SlideShare una empresa de Scribd logo
1 de 18
Descargar para leer sin conexión
Social Structuration of the Field of
   Entrepreneurship: A Case Study
             Richard Dery
         Jean-Marie Toulouse
kcole des Hautes ktudes Commerciales


      授課老師:李元德 教授
      報 告 人:博一研究生
          高 秉 毅
Abstract
   As part of the emergence of an epistemology specific to the field of
entrepreneurship research, this article aims to reveal the social structuration of
knowledge in entrepreneurship, through the empirical study of articles published
in the Journal of Business Venturing between its founding in 1986, and 1993.
   This research, by virtue of its empirical approach based on methods of
network analysis widely used in the sociology of science and technology, tends
to substitute a social representation of the field of entrepreneurship research for
the essentially cognitive and formal representation characteristic of most
epistemological reflections in this field.
   At the end of this study, the field of entrepreneurship research appears as an
intricate network, where researchers and institutions are involved in a social and
collective game of strategic struggles and alliances.
    Furthermore, this field of research appears as a largely fragmented space
fraught with the traps inherent to disciplinary introversion.
Emergence of an Epistemology of
                    Entrepreneurship Research
Already rooted in a long tradition of research, with
ramifications extending to the borders of political economy
and opening onto a variety of seminal works, the problematic of
entrepreneurship was structured into a true field of research
during the 1980s.
There is much evidence of this. The corpus of texts published
on entrepreneurship has grown exponentially; scientific journals
and associations devoted to entrepreneurship have been founded;
conferences have been organized; research centres have been
inaugurated or, at least, rendered more visible; university courses
and programmes of study in entrepreneurship have been
instituted, and so on.
Emergence of an Epistemology of
                    Entrepreneurship Research
 Putting its own stamp on the self-reflexivity characteristic
of modernity (Giddens, 1990, 1991) and joining the contemporary
movement to develop epistemologies specific to the different
fields of research, the epistemology of entrepreneurship research
 is mainly dominated by theoretical and methodological
considerations.
 T wentieth-century epistemology is marked by emerging
systems based on empirical research, a descriptive and
omprehensive approach which replaces a resolutely normative
    one,
 and research scenarios featuring historical and sociological
perspectives rather than the essentially formal and philosophical
 ones dominant at the turn of the century.
Emergence of an Epistemology of
                    Entrepreneurship Research
 Working from within the structuration trends haracteristic
of contemporary epistemology, this article contributes to the
emerging epistemology of entrepreneurship research.
 This is done by gearing our reflection to an empirical approach
based on the theoretical and methodological contributions of the
sociology of science and technology, which are currently front
stage centre in epistemological debates.
 Such an approach requires choosing a theoretical option as to
what the field of entrepreneurship actually is and then onfronting
this option with empirical reality.
Social Construction of the Field of
                       Entrepreneurship Research
Representing the field of entrepreneurship research In terms of
social construction is part and parcel of a search to understand the
concrete practices of entrepreneurship research.
 It is therefore not a matter of establishing criteria to evaluate the
scientific value of existing knowledge, designing research
protocols to guarantee the scientific value of findings, or proposing
avenues of research, study perspectives and paradigms capable of
unifying the efforts of researchers in the field.
It is, rather, a matter of understanding how the common
competitive arena of entrepreneurship research is concretely
structured by the social and collective interplay among members of
the field and participating institutions.
Social Construction of the Field of
                       Entrepreneurship Research

In order to shed light on the social construction of
entrepreneurship research, it is important to note that the variety of
knowledge is rooted in, among other things, the social context of
research, and that it is this context which must be elucidated if we
are to understand this variety (Whitley, 1984~)
the field of entrepreneurship research is perpetually tom
between the expectations of the researchers in the first sphere and
the entrepreneurs in the second.
Entrepreneurship research is, in a sense, caught between two
projects: the development of scientific knowledge related to the
realities of entrepreneurship, and active participation in those
realities.
Social Construction of the Field of
                    Entrepreneurship Research
 As a rule, the very definition of validity in entrepreneurship
research is the main stake in social relations. The race to gain
control over this definition is manifested on two levels.
 On the one hand, researchers who take up the debate are
directly involved in the development of knowledge.
 On the other hand, the debate takes place in institutions which
 foster entrepreneurship research.
 At this level, researchers engage in relations of cooperation
 and competition, with a view To gaining control over the
institutions involved in concrete research projects.
Object and Method of Research

