Plunging Into the Sea Again A Study of Serial Entrepreneurship in China

Introduction

Entrepreneurs confront high rates of failure (Klimas et al., 2021). Enquiry suggests that nearly of them fail (Lee et al., 2021). However, many entrepreneurs continuously start new ventures; either developing new ventures while operating in an existing firm (portfolio entrepreneurship) or starting a new venture after ending another (serial entrepreneurship). These types are considered habitual entrepreneurship (Plehn-Dujowich, 2010; Westhead et al., 2005; Westhead & Wright, 1998). Recent research suggests that a significant portion (as high equally fifty%) of new entrepreneurial ventures are made by those who take had entrepreneurial experience (Ucbasaran et al., 2010). As such, we explore the scholarly literature pertaining to serial entrepreneurship, as further enquiry is needed (Kraus et al., 2020).

As research suggests, virtually new ventures fail. The ramifications of failure have traumatic furnishings upon the private, leading to depression, feelings of worthlessness, a damaged reputation, depleted social uppercase, and loss of financial resources (Baù et al., 2017). Hence, the question remains: why practice serial entrepreneurs continue? Research has begun to examine serial entrepreneurs, focusing on grief recovery, the ways in which they learn from failure, and entrepreneurs' opportunity identification and implementation skills (Cope, 2011). Given that this research has only just begun (Lattacher & Wdowiak, 2020), and due to this contradiction of failure and continuance of new ventures, more theoretical and empirical research is required (Hsu et al., 2017; Klimas et al., 2021).

Our research focuses on a type of habitual entrepreneurs – serial entrepreneurs – who possess unlike characteristics to those who try for the first time (novice entrepreneurs) or those who run more than than ane operation at the same time (portfolio entrepreneurs) (Westhead & Wright, 1998). Serial entrepreneurs are very common and are considered habitual entrepreneurs, exiting one venture earlier entering into a subsequent one (Ucbasaran et al., 2009). The combination of series entrepreneurs exiting one venture for several reasons, such as failure, personal reasons, or selling the venture, and the continuous reentering of the marketplace due to their previous venture, requires farther enquiry (DeTienne & Cardon, 2012). Essentially, experiences of failure or success form very different learning paths and alternate perspectives regarding restarting weather condition (Eggers & Song, 2015) which, without specific consideration, could be deemed to clash (Sarasvathy et al., 2013).

By research has explored entrepreneurs who have failed in their ventures and have exited the marketplace permanently due to their substantial personal, fiscal, and emotional loss. This diminishes their conviction in starting a new venture, impacts their motivation to try again, and affects the extent to which they will take risks (DeTienne, 2010; DeTienne & Chirico, 2013). However, this research as well suggests that, of those who have failed, many do beginning new ventures and perform ameliorate in comparison to those who have started new ventures for the first time (Stam et al., 2008). As such, enquiry now examines the learning effects of previous failed entrepreneurial experiences, such as lessons learned, whether the series entrepreneur has learned more from failure than from past success, and the impact on human capital, business plan acumen, and efficiency of opportunity recognition in response to marketplace analysis (Cope, 2011). Following the call for continued empirical studies of business concern failures and serial entrepreneurship (Lee et al., 2021; Sarasvathy et al., 2013), researchers take focused on age and entrepreneurial reentry (Baù et al., 2017), previous failed versus successful ventures, and their differing learning effects (Eggers & Song, 2015), and how serial entrepreneurs acquire from their past experiences (whether failure or success) and improve their performance over fourth dimension (Vaillant & Lafuente, 2019).

Building upon the absence of research in bookish journals, in which near studies focus on failures rather than successful ventures, also as the constant calls noted above for more research into serial entrepreneurship, we formulate the following research questions:

RQ1 : What practise we know about serial entrepreneurs?

RQ2 : What are the key characteristics of series entrepreneurs that set them apart from other types of entrepreneurs?

RQ3 : What key areas crave further research with regards to serial entrepreneurs?

Our research expands the dynamic entrepreneurship inquiry field through a systematic and bibliometric assay of "serial entrepreneurs." Accordingly, this is one of the first studies to review the serial entrepreneurship inquiry domain systematically. Our work outlines theoretical underpinnings, inquiry themes, and contexts through a multiple correspondence assay (MCA) (Hoffman & De Leeuw, 1992). As presented in the post-obit section, this methodological approach enabled united states of america to examine sure inferences regarding the research domain'south underlying structure, enabling us to propose time to come inquiry avenues.

Methodology

A literature review denotes the relevant synthesis and scientific reflection of a research domain (Mas-Tur et al., 2020; Patriotta, 2020), intending to stimulate the domain's agreement and promote hereafter research (Casprini et al., 2020; Ferreira et al., 2019; Kraus et al., 2020). As a literature review provides a reference bespeak and represents the very essence of a research field, Bem (1995, p. 172) has defined review papers as "critical evaluations of textile that has already been published." In order to produce a comprehensive review paper, authors should perform their studies in a systematic way (Hulland & Houston, 2020; Littell et al., 2008).

We operationalized the systematic review methodology approach as follows (see Figure 1). Firstly, we divers the search criteria and collected the articles. Next, nosotros analyzed the identified publications and created the content-based codebook. Finally, we performed MCA analysis and outlined the serial entrepreneurship research domain, presented in the following section, by elaborating upon the underlying theoretical foundations, the major research themes, geographical contexts, and the methodologies employed.

Serial entrepreneurs: A review of literature and guidance for time to come research

Published online:

24 September 2021

Figure ane. Methodology protocol

Source: own draft based on (Dabić et al., 2020).

The sample of articles and data collection

To address the serial entrepreneurship research domain, we searched for academic publications which, in their title, abstruse or keywords, independent terms such as "serial entrepreneur(due south)," "habitual entrepreneur(south)," or "repeat entrepreneur(southward)," as outlined by Westhead and Wright (1998) and Guerrero and Peña-Legazkue (2019). Accordingly, "habitual entrepreneur" represents an umbrella term for "serial entrepreneurs" and "portfolio entrepreneurs." Serial entrepreneurs are conceptualized as habitual entrepreneurs who exit i venture before entering into a subsequent ane (Sarasvathy et al., 2013; Ucbasaran et al., 2006), while portfolio entrepreneurs keep to manage their original business and inherit, found, and/or buy another business organisation (Westhead & Wright, 1998). Thus, to map the trajectory of the serial entrepreneurship research field, nosotros included both the serial entrepreneur (repeated entrepreneur) and the habitual entrepreneur and performed the search in Thomson Reuters Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI), Science Citation Alphabetize Expanded (SCIE) list of journals, and Elsevier Scopus database (Kiessling et al., 2021). Next, to ensure the reliability of our research and present the progression of the inquiry field, nosotros focused on bookish journals with a peer-review process, written in English. We excluded book capacity, book reviews, briefing proceedings, and editorial notes without whatever time constraints (Gonzalez-Loureiro et al., 2015; Vlačić et al., 2021). This search criterion resulted in 118 manufactures. To ensure consistency, an international squad of 5 members selected the articles that addressed the attributes of the serial entrepreneur, excluding the articles focusing exclusively on portfolio entrepreneurs.

