THE ENTREPRENEURIAL CHARACTER: MOOD, FREEDOM, ACTIVATION

Transcription

1 THE ENTREPRENEURIAL CHARACTER: MOOD, FREEDOM, ACTIVATION Mark Clark, PhD Department of Management College of Business and Economics New Mexico State University P.O. Box Las Cruces, NM (575) Quantum Storytelling Conference December 18, 2014

2 THE ENTREPRENEURIAL CHARACTER: MOOD, FREEDOM, ACTIVATION ABSTRACT Is there a distinguishable entrepreneurial character or personality? If there is an entrepreneurial character, what are its significant factors? How does an entrepreneurial character become activated? What is the relationship between freedom, mood and activation? These questions are important for leadership teams and public policy makers concerned with political economy growth, stability and longevity. Using a mixed methods design, a purposive sample of HEOs from the homebuilding, consumer packaged goods and high tech industries was evaluated using semi structured interviews based on MECCAs and the OCAI. Significant results include: partial specification of the entrepreneurial character, a map of the process entrepreneurs employ to intermediate forms of Schumpeterian innovation, and the significance of family business relative to organizational sustainability. Entrepreneurial activation requires exposure to discovery of innovation, intermediation of resources and capabilities, and strategic innovation to achieve sustainability. Entrepreneurs leverage two factors: freedom and empathy. After motivation becomes instigated, freedom and mood cause attunement and alignment via acquisition of empathy resultant from collaboration with effective human resources. Keywords: entrepreneurship, public affairs, entrepreneurial personality

3 2 THE ENTREPRENEURIAL CHARACTER: MOOD, FREEDOM, ACTIVATION INTRODUCTION Mill (1884) understood the importance of an entrepreneurial character; and its relationship within and to a political economy, or nation. Its influence is the main determining cause of the social progress; all other dispositions of our nature which contribute to that progress, being dependent on it for the means of accomplishing their share of the work (57). Character refers to the individual set of mental abilities and moral capabilities that comprise a human being. A human being is able to operationalize knowledge, problem solving abilities, and judgment to make choices or decisions relative to markets and innovation. How to activate entrepreneurs for creation of desirable societal level outcomes is an important affair and public policy matter. Relative to unproductive or destructive forms, current public policies and institutional rules impact local, national and international levels of productive entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship occurs within and across the for profit, nonprofit and governmental sectors that comprise a democratic capitalist political economy. To achieve organizational sustainability, executive leadership teams from every sector are concerned with selection, activation and recruitment of entrepreneurs. Sustenance for the modern, international enterprise is dependent on resource acquisition, capabilities, and creation or commercialization of Schumpeterian innovation. A purposive sample of hybrid enterprise organizations (HEO) allowed for discovery of significant findings related to cultural and administrative structures and processes within sustainable for profit, nonprofit or governmental enterprises. The Organizational Culture Assessment Instrument (OCAI) served as foundation for Means end Chains for Conceptualization of Advertising Strategy (MECCAs) based laddering interviews. Using proven content analytical methods and algorithms, laddering interview data was transformed, analyzed mathematically and statistically, and re transformed to provide significant findings. This unique research design allowed for discovery of significant entrepreneurial character elements or traits. Activation of entrepreneurs is important for two reasons. First, their outputs impact individual, family and organizational sustainability. Second, outcomes associated with their outputs appear to lead to political economy longevity and availability of higher quality lifestyles. By virtue of their Schumpeterian innovation, entrepreneurs create culture and design administrative processes correlated with organizational sustainability and political economy longevity. From exploration to commercialization, entrepreneurs produce Schumpeterian innovation that causes growth, prosperity and sustainability. The outputs and outcomes associated with real entrepreneurs lead to individual and collective longevity, stability and workforce quality. This paper is associated with a series that explores the 21 st Century definition of entrepreneurship, proper specification of entrepreneurs, and,

4 3 exploration, discovery and creation of effective methods for entrepreneurial activation and workforce training. RESEARCH QUESTIONS Often, there appears disagreement over the what, how and why associated with entrepreneurship. While a generally accepted definition of entrepreneurship is lacking, there is agreement that the concept comprises numerous dimensions. The most common features of the various definitions include unique traits, risk taking, opportunity recognition, motivation and exploitation, and innovation. Other characteristics include the output or impact of entrepreneurship: such as value creation, spillover effects, or high growth (Acs, Szerb and Autio, 2014, 65). Inaccurate, unreliable or non reproducible research designs and samples have provided no current, general theory of entrepreneurship; or agreement of what personage comprises an entrepreneur. How to activate or best work with entrepreneurs is a public affairs issue of vital interest within and across the for profit, nonprofit and governmental sectors of any democratic capitalist political economy. Effective research designs, efficient workforce segmentation models, and generally accepted and reproducible methods for activation of entrepreneurs are most important for public affairs makers. 1. Is there a distinguishable entrepreneurial character or personality? 2. If there is an entrepreneurial character, what are its significant factors? 3. How does an entrepreneurial character become activated? What is the relationship between freedom, mood and activation? It is important to measure what is of interest when business or public policy decisions are made. Inaccuracies or mistakes impact future opportunities for all stakeholders. Real entrepreneurs must be located and observed, and interviewed using reproducible methods. The use of proxies or inaccurate models for entrepreneurship is no longer valid. Sufficient work has been made complete to provide a generally accepted definition for entrepreneurship. However, specification of the entrepreneur requires additional effort. Given current results, administrative processes and technology exist to measure what and who is required to define the entrepreneurial character. Organizational and political economy stakeholders provide the labor and other human based resources, make demands on business and government, and commit behaviors that cause regulation of their associated markets and environments. Individuals and groups make deliberate attempts to shape public affairs, opinion and policy. The development, modification or ratification of public policy differs between national, political economies, and the process always involves efforts by competitive groups for favor from or influence of policy makers. Public affairs and policy are expressed by the society s cultural formats, the media, and governmental expression; via constitutional law, other legislative or regulatory acts, and the several forms of judicial decisions.

