Entrepreneurial academics—How can we tell when the field is getting somewhere?

The many achievements of entrepreneurship research have given it some of the characteristics of a legitimate academic field. But there is a gap between what is being done, and what could be done better. Potential research topics include analysis of startups by various dimensions, longitudinal studies of success and failure, comparative geographic studies, examination of various roles in startups, and experimental (as opposed to simple observational) studies. Strategies for making research more rigorous could be adopted from the methods of other academic fields, especially for reconsidering indicators of valid entrepreneurship research, measuring its advances, and making progress. Researchers could do more experimental projects, report and study mysteries, paradoxes, and puzzles about the subject, and not exaggerate the priority of research methodology, especially inappropriately adopting statistical significance between means as sufficient indicator; what may be more important is the exceptional. Causes of differences between industries should also be addressed. Nonetheless, it is unlikely entrepreneur research can become anything near a general science. Entrepreneurship research can, though, reconsider old paradigms and established conventions. Entrepreneurship research and business school teaching could, for example, credit coursework where students participate in startups; let entrepreneurs participate in classes; use business creation projects as tests of accomplishment; provide freedom, encouragement, and positive feedback instead of grades; and abandon the school calendar. Moreover, research could be more experimental, involving design of interventions aimed at facilitating startups through education and assistance. Research could also be run and tracked by different parties. Overall, experimenting with different ideas and approaches could advance the field of entrepreneurial academics. (TNM)