown that reflection plays a valuable role in any kind of active or experiential learning. It forces the student to step back and think about the result of their actions and the lessons this holds for improving both knowledge and future action (Hatton & Smith, 1995; Kolb, 2014). Applied to entrepreneurship education, reflection has been used to help students better understand opportunity recognition and exploitation, the outcomes of problem-solving efforts, and the meaning of previously acquired knowledge (Cope & Watts, 2000; Pittaway & Cope, 2007). Key to this is the idea that reflection must involve challenges to the student’s personal assumptions and norms (Cope, 2003; Lundmark et al., 2019). As Lundmark et al. (2019) note, however, research has offered little insight on how reflection is taught, only that it must be incorporated in any educational effort to induce learning through doing. Entrepreneurship education is increasingly integrating reflection into its pedagogy. As practice is built into the curriculum and co-curricular activities through mechanisms discussed in this chapter, educators are requiring students to keep journals, leading discussions of lessons learned, and incorporating coaching and mentorship (Thompson et al., 2013). Recent research suggests that reflection can be an effective part of the entrepreneurship education process (Clarke et al., 2020; Clinkard, 2018; Kassean et al., 2015; Lindh, 2017; Lundmark et al., 2019). All of these major activities of current entrepreneurship education are arguably targeted to developing skills. At this point, it is useful to step back and take a look at how skills are developed, in general, and in entrepreneurship more specifically.

How Skills Are Developed The general process of skills development has been extensively addressed in the psychology, education, and adult learning literatures. It has received less attention in the entrepreneurship education literature, although this is changing. Driving this shift is the recognition that entrepreneurship involves learning (Minniti & Bygrave, 2001), and the learning process is dynamic (Rae, 2000; Reuber & Fischer, 1993). In effect, it is a form of life-long learning. Cope (2005) discusses how this dynamic learning process begins prior to startup and continues throughout the entrepreneur’s career, involving

78

T. S. LYONS ET AL.

both preparation for entrepreneurship and adaptation to changing conditions as the business grows and matures. “Entrepreneurial preparedness” requires the accumulated learning of the entrepreneur from prior knowledge and experience (Cope, 2005: 378). This learning is not only the basis upon which the business is built, but also the baseline to which learning acquired during the entrepreneurial process is added. It has been described by adult learning scholars as the “learning history” of the individual (Boud et al., 1993; Mezirow, 1991). Entrepreneurs must be able to assess this learning history, reflect on it, relate it to their specific context, and visualize how to use it in pursuing opportunities (Cope, 2005; Gibb & Ritchie, 1982; Harvey & Evans, 1995). They must also be able to update their learning history by adding the learning from new experiences (Minniti & Bygrave, 2001), which makes experiential learning crucial to successful entrepreneurship. This experiential learning tends to take place through significant “events,” involving both successes and failures (Cope, 2001; Rae & Carswell, 2000). Deakins and Freel (1998) characterize the entrepreneurship learning process as non-linear and discontinuous, involving numerous “critical events” that will ultimately decide the entrepreneur’s success, depending on how much he or she learns from each. Some scholars have argued that entrepreneurs learn more from these critical events than they do from more regular incremental learning (Cope, 2003; Mezirow, 1991). Significant events are thought to bring about higher-level learning results, which have the power to transform entrepreneurs’ thinking and increase their self-awareness (Applebaum & Goransson, 1997; Argyris & Schon, 1978; Mezirow, 1991). This is in no way meant to understate the importance of everyday experimentation and repetition as a source of learning. Research has found that this type of learning, sometimes referred to as “adaptive learning,” is capable of modifying one’s perspective or attitude (Burgoyne & Hodgson, 1983). These latter scholars have also determined that adaptive learning can result in higher-level learning outcomes, like those generated by critical events. When learning and reflection on that learning are brought together to enable the entrepreneur to use the result to address new situations, it is called “generative learning” (Gibb, 1997; Senge, 1990). Generative learning blends the past and the future to yield intention and more action (Cope, 2005). This type of learning is particularly valuable in that it permits entrepreneurs to engage in abstraction and make generalizations

4

APPLYING THE SKILLS ASSESSMENT …

79

across contexts, building bridges between events and permitting action across more situations (Cope, 2005). This theory of learning in entrepreneurship has largely been focused on practicing entrepreneurs. However, it is suggestive of an approach to developing entrepreneurship skills among students in institutions of higher education. The skill-building approach begins with knowledge; however, knowledge acquisition, alone, is insufficient to develop skills. There must be opportunities to practice that knowledge in simulated or actual professional contexts. Knowledge and practice, in and of themselves, do not develop skills, either. There must be regular feedback on the practice that forces the student of entrepreneurship to reflect and adjust both the way they think about their acquired knowledge and the way they practice it (Coyle, 2009; Neck et al., 2018). While entrepreneurship education programs have been imparting knowledge to students for decades, it is the focus on the element of practice in the learning process that is newer. If entrepreneurship education is about skill building, then practice is essential. Some have called this “deliberate practice,” in recognition of the importance of being intentional about it (Santinelli & Luecke, 2010). Coyle (2009) describes it as “deep practice,” in an attempt to capture the importance of its quality and magnitude. Coyle’s (2009: 53) formula for skill-building success— “Deep practice X 10,000 hours = world-class skill”—was highlighted by Malcolm Gladwell, who made it the focus of his book Outliers. Gladwell argued that a level of achievement that is typically ascribed to genius is actually due to the individual having put in at least 10,000 hours of practice. He uses Mozart as one of several examples, pointing out that while the composer has been labeled a genius, having begun composing at a very early age, he did not produce compositions of recognized quality that are still played today until he was 21 years of age—ample time to have put in 10,000 hours of practice (Gladwell, 2008). Translated to entrepreneurship, this suggests that skilled entrepreneurs must practice extensively. However, the amount of practice is only one dimension. It is also important how well one practices (Colvin, 2008; Coyle, 2009). Research has shown that “deep” or “deliberate” practice must include the following (Colvin, 2008; Coyle, 2009; Lichtenstein & Lyons, 2010): • The choice of what to practice must be strategic. In order to successfully develop skills, one cannot randomly practice whatever

80

T. S. LYONS ET AL.

• • • •

one chooses, nor will an attempt to practice everything be effective. The focus needs to be on addressing weaknesses and correcting errors; Pushing beyond one’s comfort zone. Developing skills through practice necessarily involves some managed risk taking. The reward lies in stretching oneself beyond self-imposed barriers to learning. Being very intentional. This requires focus and mental tenacity. It cannot be mindless or thoughtless practice. Extensive repetition. This is the 10,000 hours of practice prescribed by Coyle (2009). This permits going beyond mere mechanics to being strategic (Lichtenstein & Lyons, 2010). Continuous feedback on practice. If one merely practices on one’s own, it is just as likely that one will develop bad habits as that one will develop skills. If done well, this feedback will force reflection, a crucial element of the learning process.

Current practices in entrepreneurship education reflect this skillbuilding approach. Coursework is the principal source of knowledge acquisition for students. This is the grist for the learning mill. However, coursework increasingly involves practice as well, as instructors attempt to meld theory and practice. Lean startup principles, design thinking processes, business modeling approaches, and gaming simulations are regularly applied in the classroom. Students are asked to utilize what they learn to carry out empathetic customer discovery exercises, develop prototype products or services, test these prototypes with customers, and develop and pitch business models created around what is learned. Coursework is not the only source of practice opportunities for entrepreneurship students, however. Co-curricular activities can play this role and extend it. In the next section, we will briefly discuss the disconnect between curriculum and co-curricular activities that can too-often limit entrepreneurship education’s impact.

The Disconnect Between Curriculum and Co-curricular Activities As noted above, increasingly, entrepreneurship instructors are attempting to collapse knowledge hand-off and practice into coursework. At the same time, many entrepreneurship programs are spending tens of thousands of dollars building centers for entrepreneurship, with makerspaces,

4

APPLYING THE SKILLS ASSESSMENT …

81

accelerators, incubators, collaborative spaces, student-run retail stores, entrepreneurs-in-residence, pitch and business plan competitions, and startup internship programs, to name but a few of the co-curricular assets and activities made available to students. This functional overlap is indicative of the lack of a systemic approach to entrepreneurship education. This can cause students to think about their classroom experience as being distinct from the co-curricular activities offered by their entrepreneurship program, leading many to perceive these latter activities as being superfluous or irrelevant to their education; that is, what should be cocurricular activities have become extra-curricular activities, in the purest sense of these terms. This, in turn, may suppress participation in these co-curriculars. If skill building is the goal of entrepreneurship education, then an entrepreneurship program’s curriculum and co-curriculars should be strategically aligned with the skill-building process previously noted. The curriculum should play the role of providing knowledge. Co-curricular programming should provide opportunities to practice that knowledge, and a coaching/mentoring program should be in place to afford regular feedback on practice and encourage reflection. All of this must be effectively integrated, however, if it is to truly reinforce skill building.

Using the RISE to Integrate Entrepreneurship Programs The Readiness Inventory for Successful Entrepreneurship (RISE) discussed in Chapter 3 is not merely a tool for assessing an individual’s entrepreneurship skills, but it is also a means for organizing an entrepreneurship program into a mass customization vehicle for developing entrepreneurship skills. The RISE can be helpful in addressing the major challenges to creating and implementing a skillsbased entrepreneurship education: How do we know what skills our entrepreneurship students need to develop in order to be successful? How can we understand an individual student’s current skill strengths and weaknesses? How can we appropriately intervene to help the student leverage skill strengths and address skill weaknesses—the essence of skill development? How can we know when our interventions are working (or not) and students are improving their skill level? An important starting point for any skills-based entrepreneurship education program should be establishing goals around what skills will

82

T. S. LYONS ET AL.

be developed. Too often, this is based on what perceived exemplary programs are including in their curriculum and/or their co-curricular activities. While this may provide a place to start, it does not necessarily offer a complete and clearly articulated understanding of the skills required for entrepreneurship success. Part of the challenge lies in the fact, as noted in Chapter 1, that there is not full agreement on what the skills of entrepreneurship are. Nevertheless, it is also true that there are metaskills, both “hard” and “soft,” that have come to the surface repeatedly in the research conducted. The 30 “essential” skills of the RISE represent a research-based effort to capture those skills. The skills of the RISE provide a baseline by which curriculum can be developed or refined and co-curricular activities can be selected, refined, or expanded. The key questions that arise are threefold: (1) Are we providing the students in our classrooms with the knowledge they need for beginning the process of developing the skills prescribed by the RISE?; (2) Are we providing the co-curricular activities that reinforce the knowledge dispensed in our classrooms by providing opportunities to practice it, thereby building skills?; and (3) Are we providing the requisite coaching/mentoring to force our students to reflect on both their practice and their knowledge, allowing them to truly develop these skills? This constitutes the infrastructure of a skills-based entrepreneurship program, integrated by an agreed-upon skill set (the 30 “essential” skills of the RISE) and the skill development process, and focused on delivering a transformation in each student’s skill level. Once the skill development infrastructure is in place, the RISE can be used to manage the stages in the “helping system” discussed in Chapter 2. Because all students in the entrepreneurship program can use this infrastructure, access has been established. The infrastructure has been designed and organized to deliver a mass-customized service. The only prerequisite is the motivation on the part of the student to do the work necessary to develop their skills. Of course, we are describing an ideal implementation of a RISE-driven system. Actual implementation can vary by institution, as each will ramp up according to their readiness and the resources available. Assessment and engagement can now begin. As students enter the program, the RISE can be used to do a baseline assessment of their skills. We highly recommend that this be done with the coach/mentor who will work with them throughout their time in the program. This affords several advantages. First, we have found that a student’s initial encounter

4

APPLYING THE SKILLS ASSESSMENT …

83

with the RISE can be daunting in the sense that they may have difficulty digesting the results. Most will come to this point in time with relatively low skill levels, which can be a source of frustration and discouragement. Their coach can help them to put this in perspective and envision a path forward. Second, it ensures continuity in the skill development process. The coach will be helping the student to develop their action plans and will be working with them on follow-up assessments at the end of each term. Third, it allows the coach to get to know the student entrepreneur well enough to get an accurate sense of which interventions are more likely to work for them. The baseline assessment provides the opportunity to understand the student’s entrepreneurship skill strengths and weaknesses as they enter the program, which facilitates the coach’s efforts to guide them relative to choices of courses and co-curricular activities as well as campus-wide and community resources they can avail themselves of. This assessment can also aid the engagement of the student by helping them to better understand where they currently stand and how they can improve. As they take subsequent assessments, they can track their own progress in a meaningful way. We have also found that the attention and caring of the coach makes the student feel noticed, understood, and valued, which strengthens the latter’s engagement level. The intervention, planning, and delivery stage of the process takes the results of the RISE assessment and uses those to guide the process the coach will use to help the student to address the skills that were determined to be weak and to leverage skill strengths. The coach and the student will mutually determine which skills to begin with and develop an action plan for addressing them over the first term of engagement. The plan could comprise a variety of interventions aimed at helping the student to develop the selected skills. These might include the selection of courses to be taken that term. Elective courses might be chosen for content that is particularly relevant to the student’s skill-building needs. Core courses can also provide germane knowledge and can be viewed not as a requirement that must be met but as an opportunity to acquire knowledge that will help to strengthen a skill or skills, leading to higher RISE scores in the future. This adds an element of gamification that incentivizes learning and increases engagement. The action plan might also include co-curricular activities that provide practice opportunities for enhancing knowledge the student has already acquired or is acquiring during that term. For example, the student

84

T. S. LYONS ET AL.

and their coach may have agreed that the student needs to work on improving their skill of leadership. The coach could urge the student to volunteer to be the president of the Student Entrepreneurship Club. As another example, the skills of creativity and teaming might be identified for improvement. For this, the coach might suggest that the student enter the Entrepreneurship Center’s design challenge in its makerspace. This would expose the student to the opportunity to both engage in ideation and do it with a team competing in the challenge. Another intervention in the action plan might involve the coach assigning some homework that gets the student out into the local community. Let’s say that a skill requiring the student’s attention that term was the Relationship Management Skill of community involvement and influence. The coach could encourage the student to volunteer some of their time to serving in a local business organization. Targeted field trips can also be effective coaching tools. If the student is trying to build the skill of resourcefulness, it might prove fruitful to take them to the local business incubator and engage the entrepreneurs there in a conversation about how they creatively have overcome resource challenges. In some cases, the coach might refer the student to a faculty or staff member on campus who may be of help. The coach can also draw upon their own experiences to counsel the student regarding a particular skill. Whenever the coach prescribes a practice, they should also play the crucial role of providing continuous feedback to that practice, as discussed earlier in this chapter. In the example where the student takes on the role of Entrepreneurship Club President in order to practice the knowledge about leadership gained in the classroom, the coach should be a sounding board as the student develops a leadership style and encounters leadership challenges, forcing the student to reflect on their experiences and adjust their thinking and action, where necessary. This serves to perpetuate the skill-building process. Even if the student never achieves mastery, their skills are very likely to improve. At the end of the first term, the RISE assessment is taken again and compared to the initial baseline measurement. This provides a means to determine changes, if any, in the student’s skill level, particularly with regard to those skills targeted for improvement in the initial action plan. The hope is that, as a result of the coach’s and the student’s mutual efforts, these skills have been developed, achieving higher scores in the RISE assessment. If this is the case, a decision can be made about whether or not to continue to address these skills in the next action plan or to

4

APPLYING THE SKILLS ASSESSMENT …

85

focus on different skills. Either way, the Entrepreneurship Program now has an objective measure of the outcomes of the student’s education to date. In instances where the second RISE assessment shows no, or insufficient, improvement in skill development, the coach/student team has a basis for reevaluating the action plan and making needed changes. This set of activities constitutes the monitoring and adapting stage of the transformational helping process. RISE skills assessments can be conducted at the end of each term of the student’s tenure in the program. This provides feedback on the student’s progress and on the program’s overall effectiveness. The former has been discussed, but the latter warrants further attention. Colleges and universities have invested considerable time and resources in attempting to measure the impact of the education they provide their students. Accrediting bodies have pushed for this. Entire administrative infrastructures have been created just for this purpose. Despite all of the intelligent thought and dedicated effort committed to this endeavor, relevant and accurate outcomes measurement has remained elusive. This is due, in part, to the fact that there remains considerable disagreement over what the goals and objectives of a college education are. Some argue that imparting knowledge has intrinsic value that benefits the student throughout their life. This is likely true, if the student finds a way to incorporate this knowledge into their “life practice.” However, this puts the onus on the student to make the connection between the knowledge they receive through higher education and its practice and to solicit the regular feedback required to develop life skills (Clarke et al., 2020). This may or may not happen and makes measuring the impact of the educational experience nearly impossible during or immediately after that experience. This situation has led to a growing movement toward skills-based higher education (Daugherty et al., 2015; Watson & Watson, 2014). Skills are easier to measure for a variety of reasons, and universities have experience in skills-based education, as practiced by their professional programs (e.g., business, computer science, engineering, nursing, etc.). However, most of the skills traditionally taught by professional programs are “professional skills”—those that prepare the student to successfully undertake a job or professional career. These are narrow skills that educators in the arts and sciences argue are not relevant to a broader education. Yet, these latter educators are also beginning to recognize that they could do more to link theory to practice. There is a nascent movement to shift

86

T. S. LYONS ET AL.

the focus to helping students to develop “life skills.” As an example, at the university where one of us is a member of the faculty, a new philosophy course was recently added to the General Education curriculum that takes theories and concepts of philosophy and applies them to teaching students how to interpret what they are reading on social media in a critical way. This is a very relevant life skill for the twenty-first century. As a skill, it can be objectively measured in a meaningful way. Thanks to their multidisciplinary nature, entrepreneurship programs can legitimately argue that they teach both professional and life skills. The Business Management and Organizational Process Management skill domains of the RISE are the professional skills of entrepreneurship. The Relationship Management and Transformation Management domains capture entrepreneurship’s life skills. The skills of entrepreneurship are not merely the skills required to start a business; they are essential skills to functioning at all of the stages of the business life cycle (Lichtenstein & Lyons, 2006). Arguably, they are the skills required to be a leader in a VUCA (volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous) world, as noted in Chapter 1. Bringing this discussion full circle, the RISE assessment permits an entrepreneurship program to objectively measure the skills that it helps its students to build, both professional and life skills. This supports its outcomes measurement case at both the college and university levels, and with accrediting bodies. If, as argued above, entrepreneurship skills are essential skills for all students across campus to learn, then being able to measure life skill development, in particular, makes it easier to contend that entrepreneurship courses have a place in General Education curriculums. In the coordination and case management stage of the helping process as applied to entrepreneurship education, as suggested previously, the coach plays this role for each student with which they work. The coach manages the skills assessments through the RISE platform. They ensure that these are taken in a timely fashion and track changes in scores over time. They use the assessments to help each student plan and execute a strategy for addressing current skill weaknesses. The coach knows the program’s curriculum, the co-curricular activities and the campus’s and community’s entrepreneurship support resources and can use this knowledge to help the student to get the appropriate assistance at the appropriate time in the student’s skill development process.

4

APPLYING THE SKILLS ASSESSMENT …

87

When a student transitions out of the program (graduates), because of the mass customization that the RISE approach enables, the assumption is that they will have the same skills as all other graduates of the program. However, they will have come to this place in a highly customized way, reflecting the skills that they personally needed to develop. It is worth noting here that completion of a RISE-based entrepreneurship program does not necessarily mean that the student leaves having mastered all 30 skills. In our experience, an individual who achieves Level 4 or 5 on the RISE assessment is rare. This level of skill development has been found to be much more common among venture teams, where the team members’ combined skills are measured (Lichtenstein & Lyons, 2010). This, too, has implications for entrepreneurship education. Students should be made aware of this fact, so as to prevent false expectations or undue pressure. As most entrepreneurial ventures are run by teams these days, students should be encouraged to think in terms of finding teammates with complementary skill sets. A program that is RISEbased makes this easier, as all students are aware of their current skill level. The program can be supportive of this kind of teambuilding by making pitch competitions, makerthons, design challenges and other co-curricular activities team based and encouraging students to share their RISE scores as they create their teams.