 Our study concerns the 237 articles published in the
  Journal of Business Venturing between its founding
  in 1986, and 1993.
 Analysis of the corpus was based on co-citation
  analysis widely used in the sociology of science and
  technology and in scientomertry.
 In administrative studies, scientometrical analysis has
  been used mainly in marketing, finance,
  accounting,management informance systems, and
  organizational behaviour.
Object and Method of Research

 Wether in sociology of science or in administrative
  studies, scientometrical analysis has been used in
  particular to establish the influence─measured by the
  number of citations─of authors, titles, and periodicals
  in the construction of a given field.
 This research was accomplished in three
  methodological stages.
 In the first stage, the social content of the 237 articles studies
  was revealed through an inventory of three sociological
  markers: the authors, the institutions with which they are
  affiliated, and the references cited in each article.
Object and Method of Research

 In the seccond stage, the occurrence matrix was transformed
  into two co-occurrence matrices─one for the articls, the other
  for all the refernces in those articles.
• The first co-occurrence matrix shows classic co-author and co-
  institution networks.
• The second co-occurrence matrix was used to analyze the
  references by studying the co-citation.
 In the third stage, the reference co-occurrence martix shows all
  the reference networks according to a threshold of citations
  and co-occurences.
Description of Findings
 General Portrait of the Corpus
• As can be seen from Table 1, in eight years the Journal of
   Business Venturing (JBV) published a total of 237 articles by
   280 different authors, 84 of whom contributed more than one
   article. Through these authors, a total of 149 institutions
   (almost all universities) have taken part in constructing the
   field of entrepreneurship research. Of this number, only 45.6%
   appear more than once in the corpus.
• The articles published in the JBVcontain 3,714 different
references, the vast majority of which appear only once. These
   3,714 titles were written by 2,989 different authors, the
   majority of them being cited only once.
Description of Findings
 Networks of Authors and Institutions
• Analysis of the 143 groups of authors in the corpus brings to light the
  network of co-author relations among researchers publishing in the JBV, as
  well as the network of relations among institutions that these concrete co-
  author relations construct, whether implicitly or not (see Figures 1 and 2).
• Largely dominated by its editor, I.C. MacMillan, whose name appears as
  co-author for 26 of the 237 articles in the corpus, the JBV‘s network of co-
  author relations is an intricate weave of authors from a multiplicity of only
  loosely connected subnetworks. Seven main subnetworks headed by
  MacMillan, Bygrave, Cooper, Kanter, Birley, Gartner, and Robinson
  emerge from the global network. Furthermore, the network organized
  around MacMillan consists of three completely unrelated subnetworks.
Description of Findings
 The Network of References
•  Etles. With regard to the most frequently cited texts in the corpus and the
   co-citations linking them, the field of entrepreneurship, as used by the
   authors publishing in JBV, takes the form of a network composed of two
   main subnetworks organized around different research problematics
  (see Figure 3).
• As the network mapped out in Figure 4 clearly reveals, authors publishing
   in the JBV collectively con-struct, through their reference-making
   practices, a very tight-knit network of periodicals. Indeed, out of a
   theoretical possibility of 28 relations among the network’s 8 periodicals,
   we note 26 empirical relations, which give rise to 1,112 co-periodical
   citations.
Interpretation of Findings
 Structuration Trends
•   Social fragmentation. Study of the references in the corpus’ articles
    clearly indicates that the field of entrepreneurship is characterized by the
    fragmentation of social relations among its members. There is already a
     hint of this fragmentation in the 3,714 different titles cited by the authors
    in
     the corpus, but it is made most obvious by the fact that a vast majority of
     the references (75.9%) are used only once and that less than 12% of the
     titles are cited more than twice.
•   Struggles and alliances. Second characteristic of the social structuration of
    the corpus, the game of struggles and alliances is apparent in co-author and
    co-institution relations, as well as in the reference networks.
•   Disciplinary space (Amit et al., 1993; Bygrave, 1989a; Low & MacMillan,
    1988; MacMillan & Katz, 1992; Wortman, 1986, 1987), the field of
    entrepreneurship, as revealed by this study, is both more and less of a
    discipline than is commonly asserted.
Interpretation of Findings
 From Epistemological Norms to Concrete Research
• The variety of knowledge. Whether viewed as a problem to be solved or as
  a sign of cognitive vitality, the variety of knowledge here appears to be the
  result of social relations.
• The imbrication of disciplines. While certain authors such as Bygrave
  (1989a) have, identified theoretical networks of disciplines used in the
  study of entrepreneurship, a completely different network of disciplines
  is collectively and concretely constructed by the authors publishing in the
  JBV.
• Relative importance of places of publication. This study also makes it
  possible to add some nuances to MacMillan’s (1993) ranking of
  entrepreneurship journals.
Interpretation of Findings
 Research Problematics
•   Though the present study reveals fragmentation to be one of the field’s
    main characteristics, study of the core of references does bring to light a
    network of research problematics around which the field of
    entrepreneurship seems to be organized and where there is some sort of
    coherence (Figure 3).
•   This competition in some sort actualizes a highly structured version of the
    classic oppositions found in the field: micro/macro, characteristics of
    entrepreneurs/entrepreneurial processes, and voluntarism/determinism.
Limitations and Future Research
•   In conclusion, we would like to point out the limitations of this study and outline
    ways in which it might be followed up. In the first place, its main limitation is its
    singular character. In choosing a case study, what one gains in control and depth,
    one loses in the possibility of applying the results obtained to the whole field of
    entrepreneurship.
•   Secondly, the research sketches a static portrait, whereas structuration of the field is
    dynamic. The research thus offers an ahistorical image of this structuration.
•   Thirdly, in confining the study to the sociological markers found in the articles, the
    research masks the links between the theoretical and methodological content
    of the articles studied and the structuration movements it reveals.
•    Finally, although co-citation analysis methods made it possible to construct the
    characteristic networks involved in the social structuration of the corpus studied,
    they alone are not enough to exhaust the sociological complexity of the corpus.