5 4 Societal culture may be divided into five environments: social, economic, regulatory, technological and natural. According to Mill (1884), social market failure is the primary cause for governmental transfers and inequities within a political economy and causes lacking productivity or destruction. Productive and innovative behaviors are desirable (Kirzner, 1973; Baumol, 1990, 2010; Acs et al., 2009). The entrepreneurial character s mental abilities and moral capabilities are measurable using a combination of generally accepted instruments. For this study, cognitive laddering interviews allowed for capture of accurate, reliable and reproducible data. Entrepreneurship and Public Affairs BACKGROND INFORMATION AND LITERATURE REVIEW Entrepreneurship is the process by which Schumpeterian (1942) innovation is created, adopted and diffused by the markets defined by political, economic and social environments and institutions (Kirzner, 1973; Acs et al., 2009, 2014; Baumol, 2010). Real entrepreneurs are those that cause Schumpeterian innovation as their outputs, and those outputs create the societal level outcomes considered necessary for political economy sustenance, growth and development. The outputs and outcomes of entrepreneurship create new wealth for research and development related to innovation and human resources (Baumol, 1990, 2010; Baumol, Litan and Schramm, 2007; Clark, 1997, 2007; Acs, Audretsch and Strom, 2009; Acs, Szerb and Autio, 2014). Public affairs and public policy involve the relationship between stakeholders and defined organizations or government. These stakeholders are individuals or other collective entities with an interest in an organization s or government s affairs. In other words, the behavior of one directly impacts the behavior of the other entity. Stakeholders include investors, managers, workers, customers, vendors, and the entrepreneurs. Stakeholders exert influence or power over the environments, markets and institutions associated with the organizations and governments in which they are interested actively or passively. Public policy is the formal expression of stakeholder wants, needs or desires; and it involves political, public and policy entrepreneurs (Mill, 1884; Kirzner, 1973; Acemoglu & Robinson, 2006; Hausman & McPherson, 2006; Acs et al., 2009). Entrepreneurship involves: intelligence, instigation, innovation, investment and initiation; via the entrepreneur s exploration, discovery, creation, design, implementation, and commercialization. It occurs within and across the for profit, nonprofit and governmental sectors of any democratic capitalist political economy. The outcomes of entrepreneurship are new jobs, new income and new organized collectives, new institutions for environments and markets, and new cultural values, beliefs and attitudes (Schumpeter, 1934, 1942; Kirzner, 1973; Acs et al., 2009, 2014; Baumol, 2010). Other consequences associated with the process of entrepreneurship include motivation, future innovation, and greater rates of entrepreneurship (Clark, 2007, 2013).

6 5 [Insert Figure 1.] The Entrepreneur At the beginning of 2015, The Wall Street Journal reported the lowest US based levels of entrepreneurship ever recorded between 2010 and However, it is not clear they were measuring what they wished to measure. Figure 1 represents the complex, non linear and chaotic set of tasks required for an entrepreneur to effectively intermediate Schumpeterian innovation. Real or productive entrepreneurs are able to document innovation relative to adaption over time (Clark, 2013, 21). Innovation relative to adaptation over time forms a special type of bounded rationality only harbored by the physiological and psychological (Simon, 1997; Clark, 2013, 2015; Boje, 2014). According to Neck and Greene (2011), entrepreneurs often become personal advisors, empathetic super salespeople, real managers, and expert idea generators (57). Often, they become coaches, public relations specialists, transformational leaders, and patent or tax attorneys (Clark, 1997, 2013). Becoming an effective Schumpeterian style external or internal entrepreneur is not a trivial task. [Insert Figure 2.] During exploration and discovery, entrepreneurs exercise their freedom to attune and align with culture, markets and institutions. They wish to solve problems and create viable and profitable forms of Schumpeterian (1942) innovation. They do not forecast demand or calculate the finite supplies of resources they will consume. Entrepreneurs are first and foremost empathetic problem solvers that find a commercial use for their innovative solutions in 56% of all cases. Other times there are governmental applications for their market failurebased remedies; as much as 18% of all cases involving Schumpeterian innovation. And, in a significant number of cases (26%), innovations find no traction in the current marketplace. They are lost forever (7%) or later found in another innovation (11%). Venture or external (ENTP) and Intra enterprise or internal (INTP) entrepreneurs solve economic, political and social problems due to market and institutional failures. This has occurred throughout history (Kirzner, 1973; Baumol, 1990; Clark, 1997, 2007; Baumol et al., 2007; Acs et al., 2009, 2014). Entrepreneurial economics (Schumpeter, 1942; Penrose, 1959; Kirzner, 1973; Mahoney, 2005; Baumol et al., 2007; Clark, 2007; Baumol, 2010; Lockett, Wiklund, Davidsson and Girma, 2011) relies on behavioral theory of the firm, theory of growth for the firm, resource based view and institution based view (Simon, 1983, 1997; Penrose, 1959; Mahoney, 2005; Baumol, 2010). Applying Simon s bounded rationality and entrepreneurial freedom, the entrepreneurial behavior of individuals or collective entities may be measured in accurate, reliable and reproducible ways. The aggregate contribution of productive entrepreneurs net of creative destruction may be viewed as changes to national income; and measured in the same exact way (Schumpeter, 1934, 1942). Operationalization of variables may be questioned at the outset, and over time