The Evolution of the RISE Assessment At this point, it might be useful to explain the general origins of the RISE and how it has been extended and modified over time to make it more efficient, effective, and user-friendly. We also offer this as a way of framing a discussion about what we have learned about developing entrepreneurs along the way. The RISE represents the end product of a stream of research involving multiple and changing researchers over its course. As described in Chapter 1, we were seeking an explanation for entrepreneurial success. We were originally coming at this from an economic development perspective. We believed that if we understood why entrepreneurs are successful, we could help communities that wanted to engage in entrepreneur-focused economic development to be more efficacious in their efforts. Our findings convinced us that skills are the key to successful entrepreneurship. In order to identify the necessary skills, we began by examining the extant literature of the time. This was about the year 2000.

88

T. S. LYONS ET AL.

We created a simple four-dimension pattern of entrepreneurship skills that we described as technical, managerial, entrepreneurial, and personal maturity (Lichtenstein & Lyons, 2001), which are explained in Chapter 1. We felt this gave us a good start on understanding the skills required, but we realized that if we were going to operationalize it, we needed a way to measure these skills. In 2002, we wrote an unpublished conference paper (Lyons & Lyons, 2002) that explored marrying our skill categories with the communimetric theory of measurement discussed in Chapter 3 of this book. We then undertook to create a communimetric-based entrepreneurship skills assessment tool, which we completed in about 2004. This tool was created to support an entrepreneurship coaching system, called the Entrepreneurial League System (ELS) that was being rolled out in a pilot project that same year; thus, it was dubbed the Entrepreneurial League System Assessment, or ELSA. ELSA is described in some detail in a chapter in the book Communimetrics (Lyons, 2009). It used the four skill categories already noted and the clinical communimetric measurement system discussed in Chapter 3 of this book. It was a paper and pencil assessment tool that took about two hours to complete. It was first tested in an ELS pilot in an economic region in Central Appalachia called Advantage Valley, beginning in 2004. As was originally recommended, ELSA was administered by a third party (Lyons, 2009), which was an entrepreneurship coach. The tool, the reliability of which had already been established through testing, performed well. The coaches in the Advantage Valley ELS were able to use it effectively to establish skills baselines with their coachees and work with them to address skill weaknesses. This work had a measurable impact on the businesses of these entrepreneurs. Between 2004 and 2007, 112 entrepreneurs participated in the system and it was found to have a significant positive effect on sales and employment growth (Kutzhanova et al, 2009; Lyons, 2009) (see Table 4.1). ELSA was also used in an ELS coaching system in the Central Louisiana region. From 2006 to 2009, 92 entrepreneurs participated, with results that were very similar to those in Advantage Valley (see Table 4.2). ELSA proved its reliability and its ability to effectively guide the work of entrepreneurship coaches in the field. However, it was cumbersome and time-intensive to use. The data generated was recorded by hand and had to be entered into an electronic data management system to be tracked, analyzed, and compared. It did not lend itself well to the creation of a dynamic database. It became evident that an electronic version was

4

APPLYING THE SKILLS ASSESSMENT …

89

Table 4.1 Total sales revenue generated by advantage valley ELS clients over a six- to thirty-eight-month period as of 12/31/07 All skill levels Core metrics

Normalized metrics

Total number of clients Total sales revenue Average sale per client Median sale from client Maximum sale from client Minimum sale from client Percent of total clients Percent of total sales Average sale as percent of total sales Increased average revenue over previous level

Level 3

Level 2

Level 1

73

5

47

21

$55,445,274

$7,401,985

$44,705,844

$3,337,445

$759,524

$1,480,397

$951,188

$158,926

$206,092

$1,780,267

$273,604

$25,645

$18,324,396

$2,366,705

$18,324,396

$1,647,567

$100

$448,000

$2,072

$100

100.00%

6.85%

64.38%

28.77%

100.00%

13.35%

80.63%

6.02%

1.37%

2.67%

1.72%

0.29%

NA

$529,209

$792,262

$158,926

Source Lyons (2009). Communimetrics: A communications theory of measurement in human service settings. Springer

Table 4.2 Average and median sales revenue by entrepreneurship skill level for 109 entrepreneurs participating in the Central Louisiana Coaching system using the ELSA, 2006–2009

Skill levels

Average sales revenue

Median sales revenue

Level 3 (13 entrepreneurs) Level 2 ( 43 entrepreneurs) Level 1 (53 entrepreneurs)

$5,114,762

$3,616,748

$1,042,913

$506,375

$456,745

$242,665

Source Central Louisiana Entrepreneurial Collaborative Strategies LLC

League

System©,

90

T. S. LYONS ET AL.

needed. It was also apparent that the skill variables measured by ELSA were limited and dated. It was time to revisit the assessment’s content. A deep review of the literature on entrepreneurship skills and competencies was conducted. This was used to identify the meta-skills that were incorporated and are discussed in Chapter 3, and in 2012, the RISE 1.0 platform was built. It was web-based and designed to be a minimum viable product in order for us to test it with entrepreneurs and coaches to learn more about how it could best meet their needs to make required improvements. It offered the basic assessment, the capability to record and store data on skill measurements, the ability to create some graphics depicting skill changes, a note-keeping function for coaches, and minimal information on the types of interventions employed by coaches to develop their coachees’ skills. It was tested by various early-adopters, ranging from a large private company in the behavioral health industry that used it for developing midlevel managers as entrepreneurial leaders to the entrepreneurship center at a community college in California (described in detail in Chapter 5) to a college-run economic development program for developing rural entrepreneurs in the state of Victoria in Australia.1 Much as the ELSA before it, RISE 1.0 proved effective in guiding the efforts of coaches as they worked with entrepreneurs to develop their skills. Entrepreneurs who used it noted that it forced them to reflect on the reasons for their success, or lack thereof, and to focus on what they needed to do to improve. Coaches liked the fact that it permitted them to be more efficient and effective in pinpointing what their coachees needed in the way of resources and helped them to better match these needs to sources of support (Markley et al., 2015). Entrepreneurs also appreciated the conversations that using the assessment spawned because these helped them to better understand the skills of entrepreneurship and how they could learn more (Lyons, 2016). While the reaction by users to RISE 1.0 was generally positive, there were numerous suggestions for improvement. Many stemmed from the minimalist platform “environment.” Some found it unpleasant to work in. One user described it as “tired.” While most felt that the software was generally user-friendly, there were clearly some opportunities for improving upon it. Coaches wanted an easier way to access the

1 More information on this latter program can be found in Markley et al. (2015).

4

APPLYING THE SKILLS ASSESSMENT …

91

communimetric prompts and scoring essential to the assessment. A better system for keeping coaches’ notes on their coachees was deemed essential. Coaches and entrepreneurs expressed a desire for better reporting of assessment data, including improved graphic representation of skill changes. Among those using the assessment for economic development purposes, there was a desire for the ability to store economic impact data (revenue generated, jobs created, investment, etc.) for the businesses operated by the entrepreneurs taking the assessment, as a means of tracking changes in these numbers and correlating these with changes in skill level. All of this led to the development of RISE 2.0. In 2019, work began on this improved version of the web-based assessment tool. By March of 2020, the RISE 2.0 platform went live. This version attempts to address all of the shortcomings of RISE 1.0. It has an attractive and very professional-looking interface with users. The assessment, itself, has been streamlined and designed to make the user experience as seamless as possible. Coaches have generous space for notetaking and can generate attractive reports on the results of their activities. Measures of the economic impact of participating entrepreneurs can be collected, stored, and displayed. Our lessons learned through this evolution of the assessment tool, itself, go beyond assessment and software design. When we first started administering the RISE, we believed that it would work for the entrepreneur and the coach to take the assessment separately (the coach on behalf of the entrepreneur). Subsequently, we have learned that it is best not to encourage entrepreneurs to take the assessment on their own. This is especially true of students, for reasons we note earlier in this chapter. However, expecting a coach to assess an entrepreneur based on the coach’s observations and previous knowledge of the entrepreneur is not productive either. To get the full benefit of a communimetrics-based measurement, it is best to encourage the entrepreneur and the coach to take the assessment together. This dialog benefits both parties, as it orients the entrepreneur to the RISE and provides a basis for understanding the results, and it gives the coach an opportunity to get to know and understand the entrepreneur. This makes for a much more accurate assessment of the entrepreneur’s current skill set.

92

T. S. LYONS ET AL.

Conclusion Entrepreneurship education has come a long way in its evolution toward the development of student entrepreneurs. It now pursues a model of active learning or learning by doing. It engages students in building their own ventures and in serious games that simulate reality. It teaches students problem solving through engagement with end users, prototyping, and iterative experimentation. Throughout, it makes space for reflection by students on these experiences that helps them to better understand the knowledge imparted to them and how to improve their future actions. All of this involves skill building on the part of students; however, there is currently no way to know exactly what skills a given student needs to develop, to measure these skills in a way that permits their development, or to track changes in skill development that allow for outcomes measurement and management. The Readiness Inventory for Successful Entrepreneurship (RISE) addresses these challenges by identifying the “essential” skills of entrepreneurship, measuring them in a clinical way, and tracking changes in skill level over time. In the next two chapters, we will discuss and examine two distinct examples of the application of the RISE to entrepreneurship education— one at a community college and the other at a four-year university.

References Almeida, F. (2020). Adoption of a serious game in the development of emotional intelligence skills. European Journal of Investigation in Health, Psychology and Education, 10, 30–43. Applebaum, S. H., & Goransson, L. (1997). Transformational and adaptive learning within the learning organization: A framework for research and application. The Learning Organization, 4(3), 115–128. Argyris, C., & Schon, D. A. (1978). Organizational learning: A theory of action perspective. Addison-Wesley. Blank, S. (2013). Why the lean start-up changes everything. Harvard Business Review, 91(5), 63–72. Borgese, A. (2011). Virtual enterprise: Transforming entrepreneurship education. Journal of Instructional Pedagogies, 6. aabri.com/jip.html. Accessed December 21. 2020.

4

APPLYING THE SKILLS ASSESSMENT …

93

Boud, D., Cohen, R., & Walker, D. (1993). Introduction: Understanding learning from experience. In D. Boud, R. Cohen, & D. Walker (Eds.), Using experience for learning (pp. 1–18). SRHE & Open University Press. Burgoyne, J. G., & Hodgson, V. E. (1983). Natural learning and managerial action: A phenomenological study in the field setting. Journal of Management Studies, 20(3), 387–399. Carlgren, L., Rauth, I., & Elmquist, M. (2016). Framing design thinking: The concept of idea and enactment. Creativity and Innovation Management, 25, 38–57. Clarke, A. P., Clare, C., & Ferry, N. (2020). The use of self-reflection for enhanced enterprise education: A case study. Education and Training, 62(5), 581–598. Clinkard, K. (2018). Are employability and entrepreneurial measures for higher education relevant? Introducing AGILE reflection. Industry & Higher Education, 32(6), 375–390. Colvin, G. (2008). Talent is overrated. The Penguin Group. Cope, J., & Watts, G. (2000). Learning by doing—An exploration of experience, critical incidents and reflection in entrepreneurial learning. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior and Research, 6(3), 104–124. Cope, J. (2001). The entrepreneurial experience: Toward a dynamic learning perspective of entrepreneurship (Unpublished Ph.D. thesis). University of Lancaster. Cope, J. (2003). Entrepreneurial learning and critical reflection: Discontinuous events as triggers for higher level learning. Management Learning, 34(4), 429–450. Cope, J. (2005). Toward a dynamic learning perspective of entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 29(4), 373–397. Coyle, D. (2009). The talent code. Bantam. Daugherty, L., Davis, V. L., & Miller T. (2015). Competency-based education programs in Texas: An innovative approach to higher education. RAND Corporation. Deakins, D., & Freel, M. (1998). Entrepreneurial learning and the growth process in SMEs. The Learning Organization, 5(3), 144–155. Erichsen, P. G., & Christensen, P. R. (2013). The evolution of the design management field: A journal perspective. Creativity and Innovation Management, 22(2), 107–120. Gibb, A. A. (1997). Small firms’ training and competitiveness: Building on the small business as a learning organization. International Small Business Journal, 15(3), 13–29. Gibb, A. A., & Ritchie, J. (1982). Understanding the process of starting small businesses. European Small Business Journal, 1(1), 26–45. Gladwell, M. (2008). Outliers: The story of success. Little, Brown and Company.

94

T. S. LYONS ET AL.

Halbinger, M.A. (2020). The relevance of makerspaces for university-based venture development organizations. Entrepreneurship Research Journal, 10(2). https://doi.org/10.1515/erj-2020-0049. Harvey, M., & Evans, R. (1995). Strategic windows in the entrepreneurial process. Journal of Business Venturing, 10, 331–347. Hatton, N., & Smith, D. (1995). Reflection in teacher education: Towards definition and implementation. Teaching and Teacher Education, 11(1), 33–49. Kassean, H., Vanevenhoven, J., Liguori, E., & Winkel, D. E. (2015). Entrepreneurship education: The need for reflection, real-world experience and action. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, 21(5), 690–708. Kickul, J., & Lyons, T. S. (2020). Understanding social entrepreneurship: The relentless pursuit of mission in an ever changing world. Routledge. Kolb, D.A. (2014). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. FT Press. Kutzhanova, N., Lyons, T. S., & Lichtenstein, G. A. (2009). Skill-based development of entrepreneurs and the role of personal and peer group coaching in enterprise development. Economic Development Quarterly, 23(3), 193–210. Lichtenstein, G. A., & Lyons, T. S. (2001). The entrepreneurial development system: Transforming business talent and community economies. Economic Development Quarterly, 15(1), 3–20. Lichtenstein, G. A., & Lyons, T. S. (2006). Managing the community’s pipeline of entrepreneurs and enterprises: A new way of thinking about business assets. Economic Development Quarterly, 20(4), 377–386. Lichtenstein, G. A., & Lyons, T. S. (2010). Investing in entrepreneurs: A strategic approach for strengthening your regional and community economy. Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger/ABC-CLIO. Lindh, I. (2017). Entrepreneurial development and the different aspects of reflection. The International Journal of Management Education, 15, 26–38. Lundmark, E., Tayar, M., Qin, K., & Bilsland, C. (2019). Does reflection help students todevelop entrepreneurial capabilities. Journal of Small Business Management, 57 (3), 1157–1171. Lyons, J. S. (2009). Communimetrics: A communication theory of measurement in human service settings. Springer. Lyons, T. S. (2016). The RISE: A tool for fostering entrepreneurship in human service settings. John Praed Foundation. https://tcomconversations.org/ 2016/12/15/the-rise-a-tool-for-fostering-entrepreneurship-in-human-ser vice-settings/. Retrieved December 14, 2020. Lyons, T. S., & Lyons, J. S. (2002, November 24). Assessing entrepreneurship skills: The key to effective enterprise development planning? Presentation to the Association of Collegiate Schools of Planning Conference. Baltimore, MD.

4

APPLYING THE SKILLS ASSESSMENT …

95

Markley, D. M., Lyons, T. S., & Macke, D. W. (2015). Creating entrepreneurial communities: Building community capacity for ecosystem development. Community Development, 46(5), 580–598. Mezirow, J. (1991). Transforming dimensions of adult learning. Jossey-Bass. Minniti, M., & Bygrave, W. (2001). A dynamic model of entrepreneurial learning. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 25(3), 5–16. Neck, H. M., & Greene, P. G. (2011). Entrepreneurship education: Known worlds and new frontiers. Journal of Small Business Management, 49(1), 55– 70. Neck, H. M., Heck, C. P., & Murray, E. L. (2018). Entrepreneurship: The practice and mindset. Sage. Osterwalder, A., & Pigneur, Y. (2010). Business model generation: A handbook for visionaries, game changers, and challengers. John Wiley & Sons. Pittaway, L., & Cope, J. (2007). Simulating entrepreneurial learning: Integrating experiential and collaborative approaches to learning. Management Learning, 38(2), 211–233. Rae, D. (2000). Understanding entrepreneurial learning: A question of how? International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour and Research, 6(3), 145– 159. Rae, D., & Carswell, . (2000). Using a life-story approach in researching entrepreneurial learning: The development of a conceptual model and its implications in the design of learning experiences. Education and Training, 42(4/5), 220–227. Reuber, A. R., & Fischer, E. M. (1993). The learning experience of entrepreneurs. In N. C. Churchill, S. Birley, J. Doutriaux, E. J. Gatewood, F.S . Hoy, & W. E. Wetzel, Jr. (Eds.), Frontiers of entrepreneurship research (pp. 234–245). Babson Center for Entrepreneurial Studies. Santinelli, A., & Luecke, R. (2010, June 11). Vera Bradley (A.). Babson Case Study #656-C-10. Sarasvathy, S.D. (2008). Effectuation: Elements of entrepreneurial expertise. Edward Elgar. Schon, D. A. (1984). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. Basic Books. Senge, P.M. (1990). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization. Century Business. Szymanska, I., Sesti, T., Motley, H., & Puia, G. (2020). The effects of hackathons on the entrepreneurial skillset and perceived self-efficacy as factors in shaping entrepreneurial intentions. Administrative Sciences, 10(3), 73–88. Thompson, L. J., Clark, G., Walker, M., & Whyatt, D. (2013). It’s just like an extra string to your bow: Exploring higher education students’ perceptions and experiences of extracurricular activity and employability. Active Learning in Higher Education, 14(2), 135–147.

96

T. S. LYONS ET AL.

Vlachopoulos, D., & Makri, A. (2017). The effect of games and simulations on higher education: A systematic literature review. International Journal of Education Technology in Higher Education, 14, 22. Watson, W. R., & Watson, S. L. (2014). Redesigning higher education: Embracing a new Paradigm. Educational Technology, 54(3), 47–51.

CHAPTER 5

The Case of Santa Barbara City College

In this chapter, we examine the use of the RISE skills assessment by the Scheinfeld Center for Entrepreneurship & Innovation (the Center) at Santa Barbara City College (SBCC) and how this has impacted entrepreneurship education at the college. We begin by reviewing the Center’s history, mission, vision, programming, students, and facilities. We then discuss in some detail how the Center uses the RISE in its programs, specifically its accelerator and internship programs, and also its curriculum. We conclude by talking about SBCC’s plans for expanding its use of the RISE in the future and the Center director’s thoughts on future directions for the RISE assessment, generally. Finally, we tie SBCC’s experience back to the entrepreneurship education “transformation helping” model described in Chapter 4.