Más contenido relacionado

Destacado

Учнівська презентація (Групи учнів 8 загального та спеціального класів)
Учнівська презентація (Групи учнів 8 загального та спеціального класів)Учнівська презентація (Групи учнів 8 загального та спеціального класів)
Учнівська презентація (Групи учнів 8 загального та спеціального класів)наталья свириденко
 
Презентація вихователя Свириденко Наталії Миколаївни
Презентація вихователя Свириденко Наталії МиколаївниПрезентація вихователя Свириденко Наталії Миколаївни
Презентація вихователя Свириденко Наталії Миколаївнинаталья свириденко
 
Учнівська презентація (Група учнів 8 загального та 8 спеціального класів)
Учнівська презентація (Група учнів 8 загального та 8 спеціального класів)Учнівська презентація (Група учнів 8 загального та 8 спеціального класів)
Учнівська презентація (Група учнів 8 загального та 8 спеціального класів)наталья свириденко
 
文化變革五原則 第三組報告檔20121020
文化變革五原則 第三組報告檔20121020文化變革五原則 第三組報告檔20121020
文化變革五原則 第三組報告檔20121020smartdardar
 
Презентація Свириденко Наталії Миколаївни, вихователя
Презентація Свириденко Наталії Миколаївни, вихователяПрезентація Свириденко Наталії Миколаївни, вихователя
Презентація Свириденко Наталії Миколаївни, вихователянаталья свириденко
 

Destacado (7)

Учнівська презентація (Групи учнів 8 загального та спеціального класів)
Учнівська презентація (Групи учнів 8 загального та спеціального класів)Учнівська презентація (Групи учнів 8 загального та спеціального класів)
Учнівська презентація (Групи учнів 8 загального та спеціального класів)
 