7 6 incremental ism allows for accurate, reliable and reproducible measurement. The difficulty becomes knowing what to measure, and Figure 1 provides complete direction. Figure 1 displays the external or internal tasks for an entrepreneur, and the aggregate efforts of all entrepreneurial entities within a political economy or nation. Entrepreneurs use empathy and cultural not emotional intelligence to instigate or provide motivation for creation or intermediation of Schumpeterian innovation (Acs et al., 2009, 2014; Baumol, 2010; Peng, Lee and Hong, 2014). Freedom to evaluate and employ institutions or other regulations or rules of the game in concert with people based influence is the entrepreneurial task displayed by Figure 1. The boundaries of rationality are different for entrepreneurs. Freedom and intermediation of innovation is determined by interaction of motive and mood and based on prior innovation relative to adaption over time (Clark, 2014) as the entrepreneur attunes and aligns market failure based creation with commercial design processes. Freedom is a mathematical derivative of generally accepted bounded rationality (Simon, 1997). Freedom and Bounded Rationality Freedom allows for development of empathy (understanding, not sympathy or compassion) necessary to align with markets and institutions. Attunement and alignment require interaction with human resources internal and external to the collective enterprise; internal entrepreneurship activates external entrepreneurs; and external entrepreneurship can create external entrepreneurs or new organizations. New for profit, nonprofit or governmental organizations must not be confused with Schumpeterian new enterprises; those are new business models, altogether. New jobs created by new organizations are caught by Schumpeter s new production. For Schumpeter, a new product is an invention. Schumpeterian differentiation is captured by new production processes and new means for supply. Differentiation and invention can create new markets. New knowledge, technology, and cultural institutions cause new enterprise models or inventions. Freedom is a core element of the entrepreneur's character. It is part of the bridge between mental abilities and values drive moral capabilities. Values that determine legal and moral behavior are optional; although illegal and immoral behaviors can sometimes create short term wealth, they are usually not sustainable; ask the New York Crime Families after RICO, or Pablo Escobar. Freedom represents combinations of instrumental and terminal values that form consistent attitudes and behavioral heuristics. However, these heuristics are malleable based on new cultural intelligence, modified freedom, and newly acquired empathy during the collaborative, alignment phase of entrepreneurial intermediation. Entrepreneurial Freedom is a mathematical derivative of bounded rationality. ENTPs and INTPs leverage the bounded rationality of others against their own; and empathetically determine the solution for subject market failure. Spillover or serendipitous benefits occur when ENTPs and INTPs employ the scientific method for achievement and accomplishment (Clark, 1997, 2013).

8 7 Two Entrepreneurial Personalities Schumpeter (1942), Baumol (1990), Acs and others (2009, 2014), and Neck & Greene (2011) allow for the labeling of the two separate, productive types. One (ENTP) is external to an existing organization, and the other (INTP) is member of an existing organization. The ENTP and INTP abbreviations are also used by Myers & Briggs Foundation. For whatever reason, the description of ENTPs and INTPs provided by Myers & Briggs could serve as proxies for venture and intra enterprise entrepreneurs. Surprisingly, these generally accepted personality types provide much information relative to benchmarks for an entrepreneurial character. This is interesting, but has no relationship to the study or its results. For whatever reason, the ENTP and INTP characters share elements with the Myers & Briggs ENTP and INTP personality types. And, there are at least two other Myers & Briggs types that resemble the entrepreneurial character; as determined by the study results reported herein. Myers & Briggs Foundation offers best available description of the two types of productive entrepreneurial personality types that emerge in the US workforce. ENTPs are quick, ingenious, stimulating, alert, and outspoken. Resourceful in solving new and challenging problems. They are adept at generating conceptual possibilities and then analyzing them strategically. Usually, they are good at reading other people and empathetic. Bored by routine, they will seldom do the same thing the same way, and are apt to turn to one new interest after another. INTPs seek to develop logical explanations for everything that interests them. They are theoretical and abstract, and interested more in ideas than in social interaction. Typically quiet, contained, flexible, and adaptable. INTPs have unusual ability to focus and solve problems in their area of interest. Although skeptical, and sometimes critical, they are always analytical and reliable (Myers & Briggs, 2014). Entrepreneurial Character Activation According to Heidegger (2010), Simon (1997) and Boje (2014), freedom, attunement, and alignment (FAA) impact activation of entrepreneurs. FAA is a compound variable that bridges motive via collaboration and changes mood so creativity may be altered by the collective or new cultural intelligence (Heidegger, 2010; Boje, 2014). Each and every week of the year, there are only one hundred sixty eight (168) hours of time. Mood is most important; mood must be attuned and aligned with empathy to allow for creative intermediation and design of Schumpeterian innovation for adoption and diffusion. Mood is that point of intersection between attunement and alignment that allows for intermediation of effective and efficient forms of innovation (Acs et al., 2009, 2014; Baumol, 2010; Peng et al., 2014). Intelligence, bounded rationality and freedom combine with mood to acquire empathy via collaboration. Empathy allows for alignment of human resources with cultural intelligence and effective adoption and diffusion of Schumpeterian innovation. Mood partially develops from prior, effective exercise of freedom. Efficient intelligence combined with motivation relative to perceived or observed market failure arises within and across the several environments (5) and sectors (3) of a democratic capitalist political economy, or nation. Instigation comprises