The selected articles were published in academic journals between 1997 and 2020, with the following distribution: 1997–2002, 3%; 2003–2008, 16%; 2009–2014, 39%; 2015–2020, 42%. This distribution, too as the outlets in which the articles are published, such as the Entrepreneurship: Theory and Exercise, Small Business organisation Economic science, and the Journal of Concern Venturing, amid others, point increasing interest level in series entrepreneurship. Table 1 outlines the journals about oftentimes publishing articles in the serial entrepreneurship enquiry domain.

Serial entrepreneurs: A review of literature and guidance for futurity enquiry

Published online:

24 September 2021

Table 1. Overview of most frequent journal sources by the number of articles

The building of the codebook

The procedure for building the codebook (encounter Effigy 1) involved, in the beginning, the identification of the principal descriptors within the series entrepreneurship domain, followed past MCA (Dabić et al., 2020). In line with the methodological procedures presented in López-Duarte et al. (2016, p. 512), using QDA Miner v.five and WordStat v.viii software, this footstep by stride approach consisted of "(I) extracting the key content from the articles' titles, abstracts and keywords; (II) classifying it in gild to build a reduced list of the core descriptors; (III) revising the codebook by merging the similar categories in order to obtain a meaningful list of descriptors in terms of content and frequency." The origin of the preliminary codebook was congenital upon published literature reviews (Klimas et al., 2021; Tipu, 2020). Adjacent, in accordance with the initial categorization, the authors extracted the key content and created the final codebook, consisting of 502 keywords classified under 17 descriptors. Later on, these descriptors were grouped into iv broad themes according to their characteristics: theoretical approaches/frameworks, major enquiry themes, methodologies used, and geographical context (the comprehensive list of keywords and descriptors is available in the supplementary textile).

The multiple correspondence analysis (MCA)

In order to draw the series entrepreneurship intellectual structure, we used MCA. MCA represents a quantitative technique for investigating qualitative data (Hoffman & De Leeuw, 1992) and is widely used to detect the relationships between binary variables (the presence of the defined keywords in this study) (Gifi, 1990). Consequently, if the keyword were nowadays, a value of "1" would be entered. The value would be "0" if absent-minded. Consequent with the objectives of the report, the homogeneity analysis by means of alternating to the lowest degree squares (HOMALS) assay was performed using SPSS v.26 software. Ultimately, this approach enabled a low-dimensional proximity illustration of the enquiry domain, with the descriptors positioned along the ii axes (see Figure ii). In cases where a large proportion of the articles involved similar descriptors (that is, corresponding to the common constituent), those descriptors were positioned closer together and vice versa (Bendixen, 1995; Kiessling et al., 2021). The descriptors with the highest number of articles inside the field were positioned closer to the middle of the map.

Serial entrepreneurs: A review of literature and guidance for future inquiry

Published online:

24 September 2021

Figure two. Map of the serial entrepreneurship inquiry field

Figure 2. Map of the series entrepreneurship enquiry field

Illustration of the serial entrepreneurship research field

In guild to reveal the intellectual structure of research on serial entrepreneurship, the initial stage necessitated an agreement of the dimension poles (see Tabular array 2) (Hoffman & De Leeuw, 1992). The results yielded the explained variance of 25.6%, which, in turn, tended to misrepresent the validity of the MCA arroyo. Accordingly, given that the map combines the information of the grand variables in simply two dimensions (that is, representing loftier-dimensional space in a low-dimensional proximity illustration), Dabić et al. (2020) and López-Duarte et al. (2016), post-obit Pilus et al. (1998) recommendations, noted that the thou hateful of keywords per commodity is more profound and should be larger than ane. In our case, it was 1.27.

Serial entrepreneurs: A review of literature and guidance for future research

Published online:

24 September 2021

Table 2. Descriptors that represent the poles of the axes

Series entrepreneurs: A review of literature and guidance for future research

Published online:

24 September 2021

Table 3. Mapping streams and avenues for the future enquiry agenda of serial entrepreneurship

The far-left pole of the horizontal line revealed the dimensions of an entrepreneurial ecosystem. The publications within this category focus on the role of institutions and serial entrepreneurs' operation indicators (Ensign & Farlow, 2016; Pittz et al., 2021), using feature keywords such as institutions, ecosystem, efficiency, and economic growth, among others. The far-right end of the horizontal dimension displays studies focused on entrepreneurial capability, examined through the lenses of majuscule theory, diversity, gender, and disadvantage perspective (Barnir, 2014; Mosey & Wright, 2007; Simmons et al., 2019). Some of the representative keywords for the descriptors positioned at this pole are capital, human being capital letter, gender, and disadvantage. The upper part of the vertical axis demonstrates researchers' focus on the role of heuristics and behavioral underpinnings in series entrepreneurship, with reference to serial entrepreneurs' attributes, behavior, emotions, strategic orientation, and business organisation development, among other qualities (Hayward et al., 2010; Hsu et al., 2017). Meanwhile, the lower function of the vertical centrality focuses on serial entrepreneurs' relationships with ongoing technological development and technopreneurship fields, including elements of innovation, innovativeness, and loftier tech, as well every bit access to resource and aspects of crowdfunding (Butticè et al., 2017; Gruber et al., 2008; Lahiri & Wadhwa, 2020).

In the rest of the department, nosotros provide further details on these aspects of the research field. Thus, the following sub-sections outline the theoretical foundations, major research themes, and methodological approaches and contexts of the serial entrepreneurship enquiry domain.

Theoretical foundations

Entrepreneurship, broadly defined every bit the process of setting upwards a business or businesses, involves the recognition and seizing of opportunities in an environs highly characterized by uncertainty (Shane & Venkataraman, 2000). Serial entrepreneurs consistently engage in entrepreneurial behaviors via constant and sequential entrepreneurial activities (Amaral et al., 2011). Seriality in entrepreneurship has been mostly investigated equally a matter of occupational selection (Carbonara et al., 2020), with studies ranging in their approaches, forming a dichotomy between those arguing for the importance of learning by doing (Rocha et al., 2015) and those countering with the study of the innate abilities of individual serial entrepreneurs (Westhead & Wright, 1998).

