Toward a Theory of Public Entrepreneurship

By Peter G. Klein, Joseph T. Mahoney, Anita M. McGahan, Christos N. Pitelis. 2010

375 citations recorded by the source corpus.

This paper explores innovation, experimentation, and creativity in the public domain and in the public interest. Researchers in various disciplines have studied public entrepreneurship, but there is little work in management and economics on the nature, incentives, constraints and boundaries of entrepreneurship directed to public ends. We identify a framework for analyzing public entrepreneurship and its relationship to private entrepreneurial behavior. We submit that public and private entrepreneurship share essential features but differ critically regarding the definition and measurement of objectives, the nature of the selection environment, and the opportunities for rent-seeking. We describe four levels of analysis for studying public entrepreneurship, provide examples, and suggest new research directions.

Subfields: Business and International Management, Finance, Management of Technology and Innovation

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/bd6cb6ebeb6aae2f6103f09a965291dcd49add6f

How researchers see this paper

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

In Business and International Management

In Finance

In Management of Technology and Innovation

Citations in the corpus

Heterogeneous resources and the financial crisis: implications of strategic management theory (2009, neutral): “…in this climate, may need to be-8 come political or policy entrepreneurs, skilled at taking advantage, and influencing the direction, of the political process (Klein, McGahan, Mahoney, and Pitelis, 2009) Of course, political strategy has always been part of a firm‘s overall strategic management.”
The Context of Entrepreneurial Judgment: Organizations, Markets, and Institutions (2019, positive): “…literature in economics, leading not just to work on classic commercial entrepreneurship but also on ‘institutional entrepreneurship’ (Battilana et al., 2009; Bylund and McCaffrey, 2017), ‘social entrepreneurship’ (Saebi et al., 2019), and political entrepreneurship (Klein et al., 2010).”
Institutions, Entrepreneurship, and Economic Growth: What Do We Know and What Do We Still Need to Know? (2016, positive): “economic policy influence the country- or state-level incidence of entrepreneurship are Kreft and Sobel (2005) for the United States, Ovaska and Sobel (2005) for transition countries, Bjørnskov andFoss (2008) for a larger (though still small) cross-country context (27 countries), andMcMullen,Bagby, ”
Exploring Managerial Mechanisms that Influence Innovative Work Behaviour: Comparing private and public employees (2014, background): “In this regard, private and public organizations define ends of business contexts in which internal climates supporting entrepreneurial activity are to be created (Klein et al. 2010).”