9 8 motive, mood and freedom to attune and align innovation with market segments. Schumpeterian innovation (1942) results in larger market share, inelastic price, and attracts some of the best available human resources (Kirzner, 1973; Acs et al., 2009; Baumol, 2010). INTPs and ENTPs use empathy allows for alignment of creativity with design to alleviate market failure and achieve market share; regardless of environment or sector. As used herein, empathy relates to understanding; and is not sympathy or compassion. Empathy is crucial to perception, communication, and productivity; when related to economic, political or social market failure in a democratic capitalist political economy. Most entrepreneurial organizations are based on a combination of the modern marketing mix, new product development or human resources models (Cameron & Quinn, 2011), or the EO (Clark, 2015). Empathy allows for necessary intermediation of resources and capabilities to determine a moment or mood for Schumpeterian innovation (Schumpeter, 1942; Acs et al., 2009; Baumol, 2010). Positive externalities associated with Schumpeter s (1942) innovation forms include reduced jurisdiction of government, optimal taxation and transfer payments, more effective nonprofits, and increased profits for enterprises where profits and corporate social responsibility (CSR) are of equivalent importance. Sustainability derives from proportionally greater profits and market based evaluation of socially responsible conduct (Clark, 1997; North, 2005; Acemoglu & Robinson, 2006; Padgett & Powell, 2012). Hybrid enterprise organizations (HEO) are interested and place equivalent emphasis on market share and profit, socially responsible behaviors by individuals and the collective organization, and minimal negative impact on natural, technological, social, regulatory and economic environments (Acemoglu & Robinson, 2006; Hausman & McPherson, 2006; Acs et al., 2009; Clark, 2007, 2013). Entrepreneurial Physics Entrepreneurship becomes the physics for public affairs formulation related to growth and sustainability (North, 2005; Acemoglu & Robinson, 2006; Padgett & Powell, 2012; Boje, 2014). Public affairs and associated policy forms existing institutions or rules of the game by which markets and the several environments are sustained (Mill, 1884). The entrepreneur is relevant because they stimulate innovation that causes organizational growth and sustainability. Each individual enterprise unit becomes important to the overall political economy, or nation, because of its output that leads to desirable outcomes. An entrepreneur instigates design (Baumol, 2010) and intermediates (Peng et al., 2014) resources and capabilities (Acs et al., 2009, 2014) that produce one or more of the five (5) forms of innovation described by Schumpeter (1934, 1942). The New Political Economy is now Public affairs and Entrepreneurship; and new models are required by leadership teams and policy makers.