Santa Barbara City College SBCC was established in 1909, making it one of the oldest community colleges in California. The College offers over 100 associate’s degrees and currently serves approximately 15,000 students each semester. SBCC has been recognized by the Aspen Institute for its quality and focus in facilitating underrepresented and minority student success, student learning outcomes, degree completion and transfer rates as well as labor market success in securing good jobs after college. © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 T. S. Lyons et al., Entrepreneurship Skill Building, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-77920-7_5

97

98

T. S. LYONS ET AL.

Scheinfeld Center Overview The Scheinfeld Center for Entrepreneurship & Innovation is a hub for entrepreneurial development at SBCC and the surrounding community using a comprehensive approach that combines academic study with hands-on learning. The Scheinfeld Center provides entrepreneurial cocurricular experiential learning activities that complement a dedicated entrepreneurship academic curriculum to develop globally competent entrepreneurs. History The Scheinfeld Center was established in 2007, through the generous endowment of the late James D. Scheinfeld, an accomplished entrepreneur, civic leader, and dedicated supporter of Santa Barbara City College. He served as board member, director, and president of the SBCC Foundation, which provides private philanthropic support for SBCC and serves as the vehicle through which individuals and organizations can invest in the college and its students. Scheinfeld’s vision to encourage and support the development of new businesses, promote entrepreneurship, and assist existing businesses in Santa Barbara was born out of genuine regard and commitment to provide equal access to educational opportunities for all individuals. The Scheinfeld Center remains committed to fulfilling Jim Scheinfeld’s legacy. Mission and Vision The mission of the Scheinfeld Center is to lead the advancement of innovation and excellence in entrepreneurship education and practice, serving the current and emerging needs of their diverse student and business community. The Scheinfeld Center’s vision is to develop globally competent entrepreneurs who leverage pressing challenges and opportunities to create positive change and just, equitable, inclusive, and economically resilient communities. Programming The Entrepreneurship Program at Santa Barbara City College combines an academic curriculum housed within the Jack & Julie Nadel School of

5

THE CASE OF SANTA BARBARA CITY COLLEGE

99

Business & Entrepreneurship and the experiential co-curricular program offered through the Scheinfeld Center. This combination provides students a flexible, cost-effective way to develop their entrepreneurial mindset and skills, gain hands-on experience in starting business ventures, build social capital, and access resources while earning college credit at the same time. The combination also simultaneously supports student entrepreneurs, SBCC, and the local community by closing entrepreneurial skill gaps, supporting new business activity, providing student employment, encouraging employment and wage gains within students’ fields of study, and attracting new students. The Jack & Julie Nadel School of Business & Entrepreneurship also offers courses in other facets of business: Accounting; Business Administration; Business Law; Real Estate; Management; Computer Information Systems; Computer Applications; Finance; International Business; and Marketing. Additionally, the Scheinfeld Center collaborates with the Drafting and Computer Aided Design Department and Makerspace at SBCC to support students with prototype development. The premise that unites the entrepreneurship academic program and the Scheinfeld Center’s co-curricular activities is that cultivation of the entrepreneurial mindset, spirit, and skill set benefits all students, whether they seek employment, transfer to a university, or to start a business. Specifically, the Entrepreneurship Program includes the following components: • Academics include nine dedicated entrepreneurship courses that offer degree seekers and skill builders the opportunity to build their business while earning an Associate Degree or certificate. The courses include Introduction to Entrepreneurship and Innovation; Entrepreneurship: Idea to Business Model; Marketing Plan Development; Global Entrepreneurship; Financial Management for Startups; Enterprise Launch; Entrepreneurship Law; Business Plan Development; and Entrepreneurship: Information Systems Management. The courses are all hands-on, providing the opportunity for students to actively generate and explore business ideas, form teams, assess feasibility, conduct research and market validation, build prototypes, create minimally viable products and services, and generate sales. The faculty members are experienced entrepreneurs who teach one or more classes, and they also draw upon entrepreneurs from the Santa Barbara business community as guest

100

•

•

•

•

•

T. S. LYONS ET AL.

speakers and mentors for specialized industry expertise. Students can earn an Associate of Arts Degree or a Certificate of Completion in Business Administration with an Entrepreneurship emphasis. Enterprise Launch™ is one of the most popular courses in the Center’s academic program and enables students to rapidly launch a product or service in a single semester using a test and learn approach. The course is an important bridge between the Entrepreneurship Program, the Scheinfeld Center, the SBCC Makerspace, and the startup ecosystem in the Santa Barbara Community. The Scheinfeld New Venture Challenge annual business plan and pitch competition offers college and high school students throughout Santa Barbara County the opportunity to compete for seed money and startup support services. The competition celebrated its 10th year in 2020. The Scheinfeld Get REAL Accelerator ™ was launched in 2019 and provides four to six teams of SBCC students a 6-month program that includes dedicated mentoring and monthly customized workshops to help participating teams gain market traction. The culminating event is the Get REAL Shark Tank in which the participating founders compete for a $10,000 award and the opportunity for additional investment from angel investors. The Scheinfeld Interns Program provides students the opportunity for professional growth in entrepreneurial and business skills through virtual paid project-based internships directly with the Scheinfeld Center. Outstanding interns can continue to expand and deepen their skill set for up to three semesters with pay advancement as they take on new challenges. The Scheinfeld Center collaborates with SBCC’s Schall Career Center to match qualified students with work opportunities in the Santa Barbara business community, as well as virtual international internships. No-Cost Business Consulting is available to students outside of their academic coursework through the Scheinfeld Center in collaboration with entrepreneurs and organizations within the Santa Barbara startup ecosystem. Students access business consulting primarily through two touchpoints: (1) within the context of the Entrepreneurship Program’s hands-on academic program courses

5

THE CASE OF SANTA BARBARA CITY COLLEGE

101

and (2) within the Scheinfeld Center’s co-curricular activities that are aimed at assisting students with the launch of their ventures. The business consulting is tailored to the academic focus of each course or to the purpose of the Scheinfeld Center co-curricular program, and it’s targeted to each student’s venture, skill gaps, and launch phase. This tailored and targeted approach helps ensure that students get the right type of support at the right time, whether it’s gaining business insights, accessing resources, building social capital, or connecting with funding opportunities. Because the academic program and Scheinfeld Center welcomes diversity among students and business concepts, an expansive pool of business consultants with a wide range of entrepreneurial, industry, and business experience is required. The Entrepreneurship Program faculty members, administrators, and the Scheinfeld Center director work collaboratively to identify business consultants in their network and outreach to those who meet the students’ immediate and emerging needs. The business consulting occurs in the classroom or the co-curricular activity venue. • The Scheinfeld Innovators Studio & Community brings together creative thinkers and doers with educational and networking opportunities among SBCC students, faculty, and staff to stimulate business ventures across all academic disciplines. The Scheinfeld Center Innovators Studio provides space for program administration, mentoring, pitch practice, hosting podcasts, and holding virtual meetings. The Innovators Studio is located in a high-traffic area of the Business and Communications building adjacent to the main lobby and entrance. The space measures only 12’ x 15’, but its highly functional design was determined after careful observation of Scheinfeld Center operations over a one-year period (see Fig. 5.1). The Innovators Studio provides a venue for Scheinfeld Center administration and targeted activities without being redundant with the other spaces available in the Business Communications building. The furnishings provide a hip and modern feel that appeals to students and sets the studio apart from classrooms, while also being easily moved into different configurations for various activities. The Scheinfeld Center director’s office is located in the Scheinfeld Innovators studio and any Scheinfeld Center activities conducted there are led by the director.

102

T. S. LYONS ET AL.

Fig. 5.1 Scheinfeld innovators studio floor plan (Source Author’s creation)

The Scheinfeld Innovators Community brings together creative thinkers and doers with educational and networking opportunities among SBCC students, faculty, and staff to stimulate business ventures across all academic disciplines. The mainstay of the Scheinfeld Innovators Community is weekly meetings. The focus of these meetings is student-driven to encourage their engagement

5

THE CASE OF SANTA BARBARA CITY COLLEGE

103

and support maximum relevancy from their perspective. The Scheinfeld Center director and Scheinfeld Interns coordinate and facilitate the meetings, prioritizing flexibility and creativity to address the students’ entrepreneurial interests. For example, during the COVID19 pandemic weekly face-to-face meetings pivoted to a weekly podcast that’s live streamed on YouTube. Students can interact via live chat and the podcast guests have been Gen Z entrepreneurs from across the globe. The videos are available on the Scheinfeld Center YouTube creating a valuable resource for students and faculty alike. The Scheinfeld Innovators Community functions differently from campus clubs that are student-led and can sometimes go dormant if student leaders aren’t available. The Scheinfeld Innovators Community provides continuity from year to year, ensuring that entrepreneurial-minded students consistently have a welcoming network to connect with. Additionally, any campus clubs that have entrepreneurial projects or interests during a given semester are welcome to join forces with the Scheinfeld Innovators Community to host activities collaboratively, leveraging the extra support and resources available through the Scheinfeld Center. The Scheinfeld Enlightened Entrepreneurship Series and Academy honors entrepreneurs who have contributed significantly to the development of free enterprise throughout the world and consists of events open to the community that include fireside chats, networking receptions, and presentation of the Jim Scheinfeld Enlightened Entrepreneur Award. These entrepreneurial educational and networking events convene SBCC students, faculty, and regional entrepreneurs to address emerging entrepreneurial opportunities and common skills gaps that thwart startup activity and economic development in our region. The events also serve as professional development opportunities for faculty. Overall, the Entrepreneurship Program resources provided to students range from general to customized to meet each student at their level of entrepreneurial development and aspiration. Resources become more specific as students attain startup milestones. For example, the Scheinfeld Innovators Community provides educational networking opportunities among peers and the Santa Barbara business community to enable students from any discipline to explore entrepreneurship. In contrast, the Get REAL Accelerator program provides tailored resources and support to gain market traction according to each founder’s needs.

104

T. S. LYONS ET AL.

Students The Entrepreneurship Program welcomes diversity among business concepts and students. Students from all backgrounds, academic disciplines, and career interests are encouraged to enroll in the Entrepreneurship Program courses and participate in Scheinfeld Center activities. The demographics of students who enroll in the Entrepreneurship Program courses reflect that of SBCC overall. The largest age demographic of students is 18–24 years old (72%), and approximately 60% of students attend SBCC part time. Most students are California residents (90%) and about 5% are international students. Racial minorities represent about 56% percent of students. Approximately 22% of students can be considered low-income as indicated by the Federal Pell Grant Aid receipt. Students who enroll in the Entrepreneurship Program and engage in Scheinfeld Center co-curricular activities typically fall into three categories: • Explorers: These students are curious about entrepreneurship. They explore what it entails and whether it might be a fit for them in terms of creating a livelihood. They typically take entrepreneurship courses and participate in Scheinfeld Center activities on a casual basis, often as a complement to another field of study. • Generators: These students are highly motivated to test ideas and actively engage in launching a venture. They are typically degree or certificate-seeking students in the Entrepreneurship Program (Business Administration with the Entrepreneurship emphasis). • Starters: These students actively start and grow their business in the context of the Entrepreneurship Program. They may be degree or certificate seekers, or they may be skill builders who only take courses that address identified entrepreneurial skill gaps. Since 2008 the number of students enrolled as declared majors in the Entrepreneurship Program has remained steady, averaging 171 students each spring and fall semester. Within the context of the academic program and Scheinfeld Center co-curricular activities, each year approximately 26 student teams complete the process of designing a business concept, conducting feasibility studies, developing product or service prototypes, talking with anticipated customers, identifying funding sources, and pitching their concepts. Additionally, approximately 4–6 officially launch and grow their business annually within the context of academic program and Scheinfeld Center co-curricular activities.

5

THE CASE OF SANTA BARBARA CITY COLLEGE

105

Facilities The Jack & Julie Nadel School of Business & Entrepreneurship and the Scheinfeld Center are housed in the Business and Communications building on the SBCC campus. The building includes classrooms and a student-centric multipurpose lobby for shared study, incubation, and event space. The Scheinfeld Center Innovators Studio provides space for program administration, mentoring, pitch practice, hosting podcasts, and holding virtual meetings. The Scheinfeld Library and conference room is used for tutoring, group mentoring, and interdisciplinary campus meetings. The Fe´ Bland Forum is the venue for Scheinfeld Center events, such as the Scheinfeld New Venture Challenge business plan and pitch competition and the Enlightened Entrepreneurship Series. On the opposite side of campus, the SBCC Makerspace is housed and operated by the Drafting/CAD Department and serves as a space of synergy and innovation, working closely with students enrolled in the Enterprise Launch course and Product Design courses, so that they can develop their prototypes.

The Scheinfeld Center and the RISE Licensing the RISE was championed by the Scheinfeld Center director and strongly supported by the Business Department dean because the Entrepreneurship Program, SBCC, and the California Community College system are metric and performance driven. Thus far, the Scheinfeld Center director has been the sole person implementing the RISE, since the director interfaces with the Entrepreneurship students as they enter and exit the program by serving as a faculty member and administrator of Scheinfeld Center co-curricular activities. The Center director also serves as manager and administrator of entrepreneurial activities. The director’s role includes providing overall strategic direction of the Entrepreneurship Program in cooperation with the Business Division dean and faculty; participating in curriculum design and experiential component development; meeting with students and advising them on their business ideas or academic goals; providing mentoring and resource matching for students; and serving as a liaison with external stakeholders to establish a meaningful and measurable economic impact in the community through student and community-member created business.

106

T. S. LYONS ET AL.

To fulfill this role, the Scheinfeld Center director needed a researchbased tool for entrepreneurial skill assessment to incorporate into the Entrepreneurship Program that supports student success in three important ways: (1) provides students an entrepreneurial skills baseline that can be paired with tailored developmental plans and the capacity to track changes over time; (2) provides a common means for communication about entrepreneurship skill development; and (3) provides a means for program assessment and revision based on patterns and outcomes in entrepreneurial development among students. The RISE allows the director to accomplish this in a scalable way. Beginning in 2019, the RISE has been implemented in three areas within Scheinfeld Center co-curricular activities and the entrepreneurship academic program where students’ motivation to explore entrepreneurship and develop entrepreneurship skills is highly visible and actionoriented: (1) the Get REAL Accelerator; (2) the Scheinfeld Interns Program; and (3) as a module in the Introduction to Entrepreneurship course. RISE Pilot During the Get REAL Accelerator The Scheinfeld Center piloted the RISE with four student founders during the 6-month Get REAL Accelerator that was launched during the summer of 2019. The goal of the pilot was to enable the Scheinfeld Center director to become familiar with administering the RISE, to assess the efficacy of Get REAL in terms of catalyzing entrepreneurship skill development, and to identify other potential applications of the RISE within the Scheinfeld Center program. Get REAL consists of six learning labs with content tailored to the founders’ skill gaps, as well as dedicated mentoring from entrepreneurs in each founder’s targeted area for growth during the accelerator. Each founder identifies 6-month milestones with the guidance of their designated mentor, and founders who attain their milestones are eligible to pitch in the culminating Get REAL Shark Tank pitch competition in pursuit of cash awards. The four participating founders in 2019 were representative of the most driven and action-oriented student entrepreneurs who enroll in the Entrepreneurship Program. All of the founders were former winners of the Scheinfeld Center New Venture Challenge within the three preceding years. Three of the founders had already attained product sales prior to

5

THE CASE OF SANTA BARBARA CITY COLLEGE

107

acceptance into Get REAL, and the other had a working prototype with some market validation. The RISE was administered to the student founders by the Scheinfeld Center Director upon entry & exit from the Get REAL Accelerator. During the individual entry consultations with each founder, the RISE was used to establish a skills baseline for each founder and assist mentors with identifying targeted milestones and action plans for the accelerator. The results were used to customize learning lab content. The director and each founder identified areas of relative strength and overall areas for growth. The top three areas for growth were identified that aligned with the founder’s targeted milestones during the accelerator in consultation with each founder’s designated mentor. The RISE was then repeated during the final month of the accelerator as part of the exit interview with participating founders to assess changes. The four founders’ overall entrepreneurial skill development during Get REAL based on their entry and exit RISE scores is illustrated in Table 5.1. The RISE fulfilled all needs during Get REAL. The process of administering the RISE built rapport and collaboration among the Scheinfeld Table 5.1 Overall skill improvement among Get REAL Accelerator founders

Source Author’s creation

108

T. S. LYONS ET AL.

Center director, founders, and mentors and organized collective effort. Mentors reported that having the results of the RISE assessment helped them initially become acquainted with the founders’ needs in conjunction with their business plans and Get REAL application video pitches. In the surveys conducted after each learning lab, founders reported that the learning lab content (which addressed targeted skill gaps identified through the RISE) was valuable in helping them advance on their milestones. The exit interviews revealed skill development in the targeted areas among all founders, thus validating efficacy of the accelerator. All founders reported that the RISE was helpful in targeting areas for skill development during the accelerator. Three of the founders reported that the RISE was helpful during the exit interview as evidence of the progress they made during the six-month period. Some direct quotes from the Get REAL participants are captured below. • “It helped me understand which skills are working for me, and which skills it makes sense to develop where I’m at right now with my venture.” • “Taking the RISE before and after the accelerator actually showed me that my skills aren’t as strong in some areas as I thought they were.” • “I liked that it gave a common foundation between me and my mentor to focus on.” • “I was so busy working on my business that I didn’t realize all the progress I made with my skills during the accelerator. The realization was a nice way to finish the experience of the accelerator.” Internship Program The RISE was piloted in the Scheinfeld Center’s internship program during 2020. The Scheinfeld Center hires four to six interns each semester to provide students with opportunities for entrepreneurship skill development and paid work experience while supporting Scheinfeld Center operations. The internships primarily focus on marketing, community building, and event planning and implementation. The majority of the skills identified in the RISE can be integrated into internship projects. The Scheinfeld Center director tailors each intern’s project to align with their professional aspirations and the needs of the Scheinfeld Center. Each intern determines their weekly time commitment toward their internship

5

THE CASE OF SANTA BARBARA CITY COLLEGE

109

during the hiring process, which can range from 10 to 19.5 h per week. Interns can extend their internship for up to three semesters. Beginning in Spring Semester 2020, the RISE was implemented with two returning interns. The goal was to use the RISE to design the interns’ projects and track their entrepreneurship skill development. Historically, the interns who return for a second semester are highly motivated to leverage their internship for optimal professional development. At any given time, one or two interns with the Scheinfeld Center are second or third semester interns. Implementing the RISE with second and third semester interns enabled the Scheinfeld Center director to gain first-hand experience working with each intern during their first semester, leading to a meaningful implementation of the RISE thereafter. The Scheinfeld Center director and the intern met individually to implement the RISE and decided on three to five RISE skills to target for development based on the results of the RISE assessment, the interns’ ambitions, and their internship accomplishments. Each intern’s project is designed to provide ample opportunity for the targeted skill development. Results from the internship program pilot indicate that the RISE contributed to the interns’ perceived value of the internship and contributed to factors they considered regarding continuation of their internship. One intern continued their internship for three semesters and the other for two semesters. Both interns stated that one motivating factor for continuing their internship was the Scheinfeld Center’s demonstrated commitment to their professional growth and the RISE provided them evidence of this commitment. Both interns also reported that using the RISE as a tool to plan and track skill development was helpful as evidence of their developmental growth, which was as important to them as completion of their projects. One of the interns stated that she will continue to utilize the RISE framework for targeting skill development with her future employers. Administratively, factors that encourage intern retention provide a greater return on investment for the Scheinfeld Center as it decreases the time and resources required to establish a productive team each semester. Additionally, continuing interns have demonstrated knowledge of Scheinfeld Center operations and can serve as peer leaders on the Scheinfeld Center Team, advancing both the peer leader’s skill development and efficiency of operations. The quantification of entrepreneurship skill development also validates continuation of the internship program.

110

T. S. LYONS ET AL.

Based on the results of the RISE pilot with the internship program, the Scheinfeld Center will continue its application to track data over time. While the RISE is implemented with second and third semester interns, this opportunity is conveyed to all interns to provide incentive for continuing with the Scheinfeld Center and as a demonstration of the Scheinfeld Center’s investment in entrepreneur development. Implementation of a RISE Module in an Introduction to Entrepreneurship Course During Fall 2020, the Scheinfeld Center director designed and piloted a course module as instructor of an online Introduction to Entrepreneurship course at SBCC. The module was based on the RISE’s four domains and 30 entrepreneurship skills. The goal of the module was to: • Address a required learning objective for the course: namely, to analyze the skills necessary to successfully create, manage, and grow an entrepreneurial business venture. • Illuminate the difference between knowledge acquisition and skill development. • Identify work-based learning opportunities available through the Scheinfeld Interns program and the SBCC Career Center. The Introduction to Entrepreneurship course was taught asynchronously online to 30 students using the Canvas learning management system. The module had four steps: 1. Students completed a short reading assignment that included the following: (a) The difference between knowledge and skills and their relevance in entrepreneurship and business success. (b) A description of the RISE, its four domains, and its 30 entrepreneurial skills. (c) Methods for gaining work experience to transform entrepreneurial knowledge into established skills, including the opportunities available through the Scheinfeld Center and the career center at SBCC. An example was included that

5

THE CASE OF SANTA BARBARA CITY COLLEGE

111

described how the Scheinfeld Center uses the RISE in the Scheinfeld Interns program to assist students in entrepreneurship skill development. 2. Students identified one of their favorite well-known entrepreneurs who they consider successful and sourced one to three online articles from reliable business sources published within the past year that include three examples of the entrepreneur’s skills in action that are included in the RISE. 3. Students completed an online discussion board assignment in the Canvas learning management system that included (1) the identified entrepreneur; (2) cited article(s) used for the assignment; (3) an explanation of how the entrepreneur exemplifies the three RISE entrepreneurial skills; (4) a reflection of the most important thing they learned from the assignment regarding their own entrepreneurial skill development; and (5) a reply to two other students’ posts to further the discussion. Twenty-one students successfully completed the RISE module. All students conveyed an understanding of the difference between entrepreneurial knowledge and skills, and they expressed value in becoming aware of the 30 essential skills of entrepreneurship, as indicated by the RISE. The RISE module motivated seven students to contact the Scheinfeld Center director to learn more about the RISE and work-based learning opportunities. The Scheinfeld Center director will administer the RISE module again and integrate a link to schedule an appointment with the Scheinfeld Center director to provide an immediate way for students to take action to advance their entrepreneurship skill development.