Serial entrepreneurship is non well explained through existing theories of industry evolution and labor market theories of occupation choice. Researchers have thus utilized other theoretical foundations. Several studies on serial entrepreneurship are built upon the behavioral theory of the firm (Cyert & March, 1963) and the concepts of bounded rationality (Simon, 1972), which offer three weather condition that may bear upon seriality in entrepreneurship. Firstly, causal ambiguity surrounding the action-outcome relationship makes it difficult for entrepreneurs to evaluate courses of action (Levitt & March, 1988). Secondly, entrepreneurs are prone to cerebral bias, such equally over-conviction, which may cause dysfunctional outcomes due to asymmetry between subjective evaluations and actual abilities (Gudmundsson & Lechner, 2013). Thirdly, entrepreneurs struggle to evaluate outcomes due to the subjectivity of the definitions of success and failure (Hogarth & Karelaia, 2012).

Studies based on the principles of cerebral psychology are also pervasive in entrepreneurship (Baron & Ward, 2004; Mitchell et al., 2002). The concept of entrepreneurial noesis has been widely studied to describe how entrepreneurs remember and behave (Sassetti et al., 2018; Vlačić et al., 2020). Entrepreneurial cognition pertains to "the noesis structures that people use to make assessments, judgments, or decisions involving opportunity evaluation, venture creation and growth" (Mitchell et al., 2002, p. 97). The focus here is on how entrepreneurs use heuristics and are subject to bias. For example, Ucbasaran et al. (2010) explored how serial entrepreneurs who have experienced failure do not appear to adjust their comparative optimism.

The entrepreneurial intention – every bit explained past models such every bit Shapero and Sokol'southward (1982) entrepreneurial event model (SEE) and Ajzen'southward (1991) theory of planned behavior (TPB) – has besides been applied to the study of series entrepreneurs. For example, the higher the level of entrepreneurial intention, the faster the serial entrepreneur'south rate of new venture creation (Kautonen et al., 2015; Krueger et al., 2000). According to the Meet model, the entrepreneurial intention is influenced by an individual's perceived desirability, perceived feasibility, and propensity to act upon opportunities. The TPB model, instead, posits that entrepreneurial intention rests on the private's attitude toward an act, the subjective norm, and perceived behavioral control.

Entrepreneurship research is oftentimes grounded in institutional theory (North, 1990; Scott, 2013; Veciana & Urbano, 2008). From an institutional theory perspective, institutions are clusters of synthetic moral behavior that govern political, economical, and social interaction. Every society possesses formal institutions (that is, the legal and regulatory framework) and informal institutions that are the unwritten socially shared rules concerning acceptable and unacceptable behavior. The organizations, in our case new ventures, that come up into existence will reflect the opportunities provided by the institutional framework (Fu et al., 2018).

Entrepreneurship scholars have given the concept of an entrepreneurial ecosystem (Isenberg, 2010) a great deal of attention as it offers a framework inside which to draw the fostering of entrepreneurial activity. As defined by Spigel (2017, p. 49), "ecosystems are the matrimony of localized cultural outlooks, social networks, investment capital, universities, and active economic policies that create environments supportive of innovation-based ventures." Far from beingness an exclusive concept for entrepreneurship research, the ecosystem view is cantankerous-disciplinary and adopted in other research areas to explore fiscal, economical, sociodemographic, or political issues (Kabakova & Plaksenkov, 2018). While keeping the entrepreneur as the focal point, the ecosystem emphasizes the contextual and institutional dynamics that constrain serial entrepreneurship. Equally such, national and regional formal business regulations, or social norms and values, may stigmatize failure, hence preventing seriality or, conversely, offering an institutional surroundings in which failure is accepted, and support is in place, fostering seriality. Similarly, written and unwritten norms may make it more than or less desirable for an entrepreneur to motion from business to concern. In this vein, Simmons et al. (2014) investigated the degree to which bankruptcy regulations formalized social norms with the public stigma of failure, instilling a more general and informal sentiment of fear of failure that may foreclose entrepreneurs from restarting businesses.

The resources-based view (RBV) of the firm (Wernerfelt, 1984) constitutes some other theoretical framework for the study of serial entrepreneurship. The RBV posits that competitive advantage is created and sustained over time when firms simultaneously possess valuable, rare, nonsubstitutable, and inimitable resources. The underlying supposition of RBV is the conceptualization of firms equally agglomerations of resource heterogeneously distributed across firms. Eisenhardt and Martin (2000) revealed that capabilities are needed to integrate, reconfigure, gain, and release resource, consisting of identifiable and specific routines that put resources into use. The RBV is a sound framework that can be used to explicate the activities of SMEs and entrepreneurs. It is also able to business relationship for informality in SMEs (Kraus et al., 2011).

The scholarly literature on serial entrepreneurship also rests on the relationship between experience, learning, and functioning, with an underlying theoretical foundation of the noesis-based view (KBV) of the house (Grant, 2002). The KBV served as a prominent theoretical framework to account for the cognition and learning factors shaping series entrepreneurship. The skills and knowledge required to run a firm are predominantly experiential (Starr & Bygrave, 1991), and the creation of new ventures enhances the accumulation of entrepreneurship-specific human upper-case letter (Ucbasaran et al., 2009).

Experiential learning (Kolb, 1984) plays a key function in serial entrepreneurship equally it has a positive event upon the development of different types of skills, such as resource acquisition and organization (Cope & Watts, 2000; Stam et al., 2008; Van Gelderen et al., 2005), which augment entrepreneurial abilities by allowing the series entrepreneur to recreate ventures at a faster pace, enabling them to perform better than novices (Cope, 2011; Parker, 2013; Starr & Bygrave, 1991).

The function of knowledge is also pivotal in supporting entrepreneurial actions in terms of opportunity recognition, discovery, and employment (Shane, 2000). While the ability to apply specific knowledge to a commercial opportunity requires a set of skills, insights, circumstances, and social mechanisms, the entrepreneurial ecosystem and the regulatory framework underpin the production and accumulation of knowledge and are critical for its subsequent distribution and use (Bozeman & Mangematin, 2004).