10 9 METHODOLOGY This study involved proven and sustainable entrepreneurs operating within or external to hybrid enterprises (Clark, 2013). A hybrid enterprise organization (HEO) is different from a single focus collective enterprise. Since 1944, shareholder value, stock price and profits, and job creation have served as acceptable gauges for socially responsible market performance (Mahoney, 2005; Baumol et al., 2007; Clark, 2007; Acs et al., 2009). HEO based ENTPs, INTPs and managers place equivalent focus on profits, market share and inelastic price, but they also consider just as important socially responsible behaviors that do not damage the markets or associated social, economic, regulatory, technological or natural environments (Clark, 2013). Socially responsible behavior is much more than job creation and profits; and, being environmentally conscious goes far beyond natural environment sustainability (Acemoglu & Robinson, 2006; Padgett & Powell, 2012; Acs et al., 2009, 2014). The research design involved sustainable HEOs from high tech, consumer packaged goods, and production homebuilding industries across the US. The purposive sample only included alleged HEOs or entrepreneurial organizations (EO). Each for profit, nonprofit or governmental enterprise may boast leading market share, a reputation for socially responsible behavior, and a commitment to maximum positive and minimal negative environmental impact. Third party sources were used sample development, and included The National Association of Homebuilders, Corporate Responsibility Magazine, Fortune Magazine, US News & World Report, Business week Magazine, The Wall Street Journal, The University of Texas at Dallas and University of North Texas, NASA and CIA. The purposive sample is representative of the sectors and markets targeted for examination. For profit, nonprofit, CSR and governmental programs were involved with the sample. Measurement of real, productive entrepreneurs was the goal for this research design; and that goal achieved. The research design employed methods and question types established and made confirmable by Rokeach, Gutman and Reynolds (Rosenberg, 1956; Rosenberg, Hovland, McGuire, Abelson, and Brehn, 1960; Rokeach, 1973, 1979; Reynolds & Olson, 2001). The purposive sample involved proven and sustainable entrepreneurs operating within or external to hybridenterprises (Clark, 1997, 2013). The Organizational Culture Assessment Instrument (OCAI) and Means end Chain Conceptualization of Advertising Strategy (MECCAs) models are combined and differentiated in an acceptable fashion to establish an innovative research design (Rosenberg et al., 1960; Rokeach, 1973; Reynolds and Olson, 2001; Cameron and Quinn, 2011). Semi structured, laddering interviews with front line, middle and executive management associated with alleged HEOs comprise the purposive sample. Each collective, sampling unit or case involved a set of individual interviews with entrepreneurs, managers and other workers considered entrepreneurial by their leadership teams. Interviewees were selected based on their activities relative to new product development, sales and corporate social responsibility or sustainability program management. They are believed by their employers to be leaders or innovators. Entrepreneurs are those human resources responsible for Schumpeterian innovation; and may be administrative or technological (Acs et

11 10 al., 2009; Baumol, 2010; Clark, 2013). They are the human resources that provide the proper example or direction for others to be effective in their organizational roles. The entrepreneurs cause economic, social or political returns on investment (ROI) necessary for organizational sustainability. Along with laddering interview, each subject completed an instrument similar to the Rokeach Value Survey (RVS) combined with a Kauffman Foundation grant based survey of rural entrepreneurs. Taken together, these items comprise an effective platform for construction of individual and collective hierarchical value maps (HVM) that link values, attitudes and entrepreneurial behaviors, and allow for mapping of entrepreneurial, managerial and worker characters (mental abilities, moral capabilities). The content analytical techniques for this study method are similar to those employed for construction of VALs (SBI, 2014), HALs (Hanley Wood, 2014) and other recognized psycho graphic segmentation models. Unique relationships at the individual, collective and cross case levels of analysis may be found within the data set. The set of data from this long term study has many uses and applications related to specified research questions and others. Data collection occurred during and between 2011 and A total of thirty one (71) organizations participated in the study, and 293 subjects completed interviews during the specified time period. Additional data collected during calendar 2014 remains for analysis and integration with the present database. The pilot phase confirmed the OCAI based laddering process as being effective (4 organizations, 26 interviews), and a majority of the regular interviews were usable; and provided reliable and reproducible data for evaluation of research questions. The research design and data are accurate, reliable and reproducible. Researchers must operationalize constructs and measures using specific and realistic units of analysis. The content analytic, communications based research design provides a process to distinguish entrepreneurs from other human resources. Along with elements of the entrepreneurial character, the design and data also provide information related to activation of entrepreneurs. Understanding, specification and mapping of an entrepreneurial character are most important contributions from findings associated with the study reported, herein. Discussion of Findings, Significance and Meaning i. By its members, hybrid enterprise organizations (HEOs) are labeled entrepreneurial organizations (EOs). Managers and entrepreneurs at sustainable HEOs are aware of the need for innovation and differentiation. In fact, differentiation and invention are the two forms of Schumpeterian innovation most often pursued by HEOs and EOs. Both HEOs and EOs are based on combination of human resources and new product development models described by Cameron & Quinn (2011). Formal and informal structures (places), technologies (things) and networks (people) are of equal importance at sustainable HEOs and EOs. Sustainability involves leading market share, inelastic prices and socially responsible behavior relative to

12 11 environments, markets and institutions (EMIs). ii. iii. iv. An entrepreneurial character (EC) exists; and EC is based on mental abilities and moral capabilities (values, beliefs, attitudes that determine behavior). Genetic measurement is outside the scope of present capabilities. Relative to any EC, eccentric, odd, and weird were heard most often as raw interview responses. Better laddering questions led to organization and discipline as the character traits being referred to. ENTPs and INTPs work from their selfish or self interested agendas more often than managers or workers. Even workers appear to have more control than managers over their own agendas; more freedom within the rules of the enterprise. Most interviewees made claim managers and workers seek social approval more often and consistently relative to the ENTPs and INTPs. ENTPs and INTPs find their activation within markets subject to institutions; and collaboration often leads to these exposures. INTPs rely on collaboration to ensure alignment; often the sales force or other front line human resources provide best information for INTPs. ENTPs are more autonomous than INTPs; and are often found in field sales forces during early career stages. Often, field sales works or cross training endeavors involving field sales cause activation. It was a minority of interviewees that made claim INTPs or ENTPs found within EOs are trained or otherwise made by others. In fact, almost 80% of those interviewed believe entrepreneurs come ready made. ENTP, INTP "character" appears to be combinations of mental abilities, unique value/belief/attitude (moral capability) maps, and likely genetic composition that is outside scope of this study. It is not a personality type; it is a character type. There are ENTP and INTP character types, with slight differences based on freedom. According to those interviewed, organizational sustainability or longevity is a function of market share (56%), price inelasticity (44%), socially responsible behavior (26%), and minimal environmental impact (18%). Entrepreneurs are believed to cause innovation (74%) and organizational sustainability (56%). In a minority of cases, the entrepreneurs believe others can be innovative (18%). Managers are a lot more optimistic relative to belief anyone can be creative (47%), and workers believe more than anyone else that anyone can be creative (83%). Creativity and innovation are correlated terms in the minds of most interviewed (84%); and considered a function of networked collaboration (56%). Often, innovation occurs serendipitously (44%); however, not without adherence to select administrative processes or mission based institutions or rules for organizational conduct (26%). v. Network membership serves to set mood for entrepreneurs and managers (53%). In a significant number of cases (64%), simultaneous and informal exposure to multiple networks appears to activate entrepreneurs. Managers and workers are responsible for design, implementation and commercialization (91%). Their network based