Презентація вихователя Свириденко Наталії Миколаївни
Презентація вихователя Свириденко Наталії МиколаївниПрезентація вихователя Свириденко Наталії Миколаївни
Презентація вихователя Свириденко Наталії Миколаївни
 
Найтовще дере
Найтовще дереНайтовще дере
Найтовще дере
 
Учнівська презентація (Група учнів 8 загального та 8 спеціального класів)
Учнівська презентація (Група учнів 8 загального та 8 спеціального класів)Учнівська презентація (Група учнів 8 загального та 8 спеціального класів)
Учнівська презентація (Група учнів 8 загального та 8 спеціального класів)
 
文化變革五原則 第三組報告檔20121020
文化變革五原則 第三組報告檔20121020文化變革五原則 第三組報告檔20121020
文化變革五原則 第三組報告檔20121020
 
Найстаріше дерево в світі
Найстаріше дерево в світіНайстаріше дерево в світі
Найстаріше дерево в світі
 
Презентація Свириденко Наталії Миколаївни, вихователя
Презентація Свириденко Наталії Миколаївни, вихователяПрезентація Свириденко Наталії Миколаївни, вихователя
Презентація Свириденко Наталії Миколаївни, вихователя
 

Similar a R1 ppt.

,QVWLWXWLRQDOL]HG2UJDQL]DWLRQV)RUPDO6WUXFWXUHDV0WKDQG
,QVWLWXWLRQDOL]HG2UJDQL]DWLRQV)RUPDO6WUXFWXUHDV0WKDQG,QVWLWXWLRQDOL]HG2UJDQL]DWLRQV)RUPDO6WUXFWXUHDV0WKDQG
,QVWLWXWLRQDOL]HG2UJDQL]DWLRQV)RUPDO6WUXFWXUHDV0WKDQGRayleneAndre399
 
Fitting corporate responsibility and higher education the view of universit...
Fitting corporate responsibility and higher education   the view of universit...Fitting corporate responsibility and higher education   the view of universit...
Fitting corporate responsibility and higher education the view of universit...Luis Araujo Cazeres
 
Knowledge Transfer Within Multinational Enterprises
Knowledge Transfer Within Multinational EnterprisesKnowledge Transfer Within Multinational Enterprises
Knowledge Transfer Within Multinational EnterprisesBalaji Balasubramanian
 
Developing a meta language in multidisciplinary research projects-the case st...
Developing a meta language in multidisciplinary research projects-the case st...Developing a meta language in multidisciplinary research projects-the case st...
Developing a meta language in multidisciplinary research projects-the case st...Lucia Lupi
 
Social Constructionist Thinking
Social Constructionist ThinkingSocial Constructionist Thinking
Social Constructionist Thinkingelitarz
 
Ronayne (Barry) Thesis Final Draft
Ronayne (Barry) Thesis Final DraftRonayne (Barry) Thesis Final Draft
Ronayne (Barry) Thesis Final DraftBarry Ronayne
 
Critical management studiesand mainstream” organization.docx
Critical management studiesand mainstream” organization.docxCritical management studiesand mainstream” organization.docx
Critical management studiesand mainstream” organization.docxannettsparrow
 
11.linking the institution with the community
11.linking the institution with the community11.linking the institution with the community
11.linking the institution with the communityAlexander Decker
 
COMM141 Essential English Skills.docx
COMM141 Essential English Skills.docxCOMM141 Essential English Skills.docx
COMM141 Essential English Skills.docxwrite31
 
Professional inquiry is one of the most important aspects.pdf
Professional inquiry is one of the most important aspects.pdfProfessional inquiry is one of the most important aspects.pdf
Professional inquiry is one of the most important aspects.pdfsdfghj21
 
Applied Research In Accounting A Commentary
Applied Research In Accounting  A CommentaryApplied Research In Accounting  A Commentary
Applied Research In Accounting A CommentaryAlicia Edwards
 
Brese org innovation_lam_wp1
Brese org innovation_lam_wp1Brese org innovation_lam_wp1
Brese org innovation_lam_wp1Hind Madi
 
