ID: 1011838
2011-3-19
Word Count: 2,438 |
Introduction
The term entrepreneur is not a recent invention. It was first coined in the eighteenth century by Richard Cantillon, who identified the risk-bearing function of an entrepreneur (Jennings et al. 1994). According to Morrison (1999 p30), entrepreneurs can be regarded as “first among equals in the process of wealth creation”. Moreover, entrepreneurs are presented as economic heroes (Cannon 1991), who “combining the ability to innovate and challenge the established equilibrium of economy and society whilst in the process of recreating it” (Morrison 1999 p28).
There are two schools of thought about what makes an entrepreneur. The first is that anyone can do it if they really want to, provided they put in the effort. The second is that entrepreneurs are born and not made, which means you have to be a certain type of person, and if you are not that type, you are wasting your time. The aim of this essay is to critically analyze the both schools of thought and provide justification for arguments.
The born or made debate
It is a longstanding debate: are entrepreneurs made or born? Morrison (1999) states that the early studies of the origins of the entrepreneur, which concentrated almost entirely on emphasizing in-born personalities and motivations, assumed that the entrepreneurial flair was inherent in the individual. Such a trait model of behaviour argues that a trait being a persisting characteristic of the personality which differentiates him or her from others. Woods, referenced by Bolton (2000 p15), suggests that “75 per cent of our personality traits are due to genetic influence and 25 per cent due to environmental influence”. We have seen too many failed entrepreneurs, who have lost the family home and whose marriage has failed, to believe that educators can make people into entrepreneurs. We are