13 12 tenure is longer and more structured, technologically (61%). Entrepreneurs network based tenure is shorter, structured administratively and not technologically, and involves multiple network assignment (57%). Entrepreneurs believe others can be trained to be creative (42%); managers believe others can be trained to be creative more than other groups (71%); and worker do not believe anyone can be trained to be creative (20%). Perhaps creativity and entrepreneurship cannot be learned or taught, but it can be experienced and activated if the character first exists and then persists after motive, mood and freedom lead to effective intermediation of innovation. One concern is the fact a nascent or emerging ENTP does not have past experience to define freedom; therefore, mathematical representation becomes more difficult. Entrepreneurs provide product, market and environmental leadership for investors, managers and other workers. Entrepreneurs can build an organization for success; and professional management usually becomes necessary. Entrepreneurs are activated based on mood, attunement and interaction with environments, markets and institutions. There is no entrepreneurial personality; but there are specific sets of instrumental and terminal values that activate, set mood, and attune the entrepreneur with institutions, markets and environments. Pilot and regular research design provided results indicate mood and freedom determines the entrepreneur s innovation related values, attitudes and behaviors; and these representations of the entrepreneurial character are important for leadership teams and other business professionals, policy makers and educators. Managers are motivated to acquire and retain entrepreneurs to sustain their collective organization. Workers are motivated to become managers or entrepreneurs. Entrepreneurs are not born activated, and but activated by time, mood and freedom; they are motivated and exhibit several, unique sets of values, attitude and behavioral sets; they are not taught or trained, but are activated by experience linked with eccentric morals (Clark, 1997, 2013). Specific value belief attitude (VBA) chains that determine behaviors and stimulate the entrepreneurial attunement based on freedom and mood. These VBAs lead to productive, unproductive or destructive entrepreneurship; and Schumpeter (1934, 1942; Baumol, 1990, 2010) labeled the unproductive and destructive as creative destruction; and the creative process applies equivalently to all types of ENTP or INTP. These personality or morality proxies labeled VBAs are important for understanding activation, mood, and attunement related to alignment of resources, capabilities and market based actors or players. These VBAs may also be used to determine the crucial element for sustainable entrepreneurship. The outputs and outcomes of entrepreneurs and entrepreneurship are a function of the entrepreneurial VBAs, and due to variation in mood and freedom that cause activation, attunement and alignment with markets and institutions. Measurement of these variables and the activation of entrepreneurial VBAs are important for causing socio cultural growth, future lifestyle qualities, and longevity of the political economy. Sustainable entrepreneurship involves equivalent emphasis on market share, socially responsible behavior, and minimal

14 13 environmental impact. Sustainable entrepreneurs are accountable for political economy sustainability. There is much for exploration using the unique, mixed methods research design designed for discovery of entrepreneurial science; including its processes and characters. First, a method for discovering and activating entrepreneurs is important. Second, ways to make entrepreneurs, managers and workers more effective and efficient together harbors great value for growth and sustainability. The information presented in this report is accurate, reliable and will be reproduced, extended and expanded by future efforts related to exploration and discovery of entrepreneurial science. Selection, activation and retention of entrepreneurs correlate with organizational sustainability; and a thorough understanding of entrepreneurship and its primary characters is important for public policy makers. Freedom, attunement, and alignment become a compoundedindependent variable accountable for activation of nascent entrepreneurs. The ability to activate entrepreneurs and to do so when needed is a most important matter of public affairs matter; and especially when a nation experiences environmental or market disorder, disarray or disaster entrepreneurial activation and Schumpeterian innovation are most important. It has been argued since World War II that a national economy s most important public affairs matter is its ability to activate and employ entrepreneurs to solve those problems not solvable by investors, managers, workers, leadership teams, and governments. Additional Finding(s) One additional and significant finding emerged from this study: the importance of family business in the US. Less than one tenth of the purposive sample included enterprises that did not form from a family based endeavor. The importance of culture and administrative processes is more important than structure or technology; and most families begin with culture and administrative processes. Accumulation of wealth leads to structure and acquisition of technology to leverage human resources. Exclusion of non family origin enterprises from the existing database would allow for reconstruction of answers to research questions with an emphasis on family business. Schumpeter would concur with The Wall Street Journal; and perhaps he would have authored the article pertaining to an extreme lack of entrepreneurial activation and success between , and 2011 and Small firms are necessary to create MNEs or SOEs. Clearly, family origins may be an intervening variable impacting sustainability thought due to culture and administrative processes. Answers to Research Questions Yes, there is a distinguishable entrepreneurial character. It may be observed by the behavior described in Figure 1. There are elements associated with generally accepted psychometric instruments, but these have not been shown reliable for use in activating entrepreneurial