A Literature Review On Public Leadership In Organizations
A Literature Review On Public Leadership In OrganizationsA Literature Review On Public Leadership In Organizations
A Literature Review On Public Leadership In OrganizationsClaire Webber
 
Organizational Behavior
Organizational BehaviorOrganizational Behavior
Organizational Behaviorguest5e0c7e
 
Handbook of research in entrepreneurship education 160-165
Handbook of research in entrepreneurship education  160-165Handbook of research in entrepreneurship education  160-165
Handbook of research in entrepreneurship education 160-165shahmehr
 
An Examination Of Case Studies In Management Research A Paradigmatic Bridge
An Examination Of Case Studies In Management Research  A Paradigmatic BridgeAn Examination Of Case Studies In Management Research  A Paradigmatic Bridge
An Examination Of Case Studies In Management Research A Paradigmatic BridgeDeja Lewis
 
A CRITICAL PERSPECTIVE TOWARDS AGENCY THEORY
A CRITICAL PERSPECTIVE TOWARDS AGENCY THEORYA CRITICAL PERSPECTIVE TOWARDS AGENCY THEORY
A CRITICAL PERSPECTIVE TOWARDS AGENCY THEORYMartha Brown
 
Towards a Relational Paradigm in Sustainability Research, Practice, and Educa...
Towards a Relational Paradigm in Sustainability Research, Practice, and Educa...Towards a Relational Paradigm in Sustainability Research, Practice, and Educa...
Towards a Relational Paradigm in Sustainability Research, Practice, and Educa...Zack Walsh
 
^ Acadumy of Management Journal2001. Vol. 44. No. 2. 219-237.docx
^ Acadumy of Management Journal2001. Vol. 44. No. 2. 219-237.docx^ Acadumy of Management Journal2001. Vol. 44. No. 2. 219-237.docx
^ Acadumy of Management Journal2001. Vol. 44. No. 2. 219-237.docxhanneloremccaffery
 

Similar a R1 ppt. (20)

,QVWLWXWLRQDOL]HG2UJDQL]DWLRQV)RUPDO6WUXFWXUHDV0WKDQG
,QVWLWXWLRQDOL]HG2UJDQL]DWLRQV)RUPDO6WUXFWXUHDV0WKDQG,QVWLWXWLRQDOL]HG2UJDQL]DWLRQV)RUPDO6WUXFWXUHDV0WKDQG
,QVWLWXWLRQDOL]HG2UJDQL]DWLRQV)RUPDO6WUXFWXUHDV0WKDQG
 
Fitting corporate responsibility and higher education the view of universit...
Fitting corporate responsibility and higher education   the view of universit...Fitting corporate responsibility and higher education   the view of universit...
Fitting corporate responsibility and higher education the view of universit...
 
Knowledge Transfer Within Multinational Enterprises
Knowledge Transfer Within Multinational EnterprisesKnowledge Transfer Within Multinational Enterprises
Knowledge Transfer Within Multinational Enterprises
 
Developing a meta language in multidisciplinary research projects-the case st...
Developing a meta language in multidisciplinary research projects-the case st...Developing a meta language in multidisciplinary research projects-the case st...
Developing a meta language in multidisciplinary research projects-the case st...
 
Social Constructionist Thinking
Social Constructionist ThinkingSocial Constructionist Thinking
Social Constructionist Thinking
 
Ronayne (Barry) Thesis Final Draft
Ronayne (Barry) Thesis Final DraftRonayne (Barry) Thesis Final Draft
Ronayne (Barry) Thesis Final Draft
 
Critical management studiesand mainstream” organization.docx
Critical management studiesand mainstream” organization.docxCritical management studiesand mainstream” organization.docx
Critical management studiesand mainstream” organization.docx
 
11.linking the institution with the community
11.linking the institution with the community11.linking the institution with the community
11.linking the institution with the community
 
COMM141 Essential English Skills.docx
COMM141 Essential English Skills.docxCOMM141 Essential English Skills.docx
COMM141 Essential English Skills.docx
 
Professional inquiry is one of the most important aspects.pdf
Professional inquiry is one of the most important aspects.pdfProfessional inquiry is one of the most important aspects.pdf
Professional inquiry is one of the most important aspects.pdf
 
