Education assistant
asdfghjklzxcvbnm
IdentifyingasanEntrepreneur.pdf
FALL 2018 1
FALL 2018
Advances in Engineering Education
Identifying as an Entrepreneur: A Social Identity Perspective of the Entrepreneurial Mindset
RUSSELL KORTE
The George Washington University
Washington, DC
ABSTRACT
An entrepreneurial mindset helps innovators find, interpret, evaluate, and pursue opportunities for
their innovations. It is a concept having multiple definitions and contradictions variously focused on
individual traits, behaviors, attitudes, or beliefs. Robinson claimed that across the various definitions
of an entrepreneurial mindset there was little theoretical grounding to be found. To address this
shortcoming, this essay describes Social Identity Theory, and its close cousin, Self-Categorization
Theory, which have gained significant traction in psychology and sociology, as theoretical founda-
tions for understanding and developing an entrepreneurial mindset. Social identity is a psychological
construct describing individuals’ perceptions and values of belonging to a particular social group—in
this case, affiliating with those identifying themselves as entrepreneurs. The argument put forth here
is that a crucial aspect of developing an entrepreneurial mindset in engineering students involves
helping them identify as entrepreneurs.
Key words: Engineering Profession, Identity, Entrepreneurship
INTRODUCTION
“When engineering is charged with identifying unmet needs in the marketplace and leveraging
disruptive or high-technology-based designs to fill those unmet needs, then engineering becomes
the crux of new market creation, and developing benefit-providing, customer-driven products and
processes moves into the fore of the new tools students need to add to their toolboxes” (Kriewall
and Mekemson 2010).
One of the new tools needed by engineering students for meeting the new engineering charge
described above is an entrepreneurial mindset. An entrepreneurial engineer is expected to have
2 FALL 2018
ADVANCES IN ENGINEERING EDUCATION
Identifying as an Entrepreneur: A Social Identity Perspective
of the Entrepreneurial Mindset
deep expertise in technology, combined with the ability to decipher market needs for creativity,
innovation, and problem-solving—and build a business (Bilen, Kisenwether, Rzasa and Wise 2005;
Kriewall and Mekemson 2010; National Academy of Engineering 2004; Taks, Tynjala, Toding, Kuke-
melk, and Venesaar 2014).
An entrepreneurial mindset is a concept having multiple definitions and contradictions variously
focused on individual traits, behaviors, attitudes, or beliefs. Robinson (2010) claimed that across
the various definitions of an entrepreneurial mindset there was little theoretical grounding to be
found. To address this shortcoming, this essay describes Social Identity Theory, and its close cousin,
Self-Categorization Theory, which have gained significant traction in psychology and sociology.
Together these complementary theories provide an insightful look at the concept of an entrepre-
neurial mindset for two reasons: First, a key factor in developing entrepreneurs is the level to which
individuals come to identify and categorize themselves as entrepreneurs. Second, successfully
becoming an entrepreneur is not just an individual effort, but also dependent on the interactions
between individuals and their social contexts.
This essay begins with a brief review of the literature on the concepts of mindset and social identity.
The next two sections continue to review the literature focused on an entrepreneurial mindset and
its relation to entrepreneurship. This also includes a few examples of statements made by partici-
pants in an entrepreneurial workshop as they grapple with the idea of adopting an entrepreneurial
mindset. Finally, there is a section providing an overall strategy for addressing the inherent resistance
to adopting new identities based on social identity theory.
People generally act in accordance with the social norms of the groups with which they iden-
tify (Hogg, Abrams, Otten and Hinkle 2004). Therefore, the goal of increasing entrepreneurial
behaviors in engineering requires that engineers, at least partially, identify themselves as en-
trepreneurs. This essay focuses on the nature of an entrepreneurial mindset as a social identity
in the context of engineering education and the broader contexts of engineering practice and
entrepreneurship.
PERCEIVING A MINDSET AS A SOCIAL IDENTITY
Even though the mind appears to be the property of an individual, it is formed and brought about
by society (Bucholtz and Hall 2005; Turner and Oakes 1999). While the common idea of a mind
focuses on the individual, there is a large body of research, theory, and philosophy expanding this
singular view of human identity to a broader view of the individual embedded in and constituted
by the social realm (Doise 1997; Gergen 2008; Smith and Mackie 1997). People develop various
FALL 2018 3
ADVANCES IN ENGINEERING EDUCATION
Identifying as an Entrepreneur: A Social Identity Perspective
of the Entrepreneurial Mindset
facets of their identity out of their interactions with others in an ongoing process of development
and change (Glaeser 2005).