Zhang (2011) suggested that serial entrepreneurs are more skillful and socially connected than novice entrepreneurs. The human capital theory acknowledges that individuals with higher quality human capital letter attain better performance levels (Becker, 1962), farther reinforcing the importance of noesis, skills, and social majuscule in determining the success of serial entrepreneurs. Human capital is exemplified in entrepreneurship equally the knowledge and skills that aid in successfully engaging in new ventures (Davidsson & Honig, 2003). General human capital letter provides entrepreneurs with cognition, skills, and problem-solving abilities that are transferable across many different life situations. In contrast, specific human capital letter pertains to the pedagogy, training, and experiences that are valuable to entrepreneurial activities but have few applications exterior of this domain.

Given the shortcomings and evident overlaps of the several theoretical foundations in serial entrepreneurship, a promising contribution may come from theoretical approaches that span behavioral, institutional, and resource-based theories. For case, researchers usually employ iii related theories to explain the multifariousness in organizations: the similarity and allure prototype, social categorization theory, and social identity theory. The similarity attraction paradigm predicts that similarities in attributes increase interpersonal attraction and liking. Individuals with similar backgrounds may share common values and may observe it easier to interact with each other. Turner et al. (1987) describe the self-categorization theory, instead, as the process by which people define their self-concept in terms of their membership to various social groups. Social identity theory (SIT) (Hogg & Abrams, 1988) suggests that group members establish a positive social identity and are likely to cooperate with members of the group and compete against those exterior of it.

Barnir (2014) unveiled gender differences in the effects of entrepreneurial impetus (such as business opportunities, mentors, and the nature of work) and human capital (such equally education, employment latitude, managerial feel, and entrepreneurial capabilities) on serial entrepreneurship. Baù et al. (2017) examined the seriality of failed entrepreneurs. They showed that reentry increases during the early career stage, decreases during the mid-career phase, and so increases once more during the tardily-career stage – a relationship moderated by gender and multiple-owner experiences. Lin and Wang (2019) further clarify the impact of age on serial entrepreneurship following failure, unveiling the directly bear on of age chastened by failure, loss, and family support.

Major inquiry themes and topics

Topic 1: Entrepreneurial opportunity-recognition and opportunity creation

For entrepreneurs, the key to success is to place a marketplace need unmet by other incumbent firms and to fulfill this value proposition more effectively than other participants (Gaglio & Katz, 2001; Shane & Venkataraman, 2000). This opportunity identification is a fundamental component of entrepreneurial success and is the first step in the process of new venture cosmos (Bygrave & Hofer, 1992; Lumpkin & Dess, 1996). Why and how some people are able to identify these marketplace needs and take the risk to fulfill these customers' expectations is considered foundational to entrepreneurship inquiry (Gielnik et al., 2017; Shane & Venkataraman, 2000). Researchers have focused on opportunity identification in terms of where this ability comes from – perchance an private's pedagogy, work experience, entrepreneurial experience, or experiential adequacy (Davidsson & Honig, 2003).

Serial entrepreneurs, in detail, are an important topic of study as they are extremely competent at identifying marketplace opportunities (Taplin, 2008). Therefore, examining these individuals could help to shed calorie-free on how/where they garner their insight, the assay/interpretation of this new knowledge, and the appropriate method of developing a concern plan (Lumpkin et al., 2004). Recent research suggests that serial entrepreneurs are very successful in the opportunity recognition procedure (Urban, 2009). Some of the key findings regarding opportunity identification have suggested that new business opportunities often arise in connectedness with solutions to a specific problem later on listening to customers' wants/needs and creatively identifying latent business opportunities. Opportunities rarely come immediately just rather present themselves throughout a series of events. The serial entrepreneur realizes that mistakes are part of the entrepreneurial procedure and will apply any failure or success to hereafter ventures (Lumpkin et al., 2004).

Research into series entrepreneurs and their ability to identify marketplace opportunities for successful implementation overwhelmingly suggests that serial entrepreneurs can identify marketplace opportunities more than than other participants (Ucbasaran et al., 2009). Past research supports this ongoing exclamation as business ownership delivers skills specific to entrepreneurship, focusing its efforts on identifying and exploiting successful ideas (Chandler & Hanks, 1998; Gimeno et al., 1997). As a serial entrepreneur repeatedly starts businesses, the experienced entrepreneur understands the nuances required to identify opportunities and what is required to implement to seize them and ultimately kickoff a new venture (Shane & Khurana, 2003; Starr & Bygrave, 1991).

Topic 2: Technopreneurship and innovation

"The real question, then, … [is] non whether entrepreneurs innovate, but rather, when and where they do so." (Autio et al., 2014, p. 1098). Contempo enquiry investigating innovation and serial entrepreneurs suggests that innovativeness is shaped by past entrepreneurial experiences, as serial entrepreneurs have adult superior opportunity recognition abilities (Politis, 2005; Vaillant & Lafluente, 2019). The generative learning ability of serial entrepreneurs (taking past knowledge and applying it to new situations) helps develop new innovative products/services (Cope, 2005). Serial entrepreneurs are adept in innovation as entrepreneurial learning is primarily experience-based, with past knowledge aggregating guiding hereafter opportunities for innovation (Minniti & Bygrave, 2001; Politis, 2005). Cognitive schemas are developed by serial entrepreneurs, facilitating the selection and discernment of valuable marketplace knowledge, understanding the importance of central trends, and innovative business organisation plan developments (Baron & Ensley, 2006; Cope, 2005; Sarasvathy et al., 2013).

Series entrepreneurs have demonstrated their ability to create inventions and possess the acumen to develop a business concern programme to make an innovation a commercial success (Hoye & Pries, 2009). The evolution of these inventions tin depend upon an open innovation strategy (based on the belief that knowledgeable and artistic individuals outside of the company can also contribute to achieving strategic goals and that sharing intellectual holding both ways is useful to different parties in unlike ways). In this way, the serial entrepreneur can deliver more high-quality innovation. An open innovation strategy and a civilization of open innovation adult and promoted by meridian management motivates serial entrepreneurs to develop innovations (Yun et al., 2019).

Surprisingly, research has found an inverse relationship between innovativeness and new venture success (Boyer & Blazy, 2014; Hyytinen et al., 2015; Reid & Smith, 2000). Although serial entrepreneurs often change industries due to their innovativeness (McGrath & MacMillan, 2000), serial entrepreneurs who show the greatest innovativeness fail in one industry and attempt a new venture in a unlike manufacture (Eggers & Song, 2015). Successful serial entrepreneurs typically remain inside their industry and obtain economic success through less innovative performance. The more familiar the series entrepreneur is with their industry, the bottom their innovative performance (Lahiri & Wadhwa, 2020).