Applied Research In Accounting A Commentary
Applied Research In Accounting  A CommentaryApplied Research In Accounting  A Commentary
Applied Research In Accounting A Commentary
 
Brese org innovation_lam_wp1
Brese org innovation_lam_wp1Brese org innovation_lam_wp1
Brese org innovation_lam_wp1
 
A Literature Review On Public Leadership In Organizations
A Literature Review On Public Leadership In OrganizationsA Literature Review On Public Leadership In Organizations
A Literature Review On Public Leadership In Organizations
 
Organizational Behavior
Organizational BehaviorOrganizational Behavior
Organizational Behavior
 
Handbook of research in entrepreneurship education 160-165
Handbook of research in entrepreneurship education  160-165Handbook of research in entrepreneurship education  160-165
Handbook of research in entrepreneurship education 160-165
 
An Examination Of Case Studies In Management Research A Paradigmatic Bridge
An Examination Of Case Studies In Management Research  A Paradigmatic BridgeAn Examination Of Case Studies In Management Research  A Paradigmatic Bridge
An Examination Of Case Studies In Management Research A Paradigmatic Bridge
 
A CRITICAL PERSPECTIVE TOWARDS AGENCY THEORY
A CRITICAL PERSPECTIVE TOWARDS AGENCY THEORYA CRITICAL PERSPECTIVE TOWARDS AGENCY THEORY
A CRITICAL PERSPECTIVE TOWARDS AGENCY THEORY
 
Towards a Relational Paradigm in Sustainability Research, Practice, and Educa...
Towards a Relational Paradigm in Sustainability Research, Practice, and Educa...Towards a Relational Paradigm in Sustainability Research, Practice, and Educa...
Towards a Relational Paradigm in Sustainability Research, Practice, and Educa...
 
Periphery authors, network embeddedness, and research impact: The case of Chi...
Periphery authors, network embeddedness, and research impact: The case of Chi...Periphery authors, network embeddedness, and research impact: The case of Chi...
Periphery authors, network embeddedness, and research impact: The case of Chi...
 
^ Acadumy of Management Journal2001. Vol. 44. No. 2. 219-237.docx
^ Acadumy of Management Journal2001. Vol. 44. No. 2. 219-237.docx^ Acadumy of Management Journal2001. Vol. 44. No. 2. 219-237.docx
^ Acadumy of Management Journal2001. Vol. 44. No. 2. 219-237.docx
 

R1 ppt.