As a subset of social cognition, social identity theory and self-categorization explain how an
individual makes sense of oneself and other people (Hogg et al. 2004; Korte 2007). One’s mind (or
mindset) is a cognitive or knowledge construct that makes sense (i.e., meaning) of one’s self and
one’s interactions with the social world (Burke and Stets 2009). Thus, an entrepreneurial mindset
and identity are similar constructs, comprised of the knowledge, beliefs, values, and attitudes that
refer to an entrepreneur.
Entrepreneurship is inherently a social endeavor, dependent on the interactions and beliefs of
a diverse ecosystem of innovators, financial backers, customers, suppliers, policy makers, and so
on (Bucholtz and Hall 2005; Davidsson and Honig 2003; Zachary and Mishra 2010). Therefore, the
formation of an entrepreneurial mindset is similar to the construction of a social identity and the
categorization of oneself within a group of similar others as entrepreneurs.
“An identity is the set of meanings that define who one is when one is an occupant of a par-
ticular role in society, a member of a particular group, or claims particular characteristics that
identify him or her as a unique person” (Burke and Stets 2009, 3). Identity is conceptualized as
a cognitive construct of the self that answers the question, Who am I? Burke and Stets (2009)
described three domains of identity as personality, role, and social group. In their view of identity,
there is a core identity that sustains a relatively stable set of personality traits. Surrounding the
core identity is a role identity, which includes a set of social expectations and behaviors of how
one is to think and behave in a particular social position, and a social identity, which includes what
it means to be part of a group (e.g., organization, occupation, profession, family, community, and
so on). Essentially, one’s social identity answers the question of, Who are we?, which can change
depending on the salience of the group—engineer, manager, entrepreneur, spouse, parent, sibling
(Turner and Onorato 1999).
At any particular time, one’s identity (personal, role, and social) is the outcome of the dynamic
interactions between one’s personality and the social context. Jenkins (2008) described identity as
a process more than as an entity, emphasizing the ongoing flux of one’s interactions over time. This
view of identity fits well with the multi-faceted nature of entrepreneurship, whereby an entrepre-
neur is a creator, innovator, market researcher, business modeler, or financial negotiator interacting
with various players in the entrepreneurial process. If one does not identify oneself as a capable or
legitimate player in any of these interactions, it is likely one will find it more difficult to achieve the
expectations of the role.
The attributes that describe the ideal member of a group make up the profile or prototype of the
group. This is the key referent for those in the group, as well as those aspiring to become members
4 FALL 2018
ADVANCES IN ENGINEERING EDUCATION
Identifying as an Entrepreneur: A Social Identity Perspective
of the Entrepreneurial Mindset
of the group (Hogg, et al. 2004). One cannot join any group at any time; there are limitations based
on one’s fit and readiness, as well as how accessible the group is at the time (Turner and Onorato
1999). In the act of categorizing oneself, one evaluates the fit of the group to one’s personal identity,
and conversely, the group evaluates the individual’s fit and readiness to join. Becoming a member
of a group requires the individual to take on the norms, beliefs and values of the group, which
might conflict with one’s personal norms, beliefs, and values (Ashforth and Mael 1989). Working
out these tensions is part of developing a new identity and is an important process in developing
entrepreneurial engineers.
THE ENTREPRENEURIAL MINDSET
How one uses and responds to information is determined by one’s mindset (Dweck 2008; Noble
2015; Robinson 2010). Fostering an entrepreneurial mindset in engineering means motivating en-
gineers to develop the attributes of entrepreneurial thinking and behaviors in their work. A typical
definition of entrepreneurship at the individual level is the ability to identify and exploit business
opportunities (Frese and Gielnik 2014; Shane and Venkataraman 2000). Other attributes of an
entrepreneurial mindset include: self-efficacy, proactivity, achievement motivation, autonomy, in-
novativeness, risk-taking, competitiveness (Frese and Gielnik 2014); boundary-spanning (Burt 1997);
risk-tolerance, taking initiative, perseverance, creativity, leadership, communication skills, planning
and organizing, collaboration, and reflection (Schelfhout, Bruggerman and DeMayaer 2016); and an
opportunistic orientation (Sarasvathy 2001).
