| |
Failures in Traditional Structured Roles:
Collins & Moore at Michigan State University examined 110 entrepreneurs
founding manufacturing firms in Michigan during 1945-1958 (Enterprising
Man, 1964) and concluded:
“Throughout the preceding analysis, obviously we have been having
difficulty deciding whether the entrepreneur is essentially a reject of
our organizational society who, instead of becoming a hobo, criminal or
professor, makes his adjustment by starting his own business; or whether
he is a man who is positively attracted to succeed in it. We have,
perhaps without intention, regarded him as a reject.
… entrepreneurs are men who have failed in the traditional and highly
structured roles available to them in society. In … entrepreneurs are
not unique. What is unique about them is that they found an outlet for
their creativity by making out of an undifferentiated mass of
circumstances a creation uniquely their own: a business firm.
The men who travel the entrepreneurial way are, taken on balance, not
remarkably likable people. This, too is understandable. As any one of
them might say in the vernacular of the world of the entrepreneur, ‘Nice
guys don’t win.’”Not Very Nice People
Chester Burger in (Executives Under Fire, 1965) found that entrepreneurs
were:
“compulsively driven men whose drive comes from deep inner self doubts.
Because many of these men are, not so far beneath the service, intensely
insecure, they have fashioned elaborate devices to assert their
dominance in the hope that this will make them secure.”
More Recent View -- Simply People Apart
Liles (in The New Enterprise, 1973) found that
entrepreneurs were not misfits at all. In fact, "most of the founders
had experienced a generally high level of success in their previous
employment. Several had established outstanding records of achievement."
The key to more recent findings is to be found in
the "needs" or "motivation of the entrepreneur." |