Topic iii: Entrepreneurial strategy

As noted, series entrepreneurship is the ending of one venture in lodge to start a new venture. Research has examined the entrepreneurial strategy of entry and reentry decisions of serial entrepreneurs, with a pregnant portion of this literature focusing on the failure of serial entrepreneurs and their subsequent new venture (Amaral et al., 2011; Stam et al., 2008). Research into reentry following the failure of a new venture focuses on variables such as the experience of the entrepreneur and what they have learned from their experience, their career phase and historic period, and psychological constructs (such as resilience, motivation, and caste of mindfulness), with mixed and contradictory results (Tipu, 2020). For instance, entrepreneurs who had failed were less likely to reenter the market place, chastened by college education and employment feel (Amaral et al., 2011). Conversely, other research results suggest that failed entrepreneurs are more probable to restart than successful entrepreneurs (Nielsen & Sarasvathy, 2016). Hence, in that location is much more work to exist done in this research stream.

Other studies on entrepreneurial strategy have focused on the export tactic, utilizing the man upper-case letter theory, and the results of these experiments propose that portfolio entrepreneurs possess greater exporting intensity than series entrepreneurs (Robson et al., 2012). As an leave strategy, young corporations endemic past serial entrepreneurs are more likely to be sold. This enquiry is of involvement every bit information technology suggests that entrepreneurs practice non want to grow and rarely innovate beyond their first capability, implying that coin was not their motivation when starting their new venture. Thus, the value of ventures sold by serial entrepreneurs' is illustrated by intellectual holding rights, high-quality innovation, and employment growth (Cotei & Farhat, 2017).

Enquiry farther examined serial entrepreneurs' approaches to strategic decision-making in identifying new ventures. Beyond identifying an opportunity, both entrepreneurial and managerial talent is required to successfully implement strategy, specially in foreign markets (Corbett, 2005; Weber & Tarba, 2014). Exporting is the beginning stage in an international strategy. Firms with no prior international experience tend to have pocket-sized export revenues with short-term losses, which have repercussions on the success of their domestic operations, leading to better performance prior to their strategy of exporting to international markets (Amiti & Weinstein, 2011; Bellone et al., 2010). However, this research suggests that serial entrepreneurs, due to their strategic- and generative-based cognitive agility, are more successful when entering foreign markets (Cope, 2005; Vaillant & Lafuente, 2019).

Topic 4: Performance

Although detailed studies are defective regarding serial entrepreneurship and performance, the studies that accept been conducted have oftentimes had mixed results (for example, Eggers & Song, 2015; Gruber et al., 2008; Lafontaine & Shaw, 2016; Paik, 2014; Toft-Kehler et al., 2014) or have demonstrated no performance differences between serial entrepreneurs and those with no history (Iacobucci et al., 2004). Past enquiry based on the theories of cognition and generative learning suggests that serial entrepreneurs achieve better performance with each new venture (Cope, 2005). In dissimilarity, some research has suggested that, due to hubris and selective learning, future ventures do not perform too (Hayward et al., 2010). Other pieces of research focusing only on previous failed ventures by serial entrepreneurs suggests that entrepreneurs acquire from their mistakes and proceed to do ameliorate in the time to come (Parker, 2013; Shepherd, 2003).

Focusing on the serial entrepreneur's experience and their power to acquire from these, some researchers detect no relationship with functioning (Alsos & Kolvereid, 1998), while other researchers suggest the being of a nonlinear relationship (Toft-Kehler et al., 2014; Ucbasaran et al., 2009). However, contempo enquiry confirms that at that place is no overwhelming evidence to suggest a correlation betwixt past entrepreneurial experience and subsequent entrepreneurial operation (Valliant & Lafluente, 2018). However, this may be due to a conflict or lack of certain explanatory variables, equally suggested in inquiry on failed versus successful new ventures (Sarasvathy et al., 2013). When the innovation variable is explored for serial entrepreneurs, research suggests an inverse relationship between innovation and economical performance (Hyytinen et al., 2015).

Other functioning research has suggested that serial entrepreneurs have better sales and productivity figures (K. Shaw & Sørensen, 2019). These researchers focused on serial entrepreneurs in Denmark found that their second firm had 55% higher sales figures than their start business firm. Withal, they could not find a significant human relationship between serial entrepreneurs' traits (that is, pedagogy, age, or past success every bit wage earners) and functioning. The cardinal to high performance for serial entrepreneurs is the squad they work with, which shows that entrepreneurs must have entrepreneurial and managerial capabilities (Weber & Tarba, 2014). The functional diversity of the squad adult past the serial entrepreneur has been shown to accelerate a firm'due south performance, equally the team is stronger and better able to develop strategies and tactics when time to come issues arise (Barringer & Jones, 2004; Kirschenhofer & Lechner, 2012).

Geographical context

Most of the research on serial entrepreneurship has been conducted within Europe, Asia, and North America; however, some research articles explore serial entrepreneurship in other geographical settings. Supporting Eggers and Song (2015), inquiry in Finland suggests that serial entrepreneurs utilise their by knowledge when starting a new business in a different industry (Kuuluvainen, 2010). As these serial entrepreneurs are non ingrained in their new industry, they are able to call up outside of the box and develop innovative practices.

International research has focused on serial entrepreneurs' characteristics and has found that serial entrepreneurs in Australia were more often than not male, relatively well educated, aged between 30 and 49, born locally, and came from a family who was too entrepreneurs (Schaper et al., 2007). Research in India suggests that to be a successful series entrepreneur, one should have entrepreneurial capabilities – specifically, the ability to develop potent entrepreneurial teams (Kumar, 2012). A written report in Prc suggested that serial entrepreneurs were superior at developing networks, better at managing than new entrepreneurs, but did non demonstrate better levels of performance (Li et al., 2009).

The serial entrepreneurship literature stream concerning failure has been tested in international markets as well. Using a theoretical foundation of attribution theory, research in Uganda constitute serial entrepreneurs were less successful in future ventures if they thought their failure was due to their lack of ability (Sserwanga & Rooks, 2014). In Ghana, series entrepreneurial failure caused stigmatization and fear of future failure, focusing on external factors such as national policy barriers (Amankwah-Amoah, 2018). Other research in Ghana explored why serial entrepreneurs failed and suggested that rivals' active use of negative rumors and misinformation could affect serial entrepreneurs' new ventures to such an extent that they would fail (Amankwah‐Amoah et al., 2018).