Future Use of the RISE The RISE will continue to be an important tool for the Scheinfeld Center and the SBCC Entrepreneurship Program as Generation Z (born between 1995–2010) continues to arrive on campus. Gen Z is already the predominant generation enrolled at SBCC and within the Entrepreneurship Program, and students in this generation are entrepreneurial, desire practical skill development integrated into their education, and demonstrate concern about the cost of college in relation to the career value they receive from it. A recent Gallup (2016) student poll found that 40

112

T. S. LYONS ET AL.

percent of students surveyed from grades five to 12 want to run their own business, and 24 percent said they have already started. Results from RISE implementation thus far by the Scheinfeld Center indicate that while Gen Z is native to the digital economy and familiar with digital tools, they still need guidance regarding how to apply these skills in business. Their personal assessment of their own entrepreneurship skill set is often underestimated or exaggerated. The RISE provides an important barometer of their entrepreneurship skill development in experiential learning and the collaborative communimetrics method of implementation appeals to Gen Z. Gen Z is also the most racially diverse generation to date with nearly half (48 percent) from communities of color: Approximately one-in-four are Hispanic, 14% are black, 6% are Asian, and 5% are some other race or two or more races (Pew Research Center, 2020). The RISE is an important tool for ensuring equity in access to resources provided by the Scheinfeld Center because the tool helps identify unique needs of each individual and provides a basis for designing entrepreneurship skill development program interventions tailored to each individual’s specific needs.

The RISE and Entrepreneurship Program Development Ultimately, engagement of the Entrepreneurship Program faculty in the adoption and use of the RISE platform in the classroom would provide valuable data in terms of measuring the efficacy of the entrepreneurship academic courses in cultivating students’ entrepreneurship skill development. However, whether the adoption of the RISE can occur at this level is not yet clear. Effort is underway to familiarize Entrepreneurship Program faculty with the RISE as a first step. The value of the communimetrics model of RISE implementation is demonstrable, but it also requires considerable time to implement the RISE, and overall, faculty members are pressed for time. The Scheinfeld Center director will work with the Entrepreneurship Program faculty to determine whether the development of RISE-related course activities would be of interest to faculty to assist their students in assessing and tracking their entrepreneurial skill development within each course. The activities could alert students to the availability of the RISE to guide their entrepreneurial development through the Scheinfeld Center.

5

THE CASE OF SANTA BARBARA CITY COLLEGE

113

As the Scheinfeld Center director continues implementing the RISE in 2021, results of using the RISE will also be reported in departmental meetings and presented as a tool to cross-check to the academic program to ensure the program covers the relevant entrepreneurship domains and skills. Continued collection of RISE data and quantified measures of skill development within the Internship Program and Get REAL accelerator will be used to demonstrate the efficacy of the RISE as a tool to identify gaps for course or program revision. The RISE would become an even stronger tool for the Scheinfeld Center if the RISE organization was more strongly positioned as a trusted authority and resource in the ongoing assessment of which entrepreneurship skills are relevant in the changing workplace and business environment. This could motivate faculty members to turn to the RISE as an important tool and resource in their course development to optimize entrepreneurial skill development. The availability of course activities that introduce the concept of the RISE to students and faculty would be helpful as well. The Center director has expressed a desire for a networking group of Entrepreneurship Center directors who use the RISE and meet periodically to share best practices and insights regarding entrepreneurial skill development and innovation in entrepreneurship education to optimize entrepreneurship skill development using the RISE. This could provide more motivation to use the RISE platform to collectively contribute data to this important data set that would benefit students, Entrepreneurship Center directors, and faculty members alike.

Conclusion Clearly, SBCC approaches entrepreneurship education with a focus on skill development, using the knowledge—practice—feedback model discussed in Chapter 4. They have a curriculum for dispensing knowledge. The Scheinfeld Center is the source of opportunities for students to practice that knowledge, and feedback is provided through mentoring, largely by the Center director. The integration between these three components of the skill-building process is facilitated through the use of the RISE assessment. The Center started by using the RISE specifically with the Get Real Accelerator Program. It then adopted the assessment for use in its internship program. This programmatic approach gave the Center the

114

T. S. LYONS ET AL.

opportunity to pilot the RISE assessment on a small scale before rolling its use out more widely. The use of the RISE in the Introduction to Entrepreneurship course was pivotal, as it brought the assessment into the curriculum, familiarizing students with the tool and its capability for enhancing their educational experience. This, in effect, is helping to create a pipeline of students who can take full advantage of this capability through the programs of the Scheinfeld Center. The Center director plays the role of the “connector,” teaching about the RISE and skills-based education and coaching to the RISE in Center-based practice opportunities. In this way, the Scheinfeld Center is moving students through the five stages of the transformation “helping system” discussed in Chapter 4: assessment & engagement; intervention, planning & delivery; monitoring & adapting; coordination & case management; and transition, transforming entrepreneurship skills and student entrepreneurs.

References Gallup. (2016). The 2016 Gallup-HOPE index quantifying the economic energy of America’s youth. Retrieved from https://news.gallup.com/reports/207899/ 2016-gallup-hope-index-report-download.aspx, March 15, 2021. Pew Research Center. (2020). On the cusp of adulthood and facing an uncertain future: What we know about Gen Z so far. Retrieved from https://www.pew research.org/social-trends/2020/05/14/on-the-cusp--of-adulthood-and-fac ing-an-uncertain-future-what-we-know-about-gen-z-so-far-2/, April 1, 2021.

CHAPTER 6

The Case of the University of Tennessee at Chattanooga

In Chapter 5, we examined Santa Barbara City College’s Scheinfeld Center for Entrepreneurship & Innovation’s use of the Readiness Inventory for Successful Entrepreneurship (RISE) in two of their co-curricular programs and, later, in their introductory entrepreneurship course as a means of exposing new students to the tool and to skills-based education. In this chapter, we will look at the use of the RISE in a program-wide, strategic fashion that places skill development squarely at the center of entrepreneurship education and, in so doing, closely links the curriculum to co-curricular activities. In 2019, the Entrepreneurship Program in the Gary W. Rollins College of Business at the University of Tennessee at Chattanooga adopted a new strategic plan that placed the program’s focus on developing the entrepreneurship skills of its undergraduate majors and minors. At the heart of this initiative was the RISE, which was used in a variety of ways to ensure that the long-standing curriculum and the co-curricular activities of the newly created Center for Innovation and Entrepreneurship (CIE) were well-integrated and synergistically creating an educational system that supports skill development. This chapter describes the context and these efforts.

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 T. S. Lyons et al., Entrepreneurship Skill Building, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-77920-7_6

115

116

T. S. LYONS ET AL.

The University The University of Tennessee at Chattanooga (UTC) traces its history back to 1886 and the founding of Chattanooga University, a private baccalaureate university with an initial class of 118 students. In 1907, Chattanooga University became the University of Chattanooga, still a private institution. The university was merged into the University of Tennessee System in 1969, which began a long period of growth. Today, UTC is part of a university system that also includes the University of Tennessee at Knoxville, the University of Tennessee at Martin, and the Health Sciences Center in Memphis. Its student body is approaching 12,000, and it offers over 120 majors and academic programs in four colleges (Arts & Sciences; Engineering & Computer Science; Health, Education & Professional Studies; and the Rollins College of Business), a Graduate School and an Honors College. UTC awards degrees at the bachelor’s, master’s, and doctoral levels.

The Gary W. Rollins College of Business The Rollins College of Business is accredited by the Association for the Advancement of Collegiate Schools of Business International (AACSB). It has a little over 2,000 undergraduate students and 300 + graduate students. It is comprised of four departments—accounting, finance and economics, management, and marketing & entrepreneurship—that offer undergraduate degree programs in accounting, analytics, economics, entrepreneurship, finance, human resources, management, and marketing. It also offers a traditional MBA and an online MBA. In 2018, the College received a $40 million gift from Gary W and Kathleen Rollins of Atlanta. Gary Rollins is an alumnus of UTC and the Business College. To date, this is the largest gift in the history of UTC and resulted in the first naming of a college there. The gift is being used to provide student scholarships, hire additional faculty, launch a program and a center in Sales, and upgrade technology and facilities, among other initiatives. The Rollins College is very proud of its tradition of engagement with the community of Chattanooga. Of particular importance to this story is the College’s engagement with Chattanooga’s highly regarded entrepreneurial ecosystem. As described by Geoff Millener of the local entrepreneurship support organization The Enterprise

6

THE CASE OF THE UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE AT CHATTANOOGA

117

Center, “the ecosystem is particularly robust, encompassing, among other attributes, three core incubators; several national accelerator programs; a pipeline of neighborhood- and population-focused non-profits offering entrepreneurial programming and support; VC funds, local Kiva crowdfunding and a philanthropic pivot toward small business investment; extensive K-12 and higher education entrepreneurship opportunities; a vibrant Startup Week (now in its 7th year); and more informal, distributed networks through numerous events and meetups, with many of these partners and activities clustered within the Chattanooga Downtown Innovation District.” UTC’s Center for Innovation and Entrepreneurship is strategically located in a part of the campus that falls within the Innovation District, further cementing the Rollins College of Business’s relationship with the entrepreneurial ecosystem. In addition, in 2020, UTC leased a floor of the Edney Building in the Innovation District, which it is calling UTC-Downtown. Among other activities at this downtown “campus” are a small business incubator, operated by the CIE, and office space for the University’s Commercialization Counselor to maintain part-time hours. (This position is discussed in more detail later in this chapter.)

The Entrepreneurship Program The Program is constituted of an undergraduate major and minor and the co-curricular activities of the CIE. The major is part of the Rollins College of Business’s B.S.B.A. Program. The curriculum for the major is well established, having been in existence for many years. The minor is newer and is targeted at undergraduate majors from across the campus. Most recently, the Music and Theatre Divisions of the Department of Performing Arts adopted the Entrepreneurship Minor as part of the offerings available to their majors. The major requires 120 total credit hours to complete, including General Education and general Business School requirements. A minimum of 33 credit hours is required for the major, itself, with 16 of these credit hours consisting of dedicated courses in Entrepreneurship (see Table 6.1). The minor, which is for non-Business majors only, requires a total of 18 credit hours of coursework (see Table 6.2). The CIE began as a virtual center in 2018. In August of 2020, a new 5,700 sq. ft. facility was opened in the James R. Mapp Building in the southwest corner of the UTC campus (see Fig. 6.1). The Center includes

118

T. S. LYONS ET AL.

Table 6.1 Entrepreneurship major (without general education and general business requirements)

15 hours including ETR 3400—Innovation and Creativity in Business ETR 3500—New Venture Creation ETR 4200—Essentials of Entrepreneurial Finance ETR 4350—Managing Venture Growth MGT 3600—Management Information Systems 3 hours chosen from MKT 3180—International Marketing FIN 4120—International Finance MGT 4380—International Management MGT 4950r—International Business Experience 9 hours chosen from the following MKT 3630—Professional Selling MKT 3620—Integrated Marketing Communications MKT 4310—Digital Marketing MGT 3310—Organizational Motivation and Leadership 6 hours chosen from the following ETR 3600—Social Entrepreneurship FIN 4030—Financial Statement Analysis MGT 3310—Organizational Motivation and Leadership FIN 3710—Real Estate Fundamentals ETR 4490—Practicum in Marketing and Entrepreneurship MGT 3320—Human Resource Management MGT 4380—International Management (MGT 4380 may be applied to program or concentration requirements but not both) MKT 3180—International Marketing (MKT 3180 may be applied to program or concentration requirements but not both) MKT 3630—Professional Selling MKT 3620—Integrated Marketing Communications MKT 4310—Digital Marketing MKT 4420—Services Marketing BUS 3360—Business Law ETR 3900r—Experiential Learning: Academic Internship Program or BUS 3900r—Experiential Learning: Academic Internship Program (Only 3 credit hours from ETR 3900r or BUS 3900r may be used to satisfy program requirements.) MKT 3730—Strategic Selling & Sales Management Source Author’s creation based on University of Tennessee at Chattanooga’s Undergraduate Course Catalog

6

THE CASE OF THE UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE AT CHATTANOOGA

Table 6.2 Entrepreneurship minor

119

ETR 1010—Entrepreneurship: The mindset and skill set ACC 2000—Accounting and financial reporting: A user’s perspective FIN 3000—Small business finance MKT 3130—Principles of marketing ETR 3400—Innovation and creativity in business ETR 3500—New Venture creation Source Author’s creation based on University of Tennessee at Chattanooga’s Undergraduate Course Catalog

Fig. 6.1 Center for innovation and entrepreneurship floor plan (Source Center for Innovation and Entrepreneurship, University of Tennessee at Chattanooga)

120

T. S. LYONS ET AL.

a collaboration space that is flexible in design. It can be set up as an event space that seats approximately 75, with a podium and twin drop-down screens. It can also be configured as a work space with twelve tables, with seating for four each and a whiteboard adjacent to each table. There is a smart classroom that can seat up to 50 students. Next door to the classroom is a fully equipped makerspace, with six 3-D printers, a laser cutter, a vacuum packaging machine, a sewing machine with embroidery capability, a photography booth, and much more. A mentor suite houses space for four mentors and their student entrepreneurs to meet in privacy. There are also four small team meeting spaces that can accommodate a team of up to four members. Additional space is dedicated to a conference room, a reception area and lounge, and offices for the CIE Director and the UTC Commercialization Counselor. Programming at the CIE includes two pitch competitions—one in the fall and one in the spring—called Hatch It! and Fly, respectively (a nod to the University’s mascot—the Northern Mockingbird—which is Tennessee’s state bird). In keeping with the CIE’s and the Entrepreneurship Program’s campus-wide focus, they are both open to any student team from UTC, or any team with members from other institutions and led by a UTC student. There is a series of Lunch & Learn sessions, held monthly, during the academic year. These feature a practicing entrepreneur or member of an entrepreneurship support organization from the Chattanooga Entrepreneurial Ecosystem, who tells their story and entertains questions from students in the audience. In addition, the CIE operates a Living-Learning Community (LLC), called Idea Central, which hosts a cohort of freshmen students who can be majoring in any subject and who live together in one of the University’s residence halls. They take a one-credit hour course on entrepreneurship, how it manifests itself at UTC, and the Chattanooga entrepreneurial ecosystem. Each October, during Startup Week Chattanooga, the CIE hosts the Entrepreneurship Breakfast. This event is open to the entire university and members of the community. It features speeches by prominent entrepreneurs in the region. In collaboration with the Rollins College of Business and the Clarence E. Harris Chair of Excellence in Entrepreneurship, the CIE also hosts the annual induction dinner for the UTC-Rollins College Entrepreneurship Hall of Fame, an event that has been observed for over 20 years. At this ceremony, two new members are inducted to the Hall of Fame and a deserving student is recognized with the Collegiate Spirit of Entrepreneurship Award.

6

THE CASE OF THE UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE AT CHATTANOOGA

121

For four years, between 2017 and 2020, CIE played the role of host to the annual Southeast Entrepreneurship Conference (SEEC), a regional conference under the auspices of the national student entrepreneurship organization CEO. Entrepreneurship students from colleges and universities across the Southeast region participated in the conference. SEEC offered keynote presentations by practicing entrepreneurs, concurrent presentations and panels on a variety of entrepreneurship-related subjects, a pitch competition, and an evening event hosted by the Chattanooga entrepreneurial ecosystem, typically held in the Downtown Innovation District. The fifth and final year of UTC’s contract to host SEEC was canceled due to health concerns surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic. The CIE supports the E-Club, the student-run entrepreneurship organization that is a local chapter of CEO. The E-Club sponsors its own activities and helps with logistics for CIE events, such as the Entrepreneurship Breakfast and SEEC. Within the next two years, The CIE expects to augment its programming with these initiatives: • An Accelerator Program for students who want to move their ventures from concept to launch in a semester; • A Startup Internship Program, where we pay students to spend a semester working for a participating startup company in the Chattanooga area; • A National Speaker Series, where we bring a nationally recognized entrepreneur to campus once per semester to deliver a presentation and spend a day interacting with students; and • A makerspace-based Reverse Pitch Competition, where student teams compete to solve a selected local company’s design/product challenge. The Entrepreneurship Program is considered a Center of Excellence at UTC, with strong support from the University’s Chancellor. The Chancellor has made it clear that his principal expectations for the Program are two-fold: • It will spread entrepreneurship across the campus and • It will engage actively with the business, government, and nonprofit actors in the Chattanooga Entrepreneurial Ecosystem.

122

T. S. LYONS ET AL.

Relative to the first expectation, the Entrepreneurship Program has taken several actions and is pursuing new initiatives. First, as noted earlier in this section, the undergraduate minor is available to all UTC undergraduate majors. Second, in 2020, the Faculty Senate’s General Education Committee adopted the Entrepreneurship Program’s introductory course as a general education course for the entire university. This was an important achievement, as historically the Gen. Ed. Committee has not been favorably disposed toward including entrepreneurship courses and business courses, in general, in the general education curriculum. The principal argument has been that these courses teach professional skills, which are specific to a field or profession and not relevant to a student’s broader education. The Entrepreneurship Program was able to successfully argue that the skills taught in this course are not professional skills but life skills and skills of leadership in especially uncertain times that can be utilized in all walks of life. The course, ETR 1010 Entrepreneurship: The Mindset and Skillset, uses Neck et al.’s (2018) textbook entitled Entrepreneurship: The Practice and Mindset, which reflects the approach to entrepreneurship education advocated by Neck and Greene (2011) in Chapter 4 of this book. It teaches creativity, innovation, and problem solving in a very applied way. Its curriculum is not the only vehicle the Entrepreneurship Program is using to spread entrepreneurship across the UTC campus. In 2019, program leadership recognized that UTC needed an innovation commercialization program of its own. As a part of the University of Tennessee System, UTC has relied upon the University of Tennessee Research Foundation (UTRF) for commercialization support. However, this left UTC inventors (faculty and graduate students) without local guidance and support. The inventors behind commercialization efforts from UTC, which UTRF chose not to support, were left feeling they had no other options and often gave up on their efforts to commercialize. Many inventors at UTC were unaware that commercialization was an option at all. This resulted in numerous missed opportunities to further refine inventions and pursue markets. With this challenge in mind, the Entrepreneurship Program approached the University Chancellor’s office about creating a UTC commercialization office. The Chancellor agreed that this was a clear need and encouraged the Entrepreneurship Program and the Vice Chancellor for Research’s office to address it. Over the course of several meetings, key

6

THE CASE OF THE UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE AT CHATTANOOGA

123

campus stakeholders mapped a strategy to bring a commercialization presence to UTC. It was decided that the Vice Chancellor for Research would fund a part-time Commercialization Counselor position and embed that person with the CIE. This role was created and filled in June of 2020 and has flourished. Commercialization activity has increased substantially at UTC, and campus inventors are routinely taking advantage of workshops on such subjects as protecting IP, working successfully with UTRF, and pitching a business concept. The Commercialization Counselor has entered into an agreement with a Chattanooga law firm to provide free IP counseling to UTC researcher/inventors. CIE and the Commercialization Counselor are collaborating to stage a pitch competition for inventor teams, called “Fly for Researchers,” where the teams will compete for large cash prizes designed to be investments in the development of the ventures they are creating. As is evident, the Entrepreneurship Program has numerous programs in place and new initiatives in the works. These are not isolated extracurricular activities. They are co-curricular tactics within the larger strategy for skill-based entrepreneurship education at UTC noted in the opening paragraphs of this chapter.

The Entrepreneurship Strategy at UTC In the fall of 2019, the Entrepreneurship Program faculty at UTC revisited the mission of the program in light of the recent opening of the, at that time virtual, CIE. The impetus for this was the concern that the activities of the CIE, especially once it had its own facility scheduled to open that next year in a building that was not in the Rollins College of Business complex, could easily exist in their own orbit without a tether to the program’s curriculum. This would leave the Entrepreneurship Program with a curriculum and a set of disconnected extracurricular activities. It was determined that what was needed was a way to integrate the curriculum and the activities of the CIE. The newly hired Harris Chair of Excellence in Entrepreneurship suggested that this could be accomplished by making entrepreneurship skill building the focus of the Program and linking the curriculum to the CIE in such a way as to ensure that the two would be contributing synergistically to the skill-building process. The faculty and the head of the Department of Marketing & Entrepreneurship, the program’s academic home, agreed, and a plan for accomplishing this integration was developed and implemented.