15 14 personalities or characters. Only the markets and institutions appear effective in activating entrepreneurs. Over time, there will emerge via scientific evidence a list of elements like a marketing mix unique to the entrepreneurial character, and its activation. Freedom and mood cause attunement and alignment, after cultural or societal level intelligence inclusive of past freedom serves to instigate creativity that leads to design of Schumpeterian innovation. The mapping of the entrepreneurial character is a logical first step in discovery and implementation of methods for entrepreneurial activation or training. Experience with markets and governing institutions cause activation; and family based experience often provides the knowledge and problem solving abilities employed by an ENTP or INTP. Schumpeterian innovation causes political economy stability and longevity; and entrepreneurs are the most important variable relative to Schumpeterian innovation. Entrepreneurship is a public affairs matter and as important a public policy topic as is fiscal spending and Federal Reserve operations on behalf of the Treasury and public. Mapping the entrepreneurial character provides a level of understanding for policy makers currently not available. Entrepreneurship, public affairs and family business all rely on activation of entrepreneurial characters; and population growth demands more be activated, daily. CONCLUSION Findings result from three years of data collection and extensive content analysis. Results include accurate and reliable definition of entrepreneurship, and the characteristics or entrepreneurial character elements. The process of entrepreneurship involves complex, nonlinear and fractal phases. If workers and managers move clockwise, then entrepreneurs move counter clockwise. They encounter turbulence and cause disruption as they solve problems with solutions that benefit society. They become motivated and in the mood; in order to attune and align forms of Schumpeterian innovation with markets subject to institutions. Knowledge from this report applies to any democratic capitalist nation that relies on innovation and entrepreneurship for sustenance and growth. Entrepreneurial intervention and intermediation solves problems and saves segments of society that might otherwise perish. Real and productive entrepreneurs produce socially desirable results when their mission or vision is for profit or nonprofit. An unexpected finding from this study involves family business and creation or design of sustainable enterprise. Findings from this study are important because stimulation of Schumpeterian innovation mutually benefits the associated organization, political economy, or society. The study revealed both demographic and psychographic elements peculiar to productive entrepreneurs (ENTP, INTP). Freedom and mood are significant for successful ENTP or INTP intervention and intermediation relative to Schumpeterian innovation. Results are important for public policy related to workforce management and development. Regional populations require effective workforce segmentation to achieve growth and prosperity, simultaneously.

16 15 Workforce segmentation models allow for establishment of training and preparation of workers for effective involvement with a modern, knowledge and innovation based political economy. Current findings include a segmentation model representative of workforce composition within select organization types, or specific environment and market combinations. SOURCES Acemoglu, Daron, and James A. Robinson Economic origins of dictatorship and democracy. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. Acs, Zoltan J., Szerb, Laszlo, and Erkko Autio Global entrepreneurship & development index. Washington, DC: The Global Entrepreneurship and Development Institute. Acs, Zoltan J., David B. Audretsch, and Robert J. Strom Entrepreneurship, growth, and public affairs. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. Baumol, William J Entrepreneurship: Productive, unproductive, and destructive. Journal of Business Venturing (11): Baumol, William J The microtheory of innovative entrepreneurship. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Baumol, William J., Robert E. Litan, and Carl J. Schramm Good capitalism, bad capitalism, and the economics of growth and prosperity. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Baum, J. Robert, Frese, Michael, and Robert Baron The psychology of entrepreneurship. New York, NY: Psychology Press. Boje, David M Storytelling organizational practices: Managing in the quantum age. New York, NY: Routledge. Cameron, Kim S., and Robert E. Quinn Diagnosing and changing organizational culture: Based on the competing values framework, 3 rd ed. San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass. Chell, Elizabeth The entrepreneurial personality: A social construction, 2 nd ed. New York, NY: Psychology Press. Clark, Gregory A farewell to alms: A brief economic history of the world. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Clark, Mark. Strategic innovation within hybrid enterprises. Paper, annual meeting of Academy of Management, Philadelphia, PN, August 4, 2014.