Existing inquiry methodologies

The serial entrepreneurship research domain has been investigated using both quantitative and qualitative approaches. Accordingly, access to information through Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (Simmons et al., 2014) or country-level datasets, such as the console study of income dynamics for the Usa (Parker, 2013) or Quadros de Pessoal for Portugal (Amaral et al., 2011), in addition to offering researchers the opportunity to collect information from different sectors and industries (Hyytinen & Ilmakunnas, 2007), allow scholars to dig deeper when investigating serial entrepreneurs' attitudes, learning processes, operation, and other factors. Essentially, quantitative methodological approaches, such every bit piece-wise abiding chance function (Amaral et al., 2011), Cox proportional-hazards model (De Jong & Marsili, 2015), and other regression and multivariate models, are used in order to assess the significance and importance of factors such as characteristics (Westhead & Wright, 1998), competence, and overall functioning (Toft-Kehler et al., 2014). Qualitative methods, similar interviews, case studies, comparative case studies, and grounded theory approaches, accept been used to reveal the underpinnings motivations of series entrepreneurs – their attitudes, perceptions, and strategic approaches, among others. For example, Engel et al. (2020), using the retrieve-aloud verbal protocol and semi-structured interviews, uncovered the differences in naming ventures betwixt novice and experienced entrepreneurs. Kuuluvainen (2010), based on the instance of a young Stop serial entrepreneur, revealed the impact of thinking exterior of the box on entrepreneurial experience.

Give-and-take and time to come research agenda

Through our enquiry, we take identified several time to come avenues of enquiry that could shape the field's research agenda (run into Figure two: the spatial map). We take highlighted the gaps in current academic literature and take structured the flowing department co-ordinate to the primary theoretical focus effectually which these gaps were established, starting with the diversity theory.

Time to come enquiry avenues regarding diversity theory

While information technology is truthful that serial entrepreneurs are predisposed to starting over again (Baù et al., 2017), there is still a huge gap in our current understanding of how this attitude may exist hindered or boosted by individual characteristics, contingencies, and diversities (Barnir, 2014; Simmons et al., 2019). This stream of enquiry should accost how formal and informal institutions may affect series entrepreneurship regarding gender, household roles, race, nationality, sexual orientation, faith, (in)power, diversity, and "otherness" in general.

Some evidence of the potential touch of this has already been revealed in relation to the existence of a gender gap in series entrepreneurship. For example, Brush et al. (2009) referred to more women-specific elements of the informal institutional environment, such equally the concept of "motherhood," while Cunningham (2001) noted societal expectations about women, for example, household role expectations. Hence, possible hereafter analyses could compare cross-land cultural differences in terms of national civilisation values, for example, masculine/feminine values, uncertainty abstention, power distance, individualism/collectivism, short/long-term orientation, and indulgence.

Similarly, a large trunk of literature exists on how other formal institutions, tasks, and full general environments may influence entrepreneurs' decisions and behaviors, especially women entrepreneurs (Castor et al., 2009; Cetindamar et al., 2012). However, this consideration is completely focused on female person series entrepreneurs. To offering explicative references, more studies should accost the role of the educational organization (Mehtap et al., 2017); industry logics (Lahiri & Wadhwa, 2020); economic development, and legislative framework at a "macro level" and dedicated funding and support opportunities at a "meso level" (Brush et al., 2009), economic development (Carbonara et al., 2020), and financial arrangement development (VCs, concern angels, entrepreneurial finance instruments) (Zhang, 2019).

Diversity and disadvantaged entrepreneurship (De Clercq & Honig, 2011; Santoro et al., 2020) is a developing topic in the entrepreneurial contend and, for serial entrepreneurship, is in its nascent stage. According to Maalaoui et al. (2020, pp. 1–2), entrepreneurial studies should pay more attention to "otherness" nuances that tin can be defined in terms of sociodemographic circumstances: gender, age (senior/gray entrepreneurship), nationality, and indigenous minority backgrounds or private characteristics, attributes, and contingencies, such as refugees or immigrants, ex‐prisoners, (differently) able people, the unemployed, students, those of religion, and those of varying sexual orientations. Similar to the study of female person series entrepreneurship, future enquiry questions should likewise consider how formal and informal institutional elements tin impact those categories, thus opening upwards a new field of research on the disadvantaged and diverse serial entrepreneurship. Finally, other directions for future research that are still centered effectually diversity may constitute a link to the RBV theory, as serial entrepreneurs, thanks to their previous experience, resource, and learning abilities should exist able to develop new and more innovative products/services (Cope, 2005), fifty-fifty though the human relationship between innovation and serial entrepreneurship is not always clear (Hyytinen et al., 2015). Notwithstanding, less is known with regard to diverse entrepreneurship. For example, senior/grey entrepreneurs accrue a tremendous amount of knowledge and contacts in the industry in which they accept previously worked as employees/professionals (Harms et al., 2014). This tin go a significant advantage when information technology comes to the creation of successive ventures. Similarly, immigrant entrepreneurs who mainly target their ethnic community may find advantages to increasing human being capital, having their business contacts understand their target markets (Dabić et al., 2020). In a similar vein, disabled entrepreneurs may craft ventures to address customers' specific needs in like circumstances (De Clercq & Honig, 2011). Their ability to uniquely sympathise these contexts represents an advantage for their potential serial entrepreneurship.

Time to come research avenues regarding entrepreneurial strategy

The second stream of research focuses on obtaining a amend understanding of serial entrepreneurs' exit and reentry strategies, using more insights from RBV and KBV theories. Firstly, the resources, experiences, and skills of serial entrepreneurs impact their adjacent venture and their performance (Carbonara et al., 2020; Ucbasaran et al., 2009; Wiklund & Shepherd, 2008). However, the specific elements of this broad set are less defined. For example, Zhang (2011) asserts that just specific entrepreneurial experience in VC-backed companies assures a better endowment – in terms of VC funds – to the electric current organization. Thus, just beingness a series entrepreneur with previous general experience is non crucial. This unproblematic example calls for farther studies on relevant factors that may bear on reentry strategies and their outcomes.