This expansive range of attributes makes it difficult to articulate and operationalize precisely
what an entrepreneur is, how to educate students in entrepreneurship, and assess their learning and
behavior. Furthermore, seemingly positive attributes of entrepreneurship can turn into liabilities at
excessive levels; for example, over-confidence (inordinately high self-efficacy) and inflated beliefs in
one’s power to control tend to curtail information gathering, blind one to the risks involved, and lead
one to create rosy forecasts that often favor action over analysis, (Shane and Venkataraman 2000).
Another view of entrepreneurship focuses on the entrepreneurial process. Shane and Venkatara-
man (2000) proposed a conceptualization of entrepreneurship that was a fluid, three-stage model
requiring the pre-existence of entrepreneurial opportunities in the environment, the discovery of an
entrepreneurial opportunity, and the decision to exploit a discovered entrepreneurial opportunity.
Thus, having an entrepreneurial mindset is necessary, but not sufficient—there needs to be exist-
ing opportunities in the environment and the decision that these opportunities are accessible and
feasible to an entrepreneur.
FALL 2018 5
ADVANCES IN ENGINEERING EDUCATION
Identifying as an Entrepreneur: A Social Identity Perspective
of the Entrepreneurial Mindset
ON BECOMING AN ENTREPRENEUR: DEVELOPING AN ENTREPRENEURIAL MINDSET
Becoming an entrepreneur is learning a way of being that goes beyond knowing and doing what
entrepreneurs know and do. It is becoming ‘who we are’ (Dall’Alba 2009). This process of becom-
ing was found in feedback from individuals grappling with the development of an entrepreneurial
mindset, which was gathered from an entrepreneurial workshop designed to develop an entre-
preneurial mindset in engineering faculty and motivate them to commercialize their innovations
(National Science Foundation n.d.). These were academic professionals who had been funded to
develop educational innovations as traditional researchers and then encouraged to participate in
an eight-week workshop to become more entrepreneurial in their approach. Among other things,
these participants reported their experiences with ‘trying on’ an entrepreneurial mindset (Ibarra
1999). After eight weeks, some enthusiastically adopted the new mindset, some were tentative,
and some were resistant. For example: one participant described how his perception of being an
academic changed.
As I mentioned, it transformed me significantly. Before coming to the [entrepreneurial
workshop] program I used to think of myself as an academic whose job is to publish
and train students. After coming back from [entrepreneurial workshop], oh my god, it
has been changed. Right now, I look at everything like a business model, like it or not,
I look at academia even as a business model. Sometimes I get into arguments with
my colleagues because they think I am destroying academia because my view has
been changed and I am in favor of running academia as a business unit rather than an
academic unit.
This statement clearly reflects how one’s identity and mindset govern how one perceives the
world and processes information. This individual is identifying with and becoming a member of a
different social group—a group labeled as entrepreneurs—and as is often the case when a member
of one group adopts different norms and crosses boundaries, there is conflict.
Another example described a state of uncertainty about adopting an entrepreneurial identity:
“Thus, in a sense, the primary value [of this entrepreneurial workshop] is forcing a given educa-
tor to choose whether they really want to do something entrepreneurial.” These experiences can
also lead to rejection, as in this example: “This [entrepreneurial workshop] has reinforced my
desire to NEVER start my own company, but I am glad that I have a better understanding of the
business worldview.” This workshop allowed this participant to test a new identity—one that was
eventually rejected.
6 FALL 2018
ADVANCES IN ENGINEERING EDUCATION
Identifying as an Entrepreneur: A Social Identity Perspective
of the Entrepreneurial Mindset
PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS
One of the difficulties in the process of fostering an entrepreneurial mindset in engineering
students comes from existential differences between the traditional engineering mindset and
an entrepreneurial mindset. In the case of fostering entrepreneurship in engineering education
there is this natural tendency to resist those aspects of what is perceived as a business-oriented
way of doing things when it conflicts with what is perceived to be the engineering way of doing
things. Many academics in STEM who consider an entrepreneurial path struggle with simplistic
stereotypes (i.e., identities) that favor the academic world of science over the commercial world
of business.
There are several advantages to developing an entrepreneurial mindset in the 21st century,
most of which address the need to develop agility, adaptiveness, creativity, and social impact
(for more in-depth discussions, see Kriewall and Mekemson 2010; National Academy of Engi-
neering 2004; National Science Foundation 2010; Neck, Greene and Brush 2014; Robinson 2010;
Sarasvathy 2001). The body of research and theory on identity and entrepreneurship support
two main recommendations for developing an entrepreneurial mindset in engineering education.