124

T. S. LYONS ET AL.

The first step was the development of a mission statement that reflects this new strategic direction. The statement reads, “The Entrepreneurship Program is a program within the Department of Marketing & Entrepreneurship of the Rollins College of Business that provides students across the University of Tennessee at Chattanooga campus with the opportunity to acquire entrepreneurship knowledge, practice their knowledge, and receive feedback on that practice, in order to build their entrepreneurship skills and serves as an entrepreneurship connector between UTC and the Chattanooga Entrepreneurial Ecosystem.” This new mission not only aims to connect the program with the campus and the community, as mandated by the University Chancellor, it also puts skill-building front and center and reflects the skill-building model discussed in Chapter 4. Driven by this mission, the Entrepreneurship Program undertook several steps to ensure that its key components were fully integrated and truly building its students’ entrepreneurship skills: • The Readiness Inventory for Successful Entrepreneurship (RISE) was adopted as a guide to the essential skills of entrepreneurship to be developed by the Program. • The existing curriculum was evaluated using the 30 skills of the RISE to understand how thoroughly and deeply knowledge of these skills was being imparted to students. • The CIE adopted its own mission that acknowledged its purpose and role as the Program’s provider of opportunities for students to practice their knowledge and get feedback on that practice. • The CIE evaluated its activities for their fit with the knowledge imparted by the curriculum and their ability to provide the necessary practice of that knowledge. • The CIE began to build a mentor/coach program to provide feedback to students. • The Program piloted the use of the RISE with Entrepreneurship Majors, who were just starting their curriculum, to establish a skills baseline and track skill development. What follows is a fuller description of these measures.

6

THE CASE OF THE UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE AT CHATTANOOGA

125

The RISE as a Guide to Program Building and Assessment Because of its focus on the actionable meta-skills of entrepreneurship, the RISE was adopted by the Entrepreneurship Program as a guide for curricular and co-curricular development and assessment. The 30 “essential” skills for entrepreneurs incorporated into the RISE were used as a benchmark by the Entrepreneurship Program. This was employed to evaluate its curriculum and assess its ability to deliver knowledge necessary for the skills-building process. The CIE was evaluated based on its capability to provide the needed knowledge-practice opportunities and feedback for reinforcing these skills. The RISE skills became the linchpin for integrating the curriculum with the activities of the CIE. An assessment was developed to gauge the scope and depth of the curriculum in a three-step process. Evaluating the Entrepreneurship Curriculum First, an initial review of the Entrepreneurship Program’s course syllabi was conducted by the Harris Chair of Excellence in Entrepreneurship, the Director of the CIE, and a graduate assistant. The objective of the review was to get an idea of which RISE skills were currently being covered in each course. One-by-one, each skill was compared to the syllabi and given a binary value based on whether the skill was covered. This gave an initial idea of the breadth of coverage for the 30 skills to be measured. Next, a summary matrix was developed and sent out to instructors of each respective course. The instructor was asked to assess the accuracy of the initial evaluation and comment on the depth of each skill taught. The task was to assign values based on a 1–3 scale pertaining to the knowledge, practice, and feedback to practice of each skill that was taught: 1 being the lightest treatment. If the skill was not covered, it was assigned a zero. Finally, the instructors’ feedback was compiled into an overall summary matrix that could be used to identify gaps in the curriculum. Two primary metrics were used for each knowledge, practice, and feedback to each skill to achieve this: the percentage of courses for which instructors have assigned a positive value to that skill; and the average level of that skill across all evaluated courses. This matrix could determine lapses in the curriculum based on low values of the two metrics. If the deficiency was noted as a knowledge

126

T. S. LYONS ET AL.

gap, options for improving the curriculum were explored. If the gap was in practice or feedback, co-curricular activities at the CIE were considered. As an example, a portion of the assessment is shown in Table 6.3, where the analysis identified a weakness in the coverage of the Operations Management meta-skill. The weakness was in terms of providing opportunities for its practice and for feedback on that practice. Knowledge regarding this skill for entrepreneurs was being imparted, but there was no outlet for practicing any aspect of that knowledge. A discussion of this issue among the Entrepreneurship Program faculty pinpointed one aspect of operations management, in particular, that was not receiving adequate treatment—in the area of intrapreneurship, students were not making the connection between theory and practice. How does an intrapreneur actually operate inside a corporation or other large organization? It was suggested that one way to address this was for the CIE to host a panel discussion that was connected to the program’s course in Creativity and Innovation, involving “innovation officers” from several large companies in the region. The knowledge portion of the coverage of operations management was delivered in the classroom prior to the panel discussion. The panel, itself, provided the students with the opportunity to engage with practitioners on the subject and learn about the realities of strategy and operations for an Table 6.3 UTC RISE curriculum assessment: business management skills Business management skills

Knowledge

Practice

Count (%) Average Count (%) Knowledge of the field/industry Knowledge of laws/regs Accounting/bookkeeping Finance Marketing/communications Operations management Technology-enabled business management Average overall business Management Source Author’s creation

Feedback Average Count (%)

Average

71

1.36

71

1.36

57

0.93

71 86 100 86 57 57

1.07 1.64 1.93 1.50 0.93 0.93

57 86 100 86 29 43

0.64 1.50 1.72 1.50 0.71 0.79

71 71 86 86 29 57

0.71 1.29 1.57 1.36 0.71 0.86

76

1.34

67

1.17

65

1.06

6

THE CASE OF THE UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE AT CHATTANOOGA

127

intrapreneur. The course instructor then followed the panel with a class discussion at the ensuing class meeting. While this was not direct practice, it provided a skill-building bridge between classroom knowledge and internships with these companies or ones like them. Students were appreciative of the opportunity to move past course content toward application, with the added benefit to making connections with professionals from industry that could serve them going forward. More of these panels are being planned and are now being called “enrichment panels.” From the Entrepreneurship Program’s perspective, an added benefit of this exercise was that it provided a framework for objectively assessing its ability to build the essential skills of entrepreneurship and generating a solution that leveraged the strengths of the curriculum and of the CIE. Solidifying the CIE’s Role Adopting the skill-building model helped the CIE to more clearly understand its role as supporting the curriculum by being the place where students can apply the knowledge they derive in the classroom and get help with making sense of their practice. However, as the Center began to think through its role more fully, it was realized that it also had a part to play in imparting knowledge. Table 6.4 illustrates the way that the CIE’s activities touch upon all three of the steps in the skill-building process. While, on its surface, this may seem problematic, it actually serves to reinforce the connection between the curriculum and the CIE. The Lunch & Learns can strategically reinforce classroom knowledge by bringing entrepreneurs to campus who are practicing that knowledge, Table 6.4 CIE activities by stage in the skill-building process Knowledge

>>> Practice

>>> Feedback= Skill

• Lunch & learns • SEEC • Commercialization training • Enrichment panels • Idea central (LLC) course

• • • • • •

• • • • • •

Source Author’s creation

Pitch competitions Makerspace Co.Starters + research Grand challenges E-Club Idea central experience

E-Club Wayfinding Competition judging Co-working Mentoring Commercialization Counseling

128

T. S. LYONS ET AL.

embedding the theory in reality and affording students models for practice. SEEC provided a rich collection of practitioner insights and an opportunity to reflect on these as well as information on very timely subjects for student entrepreneurs (e.g., internet businesses, the rise of the cannabis industry, etc.). The enrichment panels are vehicles for acquiring practical knowledge and making valuable connections to industry. In short, the CIE provides applied knowledge that can bridge theory and practice and lubricate the skill-building process to which the entire Entrepreneurship Program is dedicated. Mentoring and Coaching Through the CIE There are two initiatives that the CIE has undertaken to ensure that students get the feedback they need on their practice. One is a mentor program that ensures that every student has access to mentoring in all business specializations. The second is a program the goal of which is to give every Entrepreneurship major the opportunity to take the RISE assessment with a designated coach who will work with that student to build their skills throughout their entrepreneurship education. Using a subscription to a customer relationship management (CRM) platform, CIE is building an extensive database of alumni, current and retired faculty, and community members from industry and the government/nonprofit sector that provide an impressive array of knowledge and experience in accounting, budgeting, business law, economics, finance, human resources, intellectual property, marketing, operations management, product development, regulation, strategy and venture startup, among other areas. These mentors all serve on a voluntary basis, offering their expertise to students at no cost. Mentors’ names, areas of expertise, and contact information are kept in the CRM database and are accessible to students. Mentoring will take place online or in the CIE’s Mentors’ Suite, which can accommodate four mentor/student pairs at one time. RISE coaching is in the pilot phase. At present, five Entrepreneurship majors have been matched with a coach from the Rollins College of Business faculty or the community. These coaches were all trained in the use of the assessment tool on the RISE platform. This training also included a discussion of the nature of coaching, as opposed to giving expert advice. The latter is part of an ongoing conversation among the coaches at periodic meetings held to share experiences, challenges, and ideas for addressing those challenges.

6

THE CASE OF THE UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE AT CHATTANOOGA

129

With the student’s written permission, each coach has worked with their student to take an initial RISE assessment of their skills. This measurement is used as a skills baseline coming into the program. Based on the results of this assessment, the coach helps the student identify their entrepreneurship skill strengths and weaknesses. The coach then works with the student to develop an action plan for addressing a reasonable subset of skill weaknesses over the course of that academic term. At the end of the term, the coach and the student will retake the RISE to determine what progress has been made and to adjust the action plan accordingly for the next academic term. This process is followed for all terms through the one in which the student graduates. The final measurement is used to inform the student of their progress over their course of study in the Entrepreneurship Program and by the program to measure its impact on the student’s skill-building efforts. The student can use this final result to guide their practice as they integrate into the working world. The program can use the aggregated data from the cohort to determine the aspects of their strategy that are successful and those that are not, enabling targeted improvements to be made. It is expected that the pilot RISE coaching effort will pave the way for the use of the RISE and RISE-trained coaches by all UTC Entrepreneurship majors. This will serve to connect all aspects of the Entrepreneurship Program. The curriculum will deliver knowledge pertaining to the 30 “essential” skills of the RISE, with some supplementing from CIE programming. The CIE will provide co-curricular activities and subjectrelated mentoring in support of the curriculum. RISE coaches will perform four tasks: 1. Oversee the administration and delivery of the RISE assessments to their student coaches, beginning in the first academic term as an Entrepreneurship major; 2. Work with students to develop an action plan for each academic term that addresses selected skill weaknesses identified by the assessment; 3. Guide students to courses, subject area mentors, and others on campus and in the community who can help the students address identified skill weaknesses; and 4. Offer their own insights, encourage reflection, instill discipline, and provide encouragement as students work to address their skill deficiencies.

130

T. S. LYONS ET AL.

The RISE as a Program Assessment Tool The data collected from accumulated RISE assessments can be used not only to assist individual students with their skills development but also as a means to managing the Entrepreneurship Program. The program’s mission is to develop the entrepreneurship skills of its students. An objective measure of progress in that regard is provided by the dynamic data generated by RISE assessments. More specifically, this data can be used to track the following: • Average change in overall skill level for a RISE cohort (students who enter the program at the same time); • Percentage of students who advance one overall skill level over the course of their Entrepreneurship education; two skill levels; three skill levels, etc. • Individual skills, by cohort, that improve the most; the least • Average skill changes by skill domain; • Skill change comparisons across domains. These could be compared with demographic variables (e.g., gender, age, etc.) and programming and coaching interventions to determine who is progressing and what interventions appear to be more effective than others. An analysis of the level of skill of those students who actually launch enterprises could provide interesting insights. Adjustments to curriculum and co-curricular programming could be made, informed by these analyses. Ultimately, this approach to impact assessment could influence university educational outcomes measurement and even that of regional accrediting bodies.

Conclusion The University of Tennessee at Chattanooga case provides an opportunity to consider what a fully skills-based approach to entrepreneurship education could look like. With a mission to develop its students’ entrepreneurship skills, UTC’s Entrepreneurship Program has a clear purpose and goal. This gives direction to the structure and content of the program. The former reflects the skill-building process and provides a framework, while the latter ensures that skills are actually built. None of this is possible, however, without a means of measuring skills and changes in skill level in a clinical way. The RISE assessment permits a focused evaluation of the curriculum using its 30 “essential” skills of entrepreneurship. It also facilitates the seamless integration of

6

THE CASE OF THE UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE AT CHATTANOOGA

131

curriculum and co-curricular activities. Perhaps most importantly, it makes it possible to measure and track student progress in their skill development, permitting iterative adjustments that can fine-tune the educational process for the individual student and collectively for all Entrepreneurship Program students, incorporating design principles and thinking directly into the educational process, making student reflection more focused, and supporting simulation and venture creation as education with a clear purpose.

References Neck, H. M., & Greene, P. G. (2011). Entrepreneurship education: Known worlds and new frontiers. Journal of Small Business Management, 49(1), 55– 70. Neck, H. M., Heck, C. P., & Murray, E. L. (2018). Entrepreneurship: The practice and mindset. Sage.

CHAPTER 7

Implementing a Skills-Based Curriculum with an Outcomes Management Framework

As we emerge from the economic devastation of the COVID-19 pandemic, the need for economic revival is clear. Many of the small businesses that went out of business will not return. The experiences of shifting to working and shopping from home likely will have lasting impact on a variety of industries from restaurant/hospitality, office management, retail, and even transportation related businesses. The unemployment emanating from those businesses most impacted by the pandemic will require many workers to recalibrate their career plans. Entrepreneurial solutions offer an important route to the calculus of these marketplace changes. Further, in the United States and other places, the pandemic laid bare racial and cultural disparities and disproportionalities. And, COVID appears to have had a particularly adverse impact on women in the workplace as they were called to multi-task working, homemaking, and sometimes even teaching their own children. From the perspective of the RISE and TCOM, these challenges offer incredible opportunities and represent a call to action for the field of entrepreneur development. In this book, we have presented an argument that entrepreneur development programs are best considered a skill-building enterprise. Embracing that concept, we have described how we can successfully manage such an enterprise when the primary aspiration is personal change and growth. We have created and described a strategy to use to measure © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 T. S. Lyons et al., Entrepreneurship Skill Building, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-77920-7_7

133

134

T. S. LYONS ET AL.

this personal skill growth. We have discussed applying a skills building framework in educational settings and provided two examples of how this approach can be used in practice. We believe we have achieved the threshold of proof of concept. But that only means that the work is now just beginning. There are two crossing pathways to consider. The first is working toward the support of entrepreneur development programs’ ability to provide a skill development curriculum and learning experiences. The second challenge is encouraging the use of transformational management strategies to enhance the effectiveness of these programs. Since we embrace TCOM and an aspirational management approach to our work, we seek shared aspirations with others in the field. While we realize that programs have options for strategies to measure skills, we also see the value to the evolving field of entrepreneur development of using common and comparable metrics. Taking the second path first, our strategy is to make the RISE readily available to any entrepreneur development program interested in joining this direction. The RISE is the intellectual property of the Praed Foundation, a United States Charitable Foundation organized as a 501.c.3. The Praed Foundation (originally named after the mother of Tom and John) is an operating charity whose goal is the promotion of person-centered outcomes management—people should be full and equal partners in any helping process. The working strategy of the foundation is to create and distribute person-centered assessment strategies at no cost to groups whose primary aspiration is helping others. The Praed Foundation has no monetary aspirations; the financial goal of the Foundation is to break even. Forms and words have no associated costs; therefore, they are free to use, as long as people use them ethically and responsibly and do not attempt to monetize these tools themselves. As discussed below, software platforms do have associated costs that must be covered within a collaborative framework to take work to scale. Regarding the path of building our capacity to understand and effectively build skills within entrepreneur educational programs, we believe that a collaborative approach across programs to share skill development strategies and data on their relative success presents the optimal path forward for the field. While market competition fuels success in some markets, in science and education, collaboration and cooperation are important incubators of rapid evolution of the field.

7

IMPLEMENTING A SKILLS-BASED CURRICULUM …

135

While the Praed Foundation currently has less experience in the commercial business environment, the foundation has experienced significant successes in other helping (transformational) environments. For example, the most commonly used person-centered outcomes management approach is the Child and Adolescent Needs and Strengths (CANS, Lyons, 2009). As of this writing, more than 80% of all children, youth, and families served in either child welfare or public behavioral health in the United States participate in the CANS assessment process. This market penetration makes the CANS quite nearly the industry standard. This widespread use was accomplished without the CANS ever being “marketed,” “sold,” or “branded” like competing measurement approaches. The CANS is helpful to people in their work, the people who use it talk to other people and recommend it, and in this way, it spreads, and market penetration grows. Similarly, another TCOM tool, the Safe System Improvement Tool (Cull & Lindsey, 2019; Cull et al., 2013;), is the core approach for the National Partnership for Child Safety (NPCS) which at this writing has 25 participating jurisdictions covering roughly 60% of all children in child welfare in the United States. This market coverage is despite the fact that NCPS has been in existence for less than two years. The NPCS currently focuses on a safety science approach to child death reviews that seeks to build a comprehensive set of strategies for improving child welfare and reducing or eliminating child deaths. We propose to use this same collaborative strategy to help take the RISE to scale. We believe that helping others is a shared aspiration of nearly all entrepreneur development programs. These programs exist primarily as mechanisms of economic empowerment. While specific programs and people might have additional, and perhaps even competing, aspirations, we do believe that this single aspiration is the common focus for most people across the field. It is our one universal aspiration in the field of entrepreneur development. As discussed in Chapter 3, the “C” in TCOM references collaboration. Collaboration works when you find the common aspiration and manage relationships focused on this shared goal or vision. We propose to take the RISE to scale through a collaborative approach where all implementations learn to share experiences, data, and strategies with each other based on the idea that together we are stronger, smarter, and more effective than any of us are alone. Focusing on the shared vision of the skills of prospective entrepreneurs can offer an avenue to work together toward a common purpose. Embedded in

136

T. S. LYONS ET AL.

this shared vision is the capacity of each participating individual and program to identify and meet their personal and programmatic aspirations beyond helping developing entrepreneurs. Successful collaboration is never a zero-sum situation. It is a win–win (and maybe win–win-win….) proposition. There is no reason why everyone cannot win, if together we develop an understanding of how to successfully develop emerging entrepreneurs.

The Way Forward We believe that entrepreneur skill development can best meet this call by fully embracing its transformational nature. As we have discussed throughout this book, the only way for an entrepreneur skill development program to know that it is successful is to measure its definition of success. If that definition is too distant from the end of the learning experience (e.g., business success), measurement is far more difficult, and myriad other factors can influence that proposed outcome beyond the impact of the program. For example, a class of student entrepreneurs graduating from a college/university entrepreneurship program in January 2020, just before the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, might not have the same early business success as a class who graduated in January 2019. That, of course, does not mean that the program performed worse in 2020 than 2019. The optimal way to manage transformational offerings is to directly measure those constructs upon which the learning/helping intervention is formally directed. Clearly in our model, entrepreneur development is a skill-building enterprise; therefore, development programs should be accountable to building skills. What the trainee does with those skills is up to them. Using the RISE over time to measure skill development is a straightforward solution for entrepreneurial development programs to shift to a transformational frame without holding themselves accountable for effects that are simply beyond their control. Regardless of whether an entrepreneur skill educational program chooses to use the RISE or not, they must find some means to measure and monitor skill development. The RISE is already deep in its development, ready to use, and provided at no charge. In addition, our hope is that programs will learn to collaborate with sharing data across sites to strengthen the research and development of the field. Common metrics facilitate collaboration. Few single programs serve enough prospective entrepreneurs to provide sufficient samples to

7

IMPLEMENTING A SKILLS-BASED CURRICULUM …

137

support sophisticated analytics. Together, we can solve this challenge to everyone’s benefit. We believe that a learning curve is necessary for an entrepreneur development program to: • measure and monitor skill development; • retool curriculum to focus on skill development; • develop mass customization approaches to this curriculum to best meet prospective entrepreneurs “where they are” • create program management structures that learn from experience through data. Further, we believe a concerted effort within the field of entrepreneur development to master these new approaches represents an important pathway forward that both increases the value of these programs and advances the science of practice in the field.

