Muppets and gazelles: political and methodological biases in entrepreneurship research

By Paul Nightingale, Alex Coad. 2014

337 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Accounting, Economics and Econometrics, Management of Technology and Innovation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/3489a07196689ecb13071791c8994c79e8bace9d

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Accounting

In Economics and Econometrics

In Management of Technology and Innovation

Citations in the corpus

Institutional determinants of university spin-off quantity and quality: a longitudinal, multilevel, cross-country study (2016, background): “Creating favorable framework conditions for entrepreneurship is perceived as an important tool to foster the creation and subsequent development of new ventures, especially among policy makers (Arshed et al. 2014; Nightingale and Coad 2014).”
The cost of growth: small firms and the pricing of bank loans (2015, positive): “Academic commentary has recently argued that interventions in the process of establishment or growth of SMEs are justified if targeted to growing and innovative firms (Shane 2009; Mason and Brown 2011; Nightingale and Coad 2014).”
ENTREPRENEURIAL ECOSYSTEMS AND GROWTH ORIENTED ENTREPRENEURSHIP (2014, background): “This reflects the growing acceptance that not all start-ups are of equal ‘economic value’ and that some new firms many merely displace other firms in the same locality (Nightingale and Coad, 2014).”
Beyond market failures: the market creating and shaping roles of state investment banks (2016, positive): “The challenge for SIBs is not so much to provide abundant finance for all SMEs, but to find and nurture the so-called “gazelles” (Nightingale and Coad, 2014); that is, young, high-tech firms that are SMEs.”
Is fin-tech the new panacea for poverty alleviation and local development? Contesting Suri and Jack’s M-Pesa findings published in Science (2019, background): “This fact has led Nightingale and Coad (2014) to point out that displacement is a critical factor to account for in ultra-competitive local economies in the global South, where jobs and incomes created by new entrants are all too often cancelled out by the jobs and incomes lost in incumbent enter-”
High-growth firms: Introduction to the special section (2014, background): “…activity, clearly suffers from survivor bias (Nightingale, 1997), yet policymakers and researchers still remain uncritically impressed by successful firms and entrepreneurs (Nightingale and Coad, 2014). at U niversity of Sussex on July 2, 2014 http://icc.oxfordjournals.org/ D ow nloaded from”
Access to finance for innovative SMEs since the financial crisis (2015, background): “, 2004) with only a small minority having a disproportionate impact on the national economy (Mason and Brown, 2013; Nightingale and Coad, 2014).”
Making the Most of Failure Experiences: Exploring the Relationship between Business Failure and the Identification of Business Opportunities (2016, background): “In this respect, our study suffers from the oft-cited “survivor bias” wherein entrepreneurial samples are limited to those entrepreneurs who remain in business, or start subsequent businesses on the heels of an entrepreneurial exit (Aldrich & Wiedenmayer, 1993; Nightingale & Coad, 2014).”
Startups’ Roads to Failure (2018, background): “Some authors note that innovation is driven and done by a small subset of the new firms, while a large part of the enterprises plays a marginal role [1].”
Rural entrepreneurship or entrepreneurship in the rural – between place and space (2015, background): “Mainstream economic theory would suggest that high growth firms acting on global factor and product markets are highly conducive to local development as they create new jobs and economic activity (cf. Porter, 2000; Nightingale and Coad, 2014).”