First, fostering an entrepreneurial mindset is not simply a matter of helping faculty and students
become more innovative, ambitious, or risk-tolerant. It is a more complex task of altering who
they think they are—personally, socially, and professionally. Second, the complex ecosystem that
is entrepreneurship has multiple facets that accommodate multiple definitions of entrepreneurial
identities and mindsets. An obvious distinction is among versions of entrepreneurship currently
labeled as: entrepreneur, intrapreneur, and social entrepreneur (see Hockerts 2017; Kuratko,
Morris and Schindehutte 2015; Mair and Marti 2006; Parker 2011). Each has a distinct mindset
that is important to those pursuing those efforts. It would be useful to identify and develop
more categories of entrepreneurs that help more people identify with the aim of discovering new
opportunities to create new solutions to solve difficult social problems, promote social justice,
and provide opportunities for the disadvantaged and oppressed to access a good education or
other basic needs.
The entrepreneurial spirit is an effective and necessary means of enhancing societal well-being.
Identifying as a social entrepreneur or educational entrepreneur (edupreneur) are emerging catego-
ries that expand the realm of entrepreneurship and allow a more diverse range of people to identify
as entrepreneurs. In the words of the late Jeff Timmons, from Babson College, entrepreneurship is
“not just about new company, capital and job formation, nor innovation, nor creativity, nor break-
throughs. It is also about fostering an ingenious human spirit and improving human kind.” (quoted
in Neck, Greene and Brush 2014, 1).
FALL 2018 7
ADVANCES IN ENGINEERING EDUCATION
Identifying as an Entrepreneur: A Social Identity Perspective
of the Entrepreneurial Mindset
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The author is grateful to Dr. Gary Lichtenstein for providing anonymous participant quotes from
the NSF workshop described in the text.
REFERENCES
Ashforth, B. E., and Mael, F. 1989. “Social identity theory and the organization.” Academy of Management Review, 14,
no. 1: 20–39.
Bilen, S. G., Kisenwether, E. C., Rzasa, S. E., and Wise, J. C. 2005. “Developing and assessing students’ entrepreneurial
skills and mind-set.” Journal of Engineering Education, 94, no. 2: 233–243.
Bucholtz, M., and Hall, K. (2005). “Identity and interaction: A sociocultural linguistic approach.” Discourse Studies,
7, no. 4–5: 585–614.
Burke, P. J., and Stets, J. E. 2009. Identity theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Burt, R. S. 1997. “The contingent value of social capital.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 42: 339–365.
Dall’Alba, G. 2009. “Learning professional ways of being: Ambiguities of becoming.” Educational Philosophy and
Theory, 41, no. 1: 34–45.
Davidsson, P., and Honig, B. 2003. “The role of social and human capital among nascent entrepreneurs.” Journal of
Business Venturing, 18: 301–331.
Doise, W. 1997. “Organizing social-psychological explanations.” In C. McGarty and S. A. Haslam (Eds.). The message
of social psychology: Perspectives on mind in society, pp. 63–76. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell Publishers.
Dweck, C. S. 2008. Mindset: The new psychology of success. New York: Ballantine Books Trade.
Frese, M., and Gielnik, M. M. 2014. “The psychology of entrepreneurship.” Annual Review of Organizational Psychology
and Organizational Behavior, 1: 413–438.
Gergen, K. J. 2008. “On the very idea of social psychology.” Social Psychology Quarterly, 71, no. 4: 331–337.
Glaeser, A. 2005. “An ontology for the ethnographic analysis of social process: Extending the extended-case method.”
Social Analysis, 49, no. 3: 16–45.
Hockerts, K. 2017. “Determinants of social entrepreneurial intentions.” Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 41,
no. 1: 105–130.
Hogg, M. A., Abrams, D., Otten, S. and Hinkle, S. 2004. “The social identity perspective: Intergroup relations, self-
conception, and small groups.” Small Group Research, 35: 246–276.
Ibarra, H. 1999. “Provisional selves: Experimenting with image and identity in professional adaptation.” Administrative
Science Quarterly, 44: 764–791.
Jenkins, R. 2008. Social Identity, 3rd ed. London: Routledge.
Korte, R. F. 2007. “A review of social identity theory with implications for training and development.” Journal of
European Industrial Training, 31, no. 3: 166–180.
Kriewall, T. J., and Mekemson, K. 2010. “Instilling the entrepreneurial mindset into engineering undergraduates.” The
Journal of Engineering Entrepreneurship, 1, no. 1: 5–19.