17 16 Clark, Mark Strategic innovation within hybrid enterprise organizations. Ann Arbor, MI: UMI/ProQuest. Clark, Mark Serendipitous entrepreneurial achievement and the scientific method. Richardson, TX: The University of Texas at Dallas. Hausman, Daniel M., and Michael S. McPherson Economic analysis, moral philosophy, and public affairs, 2 nd ed. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. Heidegger, Martin, and David F. Krell (ed.) Basic writings. London, UK: Harper Perennial Modern Thought. Kirzner, Israel M Competition and entrepreneurship. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago. Lockett, Andy, Johan Wiklund, Per Davidsson, and Sourafel Girma Organic and acquisitive growth: Re examining, testing and extending Penrose s growth theory. Journal of Management Studies 48, no. 1 (January): Mahoney, Joseph T Economic foundations of strategy. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Mill, John Stuart Principles of political economy. New York, NY: D. Appleton and Company. Mischel, Walter Personality and assessment. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons. Myers & Briggs Foundation. mbti personality type/mbtibasics/the 16 mbti types.htm (accessed November 8 December 12, 2014 and January 5 6, 2015). Neck, Heidi M., and Patricia G. Greene Entrepreneurship education: Known worlds and new frontiers. Journal of Small Business Management, 49(1): North, Douglass C Understanding the process of economic change. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Padgett, John F., and Walter W. Powell The emergence of organizations and markets. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Peng, Mike W., Lee, Seung Hyun, and Sungjin J. Hong Entrepreneurs as intermediaries. Journal of World Business, 49 (1): Penrose, Edith T The theory of the growth of the firm. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

18 17 Reynolds, Thomas J., and Jerry C. Olson Understanding consumer decision making: The means end approach to marketing and advertising strategy. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Rokeach, Milton The nature of human values. New York, NY: The Free Press. Rokeach, Milton Understanding human values: Individual and societal. New York, NY: The Free Press. Rosenberg, Milton J Cognitive structure and attitudinal affect. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 53, no 3. (November): Rosenberg, Milton J., Hovland, Carl I., McGuire, William J., Abelson, Robert P., and Jack W. Brehn Attitude organization and change: An analysis of consistency among attitude components. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Schumpeter, Joseph A The theory of economic development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Schumpeter, Joseph A., Capitalism, socialism and democracy. New York, NY: Harper & Sons. Simon, Herbert A Reason in human affairs. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Simon, Herbert A Administrative behavior: A study of decision making processes in administrative organizations, 4 th ed. New York, NY: The Free Press. Stake, Robert E Multiple case study analysis. New York, NY: The Guilford Press. Yin, Robert K Applications of case study research, 3 rd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

19 18 EXHIBITS Figure 1 LOGIC MODEL FOR GENERAL THEORY OF ENTREPRENEURSHIP [ENTP/INTP] [A] INPUT [IBV, RBV, THYGRWTH, BEHAVTHY, Bounded Rationality, MOOD, FREEDOM] [B] OUTPUT [forms of innovation] [C] OUTCOME [growth] (1) EXPLORE (2) DISCOVER, (3) CREATE (4) DESIGN, (5) IMPLEMENT (6) COMMERCIALIZE a. INTELLIGENCE, b. INSTIGATION 1.0 MOTIVE = FN[(Ovals), (existing "innovation/adaptatio n/time")] x [ATTITUDE, Evals]= INSTIGATION FREEDOM = FN[(Evals, Ovals) x (attitude, existing design)] = (delta EVALs/Ovals, new design) = ("innovation/adaptation/time") = ENTPs'/INTPs' unique "Bounded Rationality" 2.0 [INSTIGATION] x [FREEDOM]= ATTUNEMENT =(MOOD BEA, Evals, Creativity) 4.0 [(ATTUNED FREEDOM) X EMPATHY] x [delta Evals/delta Ovals, delta Creativity or new Design] correlates with ALIGNMENT=EMPATHY] and ALIGNMENT = FN(demand, supply, institutions, intermediation) 3.0 [(ATTUNED FREEDOM) x (HRbasedCOLLABORATI ON)] x (delta MOOD BEA, delta Evals, delta Creativity)=(Empathy) x [ATTUNED FREEDOM x (delta Evals, delta Creativity, delta Collaboration)] c. INTERMEDIATION, d. INNOVATION 3.0 Natural Resources (#, $) 1.0 Financial Capital ($, $ 1) 2.0 Technology ($, $ 1) 1.0 HR, delta Collaboration, delta Creativity [RBV, BEHAVTHY] d. INNOVATION, e. INVESTMENT, f. INITIATION 1.02 New Jobs (#, $) existing, new "collectives" 1.01 New Production Methods ($, $ 1) "differentiation" 1.03 New Supplies (#, $) existing, new "collectives" 2.01 New Products (#, $) "invention" 2.02 New Markets [IBV] = 3.0 New Enterprises (#, $) f. INITIATION, a. INTELLIGENCE 1.0 New national income (GDP) [THYGRWTH, IBV] 1.03 New Consumption (C) [THYGRWTH, IBV] 1.02 New Investment (I) [THYGRWTH, IBV] 2.0 New Institutions [IBV] 3.01 Changed Environments and Markets [IBV, BEHTHY] 3.02 Changed CULTURE and VABs [IBV, RBV, THYGRWTH] Micro Culture and Administrative Processes Micro Structure and Technological Processes Macro Structure and Technological Processes Macro Culture and Administrative Processes VABs [values, attitudes, behaviors]; RBV [resource based view]; IBV [insitution based view]; BEHTHY [behavioral theory of the firm]; THYGRWTH [Theory of Growth of the Firm]