Ensuring a Common Language of Skills: Training and Certification As the RISE moves from alpha and beta-testing sites into broad implementation, it will be important to maintain the integrity of the approach. If a central value of a collaborative approach is a common language of skills to allow shared learning and comparability, then it is critical to ensure collective fluency in that common language. The RISE is quite different from traditional measures that are simply handed to people to fill out and the information is taken and provided at face value. Effective use of the RISE requires conversations and consensus building. Failure to build integrity into the implementation process as it goes to scale results in the ultimate failure of innovations because followers emulate other followers, creating a “copy of a copy of a copy” problem that invariably dilutes approaches into something they were never intended to become. It is important that new implementations fully understand how to optimally use the RISE within the transformational framework of TCOM. With this in mind we have created a distance learning platform that supports learning how to use the RISE effectively. Since learning is best managed as a transformational offering it is critical to assess whether the required learning with the RISE has occurred. Therefore, certification

138

T. S. LYONS ET AL.

on the effective use of the RISE is required for ethical use. In other words, coaches planning on utilizing the RISE in their coaching practice, and education programs planning to utilize the RISE in their program monitoring, must learn the approach and demonstrate that learning by passing a basic certification test. The course is patterned upon certification courses that we have used with other TCOM tools such as the CANS (Lyons, 2009). While the RISE is just beginning to gain widespread use, the other tools are used millions of times each year around the world. As of this writing nearly 200,000 professionals are actively certified in one or more of the TCOM/communimetric tools on the Praed Foundation’s distance learning platform. Figure 7.1 shows the user’s view of key pages of this site. Certification on a tool such as the RISE is optimally accomplished by approximating the use of the RISE in practice. Case vignettes are provided to trainees that describe the results of conversations with developing entrepreneurs. Certification requires the individual to read the vignette and then complete the RISE based on the components of the entrepreneur’s story revealed in the vignette. While vignettes are artificial relative to real conversations, testing on the vignette at minimum allows confirmation that the individual understands the vocabulary and basic action-oriented structure of the RISE.

Fig. 7.1 Praed foundation collaborative training platform: TCOMtraining.com (Source Praed Foundation)

7

IMPLEMENTING A SKILLS-BASED CURRICULUM …

139

Our experience has been that while many aspects of learning and all aspects of certification can be effectively managed through an automated distance learning platform, there are some features of this approach that are best learned in live, interactive learning environments. As such, we routinely pair learning on the platform with live-person (whether that is in-person or online) learning opportunities. These live-person aspects are far more effective in the crucial inspiration side of helping people learn a new approach. In addition, people can ask questions or hear others ask questions making the learning more personalized. Finally, live-person learning opportunities often shame people into paying attention. Sadly, some people are only half-attending on an automated learning platform and multi-tasking, which is an ineffective way to learn anything. Being under the watchful eye of an instructor and in the presence of peers helps ensure attention. The other advantage of live-person training, as entrepreneurship educators understand, is that sometimes trainees learn as much from other trainees as they do from instructors. Creating these peer learning opportunities are important in all learning endeavors. In addition, if teaming solutions are a component of an entrepreneur’s aspirations, live-person events often provide networking opportunities. These opportunities are greater for in-person events although careful planning and some creativity can allow networking within online live-person events. One coaching skill that is particularly important to the full implementation of the RISE within its TCOM frame is the ability of coaches to have difficult conversations with prospective entrepreneurs to reach a shared understanding of their trainees’ current skill status. Anecdotally, we have observed gender differences on this dimension but clearly some prospective entrepreneurs overestimate their current skills and others underestimate their skill level. Anyone who has ever watched the business reality shows (e.g., Shark Tank) can understand the challenge of talking down someone from a lofty self-view that does not reflect reality from anyone else’s perspective. Similarly, for people who consistently under estimate their abilities, it can be challenging to build their confidence without creating an un-helpful dependency. If a prospective entrepreneur is going to succeed, an honest and comprehensive understanding of their current status is critical. While the RISE provides a context for these conversations, the coach still must be sufficiently comfortable to have these conversations in a positive and constructive fashion, while not just giving into delusional and destructive self-assessments. We are working to provide some learning supports for the soft skills of coaching from a skills perspective.

140

T. S. LYONS ET AL.

Information Management Supports To meet the aspirational goals of the RISE within the TCOM framework, a robust information systems solution is required. We are rapidly evolving toward a paperless society and electronic solutions to documentation, retention, and use of information are far more efficient than paper and pencil solutions. With that in mind we have partnered with a software development platform, Opeeka, whose developers have experience with other TCOM strategies (Fig. 7.2). While some programs may already have management software, which they could use to embed the RISE or other entrepreneur skill assessments,

Fig. 7.2 The RISE represented on the Opeeka platform (Source Opeeka, Inc)

7

IMPLEMENTING A SKILLS-BASED CURRICULUM …

141

it is likely often the case that it is quicker and less expensive to use an “offthe-shelf” software solution to get started utilizing this approach to skills assessment. The platform is designed to provide all the required functionality, from registering students and coaches to monitoring both the differences in perspective on skill development between the trainee and coach and the developed consensus on the current status of skill development. The system then allows tracking skills over time with the same trainee or aggregating skills over time by coach or program.

Skill-Building Interventions and Activities One of the daunting challenges of shifting to a skill-building framework for entrepreneur development is that there are many skills to consider. For example, the RISE brings directly into our conversation the 30 most commonly identified skills from the existing science of entrepreneur development. Many of these identified skills are actually meta-skills. In other words, the identified “molar” skill can be understood as a set smaller, more “molecular” skills. Successful Resource Leveraging, for example, is made up of a set of smaller skills. Leadership similarly can be thought of as comprising a set of skills that position a person to successfully lead others. Developing strategies to assist program participants in developing all of these skills can be daunting. When you add the idea that different prospective entrepreneurs enter a development program with varying levels of different skills, the challenge increases geometrically. The logistics alone that arise out of this complexity represents a fundamental planning and resource management challenge for entrepreneur skill development programs. It is no wonder why some programs just design a set curriculum, with initial individual differences ignored. While simplifying in this way is appealing to the entrepreneurship education or development program, it is of limited value to the prospective entrepreneur. Clearly, if we are going to learn how to do this well, our work is cut out for us. It will be neither simple nor easy. But then again, few things worth doing really are simple and easy. If they were, the field of entrepreneur development already would be so successful that we would not need to evolve. It is unlikely that many of us believe that is true. It is likely the case that the optimal strategy for developing each of the identified 30 skill areas will be different, although many skills may have overlapping skill-building approaches. Because skill building is generally

142

T. S. LYONS ET AL.

a “hands-on” or experiential learning process, it may be necessary to link program participants with experiences and learning opportunities outside the formal curriculum of the program in order to maximize skill building. Managing the available supply of skill-building options and successfully triaging them to the learning entrepreneurs based on need is a critical logistical challenge for a skill-based entrepreneur development program. Clearly, skill-building strategies are different across different skills. However, it is likely also true that effective skill-building strategies are different across different people. A strategy that is very effective for one person may not work for everyone. Pine and Gilmore’s (2011) concept of mass customization (introduced in Chapter 2) is important to think through in its applications to entrepreneur education. The formal educational setting, in general, has lagged behind in its acceptance of non-industrial models of helping people learn. We often build curriculums with the implicit assumption that students are mere replications of each other and that all will learn in the same way.

Monitoring and Measuring Outcomes Outcomes management strategies have been around for decades but have only recently begun to gain traction in the helping sector. Education has always aspired toward outcomes management in that grades are used to assess progress in learning and even gate-keep advances in grades or levels. Some have argued that the loss of focus on these clear outcomes and solutions to reach these outcome is a factor behind some of our current challenges in public education (e.g., Jimerson & Renshaw, 2012). As we discussed in Chapter 2, you cannot manage what you do not measure, and you cannot measure what you do not define. The RISE is an effort to define the key transformational goals of an entrepreneur development program. The next step is applying the measure at the beginning and end of a development program experience. That step involves learning to use the RISE in the process of the work. These initial steps are relatively straightforward compared to the next step—actually reporting and using the data collected from the RISE to inform program management and evolution.

7

IMPLEMENTING A SKILLS-BASED CURRICULUM …

143

Individual-Level Outcomes Management The first level of outcomes management is at the individual entrepreneur level: the experience of individuals participating in the development program. Figure 7.3 provides an example of an individual-level outcomes report from the Opeeka RISE platform. Outcomes at this level are best monitored as individual skills. This information gives both the

Fig. 7.3 Individual-level outcomes report on the RISE platform (Source Opeeka, Inc)

144

T. S. LYONS ET AL.

entrepreneur and the coach the most comprehensive information about what has been accomplished and what remains to be done. It can also be used to identify when developing a skill might not be indicated and finding a business partner who possesses that skill might be a better route. Coach-Level Outcomes Management Figures 7.4 and 7.5 provide examples of coach-level outcomes reports. The reports here and on hot-button pathways from these pages, allow coaches to compare individual entrepreneur’s skill development over time. These data also can be used to compare the skill development trajectories of different entrepreneurs. As discussed earlier, in a skill-building environment with an eye toward mass customization of the development program, coaching seems the most appropriate strategy. Since expertise involves a combination of experience and feedback (Ericsson, 1991), building coaching expertise, requires the program to provide robust feedback on the performance of the people they coach. Only through monitoring experiences, regardless of success or not, can coaches understand the impact of their efforts and recalibrate them to optimize effectiveness of their interventions and approaches. Program-Level Outcomes Figure 7.6 provides an example of the home page for monitoring program performance. Learning how a program performs on its fundamental aspiration goals of helping entrepreneurs build their relevant skill sets is critical to the evolution of the program. The home page provides an overview of how learners in the program are doing in terms of the current skill status of all learners; however, by clicking on different pathways it is possible to drill down to the coach or entrepreneur level as well. Program leadership can use these reports to monitor and adjust the program including identifying curriculum changes that might improve performance. In our experience, the best performing programs are generally not the ones with the best reputation. Reputation both lags performance and is influenced by the charismatic and social engineering skills of program leadership. There are, of course, exceptions to this. In profiling program performance in other fields, we routinely observe that the best performers are the programs seen as “up and coming”—the second tier programs

7

IMPLEMENTING A SKILLS-BASED CURRICULUM …

145

Fig. 7.4 Coach-level outcomes report on the RISE platform (Source Opeeka, Inc)

from a reputational perspective. Perhaps programs with a strong reputation might be tempted to rest on their laurels whereas the rising programs seek to gain a strong reputation. We, of course, do not know the mechanism of this observation. The take-home message is performance

146

T. S. LYONS ET AL.

Fig. 7.5 Coach-level outcomes report on the RISE platform (Source Opeeka, Inc)

on transformational outcomes provides different information on performance than might be anticipated based on prior beliefs about who has the best programs.

7

IMPLEMENTING A SKILLS-BASED CURRICULUM …

147

Fig. 7.6 Program-level performance/outcomes report on the RISE platform (Source Opeeka, Inc)

Equity, Social Justice, and the RISE Although issues of social and racial justice have been a long-standing problem in the United States and beyond, the recent deaths of unarmed black men in police custody and the stark disparities in health care revealed by the pandemic have laid bare the structural problems in our society that enable and maintain injustice. Now is a moment in time

148

T. S. LYONS ET AL.

when finding and implementing long-term solutions to these seemingly intractable problems seems possible. Regardless of whether personal politics lean left or right, there is broad agreement that successful economic empowerment is a fundamental approach to equity and social justice. Helping all people have equal opportunity to succeed in business is a goal that all but the most racially insensitive among us can embrace. If everyone has access to the tools for financial and employment success, then economic equity is achievable. We believe that a skills building approach to entrepreneur development is far and away the most equitable approach. No longer are we cherry-picking those we believe can succeed as is the tradition of traitbased approaches to finding entrepreneurs. In our model, anyone can become a successful entrepreneur if they can either develop the needed skills or partner with entrepreneurial teams that blend a complementary set of skills. We think it is a priority to focus our entrepreneur development activities in those communities that have been most historically disadvantaged by structural and systemic biases in our culture. We believe that the person-centered nature of our approach is a natural solution to problems of systemic bias both implicit and explicit. There is perhaps no better way to understand cultural differences than having open and honest conversations. The structure of the RISE, which focuses on coaches/teachers and entrepreneurs/students reaching a shared understanding of their skill levels, allows for talking through these challenges. Of course, as described above, these conversations can create challenges for people who are less comfortable with open discussions or those who harbor their own biases. It is likely important to be “comfortable in your own skin” as an important part of learning what it is like to be in someone else’s. We believe the consensus-based nature of our approach assists with this. Similarly, the characteristics of the RISE where one considers culture and development before they rate skill levels is another important way that we can work together toward a more equitable society. Different cultures have different values, principles, laws, regulations, and expectations. Even common concepts like “leadership” can have somewhat different meanings and manifestations in different cultural contexts. Creating a platform to remind people to consider these ideas provides some assistance in addressing them.

7

IMPLEMENTING A SKILLS-BASED CURRICULUM …

149

Research and Development There are several aspects of the RISE approach that facilitate the evolution of research and development activities within the field of entrepreneurship. First, by establishing a common language in reference to key skills that are necessary for business success, the RISE offers a strategy to bring together a field that often uses different words to describe similar or even identical concepts. This Tower of Babel reality in any developing field of inquiry always holds back the development of that field. Second, as implementations grow over time, it is possible to create a reservoir of data on skills and the evolution of skills over time. If these data can be linked to other indicators of business applications and success, then empirical research on the role of skills in business development would be enhanced. What is particularly useful about the RISE for the advancement of this area of research is that over time we will have a large and comprehensive database with reliability indicators of 30 separate skills. Most research on skills to date has focused on a small subset. Studying all at once allows for a better understanding of priorities, developmental stages, and relative importance. With proper permissions, this database can be made widely available for any interested scholar to use. The advantage of a collaborative approach to the enterprise of the RISE is that data sharing opportunities are a natural consequence of the shared responsibility of participating in the collaboration. Once a data reservoir is created and a sufficient number of partners are contributing data, it becomes possible to apply sophisticated machine learning approaches to these data to understand the role of skills and skill development to successful entrepreneurship. Ultimately, precision analytic strategies can be used to guide the evolution of both entrepreneurship education/development programs and the field. This should be an important direction of the field of entrepreneur development, but it requires the creation of large data sets with relevant information. Currently much predictive analytics work simply uses available data rather than relevant data. This is both dangerous (e.g., problems like systemic racism can creep into the analyses without being detected) and short sighted (e.g., important relationships among constructs are simply not studied). Third, communimetric measures are designed to change with changing environments and contexts. Adding, editing, and removing skills from the approach is not only do-able, it is the recommended strategy for keeping the approach relevant to changing times and environments. Language

150

T. S. LYONS ET AL.

changes, knowledge accrues, and the business environment evolves. Just as skills measurement is intended to support the positive improvement of the field of entrepreneur development, the field must support the ongoing evolution of the measurement of skills. Unlike psychometric measures which, once designed, can never be changed without threatening their validity, communimetric validity is threatened more by allowing the items to become out-of-date for the context in which you use them. Psychometric measures suffer this limitation strictly because they define the measurement characteristics based on the inter-correlation among items. Communimetric measures define the measurement characteristics based on meaning and utility. In a democratic society, the right of everyone to be able to succeed is fundamental. And, the right to individually decide on our personal definition of what success would be is of equal importance. In a democratic and capitalist society, the right of everyone to succeed economically is a fundamental. To honor this fundamental right, we must carefully consider how we establish a context for everyone to have access to this right. Public education established the right for all of us to learn. Accessible and effective education in entrepreneurship represents an important pathway for us to achieve our shared responsibility in a democratic, capitalist society. Let’s come together as a field and together discover the most effective strategies to help interested and committed people achieve entrepreneurial success. We believe a common focus on skill development is the foundation of these strategies.

References Cull, M. J., Rzepnicki, T. L., O’Day, K., & Epstein, R. A. (2013). Applying principles from safety science to improve child protection. Child Welfare, 92(2), 179–195. Cull, M.J., & Lindsey, T. (2019). Safe system improvement tool: Reference guide. Praed Foundation. Ericsson, K. A. (1991). Toward a general theory of expertise (prospects and limits). Cambridge University Press. Jimerson, S. R., & Renshaw, T. L. (2012, September). Retention and social promotion. Principal Leadership (pp. 12–16). Lyons, J. S. (2009). Communimetrics: A communication theory of measurement in human service settings. Springer. Pine II, B.J., & Gilmore, J.H. (2011). The experience economy, updated edition. Harvard Business Review Press.

Appendix A: The RISE Reference Guide

Ethical Use of the RISE We are including the RISE instrument in this book because we want people to use it and benefit from it. However, we would ask that it be used responsibly. Any entrepreneurship educator/coach/mentor who wishes to use the RISE with their students or clients should be properly certified in the use of the assessment tool. For accessing the certification materials, contact the John Praed Foundation at https://praedfoundation.org. We do not recommend that individual entrepreneurs take the assessment without a coach, as it is not designed for this purpose. On their own, entrepreneurs tend to either inflate their skill level or under-value it. This can be detrimental to their ability to develop their skills and, in some cases, can cause some individuals to give up on entrepreneurship prematurely. A RISE-certified coach, working in tandem with the entrepreneur, can provide the most accurate skills assessment and guide the entrepreneur toward skill mastery in a positive way.

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 T. S. Lyons et al., Entrepreneurship Skill Building, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-77920-7

151

152

APPENDIX A: THE RISE REFERENCE GUIDE

Readiness Inventory for Successful Entrepreneurship (RISE) Copyright 2019, 2013 by the John Praed Foundation

2019 REFERENCE GUIDE

APPENDIX A: THE RISE REFERENCE GUIDE

153

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The Readiness Inventory for Successful Entrepreneurship (RISE) is an open domain tool designed for better understanding of the relevant skills for the developing entrepreneur and to monitor evolution of these skills over time. The copyright is held by the Praed Foundation to ensure that it remains free to use. We are committed to creating a diverse and inclusive environment. It is important to consider how we are precisely and inclusively using individual words. As such, this reference guide uses the genderneutral pronouns “they/them/themselves” in the place of “he/him/himself” and “she/her/herself.” For specific permission to use please contact the Praed Foundation. Annual training and certification is required for coaches who use the RISE and can be done through the Praed Foundation Collaborative Training Platform: TCOMtraining.com. For more information on the RISE contact:

Thomas, Lyons, PhD Clarence E. Harris Chair of Excellence in Entrepreneurship Professor, Marketing & Entrepreneurship Gary W. Rollins College of Business University of Tennessee at Chattanooga [email protected] John S. Lyons, PhD Director, Center for Innovation in Population Health Professor, Health Management & Policy College of Public Health University of Kentucky [email protected] Praed Foundation http://praedfoundation.org [email protected]

154

APPENDIX A: THE RISE REFERENCE GUIDE

TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...............................................................2 INTRODUCTION ................................................................... 4 THE RISE .............................................................................. 4 SIX KEY PRINCIPLES OF THE RISE .................................................. 4 REFERENCES .............................................................................. 5 RISE CORE ITEMS ......................................................................... 6 Transformational Management Skills ............................................................. 7 Relationship Management Skills ................................................................. 12 Business Management Skills ................................................................. 16 Organizational Process Management Skills ................................................ 20

APPENDIX A: THE RISE REFERENCE GUIDE

155

INTRODUCTION THE RISE The Readiness Inventory for Successful Entrepreneurship (RISE) is an assessment process designed to allow the understanding of relevant skills for the developing entrepreneur and to monitor evolution of these skills over time. The RISE represents a strategy within a skills-based theory of entrepreneur development, which holds that success in entrepreneurship correlates with the level of skill of the entrepreneur. Further, skills weaknesses can be measured in a way that permits direct action toward their development. Research has shown that as an entrepreneur’s skills are developed to a higher level, their business’s total and median sales increase by multiples (Kutzhanova et al, 2009). The premise of this conceptual framework is that while most entrepreneurs require business models and startup capital for success, these necessities are insufficient to optimize the likelihood that their business will attain its goals. Entrepreneurs must have the necessary skills to use these resources effectively.