  • 1. Social Structuration of the Field of Entrepreneurship: A Case Study Richard Dery Jean-Marie Toulouse kcole des Hautes ktudes Commerciales 授課老師:李元德 教授 報 告 人:博一研究生 高 秉 毅
  • 2. Abstract As part of the emergence of an epistemology specific to the field of entrepreneurship research, this article aims to reveal the social structuration of knowledge in entrepreneurship, through the empirical study of articles published in the Journal of Business Venturing between its founding in 1986, and 1993. This research, by virtue of its empirical approach based on methods of network analysis widely used in the sociology of science and technology, tends to substitute a social representation of the field of entrepreneurship research for the essentially cognitive and formal representation characteristic of most epistemological reflections in this field. At the end of this study, the field of entrepreneurship research appears as an intricate network, where researchers and institutions are involved in a social and collective game of strategic struggles and alliances. Furthermore, this field of research appears as a largely fragmented space fraught with the traps inherent to disciplinary introversion.
  • 3. Emergence of an Epistemology of Entrepreneurship Research Already rooted in a long tradition of research, with ramifications extending to the borders of political economy and opening onto a variety of seminal works, the problematic of entrepreneurship was structured into a true field of research during the 1980s. There is much evidence of this. The corpus of texts published on entrepreneurship has grown exponentially; scientific journals and associations devoted to entrepreneurship have been founded; conferences have been organized; research centres have been inaugurated or, at least, rendered more visible; university courses and programmes of study in entrepreneurship have been instituted, and so on.
  • 4. Emergence of an Epistemology of Entrepreneurship Research  Putting its own stamp on the self-reflexivity characteristic of modernity (Giddens, 1990, 1991) and joining the contemporary movement to develop epistemologies specific to the different fields of research, the epistemology of entrepreneurship research is mainly dominated by theoretical and methodological considerations.  T wentieth-century epistemology is marked by emerging systems based on empirical research, a descriptive and omprehensive approach which replaces a resolutely normative one, and research scenarios featuring historical and sociological perspectives rather than the essentially formal and philosophical ones dominant at the turn of the century.
  • 5. Emergence of an Epistemology of Entrepreneurship Research  Working from within the structuration trends haracteristic of contemporary epistemology, this article contributes to the emerging epistemology of entrepreneurship research.  This is done by gearing our reflection to an empirical approach based on the theoretical and methodological contributions of the sociology of science and technology, which are currently front stage centre in epistemological debates.  Such an approach requires choosing a theoretical option as to what the field of entrepreneurship actually is and then onfronting this option with empirical reality.
  • 6. Social Construction of the Field of Entrepreneurship Research Representing the field of entrepreneurship research In terms of social construction is part and parcel of a search to understand the concrete practices of entrepreneurship research.  It is therefore not a matter of establishing criteria to evaluate the scientific value of existing knowledge, designing research protocols to guarantee the scientific value of findings, or proposing avenues of research, study perspectives and paradigms capable of unifying the efforts of researchers in the field. It is, rather, a matter of understanding how the common competitive arena of entrepreneurship research is concretely structured by the social and collective interplay among members of the field and participating institutions.
  • 7. Social Construction of the Field of Entrepreneurship Research In order to shed light on the social construction of entrepreneurship research, it is important to note that the variety of knowledge is rooted in, among other things, the social context of research, and that it is this context which must be elucidated if we are to understand this variety (Whitley, 1984~) the field of entrepreneurship research is perpetually tom between the expectations of the researchers in the first sphere and the entrepreneurs in the second. Entrepreneurship research is, in a sense, caught between two projects: the development of scientific knowledge related to the realities of entrepreneurship, and active participation in those realities.
  • 8. Social Construction of the Field of Entrepreneurship Research  As a rule, the very definition of validity in entrepreneurship research is the main stake in social relations. The race to gain control over this definition is manifested on two levels.  On the one hand, researchers who take up the debate are directly involved in the development of knowledge.  On the other hand, the debate takes place in institutions which foster entrepreneurship research.  At this level, researchers engage in relations of cooperation and competition, with a view To gaining control over the institutions involved in concrete research projects.
  • 9. Object and Method of Research  Our study concerns the 237 articles published in the Journal of Business Venturing between its founding in 1986, and 1993.  Analysis of the corpus was based on co-citation analysis widely used in the sociology of science and technology and in scientomertry.  In administrative studies, scientometrical analysis has been used mainly in marketing, finance, accounting,management informance systems, and organizational behaviour.
  • 10. Object and Method of Research  Wether in sociology of science or in administrative studies, scientometrical analysis has been used in particular to establish the influence─measured by the number of citations─of authors, titles, and periodicals in the construction of a given field.  This research was accomplished in three methodological stages.  In the first stage, the social content of the 237 articles studies was revealed through an inventory of three sociological markers: the authors, the institutions with which they are affiliated, and the references cited in each article.