Kuratko, D. F., Morris, M. H., and Schindehutte, M. 2015. “Understanding the dynamics of entrepreneurship through
framework approaches.” Small Business Economics, 45: 1–13.
8 FALL 2018
ADVANCES IN ENGINEERING EDUCATION
Identifying as an Entrepreneur: A Social Identity Perspective
of the Entrepreneurial Mindset
Mair, J., and Marti, I. 2006. “Social entrepreneurship research: A source of explanation, prediction, and delight.” Journal
of World Business, 41: 36–44.
National Academy of Engineering. 2004. The engineer of 2020: Visions of engineering in the new century. Washington,
D.C.: The National Academies Press.
National Science Foundation; retrieved November 4, 2017 from: https://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID
=1451245&HistoricalAwards=false
National Science Foundation. 2010. “The role of the National Science Foundation in the innovation ecosystem.” A paper
from the NSF Directorate for Engineering. Retrieved on November 5, 2017: https://www.nsf.gov/eng/iip/innovation.pdf
Neck, H. M., Greene, P. G., and Brush, C. G. 2014. Teaching entrepreneurship: A practice-based approach. Chapter 3,
The practice of empathy. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited.
Noble, C. 2015. “Mindsets, mind sets and mind sense.” Prometheus, 33, no. 4: 411–420.
Parker, S. C. 2011. “Intrapreneurship or entrepreneurship?” Journal of Business Venturing, 26: 19–34.
Robinson, P. B. 2010. “Engaged learning and the entrepreneurial mind set.” Journal of the Utah Academy of Sciences,
Arts, and Letters, 87: 87–110.
Sarasvathy, S. D. 2001. “Causation and effectuation: Toward a theoretical shift from economic inevitability to entre-
preneurial contingency.” Academy of Management Review, 26, no. 2: 243–263.
Schelfhout, W., Bruggeman, K., and De Mayaer, S. 2016. “Evaluation of entrepreneurial competence through scaled
behavioural indicators: Validation of an instrument.” Studies in Educational Evaluation, 51: 29–41.
Shane, S., and Venkataraman, S. 2000. “The promise of entrepreneurship as a field of research.” Academy of Manage-
ment Review, 25, no. 1: 217–226.
Smith, E. R., and Mackie, D. M. 1997. “Integrating the psychological and the social to understand human behavior.”
In C. McGarty and S. A. Haslam (Eds.). The message of social psychology: Perspectives on mind in society, pp. 305–314.
Cambridge, MA: Blackwell Publishers.
Taks, M., Tynjala, P., Toding, M., Kukemelk, H., and Venesaar, U. 2014. “Engineering students’ experiences in studying
entrepreneurship.” Journal of Engineering Education, 103, no. 4: 573–598.
Turner, J. C. and Onorato, R. S. 1999. “Social identity, personality, and the self-concept: a self-categorization perspective.”
In Tyler, T. R., Kramer, R. M. and John, O. P. (Eds.), The Psychology of the Social Self, pp. 11–46. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates.
Turner, J. C., and Oakes, P. J. 1997. “The socially structured mind.” In C. McGarty and S. A. Haslam (Eds.), The message
of social psychology: Perspectives on mind in society, pp. 355–373. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
Zachary, R. K., and Mishra, S. S. 2010. “Entrepreneurship research today and beyond: Hidden in plain sight!” Journal
of Small Business Management, 48, no. 4: 471–474.
FALL 2018 9
ADVANCES IN ENGINEERING EDUCATION
Identifying as an Entrepreneur: A Social Identity Perspective
of the Entrepreneurial Mindset
AUTHOR
Russell Korte is an Associate Professor of Human and Organizational
Learning at The George Washington University. Dr. Korte studies the
socio-cultural systems in the professions and organizations, along with
the effects of these systems on learning and performance in school
and the workplace. This work specifically focuses on the professional
socialization of engineering students, faculty, practicing engineers, medi-
cal students, and teachers. Prior to GWU, Korte was at Colorado State
University and the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign where he
helped redesign the first-year engineering program as a Fellow with
the Illinois Foundry for Innovation in Engineering Education and was a member of the Academy for
Excellence in Engineering Education—a faculty development program at the University of Illinois.
Earlier, he was a research assistant for the Center for the Advancement of Engineering Education
at the University of Washington. Past work experiences include several years in business, including
starting and growing his own consulting company. Additional research interests include theory,
philosophy, social science, workplace learning and performance, socialization, professional educa-
tion, and organization studies.
- DallAlba09
- Gergen08
- Smith97
- _GoBack