SIX KEY PRINCIPLES OF THE RISE Unlike traditional measurement approaches, the RISE is designed from the communimetric theory of measurement (Lyons, 2009). The concept of communimetrics is that measurement’s primary goal is to communicate. In research, the measurement communicates among scientists. When you take measurement out of the laboratory, however, the nature of communication changes. Communimetrics is intended for practice applications of measurement to enhance their value in an information culture context. As such, communimetric measures have key principles that make them distinct from traditional measures. Here are the key characteristics as they apply to the RISE. 1. The RISE is designed to be reliable and valid at the item level. Each item is selected because it is a meaningful indicator of some important information. In the case of the RISE, the items reflect key entrepreneur skills that have been identified in the literature on entrepreneur development. 2. The levels of each item translate immediately into action levels. The four action levels for the RISE are 0 = No evidence of the skill. 1 = Individual has some aspects of the skill but it is not currently useful. 2 = Individual has this skill. 3 = Individual has mastered this skill. 3. It is about the person not about the person with supports. Skills are described for the individual. If the individual has put supports in place to compensate for a lacking skill, the lacking skill is described, not the fact that the person has compensated for that absence. 4. The skill development ratings should be done within a cultural and developmental context. 5. It’s about the ‘What’ not the ‘Why’. The skill development ratings are description and do not have any etiological aspects. 6. Skills are rated with a 30-day rating period. Is this skill operable in the past 30-days. Evidence for a useful skill could be from outside of this window of observation however, it must be clear that the skill is still operable to describe it as useful. Although the RISE can be completed independently by either the entrepreneur or their coach, it is best used as a consensus between the entrepreneur and coach, thus providing an assessment framework that reinforces a skills development approach to entrepreneur coaching. By understanding the status of an entrepreneur’s skills, that entrepreneur can understand how they should focus their development and the coach can help them secure those needed skills either through personal development or teaming.

156

APPENDIX A: THE RISE REFERENCE GUIDE

REFERENCES Kutzhanova, N., Lyons, T.S., & Lichtenstein, G.A. (2009). Skill-based development of entrepreneurs and the role of personal and peer group coaching in enterprise development. Economic Development Quarterly 23 (3), 193-210. Lichtenstein, G.A., & Lyons, T.S. (2010). Investing in entrepreneurs: A strategic approach for strengthening your regional and community economy. Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger/ABC-CLIO. Lyons, T.S., Lyons, J.S., & Jolley, G.J. (2019). The Readiness Inventory for Successful Entrepreneurship (RISE): A tool for university engagement in entrepreneurial learning. Journal of Economic Development in Higher Education, 7 (July): 1-7.

RISE CORE ITEMS Transformational Management Skills Problem Solving Knowledge as a Resource Persistence/Relentlessness Creativity Passion/Charisma Innovation Flexibility & Adaptability Leadership

Resiliency Resourcefulness Self-Awareness

Relationship Management Skills Networking Capacity Levering Exiting Partnerships Resource Leveraging

Building and Maintaining Reputation Comm. Involvement & Influence

Accountability Teaming

Business Management Skills Knowledge of Field/Industry

Finances

Technology-Enabled Business Mgt.

Knowledge of Law/Regulations Accounting/Bookkeeping

Marketing/Communications Operations Management

Organizational Process Management Internal Communication Decision Making Process Design

Conflict & Conflict Resolution

Performance & Disciplined Action

APPENDIX A: THE RISE REFERENCE GUIDE

157

Transformational Management Skills 1. PROBLEM SOLVING This item refers to the ability to think strategically and play out multiple scenarios, understanding the potential consequences, to create possible solutions to obstacles. 0

No evidence of the skill. The individual struggles with solving problems. They might have trouble seeing all available solutions or anticipating the sequencing of solving complex problems.

1

Individual has some aspects of the skill, but it is not currently useful. The individual has some problem-solving skills but is no able to consistently creative and effective solutions. They may only anticipate immediate consequences of proposed solutions .

2

Individual has this skill. The individual has good problem-solving skills. They may show creativity and can anticipate consequences of choices beyond the short term.

3

Individual has mastered this skill. The individual has outstanding problem-solving skills. They think strategically and are able to play out multiple creative alternative solutions in future consequences related to the potential impact of a possible solution..

2. PERSISTENCE/RELENTLESSNESS This item refers to the individual’s determination, once an objective is set, to do anything possible to succeed. The ability to use adversity as a resource, drawing motivation to work harder through challenges.. 0

No evidence of the skill. The individual does not show persistence in the face of challenges. They tend to move to new projects when they decide a current project is not going to work. Their threshold for such decisions is low.

1

Individual has some aspects of the skill, but it is not currently useful. The individual has limited persistence. They will try multiple times with the same or different strategies to overcome challenges.

2

Individual has this skill. The individual is persistent. They will try multiple times using different strategies in order to be successful. They will be hesitant to ever give up on a challenge.

3

Individual has mastered this skill. The individual is relentless. If they set their sights on an objective, they will do everything in their power to succeed. They will never quit in the face of adversity. In fact, the individual uses adversity to motivate themselves to work through challenges.

158

APPENDIX A: THE RISE REFERENCE GUIDE

3. PASSION/CHARISMA This item refers to the individual’s zealous drive towards a goal; the ability to compel and inspire others by one’s personality and ability to communicate that goal. 0

No evidence of the skill. The individual has limited or no charisma and is challenged to express passion for the mission of the enterprise.

1

Individual has some aspects of the skill, but it is not currently useful. The individual has some charisma or is at times able to clearly communicate passion for the mission of the enterprise.

2

Individual has this skill. The individual is likable and draws people to them. They are clearly and consistently passionate for the mission of the enterprise.

3

Individual has mastered this skill. The individual is charismatic and passionate. Their passion is contagious. Others describe them as inspiring.

4. FLEXIBILITY/ADATABILITY TO CHANGE This item refers to the individual’s ability to assess changes in a situation and modify actions accordingly; resolving negative emotions and embracing differences. 0

No evidence of the skill. The individual shows no evidence of ability to adapt to changes occurring in their life or routine or to deal with unresolved feelings/emotions related to changes. The individual is rigid and structures in their approach to all things.

1

Individual has some aspects of the skill, but it is not currently useful. The individual has significant difficulty adjusting to changes in their life. Requires on-going or intensive support to resolve feelings and emotions related to change. Change may be a known trigger for this individual.

2

Individual has this skill. The individual may have mild difficulties adapting to change or may require a moderate level of support to process alterations in routine or life changes. No long-term difficulties. The individual may be hesitant to embrace change.

3

Individual has mastered this skill. The individual is flexible and is able to easily resolve feelings/emotions related to changes in their life. Adapts well when changes are made to usual routine. The individual savors change as a positive life experience.

APPENDIX A: THE RISE REFERENCE GUIDE

159

5. KNOWLEDGE AS A RESOURCE This item refers to the individual’s ability to harness the development and share knowledge as a core strategy to achieve a goal. 0

No evidence of the skill. The individual treats knowledge as a source of power. They collect it but do not share it unless forced.

1

Individual has some aspects of the skill, but it is not currently useful. The individual has some flexibility with their understanding of the role of knowledge in complex systems but often struggles with understanding how to use it effectively, or they may occasionally hold information for strategic reasons such as a lack of trust of others.

2

Individual has this skill. The individual has a clear understanding that knowledge is a resource best shared in social entrepreneurship.

3

Individual has mastered this skill. The individual has a vision of developing and sharing knowledge as a key business strategy within their enterprise.

6. CREATIVITY This item describes the individual’s vision to use unique and alternative perspectives to create a new strategy or to progress in an existing situation; invention. 0

No evidence of the skill. The individual demonstrates little or no creativity. They are a conventional thinker.

1

Individual has some aspects of the skill, but it is not currently useful. The individual has some creativity. They may sometimes come up with creative ideas but seldom have the confidence in them.

2

Individual has this skill. The individual is creative. They commonly have clever or non-conventional ideas that have potential for enterprise applications.

3

Individual has mastered this skill. The individual is very creative. Some might describe them as brilliant in their ability to see things in a unique manner that facilitates progress or to recognize enterprise opportunities.

160

APPENDIX A: THE RISE REFERENCE GUIDE

7. INNOVATION This item refers to the individual’s ability to produce creative ideas, then implement in strategic planning and actions, efficiently and effectively. 0

No evidence of the skill. The individual has demonstrated no ability to bring good ideas to reality.

1

Individual has some aspects of the skill, but it is not currently useful. The individual has demonstrated some innovation, perhaps retooling others’ ideas for greater efficiency.

2

Individual has this skill. The individual is innovative and able to take creative ideas and bring them to production/fruition.

3

Individual has mastered this skill. The individual has a track record of having creative ideas that they are able to rapidly bring to production/fruition in an efficient and effective manner.

8. LEADERSHIP SKILLS This item describes to the individual’s ability to lead their own team or peers effectively in pursuit of a goal. 0

No evidence of the skill. The individual lacks leadership skills or leadership experience

1

Individual has some aspects of the skill, but it is not currently useful. The individual has some leadership talent or skills but limited experience in leadership roles.

2

Individual has this skill. The individual may have notable leadership talent with an established track record of successful leadership

3

Individual has mastered this skill. The individual has significant leadership strengths. They are seen as a strong and/or effective leader.

9. RESILIENCY This item describes the individual’s capacity to quickly and effectively recover from obstacles or setbacks, developing and growing strengths from challenges to better themselves and the organization. 0

No evidence of the skill. The individual is not yet able to identify personal strengths.

1

Individual has some aspects of the skill, but it is not currently useful. The individual is able to identify internal/personal strengths but is not able to utilize them effectively.

2

Individual has this skill. The individual is able to identify most of their internal/personal strengths and is able to partially utilize them.

3

Individual has mastered this skill. The individual is able to both identify and use internal/personal strengths to better themselves and their organization and successfully manage difficult challenges.

APPENDIX A: THE RISE REFERENCE GUIDE

161

10. RESOURCEFULNESS This item refers to the individual’s ability to identify and utilize external/environmental strengths to progress and better both themselves and their organization. 0

No evidence of the skill. The individual is not yet able to identify external/environmental strengths.

1

Individual has some aspects of the skill, but it is not currently useful. The individual is able to identify external/environmental strengths but is not able to utilize them effectively.

2

Individual has this skill. The individual is able to identify most of his/her external/environmental strengths and is able to partially utilize them.

3

Individual has mastered this skill. The individual is able to both identify and use external/environmental strengths to better themselves and their organization and successfully manage difficult challenges.

11. SELF-AWARENESS This item refers to the individuals’ capability to recognize and identify their own strengths and weaknesses as well as resource and capability needs; an ongoing process of self-reflection and metacognition. 0

No evidence of the skill. The individual is not self-aware or has very limited self-awareness. They might have significant ‘blind spots’ in their self-perception that interfere with professional development.

1

Individual has some aspects of the skill, but it is not currently useful. The individual has some limited self-awareness. They have a sense of their strengths and challenges but struggles to articulate the implications of these personal characteristics on their business efforts.

2

Individual has this skill. The individual is reasonably aware of their strengths and limitations. They can articulate how their strengths and weaknesses influence business approaches and experiences. They might have some ability to design strategies to overcome personal challenges in their business plans

3

Individual has mastered this skill. The individual is fully aware of their strengths and limitations and can recognize their own resource and capability needs. They are able to adjust their approach to play to strengths and overcome challenges.

162

APPENDIX A: THE RISE REFERENCE GUIDE

Relationship Management Skills 12. NETWORK CAPACITY This item describes the individual’s ability to build and maintain networks as a leader. Ratings and Descriptions 0 No evidence of the skill.

The individual has limited or no networking skills or capacity. The individual might discount the value of networks. 1 Individual has some aspects of the skill, but it is not currently useful.

The individual has some knowledge of the importance of networking but does not have many skills or experiences with networking. 2 Individual has this skill.

The individual has networking knowledge and skills. 3 Individual has mastered this skill.

The individual is a skilled network builder and manager

13. LEVERAGING EXISTING PARTNERSHIPS This item refers to the individual’s capacity to utilize one’s existing network and relationships as a resource, including peer, advocacy and funder organizations, as well as individuals. The ability to attract long-term, mutually beneficial partnerships in order to develop and grow. Ratings and Descriptions 0

No evidence of the skill. The individual makes limited use of partnerships, alliances, and other external relationships. Those alliances and partnerships that they has are not particularly productive.

1

Individual has some aspects of the skill, but it is not currently useful. The individual does not prioritize relations with other organizations. They have developed few key collaborations or alliances

2

Individual has this skill. The individual has built and maintains relationships with others. They consistently networks in an effort to attract partnerships

3

Individual has mastered this skill. The individual has built and maintains strong working relationships with peer, advocacy, and funder organizations. Their organization is a model of effective networking. The individual is charismatic and attracts affiliations and partnerships. They have cultivated a variety of long term, mutually beneficial collaborations which they work hard to nurture and grow. They seem to ‘know everyone’.

APPENDIX A: THE RISE REFERENCE GUIDE

163

14. RESOURCE LEVERAGING This item refers to the individual’s ability to use the resources of others to achieve strategic goals. The understanding that one need not own resources to achieve one’s goals, only control those resources. Ratings and Descriptions 0

No evidence of the skill. The individual has little or no understanding, experience or interest in resource leveraging.

1

Individual has some aspects of the skill, but it is not currently useful. The individual understands the concepts of resource leveraging but has little experience or may struggle with accepting it.

2

Individual has this skill. The individual has experiences with leverage resources. They have been able to use the resources of others in order to achieve their mission/agenda without having to take any formal control of those resources.

3

Individual has mastered this skill. The individual is expert at leveraging the resources of others in meeting their business objectives. They do not have to own or control a resource to use it effectively.

15. BUILDING & MAINTAINING A REPUTATION This item describes the individual’s ability to cultivate respect as a leader and maintain a stellar reputation. The desire to share credit for success.

Ratings and Descriptions 0

No evidence of the skill. The individual has had problems or accusations of problems that has resulted in a negative reputation within the field of their enterprise OR the individual has no reputation in the field and a limited understanding of how to build a reputation.

1

Individual has some aspects of the skill, but it is not currently useful. The individual is an unknown in his/her field but has a clear sense of how to build a good reputation.

2

Individual has this skill. The individual has a solid reputation in their field. They are generally respected.

3

Individual has mastered this skill. The individual has a stellar reputation. They are seen as a respected leader in the field.

164

APPENDIX A: THE RISE REFERENCE GUIDE

16. COMMUNITY INFLUENCE & INVOLVEMENT This item is used to describe the individual’s development and creation of external working relationships towards strategic goals. The ability to perceive the political environment of a situation, and to understand and utilize influence over leaders and the community as a whole. Ratings and Descriptions 0

No evidence of the skill. Problems with external relationships that impede/prevent the individual from achieving their objectives. Issues can include No or poor external relationships Operating in isolation Toxic or relations characterized by distrust Failure to consider or pay attention to or value relationships.

1

Individual has some aspects of the skill, but it is not currently useful. The individual struggles with their external relationships. Challenges may include: Insularity--Insufficient attention to circumstances outside of organization Poor relationship management--Inconsistent in its relationships, poor relationships Misunderstanding of politics--Emphasizes wrong relationships Poor reputation--Lack of credibility or influence Absence of trust in people outside of organization.

2

Individual has this skill. The individual establishes productive external relationships that help them achieve their objectives. They understands the political context and reality of their community. The organization and its leadership is influential in its dealings with others.

3

Individual has mastered this skill. The individual has established strong, productive external working relationships that help them achieve their aims. They approach all situations with a clear perception of political context and reality. Demonstrates understanding of conventions, structures, functions, objectives of government and power political environment. The organization and its leadership effectively influence key members of the broad community (leaders and group).

17. ACCOUNTABILITY This item refers to the individual’s ability to define and create accountability structures whereby all business components have clearly articulated performance objectives that tie to the organization’s broad goals and strategies. Ratings and Descriptions 0

No evidence of the skill. The individual lacks any ability to define or articulate accountability standards or performance measures or struggles with ongoing challenges. Measures may be: Not linked to organization’s broad goals and strategy Meaningless, irrelevant or impossible to achieve Measures may be applied unfairly or with favoritism Used to create an environment of fear and anxiety Focused entirely on process, with no regard for results. [continues]

APPENDIX A: THE RISE REFERENCE GUIDE

165

ACCOUNTABILITY continued 1

Individual has some aspects of the skill, but it is not currently useful. The individual has a limited ability to articulate and communicate performance expectations and measures are used inconsistently, or may have occasional problems. Measures may be: Not linked to organization’s broad goals and strategies Too easy or too demanding Too short -term or long-term Vague or confusing Focused mainly on inputs.

2

Individual has this skill. The individual is able to articulate an enterprise in which all individuals and departments have performance objectives that tie to the organization’s broad goals and strategies. These have clear timeframes and deliverables and are generally meaningful, demanding and achievable. Performance objectives are usually focused on the end results rather than on how the work is done. Most staff use their performance objectives to guide their work. These objectives form the basis for employee performance evaluations

3

Individual has mastered this skill. The individual is able to define and create accountability structures whereby all business components have clearly articulated performance objectives that tie to the organization’s broad goals and strategies. These have clear timeframes and deliverables, and are meaningful, demanding, and achievable. Performance objectives are focused on the end results rather than on how the work is done. Most staff use their performance measures to prioritize their work. These objectives form the basis for employee performance evaluations.

18. TEAMING This item is used to describe the individual’s ability to structure teams and team-based approaches to the activities and processes of the organization. Ratings and Descriptions 0

No evidence of the skill. The individual has no or very limited teaming skills or experiences.

1

Individual has some aspects of the skill, but it is not currently useful. The individual has some teaming skills. Although relationships may be cordial, some barriers to teaming exist. Politics and hierarchy may dictate relationships and access to information. Obtaining access to resources in other parts of the organization can be difficult. The organization does not take advantage of potential efficiencies.

2

Individual has this skill. The individual is able to get people and programs to work together effectively, sharing information and resources as needed. There are few coordination issues, and the organization enjoys savings, efficiencies and economies of scale.

3

Individual has mastered this skill. The individual is able to structure team work and teaming approaches into all activities and processes. Teaming is well-coordinated and integrated across the organization, creating an environment where information is freely shared and resources are allocated according to goals and strategy. Relationships are dictated by organizational needs, rather than by politics or hierarchy. Programs are clearly linked with each other, creating efficiencies and economies of scale.

166

APPENDIX A: THE RISE REFERENCE GUIDE

Business Management Skills 19. KNOWLEDGE OF FIELD/INDUSTRY This item describes the individual’s understanding of the context surrounding the enterprise, with experience in the field itself. Ratings and Descriptions 0

1

No evidence of the skill. The individual has limited or no knowledge of the field. While the individual may have experience in business or with other social problems, they have no experience with the issues involved in the present enterprise. Individual has some aspects of the skill, but it is not currently useful. The individual has some knowledge of the field. Limits of knowledge may impede business success due to a naïve or uninformed approach.

2

Individual has this skill. The individual is knowledgeable about the field.They may or may not have some direct experience but has studied the field.

3

Individual has mastered this skill. The individual is very knowledgeable about the field to which the enterprise is directed. The individual has direct and substantial experience in this field.

20. KNOWLEDGE OF LAWS/REGULATIONS This item describes the individual’s knowledge and understanding of the existing laws and regulations in the business environment of the organization that directly pertain to the functioning of that organization. Ratings and Descriptions 0

No evidence of the skill. The individual has limited or no knowledge of the field. While the individual may be experienced in business or with other social problems, They have no experience with the legal and regulatory aspects of the present enterprise

1

Individual has some aspects of the skill, but it is not currently useful. The individual has some knowledge of the field. Limits of knowledge may impede business success due to a naïve or uninformed perspective about the existing laws and regulations.

2

Individual has this skill. The individual is knowledgeable about the laws and regulations in the business environment. They may or may not have some direct experience but has studied the laws and regulations.

3

Individual has mastered this skill. The individual is very knowledgeable about the existing laws and regulations in the business environment of the enterprise. The individual has direct and substantial expertise in relevant laws and regulations.

APPENDIX A: THE RISE REFERENCE GUIDE

167

21. ACCOUNTING/BOOKKEEPING This item identifies the individual’s knowledge and understanding of accounting and bookkeeping principles and practices. Ratings and Descriptions 0

No evidence of the skill. The individual has limited or no accounting or bookkeeping experience. .

1

Individual has some aspects of the skill, but it is not currently useful. The individual has basic but limited knowledge of bookkeeping and accounting practice.