Secondly, the prevalent approach adopted past serial entrepreneurship studies sees these strategies, pertinent resources, and knowledge bases employed mostly in terms of private consequences (for case, Tipu, 2020; Ucbasaran et al., 2009). Using a comprehensive framework elaborated for entrepreneurial failure instead (Klimas et al., 2021), nosotros argue that more attention should be paid to different outcomes, direct, indirect, long‐term ones, and time progression. The one-time is probably the most frequently investigated/experienced category, and it comprehends economic, psychological, and social consequences. However, more emphasis should be put on the other two categories to sympathize the role of resource, skills, and the noesis of an entrepreneur in reentering the field (Wiklund & Shepherd, 2008). Indirect effects occur only when direct effects are fully "digested." Specifically, they relate to grief, reflecting on learning, and proposing strategies for recovery (Shepherd, 2003). Much more should be done to facilitate an agreement of how series entrepreneurs experience these iii outcomes and phases, establishing the personal characteristics and contingencies, resources and knowledge, or institutional factors that may influence the process (Baù et al., 2017; Klimas et al., 2021). Finally, long-term outcomes can be analyzed at an individual, organizational (future venture), and environmental level. Particularly from a pure KBV perspective, the production and aggregating of noesis are disquisitional for its subsequent distribution and utilize (Bozeman & Mangematin, 2004). Even so, if accumulated stocks of cognition are deemed to assistance deal with environmental contingencies internally, such every bit processing information and making decisions (Minniti & Bygrave, 2001; Sassetti et al., 2018), it would be interesting to verify whether or not this is as well true when it comes to dealing with the environmental consequences of an exit strategy, thus managing external processes and relationships with network partners, competitors, and stakeholders.

In addition to these consequences, types of and reasons for an entrepreneurial exit may influence reentry modality and odds. DeTienne (2010) identifies 3 chief exit strategies: business firm get out, founder exit, or both. Similarly, reasons for leaving may be due to alternative options or new business opportunities, calculative options arising from evaluating the quality and value of the current venture or, finally, the normative support of the surrounding surroundings (DeTienne, 2010). The entrepreneur's characteristics may also influence these decisions (DeTienne & Cardon, 2012); for example, more than educated serial entrepreneurs may go out by selling their business when they take a good chance of making a profit. This ways that necessary resource, skills, and experiences play a function. Then far, withal, academic debates lag when it comes to studying these factors (Carbonara et al., 2020).

While RBV and KBV are more inwardly oriented, that is, more than focused on the specific business firm or entrepreneur and its/their resources and cognition, a complementary arroyo could analyze entrepreneurial leave and reentry strategies in lite of environmental contingencies, integrating the institutional theory that plays a role in entrepreneurial strategy (Carbonara et al., 2020; Cetindamar et al., 2012). For instance, transaction economical logic may touch on the decisions and outcomes of serial entrepreneurs differently. This would also open upward an interesting argue regarding regional or industry development.

Future research avenues regarding technopreneurship and innovation

The third stream of research relates to innovation in series entrepreneurship analyzed in two directions: one pertinent to the serial entrepreneur, thus internal, calling for amend integration of the topic with the capital theory; and one external and related to environmental contingencies, thus calling for integration with the institutional theory.

Unlike portfolio entrepreneurs, who are innovators, serial entrepreneurs tend to exist less innovative (Carbonara et al., 2020). For example, when serial entrepreneurs remain in the aforementioned industry, due to their accumulated homo and social capital letter, they tend to exploit opportunities rather than explore new ones (Lahiri & Wadhwa, 2020). As a effect of their accumulated capital in a certain manufacture, series entrepreneurs dwell more on stable only profitable ventures at the expense of innovative functioning. Still, it is also truthful that some of these seminal results exercise not consider, for instance, the reasons backside an entrepreneurial leave.

Another research area is that of open innovation strategy. On the one paw, some studies have demonstrated an inverted U-shaped relationship betwixt open innovation strategy adoption and innovation performance (Laursen & Salter, 2006). On the other hand, open innovation seems to stimulate series entrepreneurship every bit, through either exterior-in or within-out strategies, entrepreneurs tin can become more aware of new opportunities and exist more confident in their external environment, accumulating human and social capital (Yun et al., 2019).

The bulk of studies on innovation in serial entrepreneurship merely consider innovative performance, thus but examining the outputs of the process (for example, patents, as in Lahiri & Wadhwa, 2020). However, being innovative involves many more than strategic and organizational decisions, such as the business concern model and its changes (Corbo et al., 2020; Pizzi et al., 2020). Nosotros refer specifically to the business model as it is able to comprehensively capture an entire entrepreneurial activeness through its ties to the complex relationship between the creation and appropriation of value for a company (Zott et al., 2011). Some evidence suggests that series entrepreneurs may accept a different cognitive approach to the design of business concern models (Malmström et al., 2015). Thus, we consider information technology of import to chronicle human capital and the ability of series entrepreneurs to innovative business models, as scholarly literature is scant in this regard.

Our enquiry suggests that further exploration is required when information technology comes to the touch of the environment on the innovative abilities of series entrepreneurs. Business model innovation may occur non only for strategic and entrepreneurial market changes (Zott et al., 2011) and when adapting to new and emergent contingencies (Foss & Saebi, 2018). In recent years, one of the most prominent phenomena is the digital revolution or 4.0 era, which has affected order and, consequently, organizations and their business models (Caputo et al., 2021; Fakhar-Manesh et al., 2021). The appearance of new technologies, such as the Net of Things and the heavy use of artificial intelligence, have substantially changed how noesis is managed within organizations (Vlačić et al., 2021) and entrepreneurial activities (Obschonka & Audretsch, 2020). As serial entrepreneurs have higher levels of imaginativeness (McMullen & Kier, 2017), they should also exist able to innovate rapidly and adapt to such futuristic paradigms.

However, the external surround analysis cannot exist limited to merely the societal movements of the digital transformation. The very definition of an ecosystem relates to an environs that conceives innovation-based ventures (Spigel, 2017). Thus, we call for more studies on how formal and informal institutions impact the innovativeness of serial entrepreneurs.

Moving from i industry to another is common for series entrepreneurs (Eggers & Song, 2015; McGrath & MacMillan, 2000). This mitigates their trend to prefer exploitation over exploration (Carbonara et al., 2020; Lahiri & Wadhwa, 2020). Nevertheless, in that location is no evidence to suggest that such shifts are not also influenced by industry logic. For example, in bio-tech, open innovation strategies and serial entrepreneurship are the "genetic code" of the manufacture (Dutton, 2009). Does this embeddedness alter previous considerations regarding innovative performance?

Future research areas regarding serial entrepreneurship and sustainability

For the final two future inquiry avenues, we focus on the enquiry streams that did not emerge in the scientific map of the field (Figure ii), as academic literature is rendered silent on these topics. The first aspect that nosotros believe should be added to discussions of series entrepreneurship is the concept of sustainability. Increasingly, technology is at the service of greener, more socially inclusive, economically feasible solutions. Thus, nosotros can link sustainability to the innovation topic and business model innovation (Caputo et al., 2021; Pizzi et al., 2020). In authenticity, social, serial or habitual entrepreneurship are not rare in do, as social entrepreneurs piece of work using a trial-and-error process to deliver maximum value (Eastward. Shaw & Carter, 2007). Yet, the motivation to create a new venture in social entrepreneurship is unlike, and so the bookish debate needs to investigate the specific logic backside this blazon of serial entrepreneurship, although there are cases in practice.