  • 11. Object and Method of Research  In the seccond stage, the occurrence matrix was transformed into two co-occurrence matrices─one for the articls, the other for all the refernces in those articles. • The first co-occurrence matrix shows classic co-author and co- institution networks. • The second co-occurrence matrix was used to analyze the references by studying the co-citation.  In the third stage, the reference co-occurrence martix shows all the reference networks according to a threshold of citations and co-occurences.
  • 12. Description of Findings  General Portrait of the Corpus • As can be seen from Table 1, in eight years the Journal of Business Venturing (JBV) published a total of 237 articles by 280 different authors, 84 of whom contributed more than one article. Through these authors, a total of 149 institutions (almost all universities) have taken part in constructing the field of entrepreneurship research. Of this number, only 45.6% appear more than once in the corpus. • The articles published in the JBVcontain 3,714 different references, the vast majority of which appear only once. These 3,714 titles were written by 2,989 different authors, the majority of them being cited only once.
  • 13. Description of Findings  Networks of Authors and Institutions • Analysis of the 143 groups of authors in the corpus brings to light the network of co-author relations among researchers publishing in the JBV, as well as the network of relations among institutions that these concrete co- author relations construct, whether implicitly or not (see Figures 1 and 2). • Largely dominated by its editor, I.C. MacMillan, whose name appears as co-author for 26 of the 237 articles in the corpus, the JBV‘s network of co- author relations is an intricate weave of authors from a multiplicity of only loosely connected subnetworks. Seven main subnetworks headed by MacMillan, Bygrave, Cooper, Kanter, Birley, Gartner, and Robinson emerge from the global network. Furthermore, the network organized around MacMillan consists of three completely unrelated subnetworks.
  • 14. Description of Findings  The Network of References • Etles. With regard to the most frequently cited texts in the corpus and the co-citations linking them, the field of entrepreneurship, as used by the authors publishing in JBV, takes the form of a network composed of two main subnetworks organized around different research problematics (see Figure 3). • As the network mapped out in Figure 4 clearly reveals, authors publishing in the JBV collectively con-struct, through their reference-making practices, a very tight-knit network of periodicals. Indeed, out of a theoretical possibility of 28 relations among the network’s 8 periodicals, we note 26 empirical relations, which give rise to 1,112 co-periodical citations.
  • 15. Interpretation of Findings  Structuration Trends • Social fragmentation. Study of the references in the corpus’ articles clearly indicates that the field of entrepreneurship is characterized by the fragmentation of social relations among its members. There is already a hint of this fragmentation in the 3,714 different titles cited by the authors in the corpus, but it is made most obvious by the fact that a vast majority of the references (75.9%) are used only once and that less than 12% of the titles are cited more than twice. • Struggles and alliances. Second characteristic of the social structuration of the corpus, the game of struggles and alliances is apparent in co-author and co-institution relations, as well as in the reference networks. • Disciplinary space (Amit et al., 1993; Bygrave, 1989a; Low & MacMillan, 1988; MacMillan & Katz, 1992; Wortman, 1986, 1987), the field of entrepreneurship, as revealed by this study, is both more and less of a discipline than is commonly asserted.
  • 16. Interpretation of Findings  From Epistemological Norms to Concrete Research • The variety of knowledge. Whether viewed as a problem to be solved or as a sign of cognitive vitality, the variety of knowledge here appears to be the result of social relations. • The imbrication of disciplines. While certain authors such as Bygrave (1989a) have, identified theoretical networks of disciplines used in the study of entrepreneurship, a completely different network of disciplines is collectively and concretely constructed by the authors publishing in the JBV. • Relative importance of places of publication. This study also makes it possible to add some nuances to MacMillan’s (1993) ranking of entrepreneurship journals.
  • 17. Interpretation of Findings  Research Problematics • Though the present study reveals fragmentation to be one of the field’s main characteristics, study of the core of references does bring to light a network of research problematics around which the field of entrepreneurship seems to be organized and where there is some sort of coherence (Figure 3). • This competition in some sort actualizes a highly structured version of the classic oppositions found in the field: micro/macro, characteristics of entrepreneurs/entrepreneurial processes, and voluntarism/determinism.
  • 18. Limitations and Future Research • In conclusion, we would like to point out the limitations of this study and outline ways in which it might be followed up. In the first place, its main limitation is its singular character. In choosing a case study, what one gains in control and depth, one loses in the possibility of applying the results obtained to the whole field of entrepreneurship. • Secondly, the research sketches a static portrait, whereas structuration of the field is dynamic. The research thus offers an ahistorical image of this structuration. • Thirdly, in confining the study to the sociological markers found in the articles, the research masks the links between the theoretical and methodological content of the articles studied and the structuration movements it reveals. • Finally, although co-citation analysis methods made it possible to construct the characteristic networks involved in the social structuration of the corpus studied, they alone are not enough to exhaust the sociological complexity of the corpus.