2

Individual has this skill. The individual has sufficient knowledge of bookkeeping and accounting practices. They are capable of managing ‘the books’ at the outset of their business.

3

Individual has mastered this skill. The individual has specialized training and experience in accounting and bookkeeping.

22. FINANCE This item identifies the individual’s knowledge and understanding of financial management principles and practices. Ratings and Descriptions 0

No evidence of the skill. The Individual has no notable experience with financial management.

1

Individual has some aspects of the skill, but it is not currently useful. The Individual has some financial management experiences but either not successful or not directly related to the current business plan.

2

Individual has this skill. The Individual has relevant financial management skills.

3

Individual has mastered this skill. The Individual has notable financial management skills with a successful track record directly relevant to current business plan.

168

APPENDIX A: THE RISE REFERENCE GUIDE

23. MARKETING/COMMUNICATIONS This item identifies the individual’s understanding of and experience with marketing, sales and communication practices. Ratings and Descriptions 0

No evidence of the skill. The individual has limited or no marketing/sales/communications skills or knowledge.

1

Individual has some aspects of the skill, but it is not currently useful. The individual has some knowledge of marketing, sales, and/or communication strategy but limited experience.

2

Individual has this skill. The individual has some clear marketing, sales, or communication skills.

3

Individual has mastered this skill. The individual has outstanding understanding and experience with marketing, sales, and communication.

24. OPERATIONS MANAGEMENT This item describes the individual’s knowledge and understanding of operations management practices. Ratings and Descriptions 0

No evidence of the skill. The individual does not know or utilize standard operations management practices.

1

Individual has some aspects of the skill, but it is not currently useful. The individual has some limited knowledge of operations management practices, but they are not effectively used in their enterprise.

2

Individual has this skill. The individual uses standard operations management practices.

3

Individual has mastered this skill. The individual uses sophisticated operations management practices in their enterprise.

25. TECHNOLOGY-ENABELED BUSINESS MANAGEMENT This item identifies the individual’s knowledge of the tools of technology-enabled business (e.g. social media, CRM, bookkeeping software, etc.) and their utility to the organization. Ratings and Descriptions 0

No evidence of the skill. The individual has no or very limited knowledge of business-related technology (e.g., social media, computer software, electronic hardware, etc.).

1

Individual has some aspects of the skill, but it is not currently useful. The individual has some knowledge of technology but its potential applications in business are not understood. They may only use it in their personal lives.

2

Individual has this skill. The individual has knowledge of common strategies that utilize technology to enable business efficiency and effectiveness

3

Individual has mastered this skill. The individual is expert in the use of technology in enabling business efficiency and effectiveness.

APPENDIX A: THE RISE REFERENCE GUIDE

169

Organizational Process Management Skills 26. INTERNAL COMMUNICATION This item refers to the individual’s ability to express one’s meaning to others in a clear, transparent, and positive way; the ability to utilize effective communication to lead an organization. Ratings and Descriptions 0

No evidence of the skill. The individual’s communication is often problematic. Providing and obtaining timely, accurate information can be difficult. Communication problems create missed opportunities, the need to undo or redo work, and contribute to organizational problems. Information and access to information may be used to control resources and power. Informal communication may trump or undermine formal communication. Secrecy, misinformation and rumor are commonplace.

1

Individual has some aspects of the skill, but it is not currently useful. The individual is inconsistent in the quality and timeliness of their internal communication. People may not always get the information they need. Access to information may be controlled or limited. Different sources of communication may deliver different messages. At times, effective communication is hampered by inaccuracy and rumor.

2

Individual has this skill. Generally, the individual’s communication is effective. Most types of their efforts at communication work for most individuals within the organization.

3

Individual has mastered this skill. The individual is able to create an organization that is a model for effective internal communication. Individuals throughout the organization receive the information they need in a timely, accurate manner. Access to information is constrained only by the competence of the individual and genuine security considerations. The organization uses a wide variety of communication tools and pathways and uses each appropriately. Internal and external communications are integrated to deliver consistent messages, which are reinforced through repetition. The organization’s commitment to effective internal communication is reflected in its training, practices and expectations.

170

APPENDIX A: THE RISE REFERENCE GUIDE

27. PROCESS DESIGN This item describes the individual’s ability to work efficiently and effectively toward goals and objectives through processes that are robust, lean, well-designed, consistently used, and widely accepted. Ratings and Descriptions 0

No evidence of the skill. The individual is inefficient and often ineffective in doing work. They seem to be stuck in their ways, and unaware of alternative ways of operating.

1

Individual has some aspects of the skill, but it is not currently useful. The individual is inconsistent in his/her ability to organize and implement effective work processes. They are open to feedback and willing to change but does not have process design skills.

2

Individual has this skill. The individual operates efficiently and effectively. Their processes are well designed and widely used.

3

Individual has mastered this skill. The individual efficiently and effectively works towards achieving Their goals and objectives. Their processes are robust, lean, well designed, consistently used, and widely accepted. The entrepreneur is focused, systematic and methodical in improving the way they operates.

28. DECISION-MAKING This item describes the individual’s ability to, first, make decisions, and then to make them in a well-reasoned, informed, and timely way toward achieving individual and organizational goals. Ratings and Descriptions 0

No evidence of the skill. The individual’s effectiveness often suffers as a result of poor decision-making or a failure to make decision. Problems may include: The individual is unable or unwilling to make and stick with decisions Erratic, unpredictable and/or informal decision-making processes are common Rumor and bad information affect the quality of decisions Decisions are often make by people who lack appropriate authority or qualifications It is unclear when/if decisions have been made Ulterior motives, favoritism or cronyism affect decisions There is no ownership or accountability for decisions, behavior, or actions.

1

Individual has some aspects of the skill, but it is not currently useful. The individual struggles with sound decision-making. Problem areas may include: informally or behind the scenes While the individual has an established framework for decision making, frequently decisions are made Decisions are repeatedly second guessed and revisited The individual fails to involve the right people Inadequate,inaccurateoroutdatedinformationnegativelyimpactsthequalityofdecisions. Individual has this skill. The individual has sound processes for making decisions that further their mission, vision and goals. The individual takes advantage of available information to inform their decision-making. Generally, the right people participate in making decisions. Decisions are documented and communicated.

2

3

Individual has mastered this skill. The individual makes and implements high-quality, well-reasoned, timely decisions that further their mission, vision and goals. In making decisions, the individual takes advantage of reliable, up-to-date information, conducts risk analysis, and identifies contingency plans. When necessary, they can act quickly and decisively with limited information. Decision making processes are transparent, consider long term implications on those affected, and involve appropriate people.

APPENDIX A: THE RISE REFERENCE GUIDE

171

29. CONFLICT MANAGEMENT This item describes the individual’s ability to manage conflict in healthy and constructive ways; the ability to create an organizational culture that addresses conflict in this way. Ratings and Descriptions 0

No evidence of the skill. The individual deals with conflict in inconsistent ways and with variable results. Conflicts may not be accurately identified or adequately resolved for reasons that may include: Reluctance to honestly identify issues for fear of reprisal A lack of ownership and accountability makes resolution difficult Conflicts are glossed over or denied.

1

Individual has some aspects of the skill, but it is not currently useful. Conflicts often cause problems for the individual. The real issues behind the conflict are rarely identified and addressed. Avoidance, personal vendetta, a culture of “us versus them” and/or paranoia can perpetuate conflict, while preventing its resolution.

2

Individual has this skill. The individual identifies and deals with conflict in an honest, safe, timely manner. The organizational culture encourages individuals to focus on issues rather than blame. The individual is effective in resolving conflict.

3

Individual has mastered this skill. The individual identifies and deals with conflict in a healthy and constructive way. Issues are addressed in an honest, safe, timely manner. The organizational culture encourages individuals to focus on issues instead of blame; as a result when conflicts are resolved, parties are able to move on. The individual helps people understand how cultural and social differences impact the ways people deal with conflict. .

30. PERFORMANCE & DISCIPLINED ACTION This item rates the individual’s focus on performance as an expected norm; self-discipline and the ability to encourage and reward high performance in others. Ratings and Descriptions 0

No evidence of the skill. The individual rarely references or rewards performance and his/her business consistently under achieves. Inefficiency and ineffectiveness are commonplace and accepted as inevitable. The individual may demonstrate passivity or apathy in response to challenges or work.

1

Individual has some aspects of the skill, but it is not currently useful. While the individual is generally self -disciplined, their overall approach lacks rigor and purposeful performance. They do not consistently produce the kind of results they want.

2

Individual has this skill. The individual cultivates a culture of performance. They demonstrate discipline and rigor in all they do and constantly refers to performance. Employees have freedom and responsibility for delivering results, and are rewarded for the impact they make. The organization consistently achieves.

3

Individual has mastered this skill. The individual has a strong focus on performance. They are able to create high performance as the expectation and the norm.

Appendix B: The RISE Skills Glossary

Transformation Management Skills Problem solving—The ability to think strategically and play out multiple scenarios, understanding the potential consequences, to create possible solutions to obstacles. Persistence/Resilience—The determination, once an objective is set, to do anything possible to succeed. The ability to use adversity as a resource, drawing motivation to work harder through challenges. Passion/Charisma—A zealous drive toward a goal; the ability to compel and inspire others by one’s personality and ability to communicate that goal. Flexibility/Adaptability to Change—The ability to assess changes in a situation and modify actions accordingly; resolving negative emotions and embracing differences. Knowledge as a Resource—The ability to harness the development and sharing of knowledge as a core strategy to achieve a goal. Creativity—The vision to use unique and alternative perspectives to create something entirely new; invention. Innovation—The implementation of an invention by finding a way to get it to the market that needs it. Leadership skills—The ability to lead one’s team or peers effectively in pursuit of a goal.

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 T. S. Lyons et al., Entrepreneurship Skill Building, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-77920-7

173

174

APPENDIX B: THE RISE SKILLS GLOSSARY

Resiliency—The capacity to quickly and effectively recover from obstacles or setbacks, developing and growing strengths from challenges to better her/himself and the organization. Resourcefulness—The ability to identify and utilize external/environmental strengths to progress and better both themselves and their organization. Self-Awareness—The capability to recognize and identify one’s own strengths and weaknesses as well as resource and capability needs; an ongoing process of self-reflection and metacognition.

Relationship Management Skills Networking Capacity—The ability to build and maintain networks as a leader. Leveraging Existing Partnerships—The capacity to utilize one’s existing network and relationships as a resource, including peer, advocacy and funder organizations, as well as individuals. The ability to attract long-term, mutually beneficial partnerships in order to develop and grow. Resource Leveraging—The ability to use the resources of others to achieve strategic goals. The understanding that one need not own resources to achieve one’s goals, only control those resources. Building and Maintaining a Reputation—The ability to cultivate respect as a leader and maintain a stellar reputation. The desire to share credit for success. Community Influence & Involvement—Development and creation of external working relationships toward strategic goals. The ability to perceive the political environment of a situation, and to understand and utilize influence over leaders and the community as a whole. Accountability—The ability to define and create accountability structures whereby all business components have clearly articulated performance objectives that tie to the organization’s broad goals and strategies. Teaming—The ability to structure teams and team-based approaches to the activities and processes of the organization.

APPENDIX B: THE RISE SKILLS GLOSSARY

175

Business Management Skills Knowledge of Field/Industry—The understanding of the context surrounding the enterprise, with experience in the field itself. Knowledge of Laws/Regulations—Knowledge and understanding of the existing laws and regulations in the business environment of the organization that directly pertain to the functioning of that organization. Accounting/Bookkeeping—Knowledge and understanding of accounting and bookkeeping principles and practices. Finance—Knowledge and understanding of financial management principles and practices. Marketing/Communications—Understanding of and experience with marketing, sales, and communication practices. Operations Management—Knowledge and understanding of operations management practices. Technology-Enabled Business Management—Knowledge of the tools of technology-enabled business (e.g., social media, CRM, bookkeeping software, etc.) and their utility to the organization.

Organizational Process Management Skills Internal Communication—The ability to express one’s meaning to others in a clear, transparent, and positive way; the ability to utilize effective communication to lead an organization. Process Design—The ability to work efficiently and effectively toward goals and objectives through processes that are robust, lean, well-designed, consistently used, and widely accepted. Decision-Making—The ability to, first, make decisions, and then to make them in a well-reasoned, informed, and timely way toward achieving individual and organizational goals. Conflict Management—The ability to manage conflict in healthy and constructive ways; the ability to create an organizational culture that addresses conflict in this way. Performance and Disciplined Action—A focus on performance as an expected norm; self-discipline and the ability to encourage and reward high performance in others.

Index

A abnormal, 44, 45 adaptive learning, 25, 78 Advantage Valley, 88 agency, 49, 52, 74 analysis paralysis, 7 Artificial Intelligence (AI), 27, 28 Association for the Advancement of Collegiate Schools of Business International (AACSB), 116 attributes theory of entrepreneurship, 2 automated distance learning platform, 139 B Baruch College of the City University of New York, 75 behavior theory of entrepreneurship, 3 Blank, Steve, 7, 72 Build a Bear, 23 business coach, 30 business concept, 11, 73, 74, 101, 104, 123

business management skills, 51, 57, 126, 175 Business Model Canvas, 73 C Cattel, Stephen, 40 Cavendish Physics Laboratory, 40 Center for Innovation and Entrepreneurship (CIE), 115, 117, 120, 121, 123–129 Central Appalachia, 88 Central Louisiana, 88, 89 CEO, 49, 121 Chattanooga, Downtown Innovation District, 117, 121 Chattanooga, Entrepreneurial Ecosystem, 116, 120, 121, 124 Chattanooga, Tennessee, 116, 119, 121 Chattanooga University, 116 Child and Adolescent Needs and Strengths (CANS), 135, 138 Clarence E. Harris Chair of Excellence in Entrepreneurship, 120

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021 T. S. Lyons et al., Entrepreneurship Skill Building, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-77920-7

177

178

INDEX

clinical cutoff, 45 co-curricular activities, 5, 71, 72, 75–77, 80–83, 86, 99, 101, 104–106, 115, 117, 126, 129, 131 cognitive theory of entrepreneurship, 4 Collegiate Spirit of Entrepreneurship Award, 120 communimetric theory of measurement, 39, 88 communimetric measures, 25, 48, 49, 61, 149, 150 communimetrics, 25, 62, 88, 91, 112, 138, 150 competencies, 12, 90 complex systems, 25–31, 35 complicated systems, 25–27, 29 COVID-19, COVID-19 pandemic, 103, 121, 133, 136 critical events, 78 CUNY Institute for Virtual Enterprise, 74 customer relationship management (CRM), 59, 128, 175 D deep practice, 79 deliberate practice, 79 Delphi Method, 11 Department of Marketing & Entrepreneurship, 123, 124 Design Thinking, 55, 60, 75, 76, 80 Disney Corporation, 21 E E-Club, 121, 127 economic equity, 148 Edney Building, 117 Effectuation, 75 Enterprise Launch, 99, 100, 105

entrepreneurial ecosystem, 10, 117 Entrepreneurial League System Assessment (ELSA), 88–90 Entrepreneurial League System (ELS), 88 entrepreneurial mindset, 4, 5, 99 entrepreneurial preparedness, 78 entrepreneurial skills, 9–12, 20, 31, 33, 58, 60, 99, 104, 106, 107, 110–113 Entrepreneurship Breakfast, 120, 121 Entrepreneurship Major, University of Tennessee at Chattanooga, 72, 118, 124, 128, 129 Entrepreneurship Minor, University of Tennessee at Chattanooga, 117, 119 entrepreneurship students: explorers, generators, starters, 80, 81, 105, 121 essential skills, 9, 56, 86, 111, 124, 127 experiential learning, 72, 77, 78, 98, 112, 142

F Fly, 120 Fly for Researchers, 123 Franklin, Benjamin, 29

G Galton, Sir Francis, 40 Gamification, 83 Gary W. Rollins College of Business, 115–117, 120, 123, 124, 128 General Education curriculum, 86, 122 generative learning, 78 grit, 4 growth mindset, 4

INDEX

H hard skills, 9 Hatch It!, 120 Health Sciences Center, 116 hierarchy of offerings, 20

I Idea Central, 120, 127 Individualization, 22, 23 Interactive learning environments, 139

J Jack & Julie Nadel School of Business & Entrepreneurship, 99, 105 James R. Mapp Building, 117

K Kiva, 117

L Lawrence N. Field Programs in Entrepreneurship, 75 learning history, 78 Likert-type scales, 43 Living-Learning Community (LLC), 120 logical positivism, 46 Lunch & Learns, 120, 127

M Makerspaces, 72, 76, 80, 84, 100, 105, 120, 121, 127 MarketMaker, 74 mass customization, 23, 33, 34, 36, 81, 87, 137, 142, 144 mass production, 22, 36 Memphis, Tennessee, 116 meta-analysis, 50

179

meta-skills, 12, 53, 56, 82, 90, 125, 126, 141 Millener, Geoff, 116 minimum viable product, 72, 76, 90 Music and Theatre Divisions of the Department of Performing Arts, University of Tennessee at Chattanooga, 117

N National Partnership for Child Safety (NPCS), 135 Northern Mockingbird, 120

O Opeeka, 140 Opeeka RISE platform, 143 operationalization, 25 organizational process management skills, 51, 59, 86, 175

P Praed Foundation, 134, 135, 138, 151 professional skills, 85, 86, 122 psychometric theories of measurement, 39 psychometric theories of measurement, Classical Test Theory, 40, 41 psychometric theories of measurement, Item Response Theory, 40, 41, 43

R Readiness Inventory for Successful Entrepreneurship (RISE), 12, 13, 23–25, 33, 36, 39, 48–51, 53–55, 59, 61, 62, 71, 81–87, 91, 92, 97, 105–115, 124–126,

180

INDEX

128–130, 133–143, 145–149, 151 reflection-in-action, 76 relationship management skills, 51, 55, 84, 174 RISE, entrepreneurship academic program, 99, 106 RISE, entrepreneurship co-curricular program, 87 RISE, Gen Z, 51, 52, 57, 58, 60, 103, 111, 112 RISE, Get REAL Accelerator, 103, 106, 107, 113 RISE, internship program, 81, 97, 108–110, 113 RISE, Introduction to Entrepreneurship course, 106, 110, 114 RISE, networking group, 113 Rollins, Gary W., 116 Rollins, Kathleen, 116 S Santa Barbara City College (SBCC), 97–105, 110, 111, 113, 115 Scheinfeld Center, five stages of helping, transformation, 114 Scheinfeld Center for Entrepreneurship & Innovation, 97, 98, 115 Scheinfeld Enlightened Entrepreneurship Series, 103 Scheinfeld Get REAL Accelerator, 100 Scheinfeld Innovators Community, 102, 103 Scheinfeld Innovators Studio, 101, 102 Scheinfeld Interns Program, 100, 106, 110, 111 Scheinfeld New Venture Challenge, 100, 105

serious games, 73–75, 92 simulation, 12, 71, 75, 80, 131 Social Cognitive Career Theory (SCCT), 4 social justice, 148 social skills, 9 soft skills, 9, 10, 139 Southeast Entrepreneurship Conference (SEEC), 121, 127, 128 Stanford University d.school, 75 Startup Week Chattanooga, 120 structure, 29, 39, 44, 49, 56, 62, 130, 137, 138, 148, 174 T target construct, 25 Tennessee, 120 The Enterprise Center, 117 theory of eugenics, 40 Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB), 4 Transformational Collaborative Outcomes Management (TCOM), 30–33, 39, 46, 53, 57, 133–135, 137–140 Transformational management skills, 50, 51, 53 transformational offering, 20–23, 28, 32, 39, 136, 137 transformational planning process, 49 triangulation, 46, 47 U United States Charitable Foundation, 134 University of Chattanooga, 116 University of Tennessee at Chattanooga (UTC), 115–117, 120–124, 129, 130 University of Tennessee at Knoxville, 116

INDEX

University of Tennessee at Martin, 116 University of Tennessee Research Foundation (UTRF), 122, 123 University of Tennessee System, 116, 122 UTC Commercialization Counselor, 117, 120, 123

181

UTC-Rollins College Entrepreneurship Hall of Fame, 120 V Vice Chancellor for Research’s, 122, 123 VUCA (volatile, uncertain, complex, ambiguous), 6, 86