Future research avenues regarding series entrepreneurship and the COVID-19 pandemic

As the unabridged marketplace has been affected – in some ways, permanently – past the SARS-COV-two (COVID-xix) pandemic, the demand for entrepreneurial flexibility and adaptability is growing. Because the fact that the true affect of the pandemic cannot be estimated at the moment, serial entrepreneurs' bent for trying again (Baù et al., 2017) and their capacity to accommodate may serve as a revitalization gene. In improver, recent research reveals that ecosystem quality has a much smaller impact on the venture survival of serial entrepreneurs (Vedula & Kim, 2019). Hence, serial entrepreneurs' behavioral habit toward entrepreneurship (Spivack et al., 2014) and their chapters to recognize business opportunities (Urban, 2009) may prove to be of assistance in times to come up as society is facing multiple waves of lockdowns and is trying out new ways of doing business.

History shows that market place disruptions have recurrent tendencies (Donthu & Gustafsson, 2020) and that the revitalization process is often uneven beyond markets and categories.

Hence, as the global business concern environment changes, policymakers have the opportunity to enhance institutional support to entrepreneurial activities and provide a favorable setting for entrepreneurial nomads (aka digital nomads). Accordingly, further improvements in digital infrastructure and stronger innovation back up, in line with stable institutions, provide an opportunity for entrepreneurs to overcome the limitations caused by the COVID-19 pandemic.

Building upon these notions, future research could investigate serial entrepreneurs' opportunity recognition and performance compared with novice or portfolio entrepreneurs under the new-normal context and the changing nature of ecosystem quality. In addition, future research could shed light on how series entrepreneurs navigate political and social changing strategies; the extent to which serial entrepreneurs influence institutional policies and their role in developing new institutions; how serial entrepreneurs overcome limitations acquired by the pandemic; and the extent to which their experiences and cognitions play a role in their ability to overcome ecology stressors.

Implications for practice

Our research provides a pregnant number of implications for practitioners. Many individuals wish to begin their new venture and subsequently start their second venture. One of our key takeaways is our investigation as to how serial entrepreneurs discover their next venture opportunities through solutions to specific problems, listening to customers' wants/needs, being artistic in identifying latent business opportunities, and realizing that opportunities rarely come immediately, but rather emerge across a series of events.

Many individuals may not wish to exist entrepreneurs due to the very high risk of failure. Our research does not contradict past inquiry but rather suggests that failure may not be a bad affair, as those who and then starting time a 2nd new venture have a greater take chances of amend performance. Series entrepreneurs learn from previous mistakes and implement better business organization plans. Our enquiry suggests that successful serial entrepreneurs (a term also applicable to habitual and beginning-time entrepreneurs) take a business organisation plan mental schematic and can value innovative market place options realistically. Over fourth dimension, the serial entrepreneur develops a generative-based cerebral schema, allowing them to evaluate implementable opportunities.

VCs are interesting phenomena to serial entrepreneurs. They like to invest in series entrepreneurs and but practice so if the new venture has intellectual holding rights, loftier-quality innovation, and opportunities for employment growth. Furthermore, VCs seek degrees of turn a profit that encourage the serial entrepreneur to sell their new venture and begin another.

2 other key areas of research pertaining to practicing series entrepreneurs are that of the entrepreneurial squad and the age and career progression of the individual. Our inquiry suggests that the entrepreneur is of import merely that the team and the venture's direction are critical. A diverse squad volition support the new venture and assist as the market place, customer preferences, and value propositions modify. The diverse squad will exist able to manage all of the various nuances and develop tactics and strategies for success. Entrepreneurs tin starting time a new venture early in their careers and then be more than successful afterward. Entrepreneurs who may have failed early (or fifty-fifty those who were successful) can so start new ventures later in their careers and succeed.

Conclusion

The research into serial entrepreneurship is nascent, and much remains for researchers to explore. Even though the inquiry stream on entrepreneurship has received deserved focus by academics, the serial entrepreneurs subfield was not explored enough, although many entrepreneurs are serial entrepreneurs (Lafontaine & Shaw, 2016). Thus, this article provides a timely and necessary review of the literature on serial entrepreneurship, intending to consolidate what we know most serial entrepreneurs and their key characteristics and inspire the domain'south future enquiry. In line with the research questions that guided this review, we acknowledge that one key reason that many researchers avoid in this stream of literature is the caste of difficulty linked to the measurement and accumulation of data in this vein. To follow a serial entrepreneur tin can accept many years. Making comparisons betwixt a previous and current venture or comparing an entrepreneur to who they were previously may consequence in spurious correlations. The intent of an initial venture may exist very dissimilar from the side by side venture, and so on.

The performance of differing ventures initiated past an entrepreneur over fourth dimension would be hard to ascertain unless they were considered failures (where the business firm ceases operation). This could be one reason why bookish literature focuses on serial entrepreneurs and their subsequent ventures after failure. Performance is also difficult to mensurate, as many entrepreneurs start a concern, not for monetary gain but for personal satisfaction. They rarely grow and fail to introduce beyond their initial starting move.

The variables required for successful research on serial entrepreneurship are varied, and many units of analysis are required: the entrepreneur, the new venture, by new ventures, the new venture team, exterior influences (VC), the owner's immediate family pressures, historic period and career progression, education, and then on. The field is very hard to research, and the individual characteristics of the serial entrepreneur take not shown consistent application. Although past research suggests that the next venture will be more than successful if an entrepreneur tin overcome the loss of a by failure, no research has been conducted on how 1 overcomes this overwhelming state of affairs.

The serial entrepreneurship stream must keep to borrow from entrepreneurship literature regarding first-time entrepreneurs and habitual entrepreneurs, including portfolio entrepreneurs. Lessons for success can be learned from the differences between these types of individuals, strategies, and techniques. At that place are many overlaps in these enquiry streams, and researchers can continue to utilise comparisons when investigating and focusing on the serial entrepreneur. Other areas of focus include those that support and assist in new ventures. Current enquiry is exploring new venture teams and eventual success. Even so, others in the network of external relationships (that is, financial consultants, lawyers, networks of other entrepreneurs and established businesses, banks, and VCs) tin also provide support and guidance.

pelayosenguen.blogspot.com

Source: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00472778.2021.1969657

Share this post